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

[mchookem 16,336]

22 minutes ago, Underdog said:

Go, Bob, go! 

 

'he is a bubbling cauldron of loathsome traits'

that's fantastic. im using that.

[Dahobbs 17,545]

1 minute ago, Voluminous Banality said:

Correct, it's literally the flip side which I literally just said. It's evident that you neither understand the original tweet nor anything I've posted, so this is a good place to end the exchange.

I understand the pedantic point you've made. I've just provided fuller context. I don't get why you cant engage with that honestly. 

[Biff Tannen 45,691]

Go fight it out in the oil barons thread you jamokes. 

[royiv 9,323]

Checking in on this thread for the first time in a month. Decided around the time of the debate (didn’t watch) to tune out of election news. It’s not like I’m going to change my vote so I made the decision to not give a fuck about the daily barrage of shitty news. It’s been quite a nice break. I suggest others do it. It’s not like any of us can influence a cult member who is pushing for the project 2025 agenda. Those people are too far gone.

[Voluminous Banality 1,032]

7 minutes ago, Dbeasy said:

You are either being disingenuous or are truly missing the point. Someone pointing out that the US became a net exporter under Biden is a meaningless stat because he didn’t increase production much compared to the previous four years. As you yourself said, that’s just been the trend. Biden hasn’t done anything. And he shouldn’t get any credit for doing anything special, other than continuing the trend. But in fact, his trend has been worse than the previous four years, not better. 

That’s the critical point. It’s a completely misleading conclusion by the guy tweeting. You said “it’s fair to point out….”   But, it’s not fair to point that out. It’s completely misleading. 

Correct. The dude has now shifted to, "Well, Trump doesn't get credit for the increase in net exports during his term because he did fuck all." 🤦‍♂️ The original tweet was stupid and misleading, period. That's all I'm responding to, since someone asked.

[Dahobbs 17,545]

5 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Go fight it out in the oil barons thread you jamokes. 

My bad. Didn't mean to interrupt the panic fest. Continue on everyone!

 

[Nicole44 22,060]

4 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

My bad. Didn't mean to interrupt the panic fest. Continue on everyone!

 

 

[tx 3 putt 76,980]

Domestic terrorist ….

 

[Old Freak Nasty 821]

2 hours ago, mdmost said:

In a perfect world, Mayor Pete would be the Democratic nominee because he's more than capable of dispatching a light weight moron like Trump. He could stand in a debate and annihilate Trump's lies point by point. But he's gay and we're a nation of bigoted assholes. So we instead get the feeble old man who can't debate any longer. And we'll have to like it, it seems. 

Tim Scott's girlfriend is single now.  I'm sure something could be worked out here.

[Pancho 44,826]

👀

 

[SurlyGator 865]

Oil export talk STILL not going away...

[Biff Tannen 45,691]

3 minutes ago, Pancho said:

👀

 

[MrBig 5,405]

6 minutes ago, Pancho said:

👀

 

 

[Biff Tannen 45,691]

3 minutes ago, MrBig said:

 

Not what I took away from that at all, but ok. 

[immamac 42,857]

52 minutes ago, Voluminous Banality said:

I didn't miss the point of the tweet. To answer in the terms that you are using, in 3 years, Trump got us 90% of the way to becoming a net exporter of petroleum. In the next 3 years, Biden pushed us the final 10% across the line. You are right, of course, that it's not all about Trump and Biden, but this data hardly supports chest-beating over Biden's over-performance in this regard.

Well, you are so wrong and so stuck to your point that it's actually a bit annoying and pedantic. 

Obama did 60% of the work, trump did 30% and Biden did the final 10% if anything is truly to be considered "accurate" once you stop becoming a net importer and become a net exporter you also don't increase production as much which is a really fucking simple economic explanation. 

In effect Bidens policies have been extremely friendly to production and big oil has seen some of the largest profits in its history during his administration. 

[David Dennison 18,871]

2 minutes ago, immamac said:

Well, you are so wrong and so stuck to your point that it's actually a bit annoying and pedantic. 

Obama did 60% of the work, trump did 30% and Biden did the final 10% if anything is truly to be considered "accurate" once you stop becoming a net importer and become a net exporter you also don't increase production as much which is a really fucking simple economic explanation. 

In effect Bidens policies have been extremely friendly to production and big oil has seen some of the largest profits in its history during his administration. 

[Biff Tannen 45,691]

1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

Long term this is how I feel, but short term, I think it is a net benefit politically. Sadly, that does matter. Also, how the fuck did we get back on oil in this thread?

[Nicole44 22,060]

9 minutes ago, MrBig said:

 

 

[immamac 42,857]

8 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Not what I took away from that at all, but ok. 

https://docquery.fec.gov/cgi-bin/forms/C00703975/1724396/

However I think things do get a bit fuzzy for her then VP if she drops out or steps out as they can't amend the original organization filing. It is legally not really in question who the candidate(s) are for the organization according to the FEC. 

She's raising for herself and Joe so it's difficult to draw a conclusion other than there's good sentiment for the current ticket which includes them both as option 1a and 1b. 

 

[Js1 85,353]

18 minutes ago, Pancho said:

👀

 

But also of course the PTown gays turned out for Pete lol

[LCHorn 2,620]

59 minutes ago, troph said:

that I don't think we can recover from.

If I might share some of the hope that belied my prediction (mostly lifted from the Pod Save America boys) that Biden would ultimately withdraw from the race (I think he would resign, too-it’s the only way to be seen as a kingmaker, but that remains to be seen), it’s that Harris or Dem X is going to have the opportunity to have all of the media’s attention.  I share with @Bozo_Casanova in an affinity for a Harris/Whitmer ticket (though he may have moved on by now), really like a Harris/Beshear ticket, and frankly all of the versions discussed are kind of exciting.  I’m even onboard for a blitz primary, and if it ends up Newsome or whoever I think they keep the Biden 2020 coalition together and reinvigorate it with some the 70% of Americans who know Biden is too old.  
 

And isn’t that what Democrats are begging for, anyway?  Give us something to excite us?

I’ll add that (and I think it’s something @mdmost wrote about ten pages ago that started me thinking about this but I may owe the idea to another poster) I think we are attributing a great deal of credit to Biden for programs passed under his administration that are the culmination of lots of Democratic wish list items kind of coming together at once.  
 

The efforts made toward green energy and infrastructure are big successes, I’ve read, but in the early going I don’t see the results (which is fine, I’m glad the government is making plans that might not come to fruition for a decade or two) and it seems like it’s bad manners to judge them with a healthy skepticism until there’s a real improvement in those areas.  
 

Anyway, my point is we may, ten years hence, look back at the Biden presidency and wonder why we were fucking around with solar panels and bridges while gender and minority rights became increasingly under threat and too little was done to address the anti-democratic practices of the GOP.  

 

[Pancho 44,826]

I’m going to need our surly Latinos to explain this

 

[MrBig 5,405]

10 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Not what I took away from that at all, but ok. 

I posted the Biden’s wins tweet in response because all of the shit they say is really stupid when you compare it to the reality of what’s really going on. 

[Js1 85,353]

1 minute ago, Pancho said:

I’m going to need our surly Latinos to explain this

 

That seems like massive bullshit

[Michael Knight 12,981]

3 minutes ago, Pancho said:

I’m going to need our surly Latinos to explain this

 

See in Spanish it's pronounced er ef queue?

[Schulz2.0 28,957]

9 minutes ago, Js1 said:

That seems like massive bullshit

People with citizenship hating illegals.

[Old Freak Nasty 821]

It's going to be cute when all the MAGA Latinos try to explain in vain on their deportation flights, "no, I'm white!!"

[Biff Tannen 45,691]

Just now, Schulz2.0 said:

People with citizenship hating illegals.

With citizenship FOR NOW

[Voluminous Banality 1,032]

1 minute ago, immamac said:

Well, you are so wrong and so stuck to your point that it's actually a bit annoying and pedantic. 

Obama did 60% of the work, trump did 30% and Biden did the final 10% if anything is truly to be considered "accurate" once you stop becoming a net importer and become a net exporter you also don't increase production as much which is a really fucking simple economic explanation. 

In effect Bidens policies have been extremely friendly to production and big oil has seen some of the largest profits in its history during his administration. 

Many posters here have a hard time separating their strong political leanings from objective analysis. It wasn't my intention to set forth a premise on the attribution of credit for gains in net US export of petroleum across some decades. I was responding to a tweet which misrepresented data from 2017-2023 and that was the extent of my response. Reading comprehension is key and my limited analysis was entirely correct.

The original tweet by Rattner was misleading and the data was badly presented. It's possible to recognize this and still give Obama credit for the recovery in US oil net exports if that's how you wish to interpret the data. Understanding the data first is a good starting point whomever you support.

[Nicole44 22,060]

3 minutes ago, Pancho said:

I’m going to need our surly Latinos to explain this

 

I don’t know how to explain that if accurate. I will say over the last two months there have been a few polls on the 24/7 news channels. This is one such poll (they all say roughly the same thing):

The CBS News/YouGov poll found that a majority of registered voters overall (62 percent) would favor the government starting "a new national program to deport all undocumented immigrants currently living in the U.S. illegally." Thirty-eight percent said they would oppose it.

The survey polled 1,615 registered voters between June 5 and 7, and had a margin of error of 3.8 points.

Notably, the poll found that mass deportation was popular with Hispanics, with 53 percent saying they would favor such a program and 47 percent saying they would oppose it. White people were more supportive of mass deportations, with 67 percent saying they would back the program, and 33 percent saying they would oppose it. Among Black people, it was 47 percent in favor and 53 percent opposed.

https://www.newsweek.com/majority-hispanics-favor-mass-deportation-1913510#:~:text=Notably%2C the poll found that,saying they would oppose it.

 

Not sure why that number among Hispanics has gone up the last couple of years but there is data that says it has. That’s just one poll but if you scour the internet you can find more of the same. That poll has a small sample size so it’s not a definitive referendum on Jack shit but that sentiment is there. And it has grown over the past few years. 

[safe sex 11,735]

21 minutes ago, Js1 said:

But also of course the PTown gays turned out for Pete lol

His people, you might say.

Pete is the kind of Democrat Andrew Sullivan would vote for lmao. (I would also vote for Pete, duh)

[tx 3 putt 76,980]

Need surly maga to weight in here. Isn’t melania an anchor baby ???  ….

 

[Nicole44 22,060]

This stuff gets more confusing by the day. 

 

Priscilla Alvarez has kinda a young Talisa Soto vibe, no? Photo of Talisa included. I was watching Priscilla speak and she just reminds me of Talisa. 

Edited July 20 by Nicole44

[Pato del Muerto 52,506]

1 hour ago, Dahobbs said:

I don't understand if? Look at my prior post with the full data. You have no idea what the actual data says because you havent fucking looked at it. Net exports have been increasing at a consistent rate since 2005. It has fuck all to do with Trump. The only reason Biden's numbers look worse is because of a slight blimp upward during covid followed by an immediate return to the same multi decade trend. 

And they slowed down during Biden’s term because we hit zero. I don’t think our oil is competitive on the market compared to Saudi oil or Russian oil, right?  So if exporting isn’t a feasible goal, no reason to produce much more than you consume. 

Edited July 20 by Pato del Muerto
I may have erred in not reading to the end of the thread before posting

[Underdog 28,686]

csb/ had a great whale watching experience during a trip to ptown /csb

Cool place. 

[Red Five 40,859]

 

Good ticket. Do it.

[tx 3 putt 76,980]

13 minutes ago, Nicole44 said:

This stuff gets more confusing by the day. 

not really, who possibly benefits the most if Biden steps down ….

trump

russia

china 

saudis

news media cycle 
 

they want the Dems in total chaos so Russia can amp up the rhetoric

 

 

Edited July 20 by tx 3 putt

[Nicole44 22,060]

2 minutes ago, tx 3 putt said:

not really, who possibly benefits the most if Biden steps down ….

trump

russia

china 

saudis

news media cycle 
 

they want the Dems in total chaos so Russia can amp up the rhetoric

 

 

I get what you are saying but it’s also in direct opposition to 35 Congressional Democrats asking him to step aside. Numerous calls from other big names on the Hill asking him to “think” about it. Reports of money drying up. I get what you are saying. I also added a picture to my post. Edit. 

[Bozo_Casanova 26,472]

48 minutes ago, Pancho said:

I’m going to need our surly Latinos to explain this

 

Not Latino, but I’ve been shouting this from the rooftops for 25 years. Ahem:

THE LATINO VOTE IS👏NOT👏A👏THING.

Show me a registered voter who has the non-ethnic socioeconomic markers of a GOP voter and I will show you a person who votes Republican 90% of the time. The heavy Democratic lean of Hispanic voters is mainly an optical illusion of big city hispanic populations (ie, not Republican places) and the RGV/South Texas political machines, which are in the process of turnover. 

[troph 24,810]

Trump at a rally saying (my paraphrase) the dems demanding Biden step aside is proof of them rigging and stealing elections.

I'm not agreeing with him obviously. but...

he's really good at the rhetoric game. anyone who thinks he's a bad candidate is just not paying attention. he's the most formidable Republican candidate since Reagan. this is a fucking dog fight ladies and gents and we are in a real fucking mess.

Edited July 20 by troph

[Biff Tannen 45,691]

6 minutes ago, troph said:

Trump at a rally saying (my paraphrase) the dems demanding Biden step aside is proof of them rigging and stealing elections.

I'm not agreeing with him obviously. but...

he's really good at the rhetoric game. anyone who thinks he's a bad candidate is just not paying attention. he's the most formidable Republican candidate since Reagan. this is a fucking dog fight ladies and gents and we are in a real fucking mess.

Wat

[tx 3 putt 76,980]

If Biden steps down, news media will be ready to declare Trump the winner, as the Dems will be a rudderless ship. That’ll be too big a mountain to overcome. Trump and Vance will not debate the new nominees. I don’t see any Dem big names wanting to jump on that ticket either. Trump and the R’s have the lawyers lined up to flood the court with ‘the Dems can’t do this’ cases. Paxton will file that same day that they can’t be on the Texas ballot. The R’s already have the judges targeted with the best paths to get to the SC. At least one case will end up in front of them  ….

 

 

 

If Biden stays in it, that’s the best fighting chance imo. Now is not the time to be chicken little.
 

Trump has already said it, he’ll never lose another election if he wins this one. If that’s the future you want - Stay home mad because Biden didn’t step aside. 

[tx 3 putt 76,980]

15 minutes ago, troph said:

Trump at a rally saying (my paraphrase) the dems demanding Biden step aside is proof of them rigging and stealing elections.

I'm not agreeing with him obviously. but...

he's really good at the rhetoric game. anyone who thinks he's a bad candidate is just not paying attention. he's the most formidable Republican candidate since Reagan. this is a fucking dog fight ladies and gents and we are in a real fucking mess.

 

 

[Biff Tannen 45,691]

9 minutes ago, tx 3 putt said:

If Biden steps down, news media will be ready to declare Trump the winner, as the Dems will be a rudderless ship. That’ll be too big a mountain to overcome. Trump and Vance will not debate the new nominees. I don’t see any Dem big names wanting to jump on that ticket either. Trump and the R’s have the lawyers lined up to flood the court with ‘the Dems can’t do this’ cases. Paxton will file that same day that they can’t be on the Texas ballot. The R’s already have the judges targeted with the best paths to get to the SC. At least one case will end up in front of them  ….

 

 

 

If Biden stays in it, that’s the best fighting chance imo. Now is not the time to be chicken little.
 

Trump has already said it, he’ll never lose another election if he wins this one. If that’s the future you want - Stay home mad because Biden didn’t step aside. 

I’m not sure a) I believe most of this, but b) why it would depress D turnout. 

[Hank Kingsley 20,958]

 An eye-opening moment for me recently is how unhinged establishment Democrats that are digging in on Biden have become. Trump must have truly broke their brains.  Shouting about coups, conspiracy theories, filling social media with half-truths/lies and propaganda. 

Unfortunately MAGA brain doesn't belong to a political party. We truly are fucked. 

Only silver lining I see with Trump winning is the possibility of it breaking up the 2 party system. 

 

 

 

[tx 3 putt 76,980]

2 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

I’m not sure a) I believe most of this, but b) why it would depress D turnout. 

you don’t think the R’s aren’t going to challenge any of this in court ?

knowing the supreme Court is heavily leaning toward their side ?

 

[Biff Tannen 45,691]

1 minute ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Trump must have truly broke their brains.  Shouting about coups, conspiracy theories, filling social media with half-truths/lies and propaganda. 

Uh. The coup attempt actually occurred. 

[Hank Kingsley 20,958]

1 minute ago, Biff Tannen said:

Uh. The coup attempt actually occurred. 

I'm taking about the Biden "coup" currently being discussed on social media by hardcore Dems.

 

Edited July 20 by Hank Kingsley

[Biff Tannen 45,691]

2 minutes ago, tx 3 putt said:

you don’t think the R’s aren’t going to challenge any of this in court ?

knowing the supreme Court is heavily leaning toward their side ?

 

Yeah it’s not great, but I guess I’m just not on board with your “Dems will be rudderless” assertion. 

[tx 3 putt 76,980]

Just now, Biff Tannen said:

Yeah it’s not great, but I guess I’m just not on board with your “Dems will be rudderless” assertion. 

im sure the media and bot farms will be looking at all this in a caring light