Patterico's Pontifications

11/29/2021

2024: Trump’s Litmus Test For Selecting A Running Mate

Filed under: General — Dana @ 11:57 am



[guest post by Dana]

We’ve talked about what 2024 might look like if Donald Trump runs for president. At this point in time, the former president remains popular with Republican voters, according to November polling data:

However, the survey found that a majority of Republicans favored the former president making a run for a second term. Sixty percent of Republicans surveyed said they felt he should run while 40 percent of Republicans surveyed said they did not want to see him on the ballot. In turn, 73 percent of independents who responded to the survey said they felt he should not run, and 26 percent said they wanted to see Trump on the ticket.

A new report discusses Trump’s strategy in looking for in a running mate. Rather than increasing his base and focusing on what might pull in moderate Republicans and Democrats, or Independents, the former president has his own unique litmus test of vice-presidential worthiness:

According to conversations with a dozen Trump advisers and close associates, the former president doesn’t feel bound by geographic or ideological considerations — or any standard political rules at all.

Those familiar with his thinking say his selection will be determined by two factors that rate highest in Trump’s estimation: unquestioned loyalty and an embrace of the former president’s baseless claims that the 2020 election was stolen from him.

To be clear: The former president of the United States is looking for a running mate whose ultimate loyalty will be to him, not the U.S. Constitution. And said running mate must also be a true believer or at least be someone who is willing to lie and with eyes wide open, agree with the Big Lie that the 2020 election was rigged and stolen. Expectedly, integrity, foundational beliefs, and a functioning moral compass are not near the top of the qualification list. Clearly, Trump is laying the groundwork in case of an election loss. He wants to make sure that his running mate understands that, in case the unthinkable happens, they are expected to reject the results even though a vice-president does not have the necessary authority to make that decision. (I think that Trump views the 12th Amendment as little more than an unwelcome irritant, which in turn evidences how little he understands or values the Constitution.)

One of Trump’s campaign pollsters summed up the Trump and the Republican party thusly:

A lot of times, a presidential candidate will pick a running mate to balance out wings of the party. But with Trump, that’s not the issue. He is the party, basically. It’s so united behind him. So his choice, if he runs, will come down to what he wants. It would be a much more personal decision this time.

And according to Trump, there is no shortage of wanna-be veeps who are visiting him at Mar-a-Lago, and auditioning for the role:

“They’re all begging me. They all come here,” Trump boasted to one adviser…

Insiders say that the former president has whittled down the categories from which he is likely to draw a running mate:

Those familiar with Trump’s thinking say his prospective vice president selection would likely draw from three general lanes of candidates: women, conservatives of color or a trusted adviser — or a “consigliere,” as one adviser described it.

Not so different from Democrats, and not so different from then-nominee Joe Biden either.

So, in light of Patterico’s post this morning, the Republican Party must be reformed (or a new third party be formed), otherwise, it will remain on its downward trajectory and will continue to be known as the ReTrumplican Party.

–Dana

81 Responses to “2024: Trump’s Litmus Test For Selecting A Running Mate”

  1. Hello.

    Dana (174549)

  2. Those familiar with Trump’s thinking say his prospective vice president selection would likely draw from three general lanes of candidates: women, conservatives of color or a trusted adviser — or a “consigliere,” as one adviser described it.

    It’s funny that women & conservative of color are separate categories from people he trusts.

    Time123 (9f42ee)

  3. Heh.

    Dana (174549)

  4. @2 yeah, a politico reporter has a direct line to trump’s thinking

    they write this stuff cuz they know you eat it up

    JF (e1156d)

  5. “To be clear: The former president of the United States is looking for a running mate whose ultimate loyalty will be to him, not the U.S. Constitution.”

    what’s clear is that trump never said or implied any of this

    but, we should let this game of telephone play out

    JF (e1156d)

  6. To reform the party is to be actively engaged during the primary season.

    Trump, as ex-President, has a leg up obviously but he shouldn’t be immediately anointed if he throw his hat in the ring. He did lose the previous election, and running on a “Miss me yet?” campaign is a hell of a risky proposition. If he loses, again, his brand would take an insurmountable hit.

    Hence why I’m not convinced he’s running again… I think he’s angling to be a Kingmaker.

    whembly (fbaaf7)

  7. I find it truly odd that a law school — in this case, Marquette University’s — has a polling operation. Here’s what it says on the poll’s webpage:

    Through debates, symposia, public lectures, panels, conferences, and the Law School’s On the Issues series, Marquette University Law School has established itself as a leading venue for serious civil discourse about law and public policy matters affecting the region and beyond.

    Tracking the popularity of various leaders doesn’t seem all that related to “serious civil discourse about law and public policy matters,” but I guess this is pretty much open acknowledgement that in this day and age law school graduates — especially those outside of top-tier institutions — are going to have trouble finding well-paying jobs in the legal world and might as well start preparing themselves for careers as political operatives and consultants.

    JVW (ee64e4)

  8. Bobert or greene I should think. Both are into guns so watch your hands trump!

    asset (b50b77)

  9. It is being reformed. Hence the lament. Those swept aside, left behind or find themselves on the bottom of the deck seem to always decry the change. Or else adapt.

    Welcome to 1964.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  10. but, we should let this game of telephone play out

    JF (e1156d) — 11/29/2021 @ 12:22 pm

    Yes, we should. I think he should pick Candace Owens but she’s not old enough. Or so we all have been led to believe. What he will have discovered is that her current birth certificate is fake. The space laser was used to open a portal in time that allowed agents of the DNC to falsify the details of her birth.

    frosty (f27e97)

  11. Whembly, I agree with you and intend to participate on my state / district. I just don’t much confidence my POV is common (or even) welcome) by the majority of the GOP base. I think they like Trump and what he’s selling.

    Time123 (9f42ee)

  12. what’s clear is that trump never said or implied any of this

    Comedy gold!

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  13. R.I.P. Arlene Dahl, actress of the 40’s & 50’s, also the mother of Lorenzo Lamas

    Icy (6abb50)

  14. what’s clear is that trump never said or implied any of this

    Darling Nikki begs to disagree. From the linked article:

    One early vice presidential favorite — Nikki Haley, Trump’s former United Nations ambassador and a former South Carolina governor — appears to have been frozen out after she criticized him over the Jan. 6 riot.

    She also has no support from the base, in fact, they openly loath her, calling her Nikki McRomBush.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  15. JVW,
    I don’t know if they have a large focus public policy law or if Marquette just does for some totally unrelated reason, but 538 gave them a pretty good grade for how they do polling

    https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/pollster-ratings/

    Time123 (9f42ee)

  16. The former president of the United States is looking for a running mate whose ultimate loyalty will be to him, not the U.S. Constitution.

    In another startling news story: Scientists discover that water is wet.

    Remember that Trump unabashedly expressed the view that Supreme Court justices were supposed to work for him, not for the Constitution or the American people.

    The most blazingly obvious fact about Donald Trump is his profound selfishness and inability to recognize a higher moral standard than self-interest. When his self-interest happens to be served by doing things that some people like, they persuade themselves that he’s really motivated by a commitment to higher values. But those higher values will always be tossed aside in favor of personal benefit or ego.

    What I find most bizarre is that people I once considered highly intelligent adopted the belief that Trump is moved by an exceptionally deep love of America, and that no one else has really put America’s interest first like Trump allegedly does, and that he instinctively knows what’s best for America.

    People who actually worked in the administration saw up close how he would bend policy in the direction of personal interest, e.g. in connection with foreign business interests. While he was supposedly being super-tough on Iran with sanctions, he intervened on behalf of a Turkish bank that was being prosecuted for evading the sanctions. And why did he basically give a green light to Turkey’s attack on our former Kurdish allies in Syria, resulting in the escape of many ISIS prisoners and eventually the Kurds’ realignment with Russia?

    Etc.

    Radegunda (36002b)

  17. Trump’s party is a 3rd party. It will fail by increasing margins as it pushes non-conformists out and dares them to vote for the “other side.”

    You see this in the Greens, The Libertarians, really any party with a narrow focus: the purer-than-thou games leave you with a minority party of True Believers, that have shed the majority as untrustworthy.

    Cancel Culture is an old game with 3rd parties.

    In the Trump Party’s case the narrow focus is loyalty to Trump. Nothing else matters. Trump can announce that 2+2=17 and if you disagree you’re out. If you agree strongly, then you’re out when the sum changes to 12, since it was ALWAYS 12.

    Not many people want to go along with that, but surprisingly there are some.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  18. A running mate is mostly just to balance a ticket. Once seated, the running mate can/will/often is/ relegated or delegated to obscurity- depending of the measure of loyalty exhibited- though there are exceptions [like Daddy Darth.]

    So who would a corporatist want for the gig?

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  19. After several people were killed in the Waukesha Christmas parade, Trump said: “And the good news is, he hated Trump, OK? He hated Trump, based on early reporting.”

    I’m sure the victims’ relatives are relieved to know that.

    Radegunda (36002b)

  20. Near as I can tell, the VP candidate will be Cruz. Maybe Hawley. Conceivably Bannon.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  21. It’s entirely possible that Big Brother’s hold over Oceania was more rational than Trump’s hold over the GOP.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  22. The most blazingly obvious fact about Donald Trump is his profound selfishness and inability to recognize a higher moral standard than self-interest.

    A corporatist; a capitalist– revisit Henry Ford and his relationship w/Germany back in the day.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  23. She also has no support from the base, in fact, they openly loath her, calling her Nikki McRomBush.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 11/29/2021 @ 1:43 pm

    If the first time I’ve heard this is now and from you does that mean I’m not part of the base? Does that mean you’re closer to the base than I am?

    Also, how can anyone say Nikki McRomBush with a straight face? If we mash everything together we’d get Darling Nikki McRomBush and that feels like some sort of quadruple entendre.

    frosty (f27e97)

  24. Near as I can tell, the VP candidate will be Cruz.

    Nah. A fella like Tedtoo ‘whose allegiance is ruled by expedience’ can broker vocal Trump support for a SCOTUS nom. A sweep gets him that or he hangs on the Senate- unless his warm and winning personality forces a viable challenge. But he’s no VP.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  25. ‘She also has no support from the base, in fact, they openly loath her, calling her Nikki McRomBush.’

    They’ll “loath” her until he chooses her, and then fall in love– or in line. Pence was loathed in Indiana- until he joined the ticket:

    ‘Mike Pence: A Meteoric Rise but a Controversial Political Past
    Critics say GOP VP nominee’s track record as Indiana governor is troubling’

    https://www.rollcall.com/2016/10/09/mike-pence-a-meteoric-rise-but-a-controversial-political-past/

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  26. Trump’s VP will be someone on this list, except for #8, 6, 5, 3, 2, and 1. Or it can be Rick Scott , Kristi L. Noem, Josh Hawley, Glenn Youngkin, Liz Cheney, Larry Hogan, or Tom Cotton.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  27. @23 @26 Rip is the trump whisperer

    JF (e1156d)

  28. @26. Trump’s VP will be someone on this list, except for #8, 6, 5, 3, 2, and 1.

    You suggest DJT Jr., makes the ‘short list?’

    He’s #7 on your dance card.

    Don’t believe his kid ‘cuts a rug’ for the gig.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  29. Trump/happyfeet/2024

    mg (8cbc69)

  30. Critics say GOP VP nominee (insert name here) track record as (insert previous job(s) here) is (extremely/highly) troubling.

    It would be much bigger news if the big six media ever all loved the GOP VP candidate, and then conservatives should be worried sick.

    Harris was probably the worst Democrat VP nominee, most phony since John Edwards and no one cared.

    steveg (e81d76)

  31. You suggest DJT Jr., makes the ‘short list?’

    He’s #7 on your dance card.

    Don’t believe his kid ‘cuts a rug’ for the gig.

    There is nothing in the Constitution that prevents a father from selecting his son as VP. As long as Daddy believes he “cuts the rug” it doesn’t matter.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  32. Litmus test: Strip must turn orange, not red?

    nk (1d9030)

  33. @23 @26 Rip is the trump whisperer

    JF (e1156d) — 11/29/2021 @ 2:29 pm

    Just a prediction. No whispering involved. As usual, voters don’t care who is selected as vice president.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  34. I also don’t believe Harris will either be the VP next time around, nor a candidate if Biden is unable to run.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  35. No one can beat 80 million cellar dweller voters.
    Never Ever.

    mg (8cbc69)

  36. No one can beat 80 million cellar dweller voters.
    Never Ever.

    Yeah, well, sure, that’s what Trump’s job is. To make the GOP such a stench that nobody within a standard deviation of the center will go near it. Never ever.

    nk (1d9030)

  37. Republicans are the party of Never Ever.

    mg (8cbc69)

  38. “what’s clear is that trump never said or implied any of this”

    “Mike Pence didn’t have the courage to do what should have been done to protect our Country and our Constitution, giving States a chance to certify a corrected set of facts, not the fraudulent or inaccurate ones which they were asked to previously certify.” – Donald Trump

    Davethulhu (67c626)

  39. @31. And again:

    7. Donald Trump Jr.: JFK Jr., who wasn’t much brighter, has a better chance– and he’s dead. No way.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  40. 7. Donald Trump Jr.: JFK Jr., who wasn’t much brighter, has a better chance– and he’s dead. No way.

    Not according to Qanon.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  41. Trump got out more votes for Biden/Harris than the Democratic National Committee did.

    nk (1d9030)

  42. And intelligence has never been a criterion (as we have seen) to be VP.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  43. If Trump gets nominated in 2024, burn that b!tch down.

    Paul Montagu (5de684)

  44. Here’s what the British bettors think.

    So they think Trump himself currently has less than a 40 percent chance of getting the Republican nomination.

    Unfortunately, the next on the list is DeSantis.

    Jim Miller (edcec1)

  45. I’d rather bet a steeplechase, Jim Miller.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkROHz9Czhk

    mg (8cbc69)

  46. They chose reactively and should learn to be happy with their choice, or do better next time.

    steveg (e81d76)

  47. @2 yeah, a politico reporter has a direct line to trump’s thinking

    Most of Trump’s followers are connected to the other end. Like, for example, the ones who thought they were going to get pardoned for assaulting the Capitol.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  48. She also has no support from the base, in fact, they openly loath her, calling her Nikki McRomBush.

    Looking at how Trump and his base portrayed every exiting WH official, it is pretty clear that not being a servile yes-man made one a non-person. Only the obsequious need apply.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  49. She also has no support from the base, in fact, they openly loath her, calling her Nikki McRomBush.

    Haley’s best move now is to break with Trump utterly. Become Goldstein to his Big Brother. She could actually make that center party happen by 2024. Add Bush, Romney and a dozen US Senators (including Manchin) and you have the basis for hope.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  50. But he’s no VP.

    He’s shown that he’ll do anything for Trump. It’s not his department where the rockets come down.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  51. Harris was probably the worst Democrat VP nominee, most phony since John Edwards and no one cared.

    She made Joe credible to the left fringe.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  52. Yeah, well, sure, that’s what Trump’s job is. To make the GOP such a stench that nobody within a standard deviation of the center will go near it. Never ever.

    True, but Biden says “Hold my beer!”

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  53. Kevin, that’s a high risk high reward approach. But I think she could credibly claim to have held her nose and supported the party for as long as she could. I wouldn’t award her marks for courage in the face of trumps corruption but I could support her over Biden.

    Time123 (0ef19f)

  54. “She made Joe credible to the left fringe.”

    I assure you that “Former Prosecutor Kamala Harris” did no such thing. The left was energized by Trumps odiousness, not by the the Democratic candidates. It’s going to be a bloodbath for the Democrats in the next couple elections.

    Davethulhu (67c626)

  55. I assure you that “Former Prosecutor Kamala Harris” did no such thing. The left was energized by Trumps odiousness, not by the the Democratic candidates. It’s going to be a bloodbath for the Democrats in the next couple elections.

    If so, since it will also be a bloodbath on the GOP side, I reiterate my claim that there has been no better time to be done with both these failed parties.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  56. I wouldn’t award her marks for courage in the face of trumps corruption but I could support her over Biden.

    I give them marks for courage in the order that they stop clapping.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  57. Really, we are far past looking for “optimal.”

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  58. I view the ambivalent Trump toadies, whether they evolved like Haley, devolved like Cruz, or slunk off like DeVos, the same way I view the cathouse madams of the Old West who made the cowboys take off their spurs first. They’re no ladies, no matter what airs they put on.

    nk (1d9030)

  59. @56 Kevin you’re on fire lately.

    Time123 (9f42ee)

  60. @57, agreed. I could have maybe held my nose at policy differences with Biden if he’d shown decent competence. But he hasn’t. There’s no upside to his administration. He’s purely a least bad alternative. If the GOP can run someone better then Trump is 24….

    Time123 (9f42ee)

  61. mg- I’m not recommending that anyone rush over to London to put a bet down; I just think the collective decisions of bettors often provide useful information. (The site that I linked to gives their record, for those who wonder just how good the information is.)

    Jim Miller (edcec1)

  62. Kevin, that’s a high risk high reward approach

    Actually, I don’t think so. It’s high reward period, although whether that reward is in the short term or the long term is unclear. Since it is a given that a Trumplican Party is doomed, trying to stay in that party’s good graces seems unrewarding (unless you consider being Trump’s VP to be a reward, of course).

    Whichever “future candidate” breaks with Trump first will have the edge sooner or later. It will cause a rift in the party and may re-elect a Democrat in 2024, but TR’s Bull Moose insurrection changed the direction of the GOP, and would have gotten TR the 1920 nomination had he not dropped dead in 1919.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  63. Jim, I think they had Hillary by 2-1 for quite some time in 2016.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  64. @50. He’s shown that he’ll do anything for Trump. It’s not his department where the rockets come down.

    Anything: Like turn on him. Remember, The Donald holds a grudge –and has a very long memory:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pdy2de3LTe4

    Is he learning Chinese? 😉

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  65. I could have maybe held my nose at policy differences with Biden if he’d shown decent competence.

    If he had governed on the basis that he ran (“Let’s all come together and stop the hating…”) maybe it would have been OK. But not only is he incompetent, he’s just a frontman for a far Left party.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  66. I assure you that “Former Prosecutor Kamala Harris” did no such thing…

    And I assure you that “Former Vice President Kamala Harris” has a better ring to it. 😉

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  67. Watch what happens to Christie when he pisses off Trump w/one interview and presser too many.

    He’ll slap him down like a ball of raw dough on a pizza pan.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  68. And intelligence has never been a criterion (as we have seen) to be VP.

    You hear about the time Bill Clinton lost a spelling bee to Dan Quayle? He thought “harass” was two words.

    nk (1d9030)

  69. #63 Kevin – Yes, they had Hillary as the favorite all through the 2016 campaign. And I think, had she run a half-way competent campaign, she would have won in the electoral college as well as the popular vote.

    I don’t recall who, but some sharp observer said that Hillary was the only one in the Democratic Party who didn’t think she should take Bill Clinton’s advice. I am no fan of the man, but he does know electoral politics.

    Incidentally, I think Trump wasn’t expecting to win in 2016, but was running just to screw things up (and maybe get that hotel in Moscow he has wanted for so long). He enjoys the adulation from the crowds and the meeting with monarchs, but isn’t interested in actually governing.

    (One thing that messed up the bettors in 2016 is that some of the state polls had enormous errors. I haven’t seen a good explanation for what went wrong, though I suppose there must be one, by now.)

    Jim Miller (edcec1)

  70. Since it is a given that a Trumplican Party is doomed, trying to stay in that party’s good graces seems unrewarding (unless you consider being Trump’s VP to be a reward, of course).

    What goes around comes around:

    https://www.nytimes.com/1964/06/10/archives/goldwater-shift-seems-unlikely-liberals-facing-difficulties-in-bid.html

    Echoes. A perspective from 1964:

    ‘Attempts to get agreements from Mr. Goldwater on party principles are not necessarily doomed to failure, but they are more than likely going to be surrounded by considerable confusion and misunderstanding.

    The first reason is that Mr. Goldwater, naturally, does not view himself as in any way extreme or reckless. Thus, while he might not reject appeals to be careful, he also might not take the action that others in the party would like him to.

    Also, those Republicans who view their differences with the Senator as almost entirely an ideological matter can mislead themselves. To some observers of Mr. Goldwater, personality seems much more important than philosophy.’

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  71. #70 “unless you consider being Trump’s VP to be a reward, of course”

    Well, there are masochists in America; there are even a few masochists in politics.

    Jim Miller (edcec1)

  72. I think it’s ironic, but the existence of campaign finance and disclosure laws may be the thing that allows Trump to succeed. The problem with an insurgency against the party establishment is that the insurgents are all exposed. Trump got around that problem by using lots of his own money at first, but a Haley or DeSantis might find themselves having trouble with donors not wanting to be on President Trump’s sh1tlist.

    Gene McCarthy was adamantly against campaign finance laws (he was an appellant in Buckley v Valeo), since his insurgency against LBJ was funded by several large donors who might not have want to be on LBJ’s bad side. It is no accident that campaign finance laws were proposed immediately afterwards (in 1970, well before Watergate). See here for details.

    These laws are mostly bad and should be repealed. They enable egotistical billionaires to spend their opponents into the ground, while making it difficult (and dangerous) for insurgents to topple the powers that be.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  73. I thought I was past laughing at Clinton-Quayle jokes…

    Paul Montagu (5de684)

  74. Kevin M (ab1c11) — 11/29/2021 @ 10:24 pm

    These laws are mostly bad and should be repealed. They enable egotistical billionaires to spend their opponents into the ground, while making it difficult (and dangerous) for insurgents to topple the powers that be.

    AS proginally passed, they didn’t allow billionaires to self-fund, but the Supreme Court ruled that was unconstitutional.

    The result is that the only effective insurgents must be billionaires, and the problem is, there’s not enough of them.

    Otherwise, it strengthens parties enormously.

    Disclosures are used by misleading political ads to connect dots that are not related. When they are, denial suffices.

    Sammy Finkelman (c49738)

  75. Billionaires don’t have to start their camppaigns for president around January of the year before the election. The primary campaign is a demolition derby with no new entries. In big states, Senate races are often uncompetitive – someone runs in order to help their buddies make money from the campaign.

    Sammy Finkelman (c49738)

  76. I enjoyed the irony of McCain getting hoist on his won petard in 2008 when he accepted federal funding and the limits that came with it and Obama outraised him by more than twice as much. That and the occasional flash of Sarah Palin’s legs.

    nk (1d9030)

  77. 69. Jim Miller (edcec1) — 11/29/2021 @ 7:25 pm

    I haven’t seen a good explanation for what went wrong, though I suppose there must be one, by now.)

    The percentage of the population that answers surveys is now closer to 5% than 10%, and it’s not proportional to opinion on other matters. The raw figures are badly wrong, and pollsters have to adjust and weigh their figures. (one way to weigh is to do it in the process of taking the survey by deciding they they have enough of this type person but that’s inadequate.)

    https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/07/21/the-challenges-of-polling-when-fewer-people-are-available-to-be-polled

    …Cliff Zukin, past president of the American Association for Public Opinion Research and a Rutgers University political science professor, wrote recently that “two trends are driving the increasing unreliability of election and other polling in the United States: the growth of cellphones and the decline in people willing to answer surveys.”

    ….The potential for what pollsters call “nonresponse bias” – the unwelcome situation in which the people we’re not reaching are somehow systematically different from the people we are reaching, thus biasing our poll results – certainly is greater when response rates are low. But the mere existence of low response rates doesn’t tell us anything about whether or not nonresponse bias exists….

    Better-educated people tend to be more available and willing to do surveys than are those with less education. Nonwhites are somewhat underrepresented. People who are interested in politics are more likely to take surveys that have to do with politics. But most of these biases can be corrected through demographic weighting of the sort that is nearly universally used by pollsters….

    They can get quite good at this, but eventually you will find that polls converge, but not necessarily on the truth. When one poll is too different from the others, the pollster says to himself: I must be weighting the answers incorrectly.

    There’s also the likely voter problem, and the use of cellphones (cellphones have to e dialed manually (as all numbers used to be in the mid-1980s) and they never ask for another person if the person answering the phone is ineligible – say because it is a teenager – because cellphones are considered personal devices and not household devices.

    Sammy Finkelman (c49738)

  78. These (campaign finance) laws are mostly bad and should be repealed

    Publicly reporting campaign contributions can be weaponized by employers to weed out politically undesirable employees and to harass individuals. The law should allow contributors to be anonymous. Forced disclosure violates the First Amendment rights of donors and is compelled government speech.

    Rip Murdock (125f65)

  79. AS originally passed, they didn’t allow billionaires to self-fund, but the Supreme Court ruled that was unconstitutional.

    It was unconstitutional from the get-go. We shall hear about this again when it comes up again. It is an incredible limitation on the freedom of speech, and reporting small contributions has been seen to have a chilling effect due to cancel culture.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  80. 99.

    It is, in fact, one of the most popular laws in America: the Federal Election Campaign Act, which does indeed require campaigns, political parties, and certain citizens’ groups engaged in politics to report the names, addresses, and employment information of their financial supporters. This information is maintained in a government database that is available to anyone—businesses, union bosses, local officials, nosy neighbors, and whoever else might be curious about somebody’s politics.

    But it can’t be used for fundraising. Anyone who wants to use a campaign contribution list for fundraising must pay the politician for his list. Not to do so is to break the law.

    Sammy Finkelman (c49738)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.2476 secs.