Biden-Harris joint appearance in Arizona draws no spectators — as in ZERO attendees

Source: American Thinker.

It is tempting to read this story as predictive somehow, but in fairness to Biden-Harris supporters, there aren’t a whole lot of tea leaves in it. It’s just one of those things that makes you go, “Hmmmmm!”

39 thoughts on “Biden-Harris joint appearance in Arizona draws no spectators — as in ZERO attendees

    1. “The Democrats could have nominated Homer Simpson and have had the same support.”

      If true, then Homer Simpson and not Joe Biden would be running away with this election. That should give you something to think about. Obviously it hasn’t. Too bad.

      Liked by 2 people

    1. A full-on repeat of 2016?

      You really think so? Well, we will see.

      At this stage in 2016 the national polling had Clinton with a 3% advantage. She won the popular vote by 2%. The corresponding advantage for Biden in national polls this year is getting close to 11%. Also, the polls are paying much closer attention to the Electoral map which they failed to do in 2016. Biden is significantly ahead in EVERY state that Trump won by those small margins in 2016. And some of the states he won handily are now closely contested.” When the GOP is in a fight to hold SC, GA and TX you have to know that SOMETHING is going on.

      Bottom line, prepare to be disappointed. You might not be, but it is VERY probable that you will be.


        1. Well, all I have to go on are the polls. There is a good resource by the respected 538 organization where you can see the latest polls along with a rating of the quality of the poll. Also it shows graphs back to the spring for each state so you can see the trends. Recently Biden is trending up and Trump down in all states.

          Pick the Presidential election and the state you want to know about.

          Here are the current average polls for those “battleground states”
          Florida – Biden +4.6%
          Michigan – Biden +8.0%
          Pennsylvania Biden +7.2%
          Wisconsin Biden +7.7%
          North Carolina Biden +3.2%
          Arizona Biden +3.8%

          New battleground states
          Texas Trump +1.4%
          Georgia Biden +0.6%

          Trump won ALL of these states in 2016.


          1. I see Trump winning North Carolina and Florida. If he also wins Pennsylvania, it’s probably going to be an early night.

            This is part of what I’m getting at when I ask about comparisons between 2016 and 2020. The polls may prove to be totally unreliable.


    1. RE: “The journalist in this case buried the lede – Arizona is a battleground state.”

      The “lede” of this particular story is that no one showed up at a Biden-Harris campaign event. It’s right there in the headline and the first paragraph.


      1. “Burying the lede” is a journalistic expression which means “To begin a story with details of secondary importance to the reader while postponing more essential points or facts.”

        I believe that it is of far more importance that Arizona is a battleground state – mentioned mid-point in the story – than that one of the stops on Biden’s bus tour was kind of a flop. Trump won Arizona by more than 4 points in 2016. Current polling has him behind in that state by about 3 points. THAT is a significant change. And is why I said that the media you link to are “burying the lede.”

        You disagree? That’s fine. I feel your desperation for hopeful Trump news. Perhaps a small Biden rally in yet another new “battleground state” IS what you think is most important. Your opinions are yours, of course. And mine are mine.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. RE: “I believe that it is of far more importance that Arizona is a battleground state…”

        Far more important in what sense? Arizona’s status as a battleground state is not the focus of the story. Supporters not showing up for a Biden-Harris campaign event is the focus. The writer cannot be accused of “burying the lede” in any legitimate sense as a technical matter.

        Your criticism is only that you wanted to read a different story.


        1. Well actually the story was fine. My real point was the misplaced glee of desperate Trumpers who spread this story as if it were important.

          Let’s agree that Biden supporters are much less excitable than Trump supporters. They do not turn up in large maskless crowds be in the Presence or to chant “Lock him up” at Obama or whoever is the latest villain that Trump incites them against. They just don’t do that.

          What they seem to be doing, though, is voting. All the analyses so far indicate that the incredible surge of early voting is by those wanting Trump gone and Biden to get to work cleaning up the mess. As I already said, if a failed Biden campaign stop in a new swing state gives you comfort, enjoy it while you can.

          Liked by 2 people

          1. RE: “Well actually the story was fine. My real point was the misplaced glee of desperate Trumpers who spread this story as if it were important.”

            I see. Your real point was to exploit the post to speak your mind about people and things that are unrelated to it. Your real point was to break the Forum rule that says, “Please remain on topic.”


          2. “Moderation?” Again? Is that all you have?

            My post was entirely on topic. It was about the news item you shared. You thought it had important news. I did too. You thought the important part of the story was failed stop. I thought the important part of the story was the reported characterizing a Trump stronghold as a battleground state. I was respectful and polite. You, as is often true, have not been. You need to clean up your act.

            Liked by 1 person

        2. RE: “You thought it had important news.”

          In fact, I never said so. Quite the opposite.

          RE: “I was respectful and polite.”

          Is that what your words, “misplaced glee of desperate Trumpers” is, “respectful and polite”?


          1. “Respectful and polite”
            “Gleeful” was accurate as was “desperate.” So, if you are offended by my use of the word “Trumpers” what word would you prefer for people who STILL support Trump in spite of the overwhelming evidence that he is a lying, incompetent self-indulgent con man who has brought disaster down on this country in almost every way he could? You are not “Republicans” nor “conservatives.” Actual Republicans abhor Trump and conservatives want to conserve, not destroy. So what should it be? You people don’t hesitate to throw out “socialists” or “commies” or “anarchists”, so maybe a simple “fascists” would be better than “Trumpers”.

            “You thought it had important news”
            If you didn’t think it was important, as you now claim, why did you post it?

            Liked by 1 person

      1. Another desperate attempt to denigrate Joe Biden.
        You never have senior moment where you cannot recall a name?
        I think you will find that they are pretty common. And are not particularly important. It is judgment and principles that count in the Oval Office. Trump has less than none. Joe has plenty.

        It must be exhausting. You have been defending the indefensible for four years now. Your time in this Hell will soon be over and you can concentrate on sniping at Biden and Harris.

        Liked by 1 person

          1. Well, that clinches it. Four more years of Donald Trump because your senior moments never involve the headcount of grandchildren but Joe Biden had such a moment. Of course, Donald Trump’s hundreds of clearly demented statements, incoherent ramblings and fractured syntax don’t count because, you know, you like what he is doing to our country.

            Liked by 1 person

          2. It becomes more clear every day that Biden is really just a Trojan Horse to sneak the most Liberal Senator in Congress past the scrutiny of the voters.


          3. Finally, the truth. It is Kamala Harris that you really loathe – much as you loathe President Obama. And for the same reason. No, not that reason. You hate effective government and there is every reason to believe that she is a strong, competent and energetic leader with a take no prisoners attitude who – should she become President- will make the government active and effective again as it was under President Obama.

            If you really think that Kamala Harris is the “most Liberal Senator in Congress” then you have not been paying attention. I doubt you really think that. I am sure you are paying attention. For you “Liberal” is just another smear word which goes over big in Trump world. In the real world – not so much.

            Harris is getting PLENTY of scrutiny by the voters. And this will stick in your craw too. People like her. That is why Biden chose her.

            Liked by 1 person

        1. A little one way in your criticism, Jim. It was Mr. Smith who threw the word “cooties” out there.

          It’s really too bad that Mr. Smith can’t seem to be able to spell COVID … Or Coronavirus.


          1. The issue is the OTHER Mr. Roberts has a real difficult time not including personal attacks and does not get threatened with moderation. While I agree that Paul can be caustic at times, he usually explains his viewpoint. Whereas others just throw it out there and certain “moderators” try to silence Paul but not the others.

            The hypocrisy is the issue, not the cooties.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s