This is the kind of polling data that I was hoping to see (honestly, the local MSM is going into contortions to hide how well Trump is doing), and thank you also for bringing to my attention the existence of Omega4America, to which I’ve now subscribed.
A couple of weeks ago, Peter, you commented that Biden’s campaign may now employ a procedure to find a new VP candidate similar to when FDR ran for his final term. I recently watched a documentary on Truman’s life, so I remember how he was chosen because his attributes checked off a list. He served admirably in WW1, so that would bring in the veterans’ vote, he failed as a farmer during the 30s, so that would bring in the rural and farm voters, and so on. In Biden’s campaign, he will first have to get rid of Harris (and won’t that be interesting - it would be impolitic to kick her off, so they will have to buy her off in some believable fashion, and good luck with that!). Then they will have to weigh the pros and cons of all the viable VP candidates. Trump is also going through this process. I hope you will analyze whatever data you see during the coming weeks, so we can stay apprised on this horse race. Thanks, Peter!
It is going to be interesting to see what political events unfold between now and the conventions.
Haley dropping out pretty much ends what little drama there was in the GOP primary, and with RFK, Jr., struggling to secure ballot access across all 50 states his candidacy is problematic. There never was a serious Democratic challenge to Dementia Joe.
This may actually be bad news for the Democrats, because the one guaranteed political drama still unfolding are the indictments against Donald Trump, and the cases before the Supreme Court regarding them.
If the Supreme Court rules in Donald Trump's favor even a little bit, the Democrats are going to have some interesting messaging challenges going forward. When commentators such as Keith Olbermann call for the dissolution of the Supreme Court, it's a fair bet the radical edge of the progressive chattering class is going farther than most Americans are willing to accept.
Yet even if the Supreme Court rules against Donald Trump, the cases still have to be tried, and that means giving Trump a platform--the one thing the Democrats almost certainly were attempting to prevent. Donald Trump's own media strategy has always been predicated on the presumption that there is no such thing as bad publicity, that if the media is talking about Donald Trump they are not talking about anyone else. He used that strategy to great effect in 2016, and its efficacy in 2020 hinges on the probability that election fraud was determinative in that election outcome.
I do expect the media to do all it can to demonize Trump and to portray the criminal indictments as an appalling stain on the political process, but it is already certain the vast majority of the GOP rank and file do not accept that narrative, and it seems highly problematic that independents are willing to accept that narrative uncritically either. If that narrative fails the consequences redound all against Dementia Joe, which makes the Democrats' lawfare strategy against Trump much higher risk than I suspect they realize.
The fatal weakness of all propaganda is that once it loses credibility it no longer matters what the propagandist says, and the more the propagandist says after losing credibility the more likely people are going to simply either tune the propagandist out or take positive action to reject the propagandist. If the lawfare strategy against Donald Trump backfires--and there are some signs it already is--then a replay of 2020's electoral chaos and controversy is not likely to be quite so easily swept aside by the Democrats and the Deep State.
We have seen before that when authoritarian regimes lose credibility (Philippines under Marcos, Romania under Ceausescu, the Soviet Union under Gorbachev), they do not stand for long afterwards. If the current regime under Dementia Joe loses credibility as a result of its lawfare antics against Trump, even massive vote fraud and stuffing of ballot boxes will not save it.
We plan to spend over a month of this crazy summer in Wyoming camping. Most of it without internet. I cannot fathom what is going to happen. My sister Trump hater is already a loon about it. (No disrespect to real loons). I may be one of those who can’t push the lever or button or whatever for either of them. Nor the rest of the ballot. I don’t know yet.
For myself, voting comes down to a question of a) which candidate will be the best or do the least damage and b) does that candidate represent something I cannot in good conscience accept?
That decision I will make as close to Election Day as possible, unless events transpire to make the answers self-evident.
I already know that I cannot possibly cast a ballot for Joe Biden, nor for any Democrat.
I am undecided on Donald Trump, and may simply write in "none of the above" on the ballot.
For downballot races, I am almost certainly going to write in "none of the above" on all of them. Nothing would please me quite so much as seeing "none of the above" win the way "none of these candidates" beat Nikki Haley in Nevada
My pleasure. I'll be glad to talk you off the ledge any time. Unless, of course, you're out there to push a Democrat off of it....in which case I might join you! :P
I will not vote for democrats. I was one. They have disqualified themselves by the heinous child transgender ideology. An ideology my family is a victim of. With drugs and multilation already on a 16 yo. My only grandchild. Child sacrifice 2020 style. They can suck sand for all I care.
They are radical extremists on both sides, but they set the agenda for the Democrats & the Uniparty. Then there is Donald Trump. He has his own agenda, but it is America's agenda too.
The challenge...particularly for me, as I am self-identifying as journalist/analyst these days, and therefore am hoping to have some influence on the trajectory of the debate...is to push back against the radical extremists who wish to simply demonize the other side without actually engaging on the issues.
This will be a challenge for Trump's populist message as well. It is not that the issues are unforgivably complex or that we must always apply a reductionist approach of simplifying everything, but we also need to recognize that even ostensibly positive political change can entail some negative political and economic consequences.
Tax reform means disrupting people's tax and income and saving strategies.
Immigration reform means telling some people on all sides of that debate "no".
Draining the swamp will be its own battle royale under the best scenarios.
I am ultimately an inveterate optimist, and I do believe the Republic can be saved. Yet I also realize that saving the Republic will entail a measure of pain for all concerned, and we should not shy away from that reality.
This is the kind of polling data that I was hoping to see (honestly, the local MSM is going into contortions to hide how well Trump is doing), and thank you also for bringing to my attention the existence of Omega4America, to which I’ve now subscribed.
A couple of weeks ago, Peter, you commented that Biden’s campaign may now employ a procedure to find a new VP candidate similar to when FDR ran for his final term. I recently watched a documentary on Truman’s life, so I remember how he was chosen because his attributes checked off a list. He served admirably in WW1, so that would bring in the veterans’ vote, he failed as a farmer during the 30s, so that would bring in the rural and farm voters, and so on. In Biden’s campaign, he will first have to get rid of Harris (and won’t that be interesting - it would be impolitic to kick her off, so they will have to buy her off in some believable fashion, and good luck with that!). Then they will have to weigh the pros and cons of all the viable VP candidates. Trump is also going through this process. I hope you will analyze whatever data you see during the coming weeks, so we can stay apprised on this horse race. Thanks, Peter!
It is going to be interesting to see what political events unfold between now and the conventions.
Haley dropping out pretty much ends what little drama there was in the GOP primary, and with RFK, Jr., struggling to secure ballot access across all 50 states his candidacy is problematic. There never was a serious Democratic challenge to Dementia Joe.
This may actually be bad news for the Democrats, because the one guaranteed political drama still unfolding are the indictments against Donald Trump, and the cases before the Supreme Court regarding them.
If the Supreme Court rules in Donald Trump's favor even a little bit, the Democrats are going to have some interesting messaging challenges going forward. When commentators such as Keith Olbermann call for the dissolution of the Supreme Court, it's a fair bet the radical edge of the progressive chattering class is going farther than most Americans are willing to accept.
Yet even if the Supreme Court rules against Donald Trump, the cases still have to be tried, and that means giving Trump a platform--the one thing the Democrats almost certainly were attempting to prevent. Donald Trump's own media strategy has always been predicated on the presumption that there is no such thing as bad publicity, that if the media is talking about Donald Trump they are not talking about anyone else. He used that strategy to great effect in 2016, and its efficacy in 2020 hinges on the probability that election fraud was determinative in that election outcome.
I do expect the media to do all it can to demonize Trump and to portray the criminal indictments as an appalling stain on the political process, but it is already certain the vast majority of the GOP rank and file do not accept that narrative, and it seems highly problematic that independents are willing to accept that narrative uncritically either. If that narrative fails the consequences redound all against Dementia Joe, which makes the Democrats' lawfare strategy against Trump much higher risk than I suspect they realize.
The fatal weakness of all propaganda is that once it loses credibility it no longer matters what the propagandist says, and the more the propagandist says after losing credibility the more likely people are going to simply either tune the propagandist out or take positive action to reject the propagandist. If the lawfare strategy against Donald Trump backfires--and there are some signs it already is--then a replay of 2020's electoral chaos and controversy is not likely to be quite so easily swept aside by the Democrats and the Deep State.
We have seen before that when authoritarian regimes lose credibility (Philippines under Marcos, Romania under Ceausescu, the Soviet Union under Gorbachev), they do not stand for long afterwards. If the current regime under Dementia Joe loses credibility as a result of its lawfare antics against Trump, even massive vote fraud and stuffing of ballot boxes will not save it.
We plan to spend over a month of this crazy summer in Wyoming camping. Most of it without internet. I cannot fathom what is going to happen. My sister Trump hater is already a loon about it. (No disrespect to real loons). I may be one of those who can’t push the lever or button or whatever for either of them. Nor the rest of the ballot. I don’t know yet.
For myself, voting comes down to a question of a) which candidate will be the best or do the least damage and b) does that candidate represent something I cannot in good conscience accept?
That decision I will make as close to Election Day as possible, unless events transpire to make the answers self-evident.
I already know that I cannot possibly cast a ballot for Joe Biden, nor for any Democrat.
I am undecided on Donald Trump, and may simply write in "none of the above" on the ballot.
For downballot races, I am almost certainly going to write in "none of the above" on all of them. Nothing would please me quite so much as seeing "none of the above" win the way "none of these candidates" beat Nikki Haley in Nevada
I like that. Thanks for your analysis. It’s so helpful. Just to talk me off the ledge sometimes. ☮️
My pleasure. I'll be glad to talk you off the ledge any time. Unless, of course, you're out there to push a Democrat off of it....in which case I might join you! :P
I will not vote for democrats. I was one. They have disqualified themselves by the heinous child transgender ideology. An ideology my family is a victim of. With drugs and multilation already on a 16 yo. My only grandchild. Child sacrifice 2020 style. They can suck sand for all I care.
They are radical extremists on both sides, but they set the agenda for the Democrats & the Uniparty. Then there is Donald Trump. He has his own agenda, but it is America's agenda too.
Let's just see how it plays out.
The challenge...particularly for me, as I am self-identifying as journalist/analyst these days, and therefore am hoping to have some influence on the trajectory of the debate...is to push back against the radical extremists who wish to simply demonize the other side without actually engaging on the issues.
This will be a challenge for Trump's populist message as well. It is not that the issues are unforgivably complex or that we must always apply a reductionist approach of simplifying everything, but we also need to recognize that even ostensibly positive political change can entail some negative political and economic consequences.
Tax reform means disrupting people's tax and income and saving strategies.
Immigration reform means telling some people on all sides of that debate "no".
Draining the swamp will be its own battle royale under the best scenarios.
I am ultimately an inveterate optimist, and I do believe the Republic can be saved. Yet I also realize that saving the Republic will entail a measure of pain for all concerned, and we should not shy away from that reality.