Jump to content
270soft Forum


Steering Council Member
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


vcczar last won the day on September 26

vcczar had the most liked content!

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Philadelphia, PA
  • Interests
    My blog: https://historymonocle.com/

Recent Profile Visitors

8,855 profile views

vcczar's Achievements


Enthusiast (6/14)

  • Reacting Well Rare
  • Dedicated Rare
  • Very Popular Rare
  • First Post Rare
  • Collaborator Rare

Recent Badges



  1. Using my same algorithm for predicting the 2020 results, I am getting the following result for if the election happened today. Note: there's A LOT of data that isn't available yet, so this is a less confident analysis than what I'll be able to make in the general election 2024. Some of you may know I only missed ME-2 in the last election. I don't have as sufficient # of state polls for 2024, so this is using almost exclusively favorability, generic polls, approval, disapproval, trends from 2016 to 2020, new voter restriction laws likely to pass, etc.
  2. I was just reading a book covering the 1990s and I was surprised to find a statement Trump made when declining to be the Reform Party nominee. He was expecting to run for it, but he declined when he saw the other candidates. He said something to the effect that the reform party was a mess and that he didn’t want any part of it. He rightfully called David Duke a klansman, he called one candidate (forgot the name) a communist, but I was surprised to see that he calls Buchanan a neo-Nazi.
  3. Today the news is reporting that the GOP-backed audit found that, not only did Biden win AZ, that he actually won 300 more votes than was certified. Reminds me of when Gore contested Bush in FL and the the winner actually gained more votes. https://www.reuters.com/world/us/arizona-republicans-release-findings-widely-panned-election-audit-2021-09-24/
  4. Trump is +10 vs Biden and +13 vs Harris in a Rasmussen Poll. The Poll is a B-grade poll that leans Conservative, but that's a significant margin. Trump never polled that against a Democrat in his life. Here's what a 2024 election result would look like if there's any truth to the poll vs. Biden. Add ME and VA flipping with Harris:
  5. Sometimes a bill just takes longer. Nothing unusual. Happens with every president and every congress.
  6. I was born, raised, and lived in Texas as an adult. I'm 42 years old. Aside from 5 years in NYC and 4 years in Philadelphia, I've lived my entire life in TX. I probably know a lot more about the temperament of the people that you do. The only Texans that care about AR-15's enough to protect them are 1) Extremely Traditionalists Republicans and 2) Extremely partisan Republicans. 3) Independents that are gun collectors or are have more values in line with Libertarians. That said, these are all groups likely to poll voting for Abbott over O'Rourke or McConnaughy already. O'Rourke was clear to mention a specific gun that 98% of Texans don't own and don't plan on ever owning. It would be akin to someone saying they were going to raise taxes on people that own tanks or something, and then conservative construing that to mean the politician was going to go after everyone's vehicles or something. To be sure, it will be an early attack on O'Rourke. Thankfully early. It's an obvious attack. He will be prepared personally or by others to deflect it. Texans, both gun owners or not, will be to understand the difference between an AR-15 and sensible defensive guns. I say this as a Texan that isn't anti-gun himself. While I wish they didn't exist, the 2nd Amendment exists, and I understand the logic of them for self-defense. I'm actually waaaaay more moderate than most Democrats are on guns, possibly because I am Texan. For instance, if there's a shooter in a theatre, I'll be thankful when someone else with a gun can take care of that villain before he can wipe out the entire population in the room. I believe in gun control in as much as it may make it difficult to purchase guns for felons and the mentally ill, but until non-lethal weaponry catches on, I'm not going to go after most gun ownership. No one needs an AR-15. There's never an instance for it. One doesn't hunt with it. One generally uses some sort of pistol for domestic home defense. An AR-15, other than just for the sake of showing off, and for military purposes, is most often identified with domestic terrorism. O'Rourke is on the right side of the argument on this issue. He will cross the line when he start taking general home protection weaponry.
  7. Yeah, I don't expect it to be easy. It depends if Abbott's ends up being viewed as villainous as Cruz by Liberals. Much of O'Rourke's "success" in that race was because it seems like Democrats and liberal independents had a real shot at knocking off Cruz. The case just needs to be the same for Abbott. Abbott might be in a worse spot in some ways as he represents over two decades of GOP rule -- (1995-present). I was in middle school when there was last a Democratic governor! Also, does the below violate any sort of posting rule? I know he's gotten in trouble for emote use and crass behavior before. This doesn't seem like a respectful disagreement. This comes off more like mocking or something. Part of the reason I'm still hesitant to be back on this forum full-time is because I want to avoid behavior like this. I understand him disagreeing with me. It's valid. But this response is uncalled for and seems rather regular on his part, although he has shown some improvement since Trump's defeat in 2020. Most Texans don't own AR-15s. Most people don't. He's not saying he's going to take 99% of the guns that Texans do own. The only people that would be spooked by that statement are people that would vote for Abbott regardless of who the Democrat is.
  8. Reports mentions that Beto O'Rourke is going to run for Gov of TX. Here are my thoughts: As someone that has lived 32 years of my 42 years in TX, I can safely say that this is the strongest Democratic candidate for governor since Ann Richards. However, he can only be competitive if he recaptures his form from this Senate run vs Ted Cruz. His lackluster president campaign might have been due to his heart not being in the race, but it might also be because there were just a lot of better candidates for nomination. In the TX race, Beto will probably be the best candidate for Dems. Only the Castros or actor Matthew McConnaughy could rival O'Rourke as candidate. Abbott currently has a 41% approval, unusually low for a GOP Gov in TX. If this is maintained, O'Rourke has a shot. O'Rourke is poling more competitively, but considering McConnaughy outpolls Abbott, it suggests that a anti-Abbott voter exists. Beto would have to convince them to go to the polls. I don't think Beto's 2020 gun rhetoric is going to matter much. He can fend against that as it is a predictable attack point. Beto won't do anything on guns. He ran further left as pres candidate than his record suggest. Beto is and will remain the underdog, even if Abbott's 41% stays. The state is close to purple, but it isn't there yet. Beto, barring a huge improvement in Abbott's favorabiltiy, will be competitive. Previous elections have seen Democrats nominated candidates that half the registered Democrats didn't know. They didn't go to the polls. No one knew who Lupe Valdez was in 2018, for instance. Many people don't vote if the aren't fired up. Beto fires up Texas Democrats, even if he doesn't fire up the rest of the country.
  9. Here are my thoughts on the CA Recall and Polls: Newsom's victory was basically assured once Elder became the GOP nominee. Elder would be a good candidate in some states, but not in CA. It's analogies to having AOC run against a scandalous politician in Arkansas. Newsom could have punched a baby in the face and still won. We are in a partisan age in which party flipping is going to be very uncommon, regardless of the intensity of scandals. The Roy Moore instance in Alabama a few years ago was a huge outlier, helped only by Doug Jones being rather moderate for a Democrat. Jones fit AL more than Elder fit CA as a whole. I think presidential election landslides are going to be impossible for awhile because of this partisanship. Both Biden and Trump could perversely seek to shoot their candidacy in the foot (it often seemed to me Trump was doing that) and still be competitive with the other party. The battleground states are not numerous enough to allow a landslide. Those that aren't battleground seem firmly entrenched with one party or the other. I'd argue the definition of a presidential landslide for the 21st century is 320+ EVs, when it used to be 350+ EVs or even 400+ EVs. Newsom exceeded polling expectations. While polls correctly predicted the winner (an easy prediction), they were wrong in the magnitude. This reinforces my belief that the clearest truth in polls is the trend. Newsom's change of victory was improving weekly. When I predicted the result of Biden's 2020 victory with near-perfect accuracy (missing only ME-2), it was because I focused more on trends than the polling #. I'll be doing this again for 2024. Overall, polls are showing that Biden's Afghanistan slip up is primarily hurting only Biden. For whatever reason, it is having almost no down ballot effect. Also, Democrats are generally winning "generic polls." This suggests that the majority of poll takers disapprove of both Biden and Republicans, but not necessarily Democrats as much, for whatever reason. Biden is now ticking back upwards, however slowly. Despite being more disapproved than approved now, he's still generally beating Trump in a hypothetical rematch, although not by the poling margins of the 2020 election. A recent poll has some good and bad news for Trump. The good news is most Republicans want Trump to lead the party, but the bad news is half of GOP voters think someone else would be better at beating Biden in 2024: https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2021/09/12/most-republicans-want-trump-to-be-president-again-but-are-split-on-if-hell-actually-win-poll-finds/?sh=355ec6a2a071 Overall, GOP really needs to focus on getting a win in VA, which will be difficult, but not as difficult as the CA recall election. An upset victory in VA would give them some momentum, I think. Democrats have to feel a little bit better than their initial fears. Newsom won by a larger margin than expected. Biden is slowly ticking back upwards. Polls aren't favoring GOP down ballot because of Biden. McAuliffe seems more likely than not to win in VA. Democrats should also be elated that the GOP hasn't replaced Trump as either party leader or as frontrunner for 2024. A Trump rematch is probably a gift to Democrats. DeSantis or someone else would be much harder for Democrats to successfully attack.
  10. Newsom's polling like 10+ or more, and to make it more promising for Newsom, the trend is going for Newsom, which is probably a more accurate indicator than the poll itself. Elder was a terrible option for the GOP in California. He would do much better elsewhere.
  11. You can have baggage without being president. It's almost like you didn't keep up with the 2016 election. His own party--including Lindsay Graham--was calling for him to drop out after the Access Hollywood tape. He's had all kinds of infidelities too. He's had numerous failed businesses. His rhetoric occasionally is or borders on misogynism or racism, whether he thought he was being these things or not. He had the highest "Pants of Fire" ratings among all people in the 2016 primaries according to fact checkers. Whether one likes him or not, THIS IS BAGGAGE. He just has more of it now after 4 years. He would have had baggage if he ran in 1988 when he first considered it. He's just a baggage carrying person. He's kind of shaped like a full trash bag too.
  12. Bad analogy. That assumes the majority of Americans oppose the concerns of Blacks. Blacks might be 13% of the population, but then you might have 40-50% who support the concerns of blacks who aren't black. So that's like 53-63% supporting the concerns of Black people. I don't know the exact figures. Could be slightly less. But almost all Democrats and some Republicans would support concerns for Blacks. Going back to COVID in Canada, if the %s I posted are accurate, what you have with the anti-mask protests could be labeled as some as an example of an quasi-attempt at "tyranny of the minority." You have 20% of the population trying to force the government to abandon a popular policy (at least popular for a pandemic)-74% either supporting or somewhat supporting. That's a landslide victory for mandates! Considering that Canadians are free to answer a poll as they wish, that's a huge defeat for anti-mandate people. Tyranny is defined as cruel and oppressive rule; yet, you got 3/4 of the population supporting such supposed treatment. Either they might not think the mandates are cruel and oppressive or they think living in a pandemic without mandates would be more cruel and oppressive. I'm saying all this exclusively off that poll result. I don't live in Canada. I don't know the culture. I don't know the severity of COVID there. I don't know what would make someone anti-mandate in Canada that might be different than what would make someone anti-mandate in America. Thus, I can't really make any response for Canadians or for Canadian policy aside from that poll result. I can't find a similar poll for the US, but I did find a few showing 60%-69% supporting school mask mandates for teachers and students. I'm going to say the US is probably more anti-mandate than Canada, but the protests here get basically no coverage, unlike in Canada. It might be that the protests here are insignificant. Perhaps our COVID measures are much more lenient than those in Canada, so there's less to get upset about. I'm not sure. My personal opinion is that I favor the mandates so long as the overwhelming majority of scientists and health experts do. I ignore the politicians of both parties on the matter. Once the scientists and health experts call for an end of the mandates, I'd support their end, even if it's only GOP politicians siding with the science and health experts. For me, the pandemic is a non-partisan matter. Overall, I'm not really that invested in the mandate debate. In fact, you're the only source of information on this debate that I get. It isn't front page on any of the news sources I check. I don't search for it, because I'm not terribly interested in the matter. I respond to your posts on this more out of a sense of novelty of the thread. Sometimes its interesting to respond to fringe ideas. I'm kind of glad to live where everyone seems to be complying happily. I go all over Philadelphia. Many businesses don't let anyone in (service at the window). All other places require a mask on entry. Workers wear masks. I am yet to see anyone refuse to wear a mask and cause a lot of drama. In restaurants and coffee shops and bars, people don't have to wear masks once they're sitting down. There doesn't seem to be the 6 foot distance thing anymore. No one complains. No one talks about it. No anger. No feeling of oppression. No feeling of cruelty. There's mostly a sense that we're all in this pandemic together and trying to keep each other healthy by following the advice of the leading scientists and health experts in the world. Anyway, that's my COVID catechism. I probably won't talk anymore about it. Not terribly interested in the topic and I've got three jobs. So back to work.
  13. I want to see polling. I mean, how many of those protesters are from Montreal? Also, let's say, 1 million of the 1.78 million people in Montreal are in favor or are comfortable with mandates. Let's say 500k people have no opinion. Let's say the remaining 280k are opposed to the mandates. That's less than 20% opposed to a mandate in Montreal in this hypothetical. That's fringe, in my opinion. Let's say this 280k is much more roused to action, so 80k of them end up in a protest in Montreal. I'm not sure how popular/unpopular the mandates are in Canada, so I'm just explaining why a "massive protest" can still be fringe. Is it a massive protest? VIsually, from the image I see, is yes. Is it representative of something that most Canadians agree with? I don't know. I don't live in Canada. I don't know which news sources or polling services in Canada are the most credible, but here's the one that pops up first: https://www.ctvnews.ca/health/coronavirus/majority-of-canadians-support-mandatory-vaccinations-nanos-survey-1.5536106 Support Mandates: 53% Somewhat support: 21% (unlikely to join protest) Somewhat oppose it: 8% (probably wouldn't join the protest, but some might) Oppose Mandates: 16% (most likely to join the protest) If these numbers are accurate, that's 74% that probably don't see eye-to-eye with the protestors. I'm going to assume that "massive protest" is almost exclusively from that 16%, as I don't think someone that only somewhat opposes mandates would join in. So my guesstimate above at 20% is fairly accurate. This is likely a fringe group, if this poll is accurate, coming together. This doesn't mean they won't gain more support, but it could also just be a sign that this fringe group is just much more vocal -- sort of like the Religious Right among Christians, or the Squad among Democrats.
  14. I don’t ever see any of this kind of stuff going on in the Philadelphia area nor do I really hear of any protests in the US. I assume the situation in Canada is less popular than here. What % of Canadians support Mandates and what % of Canadians don’t? Im trying to figure out if what you are posting is fringe or mainstream.
  • Create New...