The House GOP just gave Biden’s campaign a huge gift
www.vox.com
Roughly 80 percent of House Republicans just lined up behind a plan to cut Social Security and ban all abortions.

Donald Trump would be on track to win a historic landslide in November — if so many US voters didn’t find him personally repugnant.

Roughly 53 percent of Americans have an unfavorable opinion of the former president. And yet, when asked about Trump’s ability to handle key issues — or the impact of his policies — voters routinely give the Republican candidate higher marks than President Biden.

In a YouGov survey released this month, Trump boasted an advantage over Biden on 10 of the 15 issues polled. On the three issues that voters routinely name as top priorities — the economy, immigration, and inflation — respondents said that Trump would do a better job by double-digit margins.

Meanwhile, in a recent New York Times/Siena College poll, 40 percent of voters said that Trump’s policies had helped them personally, while just 18 percent said the same of Biden. If Americans could elect a normal human being with Trump’s reputation for being “tough” on immigration and good at economics, they would almost certainly do so.

Biden is fortunate that voters do not have that option. But to erase Trump’s small but stubborn lead in the polls, the president needs to erode his GOP rival’s advantage on the issues.

  • Varyk
    21·
    8 个月前

    Has a chance? Sure.

    “On track to win a historical landslide”? Not at all. Zero evidence for that.

    That picture does not look promising or relevant.

    Don’t cast your assumptions on me to attack them; make up whatever throat-jumping stories you like, but leave me out of them.

    • mwguy@infosec.pub
      1·
      8 个月前

      “On track to win a historical landslide”? Not at all. Zero evidence for that.

      The article doesn’t claim that. It claims that a generic Republican would be on track to win a historical landslide. But not Trump because of his unfavorability.

      • Varyk
        2·
        8 个月前

        I don’t know which article you read, but:

        “Donald Trump would be on track to win a historic landslide in November — if so many US voters didn’t find him personally repugnant.”

        That’s exactly the case the article is making, and that case has no legs to stand on.

        • mwguy@infosec.pub
          1·
          8 个月前

          What? Did you read it? It shows generic R polling vs. Biden winning big but Trump v. Biden polling low. That indicates that the majority of Americans would be open to a Republican Presidency, just not a Trump presidency. They make the case with polling data.

          • Varyk
            1·
            8 个月前

            Wow, hyperbolic polling “data” that is consistently inaccurate and being constantly manipulated and interfered with hypothesizing a fictional republican representative with zero adverse character traits?

            Weird that people aren’t giving that more weight…

            • mwguy@infosec.pub
              1·
              8 个月前

              Wow, hyperbolic polling “data” that is consistently inaccurate

              Citation needed.

                • mwguy@infosec.pub
                  1·
                  8 个月前

                  Did you read that article? Their first example of a polling “miss”:

                  The average poll in the week before election day had Mehmet Oz beating John Fetterman by nearly 1% in Pennsylvania when in reality Fetterman beat Oz by nearly 5%

                  Pollsters were actually calling that race a toss up (also 538’s page ). There were several polls that predicted a slim Oz and several that predicted a slim Fetterman. Even the Republican leading pollster that was predicting a 1% the wrong way has a confidence interval of +/- 2.5 and had 4.9% other/undecided factor in the poll.

                  People are angry that they can’t read polls. They’re angry that a toss up is just that.

                  • Varyk
                    1·
                    8 个月前

                    Did you read it? It goes on to describe larger polling errors(14%) that resulted consistently in multiple elections going the opposite way of the polls.

                    Polls are consistently inaccurate.

                    You can read the whole article instead of the first sentence.