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

[Brisketexan 104215]

2 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

You have no concept of The Base and what independents want. Full stop. 

"The base" = the farthest left 5%.  How do you not get that?

Seriously.  The LARGE majority of DEMOCRAT voters favor immigration reform that includes both measures that make immigration run more smoothly AND involve more effective enforcement against illegal immigration.  but no.  IF they don't pander to the farthest left extreme, at the expense of the voters closer in the middle who are actually in play, well, that's just gonna make chainsaw mad and stay home!

I sweatergawd, the new fucking ethos in this country of "if your party isn't completely and totally defined by its most nutbar extreme, and everyone else better get on board or get fucked" is fucking insane.  It's what gives us A FUCKING OPENLY AND PROUD FASCIST PARTY ON THE FUCKING RIGHT.  I don't want a fucking insane extreme left party as its goddamned counterpart, and neither do 95% of my fellow Americans.

[immamac 42359]

@chainsaw dude you are getting cooked and showing your ass. 

Kamala is energizing non voting population to vote, much like Obama did. You know what that means? It means that shitheads who are so involved in politics that they are discouraged to vote are in the extreme extreme minority. They are the opposite of the base. The base is women, college educated people and minorities.

[aggie08 21258]

On a message board full of people who care way too much about being right on the internet, you stand out.

 

[chainsaw 9801]

2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

immigration reform that includes both measures that make immigration run more smoothly AND involve more effective enforcement against illegal immigration.

Thats why she should be saying that (like Beto did) instead of the bill fucking James Lankford sobbed about not getting passed.

[Pancho 44110]

Props to the Harris campaign for having all VP finalists “clear their schedules” the next several days.

It started with Shapiro, and now I’ve seen updates of schedules clearing for Beshear and Walz.

[WelfareBuysMyWeed 5365]

11 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

I think she's done some early signaling that she wants to pivot from Biden's policies toward Israel. I hope she does, but it sure as hell isn't going to keep me from voting for her if she doesn't, and most of you know how strongly I feel about the Israel situation as it currently stands.

I am not gonna dogpile on you or neg you or anything, but I do think you're wrong in this instance.

Within the biden administration, her role was that as an advocate for Palestine, she was supposed to be the balance in the cabinet. She called for a more sympathetic ear towards Palestinians in gaza. I think her role honestly was perfunctory and merely to give the illusion of being balanced on the issue, but for better or worse she was positioned from the get go to be more on Palestine's side. That gives her immediately a little bit of starting cred with the disenfranchised gen z: she was the only person from the biden administration even remotely listening to the talk about Palestine.

This will undoubtedly be the most difficult issue for her to navigate, especially since she has to look informed and well reasoned in her response. And it's not fair because Trump gets to basically say the worst, most offensive shit imaginable about palestine and it's a boost for him. But that's America in 2024. FWIW I think Kamala is going to be much more open to listening to Palestinians than any other option on the board, including Biden.

[chainsaw 9801]

Just now, immamac said:

@chainsaw dude you are getting cooked and showing your ass. 

Kamala is energizing non voting population to vote, much like Obama did. You know what that means? It means that shitheads who are so involved in politics that they are discouraged to vote are in the extreme extreme minority. They are the opposite of the base. The base is women, college educated people and minorities.

I want this momentum to continue, but it's still a long road ahead and when the excitement has worn off is when the real work will begin.

[SydneyCarton 47808]

4 minutes ago, aggie08 said:

On a message board full of people who care way too much about being right on the internet, you stand out.

 

I know you’re not referring to me sir. 

4 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

Thats why she should be saying that (like Beto did) instead of the bill fucking James Lankford sobbed about not getting passed.

She took an obvious and easy chance to dunk on Trump irrefutably on a topic and you’re literally grabbing handfuls of sand to rub into your vagina. You’re the one sobbing. 

[Js1 84939]

 

[WelfareBuysMyWeed 5365]

I saw someone say during the French 2-round elections that the first time you vote with your heart, the second time you vote with your brain. This is presumably what the primary system in America is supposed to be: vote for your ideological sweet heart during the primary, then get pragmatic and vote against what you definitely don't want in the general election.

Well, nobody wants to run against Kamala. She's won the hearts of the democrats. So all that's left is to vote pragmatically. @chainsaw doesn't get this. This is the general election, you have to be general in your stances. Cast as wide a net as possible. Now is not the time to narrow your vision. Because the alternative is the exact opposite of what you or the majority of the people in this country wants. Wanting a narrow vote in the general election is how you get Trumpism, because there are a lot more weirdos who will vote for trump on principle than will vote for whatever darling leftwing single-issue stance you have.

[chainsaw 9801]

2 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

I know you’re not referring to me sir. 

She took an obvious and easy chance to dunk on Trump irrefutably on a topic and you’re literally grabbing handfuls of sand to rub into your vagina. You’re the one sobbing. 

She can dunk on him about it without promising to bring it back and sign it. All she had to say was "you had your chance, you blew it, and when I am elected and we take back the House we are going to pass a comprehensive immigration reform that aligns with the America that I know"

[aggie08 21258]

3 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

I know you’re not referring to me sir.

Definitely meant for chainsaw Eeyore'ing this thread up.

[chainsaw 9801]

Just now, aggie08 said:

Definitely meant for chainsaw Eeyore'ing this thread up.

Isn't there another Kamala sunshine thread now?

[Js1 84939]

2 minutes ago, WelfareBuysMyWeed said:

I saw someone say during the French 2-round elections that the first time you vote with your heart, the second time you vote with your brain. This is presumably what the primary system in America is supposed to be: vote for your ideological sweet heart during the primary, then get pragmatic and vote against what you definitely don't want in the general election.

 

This time a billion 

[WelfareBuysMyWeed 5365]

1 minute ago, chainsaw said:

She can dunk on him

I thought the WNBA couldn't dunk

[RDCanecutter 26176]

1 minute ago, WelfareBuysMyWeed said:

I thought the WNBA couldn't dunk

Trump trying to dunk would be like smashing a piñata full of live sardines.

[Covri 6224]

12 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

I want this momentum to continue, but it's still a long road ahead and when the excitement has worn off is when the real work will begin.

You’re actively trying to make the excitement wear off, I hope you’re not doing this shit irl.

[chainsaw 9801]

8 minutes ago, Js1 said:

This time a billion 

Large groups of people don't have brains. Trump maximizes his turnout by giving his base exactly what it wants secure in the knowledge that "Never Trump" republicans still bend the fucking knee.

Kamala doesn't need to have left wing policies to turn out the base, but she does have to avoid falling into the trap of trying to appease the right because it won't win any votes from the right and it will curb enthusiasm within her base.

4 minutes ago, Covri said:

You’re actively trying to make the excitement wear off, I hope you’re not doing this shit irl.

I'm talking to like five guys on the internet. Joe Rogan, I am not.

Edited August 1 by chainsaw

[YChang 3425]

That’s it. I was gonna go vote for Kamala. I even bought me some Chuck Taylors. Guess I’m gonna go return them and not vote at all. 

[chainsaw 9801]

1 minute ago, YChang said:

That’s it. I was gonna go vote for Kamala. I even bought me some Chuck Taylors. Guess I’m gonna go return them and not vote at all. 

[WelfareBuysMyWeed 5365]

3 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

Kamala doesn't need to have left wing policies to turn out the base, but she does have to avoid falling into the trap of trying to appease the right because it won't win any votes from the right and it will curb enthusiasm within her base.

!Left != Right

[SydneyCarton 47808]

13 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

She can dunk on him about it without promising to bring it back and sign it. All she had to say was "you had your chance, you blew it, and when I am elected and we take back the House we are going to pass a comprehensive immigration reform that aligns with the America that I know"

Let me translate what your quoted statement reads to me, who at this point is a rabid democratic voter who is donating time and money:

 

”Fuck you, I have no desire to comprise and meet in the middle.” Which turns off so many voters you can’t even comprehend, obviously. You have to be like 24 years old. 

Edited August 1 by SydneyCarton

[chainsaw 9801]

Just now, WelfareBuysMyWeed said:

!Left != Right

The "border bill" was everything the right wanted. That's a right-wing policy for no reason at all (only five percent of Democrats had immigration as their top issue). I hope it doesn't become a pattern, because that will have negative consequences.

[chainsaw 9801]

1 minute ago, SydneyCarton said:

Let me translate what your quoted stammer reads to me, who at this point is a rabid democratic voter who is donating time and money:

 

”Fuck you, I have no desire to comprise and meet in the middle.” Which turns off so many voters you can’t even comprehend, obviously. You have to be like 24 years old. 

The bill was hardly a compromise. It was always intended by Biden to be a bluff.

[Loch Ness Monster 3533]

Why does chainsaw keep mentioning Beto? Beto is like the definition of being a little too honest and not playing politics to you know, actually win.

Add it to the border attack ad pile:

 

 

[WelfareBuysMyWeed 5365]

Just now, SydneyCarton said:

Let me translate what your quoted stammer reads to me, who at this point is a rabid democratic voter who is donating time and money:

 

”Fuck you, I have no desire to comprise and meet in the middle.” Which turns off so many voters you can’t even comprehend, obviously. You have to be like 24 years old. 

Not to mention, there's a party running on obstructionism already: The republicans. There are so, so, sooooo many people out there in the country who are tired of extreme division and just want a functioning government that is willing to forego ideological purity for the sake of making the damn machine run again. We've basically been without a functioning government for 16 fucking years now, as politics has become a game of not letting the "wrong side" get victories.

[SydneyCarton 47808]

2 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

The bill was hardly a compromise. It was always intended by Biden to be a bluff.

Again, perfect illustration of your lack of understanding but ceaseless certainty: it wasn’t a bluff. It was a political effort to remove a glaring fucking weakness from his campaign. That’s called politics. He needed to stop being hammered. 
 

now the people hammering the left on it are your ilk, as you project weakness to Harris on the topic and ignore her dunking all over Trump. You’re a real asset. 

Edited August 1 by SydneyCarton

[TexasHooch 5114]

8 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

She can dunk on him about it without promising to bring it back and sign it. All she had to say was "you had your chance, you blew it, and when I am elected and we take back the House we are going to pass a comprehensive immigration reform that aligns with the America that I know"

I kind of like it as it's written.  If she said what you think she should have said I'd be discouraged.

This isn't your moment dude-sorry.  This is the middle-left's moment. 

She's not trying to make you happy, she's trying to make me (and the millions like me) happy.  And that's the difference between winning and losing.  

[WelfareBuysMyWeed 5365]

7 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

The "border bill" was everything the right wanted. That's a right-wing policy for no reason at all (only five percent of Democrats had immigration as their top issue). I hope it doesn't become a pattern, because that will have negative consequences.

A) I live in Texas and actually deeply care about the border issue, in that I don't think we have a fucking border issue at all and all this talk about "securing the boarder" is just an invented problem by republicans to begin with

B) I recognize my views are an extreme minority, and that most people just don't care about the border *at fucking all*, either way. It's like not a thing people give a shit about, and letting the government grind to a halt over the issue is not something people want to happen. They will choose a meaningless, symbolic victory for the right, which will amount to a shitty couple of miles of chain link wall getting built, if it means the rest of the government keeps working, and concentrates on issues people care about.

C) The alternative to me tanking the vote over A) is a trump hell hole where I'll have way, way more problems than my opinion on the border, and what will happen to the border will be much worse on top of everything. So *BECAUSE* my feelings are are strong on this issue, I'm willing to compromise on the vote to prevent something much, much worse from happening. I know how to pick and choose my battles, because I'm not a single minded moron.

Edited August 1 by WelfareBuysMyWeed

[SydneyCarton 47808]

2 minutes ago, TexasHooch said:

I kind of like it as it's written.  If she said what you think she should have said I'd be discouraged.

This isn't your moment dude-sorry.  This is the middle-left's moment. 

She's not trying to make you happy, she's trying to make me (and the millions like me) happy.  And that's the difference between winning and losing.  

If he can’t win he wants everyone to lose. That’s what he has repeatedly demonstrated. That or he’s on the take with GRU. 

[Bozo_Casanova 26126]

35 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

There are twice as many Democrats (20%) who say supporting Israel is "much more likely" to negatively affect their opinion of a candidate than there are who feel the other way (10%). That is what the data says about the base Harris needs to turn out.

I feel like there are about 95X as many Democrats (95%ish+) who say not being Republican nominee Donald Trump is "much more likely" to postively affect their opinion of a candidate than there are who feel the other way (0%). That is what the data says about the base Harris needs to turn out.

Edited August 1 by Bozo_Casanova

[chainsaw 9801]

Just now, TexasHooch said:

I kind of like it as it's written.  If she said what you think she should have said I'd be discouraged.

This isn't your moment dude-sorry.  This is the middle-left's moment. 

She's not trying to make you happy, she's trying to make me (and the millions like me) happy.  And that's the difference between winning and losing.  

That's just it though. Her policy is right-of-center. That's why Lankford and Lindsey Graham support the policies of the bill but the republicans didn't want Biden to get credit.

If you want to improve turnout, don't demoralize the people left of center. I hope she's only acting like this for immigration because if she goes with right-of-center positions for other issues people care about it will have consequences. Don't shoot the messenger, it's just true.

[Ted Lange 15968]

There is at least 1 thing about every candidate that I "very likely" find negative, does that prevent me or 99.3% of other rational human beings from voting for them, no.

The only way everyone would get to vote for a candidate that didn't have at least one position, that wasn't 100% aligned with their view, is if we had 100+ people running for president.

[TwiceHorn 31019]

8 hours ago, Chips O'Toole said:

I don't think "weird" was the endgame for that messaging, I expect it to shift to "strange" or "off-putting" and eventually end up at "backwards" to sync with the overall message.  Or that's what I think they should do. 

The biracial stuff is only going to land with their hardened base, yet again. For like the 5000th time, it appears that winning this election in a legitimate manner was never really plan A for these people, and all they believe is necessary to regain power is to keep their base angry and loyal. I'm not a concern troll or conspiracy person at all, I'm just having a hard time connecting the dots and not seeing an overall plan that wasn't intended to end in blatant election fuckery at the very least. 

The fundamental problem here is this.  Republicans haven't really known how to win a national election in the face of a decent candidate for 20 years or more.  By this, I mean pre-Trump Republicans.

Trump only knows how to be Trump.

Because Hillary was such a shit candidate, turnout was low and Trump won electorally as kind of an accident with his energized and crazed base.  Although astoundingly large, Trump's base doesn't get him the whole election.  He's going to have to swing some people from undecided or independent or hope for a low turnout.  The more conventional Republicans may understand the problem, but they don't know how to fix it.

Edited August 1 by TwiceHorn

[chainsaw 9801]

2 minutes ago, Ted Lange said:

There is at least 1 thing about every candidate that I "very likely" find negative, does that prevent me or 99.3% of other rational human beings from voting for them, no.

The only way everyone would get to vote for a candidate that didn't have at least one position, that wasn't 100% aligned with their view, is if we had 100+ people running for president.

Same here. But if you're running a campaign and you need to maximize turnout, why would you choose a position that is twice as likely to harm you? I'm not saying she should totally lack her own principles or morph her views to suit the electorate but that's sort of the name of the game in a general election and in many instances she didn't have a strong opinion one way or the other going into the race.

[HenryJames 65814]

19 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

and it will curb enthusiasm

[SydneyCarton 47808]

6 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

That's just it though. Her policy is right-of-center. That's why Lankford and Lindsey Graham support the policies of the bill but the republicans didn't want Biden to get credit.

If you want to improve turnout, don't demoralize the people left of center. I hope she's only acting like this for immigration because if she goes with right-of-center positions for other issues people care about it will have consequences. Don't shoot the messenger, it's just true.

Left of center is overwhelmingly fine with what she saying. You’re left of Sinistral. You have to squint east to see Port. 

[Bozo_Casanova 26126]

It's funny how the progressive maximalist left, which is consistently the most retarded and politically counterproductive segment of the American ideological spectrum, the people who gave us not only GW Bush and the Iraq war but also the Trump administration, they think they are entitled to be pandered to. 

@chainsaw no offense, but the rest of the Democratic coalition, particularly labor and  historically disefranchised groups, have learned the hard way that folks like you can't be counted on and pivoted accordingly. Maybe try the GOP. 

Edited August 2 by Bozo_Casanova

[Huckleberry 32628]

9 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

It's funny how the progressive maximalist left, which is consistently the most retarded and politically counterproductive segment of the American ideological spectrum, the people who gave us not only GW Bush and the Iraq war but also the Trump administration, they think they are entitled to be pandered to. 

They are happiest when they're unhappy. We all know people like that, these guys just apply it to politics. Deep down they'd rather have the right wing win so they can rage on the internet and organize protests. 

Edited August 2 by Huckleberry

[Goredho 17265]

1 hour ago, chainsaw said:

She can win Florida and compete in Texas if the Democratic base turnout is high. The honeymoon period will end by the convention. A substantial part of the base will regress to apathy if the policies and messaging are right-wing. Sorry if that's not what you want to hear, but that doesn't make it false.

You speak only for yourself.  You may have a slight bit of insight into people who think like you, but the people who think like you are a small minority of voters relative to the number who are ready to vote to break this cycle of right/left fringe brinksmanship.

Sorry if that’s not what you want to hear, but that doesn’t make it false.

[TexasHooch 5114]

5 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

That's just it though. Her policy is right-of-center. That's why Lankford and Lindsey Graham support the policies of the bill but the republicans didn't want Biden to get credit.

If you want to improve turnout, don't demoralize the people left of center. I hope she's only acting like this for immigration because if she goes with right-of-center positions for other issues people care about it will have consequences. Don't shoot the messenger, it's just true.

Fucking A man, this isn't the primary.  This is the general fucking election.  The middle (and sure, even the Trump disliking Right) is what matters.  Drive turnout?  Give me a fucking break. The independents and  conservative leaning independents outnumber far left progressives by a large margin. If the bed-wetting wing of liberals want to stay home and risk Trump for another 4 years, fuck 'em.    The cost of courting you at this point is too high.

I like her moderate tone, both on it's face and as a strategy.  Clearly you don't, so the choice is clear.  Hold your nose and vote for Harris or bend over and get reamed by Trump.  

[chainsaw 9801]

3 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

It's funny how the progressive maximalist left, which is consistently the most retarded and politically counterproductive segment of the American ideological spectrum, the people who gave us not only GW Bush and the Iraq war but also the Trump administration, they think they are entitled to be pandered to. 

@chainsaw no offense, but the rest of the Democratic coalition, particularly labor and  historically disefranchised groups, have learned the hard way that folks like you can't be counted on and pivoted accordingly. Maybe try the GOP. 

You speak for labor? You'd be surprised how left-of-center they are as a voting bloc.

[Ted Lange 15968]

[TwiceHorn 31019]

4 hours ago, YGIFS said:

There was a pretty high-up guy in our entourage who is gay.  Kinda open, kinda closeted if that makes sense.  He's just in that age bracket where he feels he can't quite be one or the other, depending on the audience (50-55yo).  Did a lot with UT System on projects with Dept. of Energy, Dept. of Education, and Dept. of Defense.  So we're having drinks and we've completed our higher-level FBI backgrounds but they'll still be asking us shit tomorrow (like about drugs), and he brought up a good point.  We were talking about old spy movies where the bad guys would try to steal our nuclear or weapons secrets by finding a closeted gay guy to squeeze for intel under threat of outing him to his superiors.  And how that was a really serious avenue for both sides for decades.  And now, it doesn't even come up.  He said, he was once in D.C. and to clear the air he told the interviewer, "Just to be up front, I'm also homosexual."  Guy laughed and said, "There's 40 people in your group...it'd be weird if you didn't have a gay person on your team.  Then we'd think you were really hiding something."

Or in The Good Shepherd, where MI5 flat murdered Michael Gambon for being gay and thus a security risk.

[David Dennison 18435]

17 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

That's just it though. Her policy is right-of-center. That's why Lankford and Lindsey Graham support the policies of the bill but the republicans didn't want Biden to get credit.

If you want to improve turnout, don't demoralize the people left of center. I hope she's only acting like this for immigration because if she goes with right-of-center positions for other issues people care about it will have consequences. Don't shoot the messenger, it's just true.

A left of center immigration policy is going nowhere in this country. Pretending otherwise is just pandering to voters.

[Hank_Hill 18315]

If Kamala came out as pro hitler and anti puppies that would really alienate her base. I hope someone is reminding her of this. The possibility is making me worried. That’s not going to fly once the honeymoon wears off. 

[Bozo_Casanova 26126]

1 minute ago, chainsaw said:

You speak for labor? You'd be surprised how left-of-center they are as a voting bloc.

Yeah, SEIU and AFSCME thank you for supporting Ralph Nader and Jill Stein. It's important that your hands stay clean. 

[chainsaw 9801]

Just now, David Dennison said:

A left of center immigration policy is going nowhere in this country. Pretending otherwise is just pandering to voters.

The data hasn't shown that. Biden campaigned on a left of center immigration policy in 2020 and he won.

[David Dennison 18435]

Just now, chainsaw said:

The data hasn't shown that. Biden campaigned on a left of center immigration policy in 2020 and he won.

And what happened when he became president and actually had to try to get policy turned into law?

[WhatTheBuck 28694]

29 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

The bill was hardly a compromise. It was always intended by Biden to be a bluff.

I want to play poker with you.