Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

Posted
12 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Why not VP Shapiro to back Harris? Why should Harris play 2nd fiddle to a relatively unknown governor?


Contrasts. 
 

If Trump is the machismo candidate that is winning over young men, men of color, and boomer white dusters…. Why go with a woman of color. Seems to be playing into a trap.

Best ticket to beat Trump IMO is Newsom with Warnock. 
I have no polling to back this up however.

Kamila would have to publicly sign off on it though. I assume there would have to be a backroom deal on making her a Justice on SCOTUS or the AG for her to ok it bc you’ll need her out there hammering abortion talking pts. I think she’s likely the best surrogate to prosecute reason 1,567,359 that another Trump presidency is not ideal.

Posted
46 minutes ago, Pancho said:

Harris/Shapiro is getting really popular on the socials

Sign me up right now 

Posted
24 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

If Biden steps aside it’s Harris. I really don’t know why any of y'all still think it could be anybody else. We’ve had candidates picked by democratic primaries for the last 50+ years. Throwing all the votes away to let some big donors select their own preferred candidate, when we’re in an election to save American democracy, would be an insane thing to do.

But you know why they keep saying it 

  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Pancho said:

Harris/Shapiro is getting really popular on the socials

Her husband is Jewish.  Shapiro is Jewish.

Right wing MAGA Twitter would be off the charts.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 3
Posted
1 minute ago, Aqua Buddha said:

Her husband is Jewish.  Shapiro is Jewish.

Right wing MAGA Twitter would be off the charts.

They already are because JD Vance’s wife is brown and their kid is brown with a brown name lol

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted (edited)

Harris and a qualified VP from a swing state probably has the best odds of actually happening and actually beating Trump.  That means a VP of Whitmer, Shapiro, Kelly, Evers, or Cooper.  I can’t think of a qualified VP candidate from Georgia.

It is just really hard for me to believe that this many prominent democrats would be coming out against Biden if it wasn’t a foregone conclusion that he won’t be the nominee.

Edited by Snake Diggity
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
24 minutes ago, Snake Diggity said:

Harris and a qualified VP from a swing state probably has the best odds of actually happening and actually beating Trump.  That means a VP of Whitmer, Shapiro, Kelly, Evers, or Cooper.  I can’t think of a qualified VP candidate from Georgia.

It is just really hard for me to believe that this many prominent democrats would be coming out against Biden if it wasn’t a foregone conclusion that he won’t be the nominee.

Can't be another woman. If we're a country of moderates who lean misogynist, you have to put a man up there with Kamala as VP. Shapiro or Kelly makes the most sense. Shapiro is a good answer to Vance. Rust Belt governor of the single most important state in this election now. 

Edited by mdmost
  • Hook 'Em 5
Posted
11 minutes ago, mdmost said:

Can't be another woman. If we're a country of moderates who lean misogynist, you have to put a man up there with Kamala as VP. Shapiro or Kelly makes the most sense. Shapiro is a good answer to Vance. Rust Belt governor of the single most important state in this election now. 

Unfortunately, you are correct.  If Whitmer were a man, she'd be the 100% obvious choice.  30% (or more) of people's heads would explode if there were two women.

Shaprio is Jewish which won't matter to a wide number of people but the "GEORGE SOROS!!!!" crowd will be off the charts.

Kelly from Arizona is an excellent choice, IMO.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
20 minutes ago, mdmost said:

Can't be another woman. If we're a country of moderates who lean misogynist, you have to put a man up there with Kamala as VP. Shapiro or Kelly makes the most sense. Shapiro is a good answer to Vance. Rust Belt governor of the single most important state in this election now. 

Additionally, Pennsylvania Constitution states that the Lt. Gov. (also a Dem) would serve the rest of Shapiro's term.  Kelly's vacancy would result in a special election, which may be too risky given the current margins. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
5 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

Additionally, Pennsylvania Constitution states that the Lt. Gov. (also a Dem) would serve the rest of Shapiro's term.  Kelly's vacancy would result in a special election, which may be too risky given the current margins. 

In 2026. Interim until then. But yeah

Posted
12 hours ago, Pancho said:

Or he resigns, Harris becomes 47, and then trunp and his team have to order new merch with 48 put on it which they can’t do because they are poor

I like the way you think.

Posted
3 minutes ago, SurlyGator said:

The comment under the meme is better than the meme.  Nutjobs abound on both sides.

I'm legit surprised on how half of America thinks the assassination attempt was staged and the other half thinks it was an inside job.  

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
1 hour ago, WhatTheBuck said:

White man vs. white man is contrast?

I’m saying that Kamila is such a contrast.

Joe beat trump in 2020 by stealing enough of the white suburban folks and men IMO.

Maybe I’m wrong.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Posted (edited)

My issue with Shapiro is he's smallish. I'm a bit with Trump on liking my Politicians to look like politicians, and that means some height in men. And I say that as a manlet.

Luckily Harris is short, as is JD Vance. 

Edited by Bateshorn
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
6 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Disagree- if there was ever an election to lean into the dignity of women as human beings with inalienable rights, this is it. We need the aunties, the tias, the meemaws, the Angela’s, the Beckies, the Karens, thots, prudes, e-girls, waifish art history majors who smoke cigarettes, instagram models, cleat chasers, mousey women who work for the state, we need all of them to vote and save America. Men are a lost cause at this point.

I halfway agree with you.  Swing for the fences.  Why not?  Make Roe V Wade the biggest issue, tout the economy, hammer on Trump's felony convictions.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Posted
21 minutes ago, Aqua Buddha said:

I'm legit surprised on how half of America thinks the assassination attempt was staged and the other half thinks it was an inside job.  

What if it was unintentionally both? Would be a hell of a movie. 

Posted

I'm too lazy to look, but if the D's end up nominating someone else, how often in our history have we had 3 different presidents elected in 3 consecutive elections? 

Posted
44 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

Additionally, Pennsylvania Constitution states that the Lt. Gov. (also a Dem) would serve the rest of Shapiro's term.  Kelly's vacancy would result in a special election, which may be too risky given the current margins. 

Yea, I think Kelly is too important where he is. How deep is the D bench in Az? Outside of Gallego, who's left that's popular enough statewide (or at least in the greater PHX area) to hold onto that seat? Katie Hobbs? Then who becomes gov? 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
11 minutes ago, Bateshorn said:

My issue with Shapiro is he's smallish. I'm a bit with Trump on liking my Politicians to look like politicians, and that means some height in men. And I say that as a manlet.

Luckily Harris is short, as is JD Vance. 

How tall are these people?  (We all know Trump is 6'3" and 215.)

Posted
1 minute ago, hookem2010 said:

I'm too lazy to look, but if the D's end up nominating someone else, how often in our history have we had 3 different presidents elected in 3 consecutive elections? 

In the 70's we went from Nixon to Ford to Carter but Ford wasn't elected so there's that.  I'd have to say somewhere in the first half of the 20th century or in the 1800's or some such.

Posted
2 minutes ago, hookem2010 said:

I'm too lazy to look, but if the D's end up nominating someone else, how often in our history have we had 3 different presidents elected in 3 consecutive elections? 

Barring death/assassination, Franklin Pierce, James Buchanan, Abraham Lincoln. 

Posted
Just now, hookem2010 said:

I'm too lazy to look, but if the D's end up nominating someone else, how often in our history have we had 3 different presidents elected in 3 consecutive elections? 

Reagan-Bush-Clinton the most recent.  Not exactly the question you asked, but there were 7 different presidents in the 7 election cycles between 1956 and 1980.

Posted
15 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Disagree- if there was ever an election to lean into the dignity of women as human beings with inalienable rights, this is it. We need the aunties, the tias, the meemaws, the Angela’s, the Beckies, the Karens, thots, prudes, e-girls, waifish art history majors who smoke cigarettes, instagram models, cleat chasers, mousey women who work for the state, we need all of them to vote and save America. Men are a lost cause at this point.

We need 88 lines about 44 women (archetypes) 

 

 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Drool 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Snake Diggity said:

Harris and a qualified VP from a swing state probably has the best odds of actually happening and actually beating Trump.  

Biden/Harris have the best odds of beating Donald. The media is doing a hell of a job right now 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Haha 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Chuckie Finster said:

Reagan-Bush-Clinton the most recent.  Not exactly the question you asked, but there were 7 different presidents in the 7 election cycles between 1956 and 1980.

Obama Trump Biden.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)

The scary scenario is the Grover Cleveland, Benjamin Harrison, Grover Cleveland one that we may be facing soon where a guy was president, lost in the next election, and then was elected after that.  

Edited by mdmost
Posted

I guess there have been a few. But this would potentially be 3 consecutive presidents without any serving two consecutive terms. I really jacked up my question. Apologies 

Posted
3 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

Reagan-Bush-Clinton the most recent.  Not exactly the question you asked, but there were 7 different presidents in the 7 election cycles between 1956 and 1980.

Yeah but Reagan and Obama were term limited. You would've had a new president regardless. 

Posted
15 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

aunties, the tias, the meemaws, the Angela’s, the Beckies, the Karens, thots, prudes, e-girls, waifish art history majors who smoke cigarettes, instagram models, cleat chasers, mousey women who work for the state

image.jpeg.48934f2cdf2eb2eeead9d08bd78cb711.jpeg

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Haha 3
Posted
4 minutes ago, hookem2010 said:

I guess there have been a few. But this would potentially be 3 consecutive presidents without any serving two consecutive terms. I really jacked up my question. Apologies 

I get it, I think the question really is how many times have there been two one termers in a row?

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
26 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Disagree- if there was ever an election to lean into the dignity of women as human beings with inalienable rights, this is it. We need the aunties, the tias, the meemaws, the Angela’s, the Beckies, the Karens, thots, prudes, e-girls, waifish art history majors who smoke cigarettes, instagram models, cleat chasers, mousey women who work for the state, we need all of them to vote and save America. Men are a lost cause at this point.

Women like the idea of voting for a woman, but when an actual candidate is out there they start to nitpick her and end up voting for a man.  

I thought E. Warren was a great candidate last time, and was floored by how many women I talked to were dogging her -- more or less for stylistic rather than policy reasons. Wake up sheeple

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
14 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

Reagan-Bush-Clinton the most recent.  Not exactly the question you asked, but there were 7 different presidents in the 7 election cycles between 1956 and 1980.

I'm assuming he meant for re-elections to not count or it would be Obama, Trump, Biden.

Posted
14 minutes ago, mdmost said:

The scary scenario is the Grover Cleveland, Benjamin Harrison, Grover Cleveland one that we may be facing soon where a guy was president, lost in the next election, and then was elected after that.  

I'd kill for Grover Cleveland right now.

Posted
1 minute ago, South Austin said:

I'd kill for Grover Cleveland right now.

Interesting choice of phrase given recent events...

5 minutes ago, hookem2010 said:

Yea, Warren was my favorite candidate last cycle. Didn't really understand why she couldn't gain any momentum.

I agree, but also I bolded your answer. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, WBT said:

I'm assuming he meant for re-elections to not count or it would be Obama, Trump, Biden.

Correct. All those years of higher learning and I can't even pose a simple hypothetical.

Posted
3 minutes ago, hookem2010 said:

Yea, Warren was my favorite candidate last cycle. Didn't really understand why she couldn't gain any momentum.

Crowded primary. Hard to just say it’s just bc “woman.” 

If you’re going to win a Dem primary, you better figure out how to appeal strongly to black voters. Hillary and Biden both buried their competition with black voters. I’m not saying their ideas weren’t popular in the party, but both Bernie and Warren from lily white New England didn’t gain any traction with them 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
10 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Disagree- if there was ever an election to lean into the dignity of women as human beings with inalienable rights, this is it. We need the aunties, the tias, the meemaws, the Angela’s, the Beckies, the Karens, thots, prudes, e-girls, waifish art history majors who smoke cigarettes, instagram models, cleat chasers, mousey women who work for the state, we need all of them to vote and save America. Men are a lost cause at this point.

Great analysis.  Except it misses one key thing: perhaps the most devastating, crippling misogynists in the world are....other women.  Men are a lost cause, but nominating a minority female will boost the turnout of shitty men.  And if you think we'll make up the gap because women will be enthusiastic and support Kamala...you haven't been paying attention to how shitty women, particularly white women, are.  See the breakdown from 2016:

_92349609_us_elections_2016_exit_polls_g

Yes, "things have changed since then."  I think that in the aggregate, they've gotten worse, not better.  Women are not coming to save us.  The Karens from the burbs are going to show up in force to support the candidate who hates minorities as much as they do.  And a lot of other women "just can't trust a woman to make such big decisions," because believe it or not, plenty of women are as misogynist as men.

Nobody is coming to save us. And we are incapable of saving ourselves.  Self-immolation is our destiny.

Posted
21 minutes ago, mdmost said:

The scary scenario is the Grover Cleveland, Benjamin Harrison, Grover Cleveland one that we may be facing soon where a guy was president, lost in the next election, and then was elected after that.  

 

5 minutes ago, South Austin said:

I'd kill for Grover Cleveland right now.

Beat me to it.  I'd give your left nut for Grover Cleveland on the ballot.



×
×
  • Create New...