mtutiger

Biden got 16M more than Hillary.

I won't say he'll get less voters, but a hypothetical 2024 win is going to be different in demographic composition than his 2016 win and 2020 loss. It just will be.... just as it was for every other President who ran for reelection or, in the case of Cleveland, ran for the office again. People talk about absolutes with this stuff, but there are changes going on under the hood all the time. So yeah, he'll need to do some addition... he has avenues to do it, but he will need to do it

100%. Trump is a turnout machine... not just in favor, but also in opposition

I'd have to pull the numbers, but as I recall Obama actually did win over some voters who did not vote for him in 2008 and did turn out additional voters in 2012. And that played a role in his reelection. I'd also add that Mitt Romney won more votes than John McCain did as well. Practitioners of this stuff (think people like Murphy and Axelrod and Carville) tend to harp on persuasion as being critical to any candidate looking to win reelection... you need to add some new voters in to offset any losses you have from the previous election. Trump is not immune to that... how he kept it close (ie. More low propensity voters, doing better with POC) is proof.

My question is whether / how Trump actually adds voters. Part of how he kept the last one close is two-fold: he managed to find more low-propensity voters and he did better with Hispanics and (to a lesser extent) black voters. He needed that given how much worse he did in the suburbs. Winning reelection, or winning the office back in this case, requires addition. Especially if trends in the suburbs continue. I could see him adding with non-college POC, but it is hard to see him turning out more low propensity voters than he did last time. But you never know.

Part of the issue is that the Republicans Trump lost now call themselves "Independents" or "Democrats". At the end of the day, there's just a big trade going on under the surface where some contingent of old D voters (generally blue collar whites, some non-college POC) are leaning more R and some contingent of voters in suburban areas are leaning more D. And there is little evidence that this is changing. One reason, at least in Texas, why I can tell the dynamic in the suburbs isn't changing much is how the Republican legislature is drawing Congressional districts for redistricting... moves like cutting Denton out of its current district and putting it into a district with the Panhandle counties, cutting Plano/Frisco out from the rest of Collin County and putting it in a district with Texarkana.... these are all things you do when you are concerned with the trends in the existing district as-drawn.

His struggles in the suburbs aren't going to get any easier either.

Sure. He drives turnout in a way that the likely voter models don't capture. I get it. In and of itself, though, that doesn't mean that there isn't 53% of GOP voters who would prefer a different candidate. And even if it was off, most polling misses are off by 5-10%, not 40. (ie. He'd still only be at 57% or so with primary voters) My only point is that while I believe the poll may very well be accurate, its functionally meaningless in a primary process with "winner take all" contests and with an electorate who will still suck it up and vote for him if he's on the ballot against a D

Fox "News"

There are a lot of people who voted for Trump who did not like him but felt that he was the lesser of two evils. I suspect that has not changed in the last 8 mos or so. I'm not sure that a poll asking GOP voters if who they would like to see be nominated in 2024 is predictive of elections. Just as polls on approval alone aren't necessarily predictive either.

You'll have to take that up with the judge.

I would be fine with Seager or Story.... 9r even Semien if the contract isn't too long. The reality is that they need a Plan B. Even if they go hard at Correa, there's no guarantee they reel him in.

The truth is, a lot of folks will not try if he declares. Whether the polling is accurate or not, the end result of a Trump run, given how heavy the GOP Primary process is with "winner-take-all" contests, is a resounding victory for the former guy. The political media (ie. Folks like Jonathan Martin) are trying to sell papers and draw eyeballs so they are kinda hanging on this poll result... but even if he's at 47% or whatever among GOP voters, it doesn't challenge the reality that he wipes the field in an open primary. He'd have to get down to around 20-25% before any drama starts unfolding.

As I alluded above, primary support =/= general election support. I absolutely believe that there's a sizeable contingent in the GOP that would love to see Trump pass the torch of trumpism to someone else. But that those same people will still, push comes to shove, support him in a general election against Biden or any other D

I believe the polling... Trump's hardcore is only about 30% or so of the GOP. His act has wore thin in a lot of places. The issue is that, even if the polling is accurate and he garners 45-50% support in a hypothetical primary, he still wins, and the remaining 55% or so will fall in line and vote for him anyway

Don't love the stance on the bathroom bill, but Dems need to be better about running candidates who can win in particular districts. Particularly in a state like NC which will likely end up with a tougher map coming out of redistricting.

Simmons would be OK, but ideally they'd find another bat if they go with someone like him. Maybe an OF bat

Am I the only one who feel like they've flown under the radar all season? Don't get me wrong, all the AL East teams and NL West teams are impressive and deserve the coverage they have gotten, but the Astros are still kinda sitting there and they seem as well built to win the pennant and make a WS run as anyone

I'd be OK with an occasional road alternative (either based on 1984 or the 60s). But they had better not mess with the home unis any more than they did a couple of years ago.

Man, the White Sox are really getting exposed in this series....

Former Tiger Steve Sparks sighting.... doing color commentary on Astros Radio.../.

It may be an assumption that may not find a better opportunity elsewhere? Either way, he did a really good job eating innings and was invaluable down the stretch, but he's still more of a mop up/spot starter type, not rotation

Chris Taylor walk off jack!

This game is a lot more entertaining than last night's 💣

I guess I dont get why his comment was bad PR. As fans, we have talked over and over about the impact past contracts have had on payroll and how it impacts being able to make additions to the ballclub. I dont mind the fact that he's acknowledging that. And that a goal of his going forward is to avoid being put into a similar situation in the future. If anything, I appreciate his candor on that. Not making excuses for any bad decisions he has made as GM, but I understand where he is coming from with his comments and didn't have a negative view of them.