I'll be pretty surprised if Biden loses tbh. He has everything going for him. Even the white suburban housewives want him because they think the riots will stop if he wins.

I thought for sure that after Hillary's loss the Dems would do some soul-searching. But I'm not sure that's really happened. I don't think many of them even know why Trump won.

As you pointed out, the conditions are perfect to unseat an incumbent - I predict though, that if Trump wins (and I think he will), the Dems will have more excuses for why they lost that have a shaky connection with reality.

Curious - do you have any sources on that claim? My thought was that the white suburban housewife would begrudgingly vote for Trump because he's better positioned himself as the 'law and order' candidate. And if you know anything about white suburban housewives, they don't like their Target shelves to be empty. Biden doesn't have everything going for him though, namely his highly questionable mental acuity and the implications that might have at the debates.

Yeah cause the Democrats aren't a force for change for the betterment of anybody. They're simply the avatar for the power of upper class white city dwellers.

There's a lot of stuff out there like this.

Politico - Trump’s Scare Tactics Aren’t Working on Women in the Suburbs

To be fair, BLM hasn't exactly helped their case in differentiating themselves from the looting.

BLM organizer who called looting ‘reparations’ dismisses peaceful protesting

That article sounds mostly anecdotal and unconvincing to me. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that there is real information out there that confirms what you're saying, I'll have to look.

So Atkins is implicitly supporting Target and McDonald's as only doing what they need to do in order to eat? Looting multinational corporate chains cause you're ****ing pissed is a rational end result to those corporations looting your communities even if you're so ****ing pissed that you're not rational.

I've never read Harry Potter.

I'm not sure what you're getting at here. How is Trump running on the riots me blaming anything? He is running on the riots, and the riots don't accomplish anything positive for the BLM movement. It only gives their opponents fuel to animate fence-sitters.

They you never knew how woke Hermoine was. Hermoine would have shamed J.K. Rowling for her transphobia.

If he can successfully run on riots that manifested under his administration with all the other conventional marks against the incumbent that are currently in place... Then your candidate is **** and/or they ran a **** campaign. Simple as that.

You must need a hug. Sadly I don't hug non-Harry Potter fans.

Because sanitized liberals like you agree with Trump that the protests are bad it gives Trump ammunition that the country doesn't support the protests. If you just supported them you'd be one less person agreeing with Trump.

omfg it's Hermione not Hermoine

He's going to hammer home on the fact that all manifested in Democrat-run cities and that he'd offered assistance to various local governments and they refused it.

If you can't combat that your candidate is ****.

Fact is nobody has any confidence Biden even has a pulse. I think even Hillary would have won this election if she didn't run in 16.

Yeah, that's fair.

But is he my candidate because I'm going to vote for him in the General and not throw a fit and take my hanging chad home with me?

He's just your candidate. Be honest.

Yeah we know you're not going to do anything to communicate that your candidate should do anything different.

I can vote for Biden and throw a fit at the same time.

Why should he? He's still leading in the polls and all he's needed to do is nap in his basement.

On what grounds?

Different from what?

Not anymore.

do you prefer him to Bernie?

Yes.

Then he's your candidate.

Do you prefer Biden to Hitler?

I'm shaking my fist at your avi right now.

Never read Harry Potter and prefer Biden over Bernie. SMH.

Did Hitler run in the Dem primaries or something? I must've missed that.

Stay positive.

.

The two basic choices were Bernie and whoever the establishment threw up. That was Biden this time. and keep in mind his main argument was 'electability.'

And you're mad at the voters?

It's too bad Andrew Yang didn't pick up more momentum.

Always. I take it you were probably mad at them in 2016.

In a weird way, i think a lot of candidates who didn't gain more traction than they should have suffered because of low voter turn out in 2016. No one wanted to take risks this year with trump because 42% of the country stayed home.

You couldn't prove it. If enough people voted for Clinton that she won, there'd be no candidates this year. But if Trump wasn't the nominee and Clinton lost, people like Yang (I think) would have done better.

I was made at the non-voters.

According to the Bernie crowd, it was whoever was beating Sanders.

Not true, I would have taken a Warren.

That's who I voted for. But apparently Biden is my candidate.

I tend to think the fact that 2016 had relatively successful campaigns by so called outsiders is what made people like Yang and Tulsi even think to throw their hat in the mix. Traditionally there would be no room for them, and a Jeb Bush type beating Clinton is very much a continuation of the traditional status quo.

I wouldn't have. She's a snake.

Same difference. You were mad at the results. You just assume the non voters would've swung it your way. If they cared enough to do so they would've. That's democracy.