Jump to content

Welcome to FutureTimeline.forum
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

2020 US Presidential Election


  • Please log in to reply
619 replies to this topic

#581
Jessica

Jessica

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 967 posts

Political Polls @Politics_Polls

 
 
 
 

Trump Job Approval Among adults: Approve 37% Disapprove 59% . Among registered voters: Approve 36% Disapprove 60% American Research Group 10/17-20 https://americanresearchgroup.com/economy/ 



#582
Jessica

Jessica

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 967 posts

Quinnipiac, Oct. 17-21, 1587 RV (change from last week)

Approve 38 (-3)
Disapprove 58 (+4)

Strongly approve 28 (-3)
Strongly disapprove 53 (+5)

I believe this is at least a tie for Trump's worst approval by Quinnipiac.

Impeachment inquiry:

Approve 55 (+4)
Disapprove 43 (-2)

Remove Trump:

Yes 48 (+2)
No 46 (-2)



#583
Jessica

Jessica

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 967 posts

Independent voters support impeachment AND removal 49%-41%



#584
Jessica

Jessica

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 967 posts

CNN/SSRS, Oct. 17-20, 892 RV (change from April)

Biden 53, Trump 43 (was 51/45)
Sanders 52, Trump 43 (was 50/44)
Warren 52, Trump 44 (was 47/48)
Buttigieg 50, Trump 44 (was 47/44)



#585
Jessica

Jessica

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 967 posts

Ipsos Core Political Data Tracker (weekly), Oct. 18-22, 4083 adults including 3447 RV

Adults:

Approve 39 (-1)
Disapprove 55 (+1)

Strongly approve 20 (-3)
Strongly disapprove 42 (nc)

Impeach Trump?  Yes 46 (+3), No 40 (-2)

RV:

Approve 41 (-2)
Disapprove 57 (+3)

Strongly approve 22 (-3)
Strongly disapprove 44 (+1)

Impeach Trump?  Yes 48 (+4), No 42 (-1)



#586
caltrek

caltrek

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,964 posts

"Establishment Fears" Grow as Sanders and Warren Reveal Energy of Democrat's Progressive Wing

 

https://www.commondr...rogressive-wing

 

Inttoduction:

 

(Common Dreams) The Democratic establishment is looking at the party's 2020 presidential primary field and seeing nothing but reasons to fear a progressive nominee—though they prefer one of the two to the other. 

 

That's according to a number of reports over the past two days which suggest that powerful elites in the party are increasingly worried about the potential of a nomination win by either Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) or Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), both of whom who have made progressive change a centerpiece of their campaigns. 

 

"The presidential primaries are not going at all the way these rich and powerful Democrats want," wrote The Nation's Jeet Heer on Wednesday. "Their preference is for a centrist presidential candidate."

 

On Tuesday, New York Times reporter Jonathan Martin found that major party donors are increasingly worried that Warren particularly—Sanders is not mentioned until the article's penultimate paragraph—will take the nomination and are willing to do whatever it takes to stop that from happening. The party elite are courting members of the party like former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), and former Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick, as well as nominal independents like former New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg to jump in the primary race. But nobody, at least so far, is biting.


The principles of justice define an appropriate path between dogmatism and intolerance on the one side, and a reductionism which regards religion and morality as mere preferences on the other.   - John Rawls


#587
caltrek

caltrek

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,964 posts

The Wall Streeters Who Actually Like Elizabeth Warren
 

 

https://www.vox.com/...rs-donald-trump

 

Introduction:

 

(Vox) On Wall Street, there are rich guys, and then there are very rich guys. And in the first camp, there are a surprising number who think an Elizabeth Warren presidency would not be the apocalypse.

 

“You know what I like about Warren? Warren doesn’t want my money, actually,” said one mid-level hedge fund executive who has already maxed out on his donation to the Massachusetts Democrat in the 2020 presidential primary. “My firm is great, but some people in the industry are scumbags.”

 

Warren is a longtime critic of the financial industry, and she has made her fair share of enemies among some of its major players. There has been a litany of stories in recent months — including one I wrote — quoting finance executives and bankers on how disastrous they believe a Warren presidency would be: Deciding between Donald Trump and Warren is a “decision between sickness and death.” Major Wall Street Democratic donors will sit the election out. Warren is the one candidate who is “toxic for the business community.”

 

But not everyone on Wall Street hates her. In fact, there are plenty of people who believe the idea of Warren in the White House sounds pretty good. And it’s not a grudging acceptance of her worldview but instead genuine support for it.

 

Some in the industry believe that the excesses of the financial system continue to be a problem in the wake of the Great Recession and that corporate concentration, wealth inequality, and lax regulation are still issues that need addressing. Do they think she’s 100 percent right on everything? No. But they know she’s smart, and they think she’s approaching policy with a scalpel, not a sledgehammer. They believe Warren when she says she is a capitalist and are on board with her brand of capitalism.


The principles of justice define an appropriate path between dogmatism and intolerance on the one side, and a reductionism which regards religion and morality as mere preferences on the other.   - John Rawls


#588
Jessica

Jessica

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 967 posts

IA-Civiqs/ISU: Warren 28, Buttigieg 20, Sanders 18, Biden 12

 

Warren 28%
Buttigieg 20%
Sanders 18%
Biden 12%
Klobuchar 4%
Harris 3%
Steyer 3%
Gabbard 2%
Yang 2%
Booker 1%
O'Rourke 1%
Bennet 1%

https://civiqs.com/d...ook_2019_10.pdf



#589
starspawn0

starspawn0

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,289 posts
Although he is probably going to lose, so it isn't worth mentioning it, but this Nathan J. Robinson piece about Buttigieg is pretty good:

https://www.currenta.../all-about-pete
 

Before I dive into Shortest Way Home’s account of the life and career of Peter Buttigieg, let me be up front about my bias. I don’t trust former McKinsey consultants. I don’t trust military intelligence officers. And I don’t trust the type of people likely to appear on “40 under 40” lists, the valedictorian-to-Harvard-to-Rhodes-Scholarship types who populate the American elite. I don’t trust people who get flattering reams of newspaper profiles and are pitched as the Next Big Thing That You Must Pay Attention To, and I don’t trust wunderkinds who become successful too early. Why? Because I am somewhat cynical about the United States meritocracy. Few people amass these kind of résumés if they are the type to openly challenge authority. Noam Chomsky says that the factors predicting success in our “meritocracy” are a “combination of greed, cynicism, obsequiousness and subordination, lack of curiosity and independence of mind, [and] self-serving disregard for others.” So when journalists see “Harvard” and think “impressive,” I see it and think “uh-oh.”


Nathan J. Robinson's writing amuses and enlightens me the way Matt Taibbi used to. Somewhere along the way, though, Taibbi got too arrogant, too ideological, and too smug, and it shows in his writing. Robinson also picks better targets, and targets them for the right reasons. Taibbi's shtick is to make the elite look stupid -- to show that the emperor has no clothes. Robinson tries to show you what's on the inside, and why you shouldn't trust them. He doesn't make fun as often (as Taibbi); his method is more about sneering.
  • rennerpetey and johnnd like this

#590
Jessica

Jessica

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 967 posts

Rasmussen (10/25)

Approve - 43%

  • Strongly - 31%

Disapprove - 56%

  • Strongly - 46%

NET: -13% (-15% between strongly approve/disapprove)
http://www.rasmussen...l_index_history



#591
Jessica

Jessica

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 967 posts

NBC News/SurveyMonkey, Oct. 8-22, 18101 RV (change from July)

Approve 44 (-4)
Disapprove 54 (+3)

Strongly approve 29 (-3)
Strongly disapprove 44 (+3)

Impeach and remove Trump (no prior):

Yes 49
No 49



#592
Jessica

Jessica

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 967 posts
Kamala Harris Will Cut Staff, Limit Pay as Campaign Falters
Bloomberg


Short on cash and falling in the polls, Kamala Harris plans to cut staff in her Baltimore headquarters and reduce pay for advisers in an effort to keep her presidential campaign afloat.

Campaign manager Juan Rodriguez outlined the restructuring in a memo, citing an “incredibly competitive resources environment” and a need to reduce spending to maximize prospects in Iowa. He said he would “take a pay cut along with all consultants.”

The changes include redeploying staff from key early states of New Hampshire, Nevada and her home state of California to Iowa, where Harris is making a make-or-break bet. Her operation in South Carolina, another important early state, won’t change, the memo said.

The decision to cut staff is Harris’s second course correction, coming six weeks after her campaign said she would place a premium on Iowa and campaign heavily there.

 

 



#593
Jessica

Jessica

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 967 posts
YouGov Poll - Biden 27% (+3), Warren 23% (+2), Sanders 14% (-1), Buttigieg 8%, Harris 4% (-1)

#594
Jessica

Jessica

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 967 posts
Suffolk University Poll - JB 28, EW 17, BS 13, PB 10, TG 4, AY 3, KH 3,

#595
Jessica

Jessica

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 967 posts

AP/NORC, Oct. 24-28, 1075 adults (1-month change)

Approve 42 (+2)
Disapprove 56 (-3)

Strongly approve 25 (+1)
Strongly disapprove 42 (nc)



#596
Jessica

Jessica

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 967 posts

IBD/TIPP, Oct. 24-31, 903 adults (1-month change)

Approve 39 (-4)
Disapprove 56 (+2)

Among independents: Approve 34 (-9), Disapprove 58 (+6)

Impeachment inquiry (n=768):

Support 61 (+6)
Oppose 39 (-5)

Among independents: Support 64 (+11), Oppose 35 (-10)



#597
wjfox

wjfox

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,704 posts
  • LocationLondon
no.gif
 
 
-----
 
 
‘The stakes are enormous’: is Hillary Clinton set for a White House run?
 
Mon 4 Nov 2019 07.00 GMT
 
The candidate who lost to Trump is making all the right moves as some fear a primary gone too far left. It’s a tantalising notion, but most observers counsel caution – and a dose of realism
 
 
Ahigh-profile book tour. Countless TV interviews. Political combat with a Democratic primary candidate and Donald Trump. A year before the US presidential election, it looks like a campaign and it sounds like a campaign but it isn’t a campaign. At least, not as far anyone knows.
 
Yet a recent surge of activity by Hillary Clinton, combined with reports and columns suggesting the Democrats have not found the right candidate, have made a 2016 rematch a fun, speculative and potentially intriguing topic of Washington conversation.
 
The sense that something strange is going on began a few weeks ago. A book is a traditional vehicle for a candidate. The former secretary of state launched The Book of Gutsy Women, co-written with daughter Chelsea, and embarked on a tour that included events, speeches and late-night TV appearances.
 
Clinton, 72, whose narrow, devastating defeat by Trump was one of the greatest upsets in political history, has also become more prolific and pugnacious on Twitter.
 
 
 
8XhYdGw.jpg

  • rennerpetey likes this

#598
Jessica

Jessica

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 967 posts

IBD/TIPP, Oct. 25-30, 1430 RV

Biden 53, Trump 43
Warren 52, Trump 44
Sanders 51, Trump 44
Harris 49, Trump 45



#599
Jessica

Jessica

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 967 posts
Echelon Insights poll: Biden 32%, Warren 22%, Sanders 15%, Buttigieg 6%, Harris 5%
http://echeloninsigh...Dem-Primary.pdf


They also polled on how well Biden would do against three of his top rivals if it were a two-person race:


•Movement in head to head match-ups against Biden reflect recent shifts in support. In August, Biden held a 20 point advantage against Warren in a head to head match-up. Today, Biden’s lead against Warren narrowed to 11 points.

•Conversely, Biden’s advantage in head to head match-ups against both Sanders and Harris widened since August.

•In August, Biden led Sanders by 20 points; today, Biden leads Sanders by 31 points.

•In August, Biden led Harris by 24 points; today, Biden leads Harris by 37 points.

 

 


#600
Jessica

Jessica

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 967 posts
Julian Castro's Presidential Campaign Told Staffers They May Want to Look for Other Work
 
Former San Antonio mayor Julián Castro will refocus his 2020 presidential bid on Iowa, Nevada and Texas and has informed staffers layoffs may be coming, CNN reports, citing people familiar with the plans.

Castro's campaign has been considered a long shot since it launched in January. Last month, the candidate — who's polling in the single digits — warned that if he couldn't raise $800,000 by the end of October, he'd be forced to withdraw.

Donors helped Castro meet that goal, and CNN reports that he has no immediate plan to drop from the race. However, citing its unnamed source, the network said top campaign leadership wanted to be as "clear as possible" with staffers that they're free to look for other work.

Observers have been waiting for the crowded Democratic presidential field to narrow, and the news from Castro's camp is another recent indication that time may soon be at hand.

 






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users