?
Please provide fact based evidence for your assertion.
Not that you will, but it would be interesting to see you translate your feelings to something tangible and supported by a less subjective reality.
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics ... hievements
The above sites list only a small sample of the damage Trump has done, and there is nothing really new here. Most, if not all of this evidence and more, has already been often discussed at length by many of us. You obviously are not paying attention!
He has dangerously weakened or eliminated environmental, food safety, pesticide use regulations and others intended to safeguard both human and animal life. Our streams and waterways are becoming more polluted and hazardous; he has drastically weakened or eliminated independent oversight intended to minimize fraud, waste and abuse, famously declaring that he doesn't need oversight, that he himself is all the oversight needed, thus insulating himself and his administration from any honest scrutiny of any potential misdeeds or crimes. How in any reasonable universe is this a good thing?
And there is no possible way you can deny that he has horribly botched the response to the coronavirus pandemic compared to most other nations' leaders, without revealing yourself to be a flaming idiot! Even you don't have the chutzpah to deny that! There is already a whole thread dedicated to that, to which you have, so far, not dared to respond!
And furthermore, can you honestly deny that he has seriously and possibly permanently damaged relations between the U.S. and its closest allies, or that Trump has become the laughing stock of most of the world? U.S. world leadership has been severely weakened or even become a joke because of Trump!
offending your sensibilities is not "major damage" nor is it fact based.
And your largely opinion based citations are not tantamount to major damage either. For example (notwithstanding your overtly liberal sources) a minor budget reduction for Planned Parenthood is bot "major damage".
Again,provide something that is fact based concede to your hyperbole being more of the tiresome emotions based TDS that's been incessant, in lieu of platform, for the past 4 years.
A model that has Missouri flipping, but not Arizona is spectacularly wrong.
My first thought is it may just be an outdated prediction from twenty years back when Missouri was one of the true bell weather predictor states. But in reading the article it was interesting that the reason was it's narrow focus on economic variables.
American voters can be fickle and they might actually appreciate that Trump has set a new world record in lying and adds to his total every single day.
[quote=honorentheos post_id=1226146 time=1590809294 user_id=7137]
[quote=EAllusion post_id=1225683 time=1590466428 user_id=1078]
A model that has Missouri flipping, but not Arizona is spectacularly wrong.
[/quote]
My first thought is it may just be an outdated prediction from twenty years back when Missouri was one of the true bell weather predictor states. But in reading the article it was interesting that the reason was it's narrow focus on economic variables.
[/quote]
Yeah, I saw the model. It's clearly a poor model if the forecast is that Missouri is gonna flip, but Arizona isn't. Missouri was a +18 Trump state. If economic conditions flip that outcome, there will be corresponding national impacts. Those conditions are also gonna also tip a state that Biden has wire-to-wire led in polling. Biden might not win Arizona. Hell, Biden might get crushed in a landslide of voter suppression and election malfeasance. Seems distinctly possible. I don't know. But if your model spits out [i]that[/i] result, your model sucks and no one should be listening to it.
I don't disagree. But it's interesting why it gets the result it does. It seems that the overall model just focused on popular vote and has been highly accurate in aligning economics with that metric. Not that it needs a model to tell us recessions are bad for incumbent Presidents. The state predictions are performed individually and narrowly on economy variables in each particular state. So Missouri, despite having demographic changes that have lead it to be solidly red for twenty years now, also faces tougher economic conditions than Arizona. The model is a blunt instrument but it does bring up an interesting question regarding how bad would it need to get for a red state tonflip thoughts fnit has been red less than twenty years? Anyway.
That said, watching the national mood and unrest on top of the uncertainty in just about everything, those whose jobs involve modeling the future regardless of method seem likely to be in for a harder time this year than most.
The model is a blunt instrument but it does bring up an interesting question regarding how bad would it need to get for a red state tonflip thoughts fnit has been red less than twenty years? Anyway.
It's one poll by a relatively new polling outlet. It's hard to make a judgement about a single poll DT. Moreover, if Trump is up +4 in MO while simultaneously being down around 6 in Arizona, that indicates that the MO-AZ differential is +10 Biden in Arizona's direction. This reinforces that it is difficult to imagine MO flipping, but not Arizona.