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

[MrBig 5,424]

2 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

I’m not a party member and don’t want to be. I supported Bernie, still do, but he lost. That’s how it works. Joe won, he’s the guy, get in line.

Sitting out doesn’t make you an independent, it makes you a moron in the current times.

Your disdain and condescension for Independents and undecided voters is the exact reason why Democrats lose elections. Being an asshole screaming in people’s faces to get in line and vote for Biden to save democracy turns voters off of voting for Biden, even if they hate Trump.

People are more inclined to do something if you appeal to their interests instead of calling them stupid for not making an obvious choice to vote for Joe Biden over Russia-backed Trump. A vote is a vote so if you can’t even be bothered to throw breadcrumbs at any potential voters because you prefer to shove it down their throats and say that democracy will end if you don’t eat it, you should expect a lot of people who choose to starve even if it is the worst choice they can make. 

[hobbes2702 13,049]

1 minute ago, Aqua Buddha said:

That’s disrespectful and unacceptable.  If he wants to be the leader of the party then lead the party,

1) he should be on time, but he does have a pretty important job.

2) Levin has no business “telling” the president to step aside. He won the votes. Period.

[Goredho 17,413]

4 minutes ago, MrBig said:

A vote is a vote so if you can’t even be bothered to throw breadcrumbs at any potential voters because you prefer to shove it down their throats and say that democracy will end if you don’t eat it, you should expect a lot of people who choose to starve even if it is the worst choice they can make. 

If two bad candidates that no one wants are shoved down independent's throats, do they even live in a democracy?

I'm guessing they probably wind up doing their own research to find the answer on YouTube.

[hobbes2702 13,049]

10 minutes ago, MrBig said:

Your disdain and condescension for Independents and undecided voters is the exact reason why Democrats lose elections. Being an asshole screaming in people’s faces to get in line and vote for Biden to save democracy turns voters off of voting for Biden, even if they hate Trump.

People are more inclined to do something if you appeal to their interests instead of calling them stupid for not making an obvious choice to vote for Joe Biden over Russia-backed Trump. A vote is a vote so if you can’t even be bothered to throw breadcrumbs at any potential voters because you prefer to shove it down their throats and say that democracy will end if you don’t eat it, you should expect a lot of people who choose to starve even if it is the worst choice they can make. 

My disdain is for people who try to tell a party that they don’t support or regularly vote for who they should nominate. People who didn’t vote in the democratic primaries saying the Dems should tell their own voters to fuck off.

Anyone who is turned off by someone telling them to vote for Biden to save democracy is either a trumper, a republican, or won’t be voting anyway.

Appeal to their interests? The ones that only they care about? They aren’t asking for breadcrumbs. They are asking to own the bakery. The one they have no actual stakes in helping build. The independents on this thread are telling us they will only vote for their preferred candidate or their pet project. You can’t appeal to those people in any real way. You certainly can’t base your decisions on them. 

Edited July 12 by hobbes2702

[Goredho 17,413]

1 minute ago, hobbes2702 said:

You certainly can’t base your decisions on them. 

You can certainly base your loss on them.

[David Dennison 18,941]

3 minutes ago, Goredho said:

If two bad candidates that no one wants are shoved down independent's throats, do they even live in a democracy?

I'm guessing they probably wind up doing their own research to find the answer on YouTube.

Here's the deal. A whole lot of people do want those candidates.

[hobbes2702 13,049]

1 minute ago, Goredho said:

You can certainly base your loss on them.

Please lay out the solution to getting these independents to vote? They aren’t going to suddenly fall in line behind Kamala, we know this because they’ve told us. 

[David Dennison 18,941]

13 minutes ago, MrBig said:

Your disdain and condescension for Independents and undecided voters is the exact reason why Democrats lose elections. Being an asshole screaming in people’s faces to get in line and vote for Biden to save democracy turns voters off of voting for Biden, even if they hate Trump.

People are more inclined to do something if you appeal to their interests instead of calling them stupid for not making an obvious choice to vote for Joe Biden over Russia-backed Trump. A vote is a vote so if you can’t even be bothered to throw breadcrumbs at any potential voters because you prefer to shove it down their throats and say that democracy will end if you don’t eat it, you should expect a lot of people who choose to starve even if it is the worst choice they can make. 

Democrats lose presidential elections because our constitutional method for choosing a chief executive is dumb as fuck.

[DixonHur 11,345]

34 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Do you care about anyone but yourself?

Of course, but you specifically asked, "even if just for you?"

So that's the question I was responding to.

[jimmyjazz 46,004]

4 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Here's the deal. A whole lot of people do want those candidates.

And those candidates would turn off a whole bunch of Biden voters.

The way I see it, the Dem platform should be "beat Donald Trump".  I don't necessarily think it should play out that way in every election, but in this election, those are the key talking points.  Well, one talking point.

But I'll be damned if I'm going to give a lot of creedence to people who don't work to build party unity stomping their feet and saying "if you don't appease us we won't vote for your guy".  That's Bernie Bro shit all over again and it is wholly counterproductive to the solving the problem at hand.

[DixonHur 11,345]

34 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

Thank you for proving the point that independents are exactly what @Js1 said they are. Do it their way only or they take their ball and go home.

“Independents” are not serious people. But then again, they aren’t really independent either.

Um, so how are the Dems and GOP any different?

Lol, at the second part.  We don't agree with you so clearly you aren't serious.  

You guys are pretty funny, I'll give you that.

[Js1 85,457]

6 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Here's the deal. A whole lot of people do want those candidates.

And in politics, you don’t always get what you want. But the outcome of a Biden win >>>> the outcome of a Trump win.

Hold your nose, suck it up and be an adult. Think about something besides yourself 

[jimmyjazz 46,004]

2 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

Of course, but you specifically asked, "even if just for you?"

So that's the question I was responding to.

Fair enough.  Seems like you might consider whether your future is as cushy as you seem to think it is, but whatever.

[hobbes2702 13,049]

3 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

Um, so how are the Dems and GOP any different?

Lol, at the second part.  We don't agree with you so clearly you aren't serious.  

You guys are pretty funny, I'll give you that.

That’s your question and you want us to take you seriously? Wut? You’re not serious people because there is no actual solution that satisfies you, except for the exact thing you specifically want. That’s not how anything works.

Edited July 12 by hobbes2702

[wildcat09 29,360]

I have so much more empathy and respect for weirdo undecided voters who don't pay attention to politics and just vote on complete vibes every four years at best than I do for "independents" who vote in every election, 95% of the time for Republicans, and openly tell us they don't care about something unless they think it will directly affect them. Even aside from them being assholes, the latter are just much much dumber fucking people.  

You're a middle-aged conservative white guy so how is Project 2025 going to hurt you? Oh, I dunno, how was the average German affected by the nazi rise to power? Do you think things were generally pretty good for the folks in Dachau who studiously ignored the fucking concentration camp in their back yard? Or do you think the nazi insanity and incompetence got their sons killed in a war before they themselves starved to death or had their house bombed by a foreign military? 

Try naming a country, anywhere and at any time in human history, that was run by a dictatorship in which things were or are actually pretty good for most of its people. I'll wait.

[Loch Ness Monster 3,533]

Let's name all the Presidents that have won re-election with a 37% approval rating or lower in modern history.

Well hmm.

[Js1 85,457]

1 minute ago, DixonHur said:

Um, so how are the Dems and GOP any different?

L. O. FUCKING. L. 

This is how I know you’re a troll and an unserious person. 

[DixonHur 11,345]

12 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

My disdain is for people who try to tell a party that they don’t support or regularly vote for who they should nominate.

Sorry to ruin your narrative, but this independent has voted Dem in every election since 2004.

[Goredho 17,413]

9 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

Please lay out the solution to getting these independents to vote? They aren’t going to suddenly fall in line behind Kamala, we know this because they’ve told us. 

Nominate a sharp moderate under the age of 65.  Done.

[Js1 85,457]

I almost forgot why I had you on ignore but now I remember how you made up a bunch of right wing BS and claimed it was part of the official Dem platform. You’ve been a right wing troll for a long time 

[DixonHur 11,345]

1 minute ago, hobbes2702 said:

Wut? You’re not serious people because there is no actual solution that satisfies you, except for the exact thing you specifically want. That’s not how anything works.

Didn't realize the electorate outside of the 2-party system was not allowed to have opinions.

Your party can choose whomever they want, but that doesn't mean I can't suggest an alternative, or that I am beholden to vote for your choice.

Put another way, what % of registered Dems would you estimate are voting FOR Biden, and not AGAINST Trump?

IE would the Dems not vote for a Dem other than Biden?  

I can assure you a lot more independents would be happy to pull the lever for a different Dem.

[DixonHur 11,345]

5 minutes ago, Js1 said:

L. O. FUCKING. L. 

This is how I know you’re a troll and an unserious person. 

So, anyone who doesn't share your world view is a troll?

Please, I beg of you, put me on ignore.

I have zero respect for posters who can't tolerate differing opinions.

[Red Five 40,877]

@Bateshorn Is this thread pretty much what DC looks like right about now?

[TexArcher 37,997]

6 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

Um, so how are the Dems and GOP any different?

 

The former is a political party, however flawed it might be.

The latter is a group of cons doing whatever it takes to get elected, so that they can become famous and profit, and in some cases stay out of prison.

Hope this clears it up.

[hobbes2702 13,049]

9 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

Sorry to ruin your narrative, but this independent has voted Dem in every election since 2004.

And yet still had to ask the question about how the parties are different. 

[David Dennison 18,941]

Just now, DixonHur said:

Didn't realize the electorate outside of the 2-party system was not allowed to have opinions.

Your party can choose whomever they want, but that doesn't mean I can't suggest an alternative, or that I am beholden to vote for your choice.

Put another way, what % of registered Dems would you estimate are voting FOR Biden, and not AGAINST Trump?

IE would the Dems not vote for a Dem other than Biden?  

I can assure you a lot more independents would be happy to pull the lever for a different Dem.

So what you're saying is, a large swath of independents would rather help Donald Trump by not voting than vote for Joe Biden?

I mean, OK.

[hobbes2702 13,049]

9 minutes ago, Goredho said:

Nominate a sharp moderate under the age of 65.  Done.

So Kamala should be fine then. But they keep telling us she’s not. So let’s just go around and around until all the independents agree on a candidate.

Or we could do this thing we already did, you know, voting.

[YGIFS 19,452]

20 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Democrats lose presidential elections because our constitutional method for choosing a chief executive is dumb as fuck.

the Electoral College certainly helped Carter handily defeat Ford despite only getting about 1.5mm more popular votes.  Kennedy beat Nixon by almost 100 EC votes, despite winning the popular vote by about 100k.  Truman used the EC by over 100 votes despite beating Dewey in the popular by less than 2mm votes.  EC worked out well for Wilson over Hughes despite only winning the popular by 500k.  Democrat Cleveland wins the EC handily despite just a 300k popular vote margin.  Cleveland also runs away with the EC in 1884 despite winning the popular by just 20,000 votes.  

the EC has benefited the Democratic Party more often than most people realize.  Yes, it's a bigger issue now, but it has helped your party many times over history.  They knew there'd be states leaning one way or the other on a reliable basis.  They, perhaps naively, built the mechanism to make any newly on-boarded states feel validated.  We were agrarian and merchant based at the time.  But even until Carter/Ford, the system more or less worked.  They knew there'd be more states, different parties, and left open a system to amend it all after Article VII.  

To your point now though is...what they didn't anticipate nor could they have.  It's what's wrong now with the EC/PV setup.  They didn't realize the concept of so many people living in cities and suburbs.  Their prize mistake-a lack of imagination.  It's helped both parties over the years, other parties as well (Whigs, I'm looking at you).  We are just organized and spread out differently now.  There are truly red states thru and thru like Wyoming and North Dakota.  There are truly blue states thru and thru like Oregon and Rhode Island.  Most of us live, even if our neighbors don't know it...in an America without demarcation of borders...rather Urban/Suburban-College versus Rural/Suburban-Non College.  When we accept that along with demographic shifts (aging and color), and adjust accordingly...everything changes for a century.  But we don't get to 2032 until we figure this shit out first.  All else is commentary. 

[Foosters 17,860]

1 hour ago, DixonHur said:

 

I'd prefer Trump lose, but if he wins, I'll be fine.

So will I. But you don't see me running around acting like a spoiled child.

[hobbes2702 13,049]

8 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

Didn't realize the electorate outside of the 2-party system was not allowed to have opinions.

Your party can choose whomever they want, but that doesn't mean I can't suggest an alternative, or that I am beholden to vote for your choice.

Put another way, what % of registered Dems would you estimate are voting FOR Biden, and not AGAINST Trump?

IE would the Dems not vote for a Dem other than Biden?  

I can assure you a lot more independents would be happy to pull the lever for a different Dem.

But you’ve told us they won’t pull the lever for the only other Dem that is an option. So should we ignore you or just keep going down the list?

[David Dennison 18,941]

Just now, YGIFS said:

the Electoral College certainly helped Carter handily defeat Ford despite only getting about 1.5mm more popular votes.  Kennedy beat Nixon by almost 100 EC votes, despite winning the popular vote by about 100k.  Truman used the EC by over 100 votes despite beating Dewey in the popular by less than 2mm votes.  EC worked out well for Wilson over Hughes despite only winning the popular by 500k.  Democrat Cleveland wins the EC handily despite just a 300k popular vote margin.  Cleveland also runs away with the EC in 1884 despite winning the popular by just 20,000 votes.  

the EC has benefited the Democratic Party more often than most people realize.  Yes, it's a bigger issue now, but it has helped your party many times over history.  They knew there'd be states leaning one way or the other on a reliable basis.  They, perhaps naively, built the mechanism to make any newly on-boarded states feel validated.  We were agrarian and merchant based at the time.  But even until Carter/Ford, the system more or less worked.  They knew there'd be more states, different parties, and left open a system to amend it all after Article VII.  

To your point now though is...what they didn't anticipate nor could they have.  It's what's wrong now with the EC/PV setup.  They didn't realize the concept of so many people living in cities and suburbs.  Their prize mistake-a lack of imagination.  It's helped both parties over the years, other parties as well (Whigs, I'm looking at you).  We are just organized and spread out differently now.  There are truly red states thru and thru like Wyoming and North Dakota.  There are truly blue states thru and thru like Oregon and Rhode Island.  Most of us live, even if our neighbors don't know it...in an America without demarcation of borders...rather Urban/Suburban-College versus Rural/Suburban-Non College.  When we accept that along with demographic shifts (aging and color), and adjust accordingly...everything changes for a century.  But we don't get to 2032 until we figure this shit out first.  All else is commentary. 

It's stupid and should be scrapped at soon as possible.

[hobbes2702 13,049]

1 minute ago, YGIFS said:

the Electoral College certainly helped Carter handily defeat Ford despite only getting about 1.5mm more popular votes.  Kennedy beat Nixon by almost 100 EC votes, despite winning the popular vote by about 100k.  Truman used the EC by over 100 votes despite beating Dewey in the popular by less than 2mm votes.  EC worked out well for Wilson over Hughes despite only winning the popular by 500k.  Democrat Cleveland wins the EC handily despite just a 300k popular vote margin.  Cleveland also runs away with the EC in 1884 despite winning the popular by just 20,000 votes.  

the EC has benefited the Democratic Party more often than most people realize.  Yes, it's a bigger issue now, but it has helped your party many times over history.  They knew there'd be states leaning one way or the other on a reliable basis.  They, perhaps naively, built the mechanism to make any newly on-boarded states feel validated.  We were agrarian and merchant based at the time.  But even until Carter/Ford, the system more or less worked.  They knew there'd be more states, different parties, and left open a system to amend it all after Article VII.  

To your point now though is...what they didn't anticipate nor could they have.  It's what's wrong now with the EC/PV setup.  They didn't realize the concept of so many people living in cities and suburbs.  Their prize mistake-a lack of imagination.  It's helped both parties over the years, other parties as well (Whigs, I'm looking at you).  We are just organized and spread out differently now.  There are truly red states thru and thru like Wyoming and North Dakota.  There are truly blue states thru and thru like Oregon and Rhode Island.  Most of us live, even if our neighbors don't know it...in an America without demarcation of borders...rather Urban/Suburban-College versus Rural/Suburban-Non College.  When we accept that along with demographic shifts (aging and color), and adjust accordingly...everything changes for a century.  But we don't get to 2032 until we figure this shit out first.  All else is commentary. 

You just listed a bunch of people that won the popular vote and the EC. Not sure how that matters at all to what @David Dennison said.

[Goredho 17,413]

This thread is pretty pointless now.  Everyone's regurgitating the same takes, myself included.  Nobody's mind is being changed, and no one here has any real insight or pull to influence what the Democratic party does.  Its not even a debate about what the best course of action is anymore.  It's about having a refuge so as to maintain morale and having reinforcement that everything is on track.  If ya'll need that, who am I to deny it?

My only hope is that the people that do have insight and influence are acting accordingly and making the best decisions.  That they seem pretty non committal and divided on Joe's future does not instill confidence in me that things are under control and going according to plan.  That also aligns with what I've personally witnessed from Biden at the debate and yesterday.

But hey, by all means, keep the faith.

[Degenerate Gardner 4,085]

I wish I had a dollar for every push poll text I received in the last week or so.

[MrBig 5,424]

10 minutes ago, Js1 said:

I almost forgot why I had you on ignore but now I remember how you made up a bunch of right wing BS and claimed it was part of the official Dem platform. You’ve been a right wing troll for a long time 

This is the type of shit that has us in the position we are all in. Those of us who saw video footage of Biden over the years and spoke up about his troubling missteps were smeared as right wing trolls in the news. The videos of Biden looking old and frail were all dismissed as right wing propaganda when it was a legitimate concern. It was reminiscent of Trump calling everything “fake news” because it was not to be discussed when it was what we all should have been talking about before primary season. That debate hit us like a ton of bricks to the reality of what was really going on with Biden. I feel stupid for thinking his poor health was just a right wing talking point and not a valid concern. 

[YGIFS 19,452]

Just now, hobbes2702 said:

You just listed a bunch of people that won the popular vote and the EC. Not sure how that matters at all to what @David Dennison said.

I was merely pointing out that there have been very narrow popular vote victories by Democrats in the last century+, but that vote margin was far different than the differential in the Electoral College.  The tacit point is a 1% margin in the PV versus a 30% difference in the EC vote margin illuminates a lot more than just "the EC is dumb because Hillary didn't win!"  The system needs to be addressed yes, perhaps the Maine/Nebraska model.  Who knows?  We only know what it would take to amend it in terms of Congressional votes and State Legislatures.  And that is simply not happening in the next 8 years.  I don't make the rules.  

Like the Ned Beatty speech in "Network" or the premise of a borderless world in "Rollerball."  The EC, and it's amendable flexibility, was put into place to onboard new states and give them agency.  That's all.  It wasn't rigged 250 years ago to keep evil Republicans into the Oval.  But once we shed the concept of a state, and accept the dynamic of urban/college-suburban v. rural/non college-suburban...then some real change on elections can occur.  I don't know if some of you have noticed, but the 2025/hard right plan is to do just that---shed the concept of a state having value and agency.  All of it falling it under a Dictatorial Swamp Bag of Shit.  Why not try a page of their playbook?    

[LCHorn 2,626]

44 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

2) Levin has no business “telling” the president to step aside. He won the votes. Period.

I don't know why not, Levin's a voter and we don't elect Kings in this country.  Levin is perfectly entitled to express his position and isn't obligated beyond that. 

Some of ya'll that are purported Trump opponents are leaning into very antidemocratic positions.  Very pot calling kettle...

[David Dennison 18,941]

2 minutes ago, YGIFS said:

The EC, and it's amendable flexibility, was put into place to onboard new states and give them agency.  That's all.  It wasn't rigged 250 years ago to keep evil Republicans into the Oval.  But once we shed the concept of a state, and accept the dynamic of urban/college-suburban v. rural/non college-suburban...then some real change on elections can occur.  I don't know if some of you have noticed, but the 2025/hard right plan is to do just that---shed the concept of a state having value and agency.  All of it falling it under a Dictatorial Swamp Bag of Shit.  Why not try a page of their playbook?    

[hobbes2702 13,049]

3 minutes ago, MrBig said:

This is the type of shit that has us in the position we are all in. Those of us who saw video footage of Biden over the years and spoke up about his troubling missteps were smeared as right wing trolls in the news. The videos of Biden looking old and frail were all dismissed as right wing propaganda when it was a legitimate concern. It was reminiscent of Trump calling everything “fake news” because it was not to be discussed when it was what we all should have been talking about before primary season. That debate hit us like a ton of bricks to the reality of what was really going on with Biden. I feel stupid for thinking his poor health was just a right wing talking point and not a valid concern. 

Get a fucking grip. If you actually watched the debate or any public appearances after you wouldn’t post this. The reality of what’s going on with Biden is he’s old. He’s not senile, he’s not gonna die tomorrow. It’s the exact same reality it was in 2020 with less hair.

[hobbes2702 13,049]

6 minutes ago, LCHorn said:

I don't know why not, Levin's a voter and we don't elect Kings in this country.  Levin is perfectly entitled to express his position and isn't obligated beyond that. 

Some of ya'll that are purported Trump opponents are leaning into very antidemocratic positions.  Very pot calling kettle...

we don’t have kings. People vote. And people voted already. Levin is telling Biden to ignore the voters.

The antidemocratic position is taking the choice away from the voters who have selected their nominee for president.

Edited July 12 by hobbes2702

[Bozo_Casanova 26,516]

I still wish Joe would pass the torch, but I have to admit I like his attitude. 

[David Dennison 18,941]

1 minute ago, hobbes2702 said:

we don’t have kings. People vote. And people voted already. Levin is telling Biden to ignore the voters.

The antidemocratic position is taking the choice away from the voters.

bUt InDePeNdEnTs DoN't GeT tO vOtE iN tHe PrImArIeS!

[gmr548 16,590]

1 hour ago, CTC2 said:

I don’t disagree but the prevailing thought that Biden is losing his mind and Trump is somehow cognitively healthy is more what I was pointing out.  

Because Trump is teflon as a cult leader and this country can't think critically. I agree there's a definite difference, anyone who doesn't is being willfully ignorant or just has forgotten Trump, but above all the focus needs to be on holding the White House.

[DixonHur 11,345]

21 minutes ago, TexArcher said:

 

The former is a political party, however flawed it might be.

The latter is a group of cons doing whatever it takes to get elected, so that they can become famous and profit, and in some cases stay out of prison.

Hope this clears it up.

Perhaps, I wasn't clear.  The question was in terms of telling people who they had to vote for.  Independents aren't a party, so we don't get to choose the nominees.  Meaning we either vote R, D, or stay home.  

For me, the GQP is hopeless, so voting R is not an option, and Dems are basically telling independents to support a candidate they don't like or shut the fuck up.  Which is their right.  But some of us don't think Biden can win and are putting forth other options, within the Dem party, that we think would have a better chance to beat Trump by motivating independents.

And we're greeted by people like @Js1 and @hobbes2702, who are basically telling us we suck, we're trolls, or that there's no such thing as an independent.  Which is their right but make no mistake, the Dems need independents more than independents need them.

[Loch Ness Monster 3,533]

40 minutes ago, Loch Ness Monster said:

Let's name all the Presidents that have won re-election with a 37% approval rating or lower in modern history.

Whoever said it's never happened in modern history was correct. Clearly a lot of people want some new blood.

[Beantown Express 2.0 6,559]

2 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

Get a fucking grip. If you actually watched the debate or any public appearances after you wouldn’t post this. The reality of what’s going on with Biden is he’s old. He’s not senile, he’s not gonna die tomorrow. It’s the exact same reality it was in 2020 with less hair.

This is exactly correct.  Also, everyone posting polls needs to realize its fucking July.  Not saying Biden is who I prefer as president but let's see what the next 4 months bring when Trump starts talking again and more of what the Republican party wants to do if Trump wins starts getting more news coverage.  Many independents may vote for a decrepit Biden in November if the Dems start running ads with kids in cages, being taken from their parents and just say, "if you want this evil shit again then vote for Trump".   Start running ads that state if you are a woman and vote for Trump you will end up with a world just like the Handmaids Tale".  Trump continuing to do stupid, crazy shit and the Dems running some scary ads in swing states could easily change the polling.  Are the Dems smart enough to run this playbook?  That I am not sure, and I have full confidence they will fuck it up.  

The other choice is Biden should just offer anyone that votes for him in MI, PA, WI, AZ, NV and Georgia $10K cash if he wins.  He does have immunity from any consequences from doing that, right?  May as well flat-out bribe people for their votes and get the win. 

[hobbes2702 13,049]

Just now, DixonHur said:

Perhaps, I wasn't clear.  The question was in terms of telling people who they had to vote for.  Independents aren't a party, so we don't get to choose the nominees.  Meaning we either vote R, D, or stay home.  

For me, the GQP is hopeless, so voting R is not an option, and Dems are basically telling independents to support a candidate they don't like or shut the fuck up.  Which is their right.  But some of us don't think Biden can win and are putting forth other options, within the Dem party, that we think would have a better chance to beat Trump by motivating independents.

And we're greeted by people like @Js1 and @hobbes2702, who are basically telling us we suck, we're trolls, or that there's no such thing as an independent.  Which is their right but make no mistake, the Dems need independents more than independents need them.

You do suck.
You literally gave us a “we’ll fascism won’t effect me so who cares right”. 

[DixonHur 11,345]

31 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

So what you're saying is, a large swath of independents would rather help Donald Trump by not voting than vote for Joe Biden?

I mean, OK.

Sort of.  I think a large part of the electorate has his the "fuck it, I don't care anymore" stage of grief.

[HendersonHorns 85]

40 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

I have so much more empathy and respect for weirdo undecided voters who don't pay attention to politics and just vote on complete vibes every four years at best than I do for "independents" who vote in every election, 95% of the time for Republicans, and openly tell us they don't care about something unless they think it will directly affect them. Even aside from them being assholes, the latter are just much much dumber fucking people.  

You're a middle-aged conservative white guy so how is Project 2025 going to hurt you? Oh, I dunno, how was the average German affected by the nazi rise to power? Do you think things were generally pretty good for the folks in Dachau who studiously ignored the fucking concentration camp in their back yard? Or do you think the nazi insanity and incompetence got their sons killed in a war before they themselves starved to death or had their house bombed by a foreign military? 

Try naming a country, anywhere and at any time in human history, that was run by a dictatorship in which things were or are actually pretty good for most of its people. I'll wait.

Singapore is a modern example I would say where the dictator they have is what most of their people want. 
 

I know they have very harsh laws, and would not want that here, but their people seem very happy. Especially the majority. 
 

unless I fell to fake news again. Which I have many times. 

[DixonHur 11,345]

3 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

You do suck.
You literally gave us a “we’ll fascism won’t effect me so who cares right”. 

I care, but if you don't want my vote, that's your choice.  

My point is we don't have as much to lose as many Dem voters, so cast us aside at your own risk.  

Edited July 12 by DixonHur