2024 Presidential Election Thread - Let's keep the party going.

[chainsaw 9872]

9 minutes ago, Longhorn94 said:

im sick and tired of "democrats are bad at strategy" rants and Joe is too old rants.

They are, he is, and I'm more sick and tired of that being true than I am of the rants.

['stache 21823]

3 minutes ago, Skipper said:

This is just wrong.  When Biden inevitably loses this election, this debate will forever be discussed as the turning point and every decision the inner circle of the party made in the 18 months leading up to it and after will be debated.   The debate convinced the vast majority of Biden voters that Biden is flat out unfit to be President for another term.  Full Stop.  The result will be a bunch of those in the category of "reluctant" Biden Voters or pure Anti-Trump voters to sit it out or vote 3rd party.  Because the reality is neither of these candidates have any business being President.  The competent American public recognizes what a ridiculous choice it is and the reality is many will just throw their hands in the air and say fuck it, wake me up in 4 years. 

The margins were slim to begin with but relying on the non R voting public to actually make an effort to vote on the basis that an essentially incapacitated Biden is still better than Trump is not a winning strategy.

If America votes in a lying anti-American traitor who is openly saying he'll go full dictator, because of a bad debate performance by his opponent, we don't deserve democracy anyway.

Edited July 2 by 'stache

[mdmost 43006]

3 minutes ago, Skipper said:

This is just wrong.  When Biden inevitably loses this election, this debate will forever be discussed as the turning point and every decision the inner circle of the party made in the 18 months leading up to it and after will be debated.   The debate convinced the vast majority of Biden voters that Biden is flat out unfit to be President for another term.  Full Stop.  The result will be a bunch of those in the category of "reluctant" Biden Voters or pure Anti-Trump voters to sit it out or vote 3rd party.  Because the reality is neither of these candidates have any business being President.  The competent American public recognizes what a ridiculous choice it is and the reality is many will just throw their hands in the air and say fuck it, wake me up in 4 years. 

The margins were slim to begin with but relying on the non R voting public to actually make an effort to vote on the basis that an essentially incapacitated Biden is still better than Trump is not a winning strategy.

The debate was validation for people who thought already that Biden was too old. For those on the fence, it was the jumping off point. For those on the left who were never happy that an old man was the choice with no alternatives allowed, it was validation that we're about to lose everything because we want to place our faith that the American public will think old man Biden is better than authoritarian Trump. 

[TexArcher 37987]

27 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Wrong. His best chance to make everyone forget about the first one is to turn in a solid performance in a second one. That should be self-evident.

No one is going to forget the first one. Trump will flood the airways with reminders. 

So.  Much.  Denial.

This is like a TCU football fan thinking they could beat Georgia if they got another crack at it.

Biden should be kept away from cameras as much as possible, and he should always be limited to prepared remarks.  Anything beyond that is asking for another disaster.  Because that "cold" isn't going away.

[Rex Kramer 1342]

1 hour ago, David Dennison said:

Did it?

I seem to remember a few hiccups, one in particular. I think Ken Burns made a documentary about it.

Something that has that many amendments isn’t infallible. I wouldn’t say it’s not working, necessarily, because of the ability to implement amendments. But it’s venerated status is and always has been ridiculous. 

[Rex Kramer 1342]

1 hour ago, Pancho said:

Nobody is even talking about the debates anymore. 

lol. I suspect you want to believe this, but it’s a laughable thought. 

[David Dennison 18935]

56 minutes ago, TexArcher said:

The ones who are dangerously close to losing twice to the worst candidate in history.

This fiasco is on the entire party.  The Dems are right on all of the issues, but they're about as competent at campaining as Gregg Berhalter is at international soccer.

What should they have done? Support a challenge to their own incumbent?

[aggie08 21505]

14 minutes ago, Skipper said:

This is just wrong.  When Biden inevitably loses this election, this debate will forever be discussed as the turning point and every decision the inner circle of the party made in the 18 months leading up to it and after will be debated.   The debate convinced the vast majority of Biden voters that Biden is flat out unfit to be President for another term.  Full Stop.  The result will be a bunch of those in the category of "reluctant" Biden Voters or pure Anti-Trump voters to sit it out or vote 3rd party.  Because the reality is neither of these candidates have any business being President.  The competent American public recognizes what a ridiculous choice it is and the reality is many will just throw their hands in the air and say fuck it, wake me up in 4 years. 

The margins were slim to begin with but relying on the non R voting public to actually make an effort to vote on the basis that an essentially incapacitated Biden is still better than Trump is not a winning strategy.

All of this. And I can't even really blame those who sit out at this point. People can call them stupid or short-sighted or uninformed or manipulated--and there's still a lot of truth to those descriptors in such a critical election--for not getting out and voting for the obvious lesser of two evils...but, "Hey, take time out of your day to vote for the guy who absolutely will not be president on January 1, 2029 (if he's still breathing)" inevitably breeds apathy.

[MissingInAction 25116]

[David Dennison 18935]

This thread reminds me that I voted for the guy who's older than Joe Biden.

Cool story, bro.

[hookem2010 2624]

12 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

What should they have done? Support a challenge to their own incumbent?

It seems like someone should have gotten in Biden's ear a while ago about stepping aside. I know I, and many others, were mocked last year when bringing up running a different candidate due to giving up the incumbent advantage. Does that advantage still exist when the candidate appears unsafe to be left alone at home, much less run a country?

[Skipper 6136]

8 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

What should they have done? Support a challenge to their own incumbent?

Yes.  If you believe the recent reporting of Bernstein, people within the party have been trying to ring the alarm bell for the past 18 months and there has been significant cognitive decline in particular within the past 6 months.   Given the debate performance that seems pretty valid.   So yes, I think the D inner circle/power brokers that were actually aware of this should have made the move months ago.  At the least, they never should have allowed him on a debate stage.   If it comes out that it really was Biden's stubbornness/failure to accept reality (whether in regards to running or with respect to doing the debate), this election is on everyone that enabled him or were too afraid to tell an old man no (even if he is the President). 

To be clear, I was supportive of the debate because I thought it gave him the chance to prove everyone wrong.  I had no idea he had declined as much as he obviously had.  The people in the room with him absolutely had to know and know the risk.  Absolute incompetence.

[DixonHur 11342]

32 minutes ago, 'stache said:

If America votes in a lying anti-American traitor who is openly saying he'll go full dictator, because of a bad debate performance by his opponent, we don't deserve democracy anyway.

Maybe, and hear me out, the Democrats should have put forth a better candidate?  Both in 2020, and 2024.

['stache 21823]

Just now, DixonHur said:

Maybe, and hear me out, the Democrats should have put forth a better candidate?  Both in 2020, and 2024.

Um, no, maybe, just maybe, the American public should be turned off by fascism? Nah, blame the democrats, always their fault.

[immamac 42871]

Just now, hookem2010 said:

It seems like someone should have gotten in Biden's ear a while ago about stepping aside. I know I, and many others, were mocked last year when bringing up running a different candidate due to giving up the incumbent advantage. Does that advantage still exist when the candidate appears unsafe to be left alone at home, much less run a country?

I'm on record with this opinion but deferred to Biden being alright to run especially after the state of the union. The debate was...just one of those wow moments that doesn't happen very often. It was such an incredibly enormous miscalculation that it's really hard to logically process and justify as anything other than stupidity or intentional to get him to step aside. 

[Pancho 44860]

46 minutes ago, Skipper said:

This is just wrong.  When Biden inevitably loses this election, this debate will forever be discussed as the turning point and every decision the inner circle of the party made in the 18 months leading up to it and after will be debated.   The debate convinced the vast majority of Biden voters that Biden is flat out unfit to be President for another term.  Full Stop.  The result will be a bunch of those in the category of "reluctant" Biden Voters or pure Anti-Trump voters to sit it out or vote 3rd party.  Because the reality is neither of these candidates have any business being President.  The competent American public recognizes what a ridiculous choice it is and the reality is many will just throw their hands in the air and say fuck it, wake me up in 4 years. 

The margins were slim to begin with but relying on the non R voting public to actually make an effort to vote on the basis that an essentially incapacitated Biden is still better than Trump is not a winning strategy.

 

The debate wasn’t a turning point. People already knew they were going to vote for a lying sack of shit who is open about being a traitor to America. The debate just confirmed that. Biden could have gone Obama oratory style and it wouldn’t have changed anyone’s mind. They already knew what they were going to do. Biden voters were still going to vote for Biden regardless of his debate performance. You’re seeing them admit that now. Some of them want a change, sure, but they aren’t going all of a sudden not vote for Biden in November. If he’s on the ballot, he’s getting their vote. 

[Snake Diggity 4625]

2 hours ago, immamac said:

It's so fucking bad that Donald Trump didn't dunk on him. I don't think some of you have been honest with yourselves. This was so bad, the worst most morally bankrupt person in the public eye decided to not fuck with it because it was clear that Biden is just a sad old man who's lost his fucking marbles. It's fucking bad. Jake tapper isn't a Republican anything. Joe Biden shouldn't be the fucking president for 4 more years. Maybe he can do 1 or 2 more, but that's it. The campaign shouldn't drop him like a rock, but I think pivoting to a clear transition and graceful exit for him post election would be best. It was too early for him to transition out last year, he was fine, but he's meh at best going into November and by this time next year I doubt he's just coasting on the meh line, he will degrade and when he does if they have a real vocalized plan and everyone gets on board to gracefully transition I think they can run that ticket. 

4 more years of Biden is ludicrous. No one in their right mind believes that's possible. The 70% of voters who are already decided don't matter. The 30% left matter a lot, and those people for better or worse aren't voting for a fucking corpse even against a dictator. 

I wonder how it would sell to have Biden swap with Kamala and be VP?  My guess is that would be a disaster but maybe they could spin it as a way to keep the incumbency advantage and mitigate Harris’s downside.

Just now, Skipper said:

Yes.  If you believe the recent reporting of Bernstein, people within the party have been trying to ring the alarm bell for the past 18 months and there has been significant cognitive decline in particular within the past 6 months.   Given the debate performance that seems pretty valid.   So yes, I think the D inner circle/power brokers that were actually aware of this should have made the move months ago.  At the least, they never should have allowed him on a debate stage.   If it comes out that it really was Biden's stubbornness/failure to accept reality (whether in regards to running or with respect to doing the debate), this election is on everyone that enabled him or were too afraid to tell an old man no (even if he is the President). 

To be clear, I was supportive of the debate because I thought it gave him the chance to prove everyone wrong.  I had no idea he had declined as much as he obviously had.  The people in the room with him absolutely had to know and know the risk.  Absolute incompetence.

I was shocked by Biden in the debate because of how he looked in the SOTU in January.  That was just 5 months ago and that performance seemed to go a long way to alleviate concerns about Biden’s fitness; I know it did for me.  I was expecting another performance like that, so to see how bad off he was last week was devastating.

[David Dennison 18935]

Just now, hookem2010 said:

It seems like someone should have gotten in Biden's ear a while ago about stepping aside. I know I, and many others, were mocked last year when bringing up running a different candidate due to giving up the incumbent advantage. Does that advantage still exist when the candidate appears unsafe to be left alone at home, much less run a country?

I'm pretty sure someone's been in his ear since 2020, when the campaign hinted at serving one term.

But then he won and it became obvious that he was going to run for re-election because that's how presidential politics works.

Now someone has to convince him to willingly give up power. 

That is a Herculean task.

[MissingInAction 25116]

[WhatTheBuck 28789]

37 minutes ago, immamac said:

You were always a moron, but holy shit you are really this stupid? 

You don’t handle criticism well at all. Has anyone ever told you that? Go ahead and get defensive and hostile. You’re wrong. You’re so wrong it’s not really worth my time trying to explain the obvious to you. But I’ll throw you a bone and see if you can figure it out.

There are two debates scheduled. All Biden had to do in the first one was go out there and show that he’s got it together and exceed the very low expectations set for him by his opponent. He failed miserably at that. So there’s another debate scheduled and if he can go out and show us the Biden we wanted to see in the first debate, you’re arguing that there is nothing to be gained by that. And you have the nerve to call me a moron. Lol, please. (It doesn’t matter whether you think he can improve his performance or not. That’s immaterial.)

It’s not rocket science. Biden lost the first contest. Of course he would benefit from a better performance in a rematch. How is that even questioned? You’ve followed sports before, right? This isn’t a novel concept.

[aggie08 21505]

1 minute ago, Pancho said:

 

The debate wasn’t a turning point. People already knew they were going to vote for a lying sack of shit who is open about being a traitor to America. The debate just confirmed that. Biden could have gone Obama oratory style and it wouldn’t have changed anyone’s mind. They already knew what they were going to do. Biden voters were still going to vote for Biden regardless of his debate performance. You’re seeing them admit that now. 

This is incredibly naive, dude. Swaying Trump voters over to Biden was never the objective of the debate.

[mdmost 43006]

There's big "only I can fix it" energy from Biden since the Trump threat increased. We're now being asked to ignore every piece of data that shows he should step down because he's our only option to beat Trump. There's risk with both options of him staying or him stepping down. So someone better figure out the most likely option to not have Trump win and everyone get behind it immediately.

4 minutes ago, Pancho said:

 

The debate wasn’t a turning point. People already knew they were going to vote for a lying sack of shit who is open about being a traitor to America. The debate just confirmed that. Biden could have gone Obama oratory style and it wouldn’t have changed anyone’s mind. They already knew what they were going to do. Biden voters were still going to vote for Biden regardless of his debate performance. You’re seeing them admit that now. 

Yes but for those on the fence, the debate reinforced that staying home is the easiest option now than to either pull the lever for a felon or for someone they know will not finish out the next 4 years. Or they hold their nose and vote for Trump because continuity is easier to go with than the unknown of when Biden will die in office or be forced out due to being unable to complete the term. 

Edited July 2 by mdmost

[hookem2010 2624]

I will admit that my concerns at the time were based more on Biden drowning in the admittedly flawed polls. But I don't think it was unbelievable or unforeseeable that Biden would be declining mentally by the time of this election. He's not just 81, he's been President or VP for 12 of the last 16 years, and the other 4 he was watching Trump attempt to destroy the country and campaigning. Not to mention the death of his son, or his other child's legal/personal issues. The man has experienced multiple lifetimes of stress in the last two decades.

Edited July 2 by hookem2010

[Longhorn94 2456]

if your take away from the debate was that Biden is too old so you aren't going to vote for him or you are going to sit this one out - SURPRISE - you were never going to vote for BIden. Because that means that you were ok with the guy on the other side who literally lied every single time he opened his mouth. You can say Biden performed poorly but he at least told the truth no matter how slowly. The other guy lied about every goddamn thing and that should disqualify him from getting any vote that isn't a MAGA idiot. So again, if you claim this debate changed your mind, you were always ok with the lying fascist and never supporting the truth telling democrat.

[immamac 42871]

1 minute ago, WhatTheBuck said:

You don’t handle criticism well at all. Has anyone ever told you that? Go ahead and get defensive and hostile. You’re wrong. You’re so wrong it’s not really worth my time trying to explain the obvious to you. But I’ll throw you a bone and see if you can figure it out.

There are two debates scheduled. All Biden had to do in the first one was go out there and show that he’s got it together and exceed the very low expectations set for him by his opponent. He failed miserably at that. So there’s another debate scheduled and if he can go out and show us the Biden we wanted to see in the first debate, you’re arguing that there is nothing to be gained by that. And you have the nerve to call me a moron. Lol, please. (It doesn’t matter whether you think he can improve his performance or not. That’s immaterial.)

It’s not rocket science. Biden lost the first contest. Of course he would benefit from a better performance in a rematch. How is that even questioned? You’ve followed sports before, right? This isn’t a novel concept.

This isn't fucking sports you god damned idiot. 

[Skipper 6136]

1 minute ago, Pancho said:

 

The debate wasn’t a turning point. People already knew they were going to vote for a lying sack of shit who is open about being a traitor to America. The debate just confirmed that. Biden could have gone Obama oratory style and it wouldn’t have changed anyone’s mind. They already knew what they were going to do. Biden voters were still going to vote for Biden regardless of his debate performance. You’re seeing them admit that now. Some of them want a change, sure, but they aren’t going all of a sudden not vote for Biden in November. If he’s on the ballot, he’s getting their vote. 

It's not even worth debating with you or a handful of others as you aren't going to change your mind.  But I pretty strongly disagree with all of this and think anyone that thinks this way absolutely has their head in the sand.  

[DixonHur 11342]

1 minute ago, 'stache said:

Um, no, maybe, just maybe, the American public should be turned off by fascism? Nah, blame the democrats, always their fault.

Welp, ok.  Enjoy the fascist dictator.

I don't blame the consumer for failed businesses... I blame the business for putting out a crappy product that people don't want.

In this case, that's both candidates, but the GOP will be more motivated.

[immamac 42871]

Just now, Longhorn94 said:

if your take away from the debate was that Biden is too old so you aren't going to vote for him or you are going to sit this one out - SURPRISE - you were never going to vote for BIden. Because that means that you were ok with the guy on the other side who literally lied every single time he opened his mouth. You can say Biden performed poorly but he at least told the truth no matter how slowly. The other guy lied about every goddamn thing and that should disqualify him from getting any vote that isn't a MAGA idiot. So again, if you claim this debate changed your mind, you were always ok with the lying fascist and never supporting the truth telling democrat.

You do realize that the people posting here aren't the ones who aren't voting right? There's a significant contingent that needs to vote that are undecided or "checked out". The debate didn't check them in, but come time to vote in November with the choices people will likely just "sit this one out". That's the problem, not that anyone is changing their vote. There's lots of data supporting your position of people not changing their vote etc, it's the people who weren't sure if they were gonna vote or just don't want to vote for either who got further away from turning out. 

Low turnout is going to be a favorable outcome for Donald Trump in key states. 

[mdmost 43006]

1 minute ago, Longhorn94 said:

if your take away from the debate was that Biden is too old so you aren't going to vote for him or you are going to sit this one out - SURPRISE - you were never going to vote for BIden. Because that means that you were ok with the guy on the other side who literally lied every single time he opened his mouth. You can say Biden performed poorly but he at least told the truth no matter how slowly. The other guy lied about every goddamn thing and that should disqualify him from getting any vote that isn't a MAGA idiot. So again, if you claim this debate changed your mind, you were always ok with the lying fascist and never supporting the truth telling democrat.

The great middle doesn't see the existential threat that Trump is. They want lower taxes, cheap prices on the goods they buy, to go to work and raise their kids. They don't pay attention to this at the same level or passion as people on the left and right. 

[BehoId, The Underminer! 11669]

4 minutes ago, Longhorn94 said:

if your take away from the debate was that Biden is too old so you aren't going to vote for him or you are going to sit this one out - SURPRISE - you were never going to vote for BIden. Because that means that you were ok with the guy on the other side who literally lied every single time he opened his mouth. You can say Biden performed poorly but he at least told the truth no matter how slowly. The other guy lied about every goddamn thing and that should disqualify him from getting any vote that isn't a MAGA idiot. So again, if you claim this debate changed your mind, you were always ok with the lying fascist and never supporting the truth telling democrat.

we've said it a few times on here, but everyone here votes, and we all pretty much vote the same.  we're talking about the million folks out of 350 million spread over a dozen states that will decide this thing.

[aggie08 21505]

2 minutes ago, Longhorn94 said:

if your take away from the debate was that Biden is too old so you aren't going to vote for him or you are going to sit this one out - SURPRISE - you were never going to vote for BIden. Because that means that you were ok with the guy on the other side who literally lied every single time he opened his mouth. You can say Biden performed poorly but he at least told the truth no matter how slowly. The other guy lied about every goddamn thing and that should disqualify him from getting any vote that isn't a MAGA idiot. So again, if you claim this debate changed your mind, you were always ok with the lying fascist and never supporting the truth telling democrat.

Again, this isn't about losing votes to Trump. It's about the people who are going to throw their hands in the air and say, "Fuck it, I'm out."

[immamac 42871]

Put differently this is 2016 all over again. A hold your nose and vote candidate vs a Republican shit show of a candidate. 

[DixonHur 11342]

7 minutes ago, Pancho said:

 

The debate wasn’t a turning point. People already knew they were going to vote for a lying sack of shit who is open about being a traitor to America. The debate just confirmed that. Biden could have gone Obama oratory style and it wouldn’t have changed anyone’s mind. They already knew what they were going to do. Biden voters were still going to vote for Biden regardless of his debate performance. You’re seeing them admit that now. Some of them want a change, sure, but they aren’t going all of a sudden not vote for Biden in November. If he’s on the ballot, he’s getting their vote. 

Really bad take from an otherwise good poster.

This theory assumes we live in a binary world with only Democrats and Republicans.  But the truth is that independents determine the outcome of elections in the US.  And we are not enthusiastic about either option, and many might stay home because...truth bomb...Project 2025 and Trump doesn't threaten them.  To be clear, I'm voting Biden (or whoever the Dems nominate), but I live in Texas so it might not matter.

['stache 21823]

1 minute ago, DixonHur said:

Welp, ok.  Enjoy the fascist dictator.

I don't blame the consumer for failed businesses... I blame the business for putting out a crappy product that people don't want.

In this case, that's both candidates, but the GOP will be more motivated.

I mean, you do realize how this works, right? 

Newsome: "Too California, what a nightmare"

Whitmire: "Another Hillary, too emotional, should probably smile more"

Buttigieg: "A gay? No wai"

Kamala: "DEI candidate, also prosecuted Black people."

There will always be something that democrats will say "ehrmagerd moderates won't vote for them dooooooooooooom" 

None of them have a 4 year record of success to run on, and a lifetime of moderate positions. Switching now would be a full blown disaster, period. If you or others are ok staying home in November because of a bad debate performance, the fascism is their fault. Again, why is the right not constantly calling for the fascist to step down? Because the game is rigged and 75% of the country's citizens are dumber than dirt.

[Js1 85439]

8 minutes ago, immamac said:

This isn't fucking sports you god damned idiot. 

You do take things way too personally, though. Like god damn bro

[Skipper 6136]

5 minutes ago, Longhorn94 said:

if your take away from the debate was that Biden is too old so you aren't going to vote for him or you are going to sit this one out - SURPRISE - you were never going to vote for BIden. Because that means that you were ok with the guy on the other side who literally lied every single time he opened his mouth. You can say Biden performed poorly but he at least told the truth no matter how slowly. The other guy lied about every goddamn thing and that should disqualify him from getting any vote that isn't a MAGA idiot. So again, if you claim this debate changed your mind, you were always ok with the lying fascist and never supporting the truth telling democrat.

Everyone is telling you the same thing but I'll say it again for all of you that somehow don't get it.   MAGA and R's are going to turn out for Trump.   You now have a lot of people that voted for Biden last time that flat out don't think either one of them have any business being President.   I don't understand how anyone can say with a straight face that Biden is mentally fit to be President another 4 years.   So I'll say it again.  Relying on people to show up and vote for someone that has a very real chance of either dying or becoming completely incapacitated over the next 4 years is not a winning strategy.  The result of that disastrous debate is hundreds of thousands staying home or voting third party.  

['stache 21823]

1 minute ago, Skipper said:

Everyone is telling you the same thing but I'll say it again for all of you that somehow don't get it.   MAGA and R's are going to turn out for Trump.   You now have a lot of people that voted for Biden last time that flat out don't think either one of them have any business being President.   I don't understand how anyone can say with a straight face that Biden is mentally fit to be President another 4 years.   So I'll say it again.  Relying on people to show up and vote for someone that has a very real chance of either dying or becoming completely incapacitated over the next 4 years is not a winning strategy.  The result of that disastrous debate is hundreds of thousands staying home or voting third party.  

So another person who only watches debates and nothing else. Cool.

[Skipper 6136]

2 minutes ago, 'stache said:

So another person who only watches debates and nothing else. Cool.

"Another Person" LOL.    It's truly amazing to me you all can't grasp nobody is talking about the fucking people on this board.   We are talking about public at large.  JFC.

[WhatTheBuck 28789]

6 minutes ago, immamac said:

This isn't fucking sports you god damned idiot. 

You’re kind of a dimwit if you think there’s nothing analogous between the two. Again, your assertion is that the loser of the first contest has nothing to gain from a rematch.

[mdmost 43006]

8 minutes ago, 'stache said:

None of them have a 4 year record of success to run on, and a lifetime of moderate positions. Switching now would be a full blown disaster, period. If you or others are ok staying home in November because of a bad debate performance, the fascism is their fault. Again, why is the right not constantly calling for the fascist to step down? Because the game is rigged and 75% of the country's citizens are dumber than dirt.

It's a disaster either way. Now is the time to figure out which disaster gives you the best chance of winning. And the right is not constantly calling for him to step down because he is a means to an end. Restrict abortion, round up illegals and throw them out, limit who can immigrate to our country, restrict birth control, get rid of any form of equity. They want all that and Trump will give it to them because he doesn't have any morals. He just wants to win and be loved by them. 

And stop equating anyone on here as the people who will stay home. We are talking about the middle of America that is apathetic. The debate only increased that. 

Edited July 2 by mdmost

[DixonHur 11342]

4 minutes ago, 'stache said:

Whitmire: "Another Hillary, too emotional, should probably smile more"

This is a bad comp.  Hillary didn't lose because she's a woman.  She lost because of her last name and 25 years of vitriol against her including a little thing called Bengazi.

She would have made an excellent President, IMO, but her "unlikability" from years of propaganda was too much to overcome.

Grethen doesn't have that same liability and there is very little time for the GOP to make it stick. 

On the flip side, I think she would motivate independents, like me, to vote. 

[mdmost 43006]

3 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

This is a bad comp.  Hillary didn't lose because she's a woman.  She lost because of her last name and 25 years of vitriol against her including a little thing called Bengazi.

She would have made an excellent President, IMO, but her "unlikability" from years of propaganda was too much to overcome.

Grethen doesn't have that same liability and there is very little time for the GOP to make it stick. 

On the flip side, I think she would motivate independents, like me, to vote. 

She is honestly the strongest candidate and the easiest from an electability standpoint. But she's a woman and misogyny is still there. She also doesn't have enough recognition and there's not enough time to get that for her. Plus, African Americans probably stay home after a black VP is passed over for a white woman. The Democrats need the AA vote to win. Go back to Georgia for evidence of that. At this point it's severely limited Joe Biden or unpopular Kamala. 

Edited July 2 by mdmost

[Rex Kramer 1342]

23 minutes ago, Pancho said:

 

The debate wasn’t a turning point. People already knew they were going to vote for a lying sack of shit who is open about being a traitor to America. The debate just confirmed that. Biden could have gone Obama oratory style and it wouldn’t have changed anyone’s mind. They already knew what they were going to do. Biden voters were still going to vote for Biden regardless of his debate performance. You’re seeing them admit that now. Some of them want a change, sure, but they aren’t going all of a sudden not vote for Biden in November. If he’s on the ballot, he’s getting their vote. 

Wow, you’ve got your head in the sand. 

[Chuckie Finster 22702]

 
The debate wasn’t a turning point. People already knew they were going to vote for a lying sack of shit who is open about being a traitor to America. The debate just confirmed that. Biden could have gone Obama oratory style and it wouldn’t have changed anyone’s mind. They already knew what they were going to do. Biden voters were still going to vote for Biden regardless of his debate performance. You’re seeing them admit that now. Some of them want a change, sure, but they aren’t going all of a sudden not vote for Biden in November. If he’s on the ballot, he’s getting their vote. 

Think of the election as a Mack Brown led Longhorn football team.

We start off the season with a few decent performances, nothing flashy. We are ranked fine in the polls, but our fanbase thinks we should be higher. Our rivals claim that we are overrated and haven’t played anyone. Deep down, we know that we have been holding our best plays for the OU game. We know that if we just get a chance to show our stuff on a national stage, everyone else will see what we see in this team, and we will finally get the national respect we deserve.

Then the OU game happens. Our play-calling is shit (GDGD). Most of the negative commentary surrounding the team turns out to be correct and we get blown out.

Yes, we will always support the team. And yes, our rivals will always talk shit. But the impression made to the general public and poll voters that day will stick with us for the rest of the season, even if they didn’t specifically watch that game. The narrative has been set.

Last week’s debate was the OU game.

[immamac 42871]

Just now, mdmost said:

She is honestly the strongest candidate and the easiest from an electability standpoint. But she's a woman and misogyny is still there. She also doesn't have enough recognition and there's not enough time to get that for her. Plus, African Americans probably stay home after a black VP is passed over for a white woman. The Democrats need the AA vote to win. Go back to Georgia for evidence of that. 

Dude...come on. She was an awful candidate, it's really well studied at this point. The debrief of the 2016 election was all about how bad of a candidate she was and the hubris she had to not heavily campaign in states that were assumed safe with turnout. That turnout didn't happen. It wasn't people voting for trump over Hillary that lost her the election. 

[LCHorn 2622]

8 minutes ago, 'stache said:

Switching now would be a full blown disaster, period.

I’ve come around to the idea that switching might not be a disaster.  I think most of the Biden coalition voters are baked into opposing Trump and the remainder are open to an alternative not named Kamala.  Biden’s debate performance and the media fixation with it will provide the permission in most voters minds.
 

Tell me who the VP is and it’ll re-assure me about viability.  You almost have to pick an African American woman, both to re-assemble the coalition and to keep Kamala out of the contest for potus and delay coalescing around one candidate.  I think either Newsome or Whitmer would be fine and the short campaign will help them not ring up body blows that inevitably turns off independents.  

[mdmost 43006]

5 minutes ago, immamac said:

Dude...come on. She was an awful candidate, it's really well studied at this point. The debrief of the 2016 election was all about how bad of a candidate she was and the hubris she had to not heavily campaign in states that were assumed safe with turnout. That turnout didn't happen. It wasn't people voting for trump over Hillary that lost her the election. 

I was talking about Gretchen Whitmer, not Hillary. 

Edited July 2 by mdmost

[scottsins 1968]

Everyone is telling you the same thing but I'll say it again for all of you that somehow don't get it.   MAGA and R's are going to turn out for Trump.   You now have a lot of people that voted for Biden last time that flat out don't think either one of them have any business being President.   I don't understand how anyone can say with a straight face that Biden is mentally fit to be President another 4 years.   So I'll say it again.  Relying on people to show up and vote for someone that has a very real chance of either dying or becoming completely incapacitated over the next 4 years is not a winning strategy.  The result of that disastrous debate is hundreds of thousands staying home or voting third party.  

So…we are just going to ignore the whole concept of previous Trump voters who will NOT come out for him now (new shit has come to light)? Also, I’m a previous Biden voter who now thinks neither of them should be POTUS. And I’ll pull the lever for Joe AGAINST TRUMP in November. I just wonder how many past Biden voters do NOT hate Trump with a burning passion, basically just ambivalent to the extent that they just don’t vote at all?

Who are those people, and how many of them are there?

[DixonHur 11342]

Just now, mdmost said:

She is honestly the strongest candidate and the easiest from an electability standpoint. But she's a woman and misogyny is still there. She also doesn't have enough recognition and there's not enough time to get that for her. Plus, African Americans probably stay home after a black VP is passed over for a white woman. The Democrats need the AA vote to win. Go back to Georgia for evidence of that. 

Yes, misogyny is real, but I'd argue that 99% of them are already voting for Trump.  But she may be able to swing/motivate some suburban women.

As for national recognizability, I think that's way over rated today.  Deep blue states will vote for whichever candidate the Dems put forth.  So she only needs to work on a few swing states... which includes her state, and nearby states such as Wisconsin and Minnesota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, etc.

And I doubt African Americans stay home because they have too much to lose from Project 2025 and a 2nd Trump presidency.

[David Dennison 18935]

2 minutes ago, LCHorn said:

I’ve come around to the idea that switching might not be a disaster.  I think most of the Biden coalition voters are baked into opposing Trump and the remainder are open to an alternative not named Kamala.  Biden’s debate performance and the media fixation with it will provide the permission in most voters minds.
 

Tell me who the VP is and it’ll re-assure me about viability.  You almost have to pick an African American woman, both to re-assemble the coalition and to keep Kamala out of the contest for potus and delay coalescing around one candidate.  I think either Newsome or Whitmer would be fine and the short campaign will help them not ring up body blows that inevitably turns off independents.  

Do you think Joe Biden can be convinced? That's all that matters right now.