The Guardian: Trump's poll numbers dip over handling of coronavirus pandemic
Support for Donald Trump’s handling of the coronavirus has plunged over the past week, polls show, as some of his advisers and Republican allies are said to be concerned over the US president’s daily briefings on the pandemic.
Trump experienced an upturn in public support as the virus hit the US, and his job approval rating surged to almost the highest rating since he was elected. As concerns over the government’s response have grown, however, the number of people who believe the president is doing a good job appears to be settling back to pre-coronavirus levels.
FiveThirtyEight's aggregates for Trump's approval rating and Americans' views on COVID-19 indicate that the trend line is common across multiple reliable polls.
As always, don't read too much into a single week's polling data, don't assume trends will continue, understand a lot of shit is going to happen between now and November that we haven't foreseen, and while "who would you vote for, Biden or Trump?" polls are going to start getting a little more reliable now that Biden's effectively clinched the nomination, it's still way too early to assume they'll look the same come election day as they do now. (Hell, if this campaign is anything like 2016, the election won't look the same as polls from mid-October.)
But for anyone who was concerned that Trump was actually coming out of this crisis more popular than he went into it, it appears that trend may have reversed. For now.
Friday wrote:As I have stated many times now, COVID has thrown the world into CHAOS MODE as far as reliable predictions about future events.
Yeah, I keep banging the "a whole lot of shit is going to happen between now and November that we can't possibly predict" drum, and a once-in-a-century plague is at the top of the list of things we didn't know were going to happen six months ago. (And seven months ago we didn't know that the president was going to be impeached, a thing which most people aren't even talking about anymore. We live in strange fucking times.)
COVID-19 is, clearly, the biggest single factor in how the next few months are going to play out, including its knock-on effects like what it's doing to the healthcare sector and the economy. But there are plenty of other, smaller wild cards in the months to come.
Looks like the Supreme Court will be hearing oral arguments on Trump's tax records next month, by phone. Now, the way our news cycle's been going this past month, maybe that won't even register; maybe it'll just be a blip. But on the other hand, the press sure love live coverage of trials, and they've always wanted the chance to cover oral arguments in a Supreme Court case as they're happening.
I think she does a good job of hitting some of the major points here -- that aside from immigration and healthcare being life-or-death issues, Biden's conservative stance on both is simply bad electoral politics, that he's had trouble attracting young and Latino voters and he can't just take for granted that they'll show up in November on "hey, remember Obama?" alone, and that just because he's beaten candidates with more progressive healthcare policies doesn't mean that those healthcare policies are the reason he beat them.
Look, I know we try to be rational here, to rely on facts and try to ensure we're using good information. So, I don't know, maybe something else affected these numbers.
But it sure as hell LOOKS like proof that yes, the DNC has literally murdered hundreds of Americans from their own party so they could install Biden.
Like I said, maybe something else is at work here, but I do know that Ohio is one of the states that's done shit like allowing churches to stay open. And that Illinois's government Coivid information pages explicitly states that they recommended against the primary going forward and specifically points to Ohio's postponement of the primary as an example of what was supposed to happen.
But now there's a new wrinkle.
EDIT: Cached deleted tweet content:
NBC News confirms that Biden & Obama were eager to have the Wisconsin primary go as scheduled & were both prepared to publicly escalate against Bernie if the primary was moved.
They were willing to fatally infect voters w/the virus to get Bernie out.https://t.co/5d9JHhKbYG pic.twitter.com/bFlXiu3njL
— Ben Mishiev (@ben_mishiev) April 15, 2020
(the images are gone of course but refer to text printed on pages 7 & 8 of the document released by NBC)
So, if this is accurate, the Biden campaign, and possibly even Obama himself, contacted Bernie and said "Unless you drop out, we will insist that the Wisconsin primary goes forward as planned.", that the Biden campaign essentially told Bernie they would continue to kill hostages until their demands were met.
I don't want to say this is the whole story; maybe Bernie would have stayed in if he thought he had a stronger chance. But he knew what he was up against. He knew what they'd already done. He knew how high the deck was stacked against him and how long the odds were getting. We know he made a tactical error in not demanding vote-by mail clearly and harder and making it a moral stand to hold against the Biden campaign, but that's not even remotely the same.
But the use of a man's conscience to break him in this way, by those who seemingly have none, has to be right down there with Nixon sinking the Vietnam peace talks for a low point for American politics.
Mongrel wrote:Look, I know we try to be rational here, to rely on facts and try to ensure we're using good information
Which makes it difficult to reconcile that particular bit of rumormongering with the demonstrated sequence of events, where Wisconsin's Democratic governor tried to delay the the primary and extend the absentee-ballot deadline, Republicans countersued to block it, the DNC itself filed the SCOTUS brief supporting the extension, and the Republican side of the court denied it 5-4.
My comments on the deleted tweet DO begin with "If this is accurate", though... actually... did you see my post before or after the second tweet was deleted? 'Cause if there was just a blank space there when you read it, obviously it just looks like I'm just babbling on from the first tweet.
The OP deleted and reposted the tweet, because he wanted to walk back his conjecture.
Source here: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/blog/n ... #live-blog (currently on page 2, may change. Heading is "Sanders drops out: How Biden, Sanders (and Obama) got to this point")
From what I can find, the Biden campaign was saying it was safe to go until the day of. There's a lot of possible things that might have been said privately between the campaigns - maybe Bernie ends up complicit here too, as the article also claims he agreed to stay in to drive turnout for the Wisconsin Supreme Court election.