TRUMp and TRUMan, Biden and Dewey

  • Thread starter Thread starter CaptFun
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

CaptFun

Guest
Idly musing about how this election mirrors others from the past … particularly “upsets*”
  • when the all knowing Press’ polls were wrong (and speculation as to why).
Aside from TRUMp’s “upset” another
memorable one was TRUMan over Dewey.

While Dewey kicked back, ensconsed in a big lead (or so the press thought), TRUMan went full type A and indefatigably sped all around the US by train, giving speeches from a platform on the back of
his presidential caboose.

TRUMp emerges from a hospital bed, with just a bit of rest and gives speeches at airports.

Biden, like Dewey, seems to hope absence makes the heart grow fonder with his low key approach. But Dewey didn’t seem to have right wing protesters rioting in Republican states, vandalizing things and defying their local police to distance himself from.

TRUMan, the incumbant had to head off strikes everywhere by angry unions … and a Republican Congress that passed the Taft-Hartley curbs.

The incumbants had Presidential powers and DID stuff (which also had some political effects).

Truman could win easily if he won New York. But Dewey was FROM New York (like FDR) and quite popular.

TRUMan recognized Israel in 1948 and was the first Presidential candidate to speak in Harlem. Besides which he integrated the armed forces. For all that, he came up short in New York but won many small states (and the election),
angry tones and all.

TRUMp, besides barnstorming all over the US in Airforce 1 … greeted by happy, adoring throngs mostly … DOES stuff. Big stuff. Some things are not liked by all … but he seems to keep his promises like them or not.

TRUMan “dropped the atom bomb”. It DID end WWII though. And arguably may have even SAVED lives … after Japan’s quick surrender and peaceful occupation. And the fact that one BIG bomb was compared, not against nothing … but vs. the saturation bomb annihilation of Dresden and MORE of the large German cities.

TRUMp destroyed ISIS yet is forging treaties in the Middle East … and may soon be bringing troops home (like TRUMan … with an assist from Sen.Taft and the GOP of his time).

If the US still likes the “underdog” the haughty media bias may benefit TRUMp … as it did
TRUMan. *

🤯 TRUMan’s win …
was followed by quite a rough ride from 1949 through 1953 … thanks to
an enemy named Joe … and Communists in Europe, China, and their spies in the U.S. < stolen atom bomb secrets for e.g.

PS: As to JOE … I was thinking Stalin, not Mc Carthy as TRUMan’s REAL enemy.
 
Last edited:
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
My whole history class in the fifth grade was a lie, A LIE
 
:grinning_face_with_smiling_eyes: Glad to have shared those illuminating, if whimsical facts that lead to such a heart rending epiphany re: your primary education.

Hope there was something more profound than the “coincidence” that both TRUMp and TRUMan’s names start similarly, were underdog incumbants, and face(d) hideaway opponents nursing a (media claimed) lead as their go-to campaign strategies.
👍
 
Last edited:
I think Trump is going to win, if you want my two cents. Hope he does. Facebook and Twitter censoring NY Post article and using Politifact for a fact checker is going to back fire on them, watch.
 
I think Trump will win nationally. In the Electoral College.

Not here in California … although it may be closer than last time he ran. Have seen many more Trump flags, banners, and people wearing Trump merch this time however.

People love him, people hate him, but Trump is a superstar.

Joe Biden, well, some people do love a good ol’ mashed potato sandwich … even a cold one on white bread … if it has the letter D next to it.

Keep Joe breathing though, and the mainstream media, pollsters, teacher’s unions, government workers’ unions

(who do they strike AGAINST when they strike I wonder?)

and that class of “students” more found on the streets … than in class …

(doing loud rudimentary and repetitive chants in the streets into the wee hours of the morning) –

will try to whisk his crazy wheeled gurney past the race finish tape.

There probably aren’t many undecided voters to divvy up … but some of the low information voters are starting to realize that the sky didn’t fall during the Trump Administration’s stewardship …

The sky became the limit (until the China virus added new limits).

Lately Biden is getting the bad news (son’s laptop, tapes showing he and Kamala condemning fracking even as they campaign in Pennsylvania …

… while Trump is being touted for 3 Nobel Peace Prizes for his foreign policy, and getting black rap artists like Fifty Cent (“I don’t wanna be 20 cent!”), Ice Cube and Kanye West to help him make a dent in that 90% to 10% deficit with black voters this time
 
adamhovey1988 said:
I think Trump is going to win, if you want my two cents. Hope he does. Facebook and Twitter censoring NY Post article and using Politifact for a fact checker is going to back fire on them, watch.
Click to expand...
Hope so, I’m not counting on it, I’m just hoping almost against hope that the margins of errors in these polls are slim enough that Biden has a lot of “false positives” and Trump has a lot of “false negatives”.

Let me be clear, though, that my far, far overriding reason for supporting Trump (and a Republican Senate) is the abortion issue. If abortion weren’t on the table — if someone could wave a magic wand and suddenly everyone were pro-life — my economic and social principles would be closer to Bernie Sanders and even (shudder!) AOC. There. I’ve said it.

Subsidiarity is nice, and certainly solutions should be executed at the lowest social level possible, but there are some things that just can’t be done as efficiently, with the greatest good for the greatest number, at a lower level as opposed to a higher level. I am totally in favor of Medicare For All and similar social benefits. And, yes, I’d raise taxes. Probably quite a bit.

Second Amendment rights would, however, be a sticky issue. I’m 100% behind Trump and the conservatives on that too.
 
Last edited:
Currently Trump is double digits behind nationally according to both Fivethirtyeight and Real Clear Politics. That is way beyond margin of error territory. He’s currently between a one in six to one ten shot depending on who you listen to, for reference he was one in three in 2016. He needs to close up fast to win, the cynic in me would say that’s why he’s been trying to lower the turn out.
 
That’s still beyond margin of error. I think Fivethirtyeight have Trump at 12% Biden 88% and it’s been pretty stable for about a week.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Nicht gut for DJT.
 
As surprising polling fails in history is a subplot here, I’m reminded of polls that predicted a swift end of the upstart FDRoosevelt administration in the 1936 elections at the hands of the GOPs Alf Landon of Kansas.

Surely good pollsters should use the most up to date technologies to be as accurate as they could be … or should they?

The polling anomaly that baffled the experts in 1936 was that it was telephone polls < (I spelled that right :grinning_face_with_smiling_eyes:) gathering the, skewed as it turned out, data.

More Republicans still HAD phones. Who wasn’t called wasn’t polled. But such still voted.

In the midst of the seemingly insolvable depression … people were looking for the help that FDRs alphabet soup of programs might bring them. And if desired jobs weren’t around … a beer at least was legal.

FDR, not Landon, got the landslide.

Looking at Homeschool Dad’s post above I thought of the principal of redundancy that may have lead to Churchill’s shocking upset in 1945 … and to a lesser extent GHW Bush’s in 1992.

Still a popular National Hero, fresh off winning WWII over the Axis powers, Churchill was beaten by the Labour Party’s Clement Attlee in an upset few saw coming. Churchill became redundant some say because though he’d “won the war” … the war was over - and continuing it against Japan and/or the Soviets was not as popular as bringing their boys home and attending to domestic matters.

Attlee 's priorities seemed to be the next step for some … and after all, he’d been a partner in the coalition government Churchill had formed … and so not as unpatriotic nor party oppositional as opposing Churchill might have seemed.

Trump may have fulfilled many of his promises, and maybe the most impotant ones, but if say, he’s slain the abortion monster now … some people’s main reason for supporting him and the GOP might wane in importance. 🤯

Critics of my own pro-life reasons for voting GOP used to say " … they don’t REALLY want abortion to GO … they just want the ISSUE!"

If Trump, in his SCOTUS appointments and other actions, has slain or badly injured the corporate abortion Goliath … could it BE that he gets retired by a now satisfied base … because no other issue motivates people to support the GOP like this life vs. death one?

PS: Churchill did regain the Prime Ministry in 1951 … but England and the times had changed a lot in 6 years.

🤔 Trump 2024 (after a hiatus)? Too many possibilities to consider for me now.

I do tend to reward people who’ve done a good job of repping me in the past rather than …

… discard them due to their ‘no longer needed so much now’ expertise …

… just for the curiosity of seeing about a novel new, (hope and) change for change’s sake government. 🇺🇸
 
CaptFun said:
The polling anomaly that baffled the experts in 1936 was that it was telephone polls < (I spelled that right 😄) gathering the, skewed as it turned out, data.
Click to expand...
I’ve heard that same story about the 1948 election - all done by telephone. Phones were not universal then as they are now, and people with them tended to have higher incomes and skewed Republican.
 
Also in 1992 the term “shy Tory” was created, essentially voters didn’t want to be known as Tory voters (can’t think why) so they lied to people taking exit polls. They’ve corrected for it in the methodology these days, but that exit poll caused much furrowing of brows on election night.
 
I read an article where the top pollsters were asked how they’ve changed their polling since the Hillary failure.

Almost all of them realized that the didnt weight the lower education voters enough…a group that voted very highly for Trump. It’s usually assumed that the weight should be given to higher educated voters as they show up in larger numbers. 2016 showed that error as the mobilization of the lower end voters came out in large numbers.

This year, they think they have properly corrected for this error. That’s yet to be seen. I’m almost as interested in who gets the polling correct as the winner of the election. That’s because I like statistics, though, not because I’m uninterested in the election.
 
That was cute! Especially because his point about the undercounting or weight of lower educated voters! He also brings up the difficulty of this years polling accuracy due to the economy, the pandemic and the protests. I’m watching several polls to see how they fare. I sure wouldn’t want their job in this election climate!

I’m also interested in seeing what the turnout is in states where mail in voting occurred. How many did or didn’t mail in and how many of those that didn’t, go to the polls. I know that the majority of Trump supporters are waiting to vote in person…but will it be 80% or more like 51%? Interesting times!
 
Ahhh the old,Trump supporters are undereducated,knuckle dragging Neanderthals
 
Last edited:
Projecting much?

The thing is that the polls in '16 did underestimate the number of white, voters without college degrees. Being white and not having a college degree does not make one ‘less than’, but Trumps rhetoric did resonate with that voter bloc for what ever reason.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top