Jump to content

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


bolverk

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Gatorubet said:

This is a Trumper. He’s “trying to understand it.”.  He posted the betting bullshit that Maga is trying to sell the Bros to convince them he’s gonna win.

If he can’t understand it, that means he’s a fan of the orange turd doing some gentle trolling.  if you truly has not watched any TV or news or social media since Biden dropped out, then he just needs to shut the fuck up and watch what happens because he wasn’t interested until today.

Mostly, by showing up with a stupid question that will illicit responses that aren’t positive (for no other reason, implying we haven’t discussed something we’ve discussed to death), he can run back to DT and say how mean and brainwashed the bubble is in the cloak room.  

But I’m not gonna neg him, it’s fine letting it play out.

In fairness, the national narrative outside of the surly safe space is that Harris is blowing it.

That doesn't mean she is, but that's the narrative.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

This is a Trumper. He’s “trying to understand it.”.  He posted the betting bullshit that Maga is trying to sell the Bros to convince them he’s gonna win.

If he can’t understand it, that means he’s a fan of the orange turd doing some gentle trolling.  if you truly has not watched any TV or news or social media since Biden dropped out, then he just needs to shut the fuck up and watch what happens because he wasn’t interested until today.

Mostly, by showing up with a stupid question that will illicit responses that aren’t positive (for no other reason, implying we haven’t discussed something we’ve discussed to death), he can run back to DT and say how mean and brainwashed the bubble is in the cloak room.  

But I’m not gonna neg him, it’s fine letting it play out.

I dunno dude. I wandered in here for the first time in 2018 asking questions about Michael Bloomberg. I knew I hated trump and he was a clown but I didn’t know much else. Before that I was as violent of a “take your bullshit politics to the cesspool that is the cloak room” as anyone having never even been here. It happens. 

Edited by SydneyCarton
  • Hook 'Em 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, heso said:
2 hours ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

Polls have sample sizes of hundreds or a couple of thousand. Early voting has sample size of millions. It’s not theoretical or speculative. All polling is based on modeling from past elections. There has never been a gender gap like this in turnout. If Harris wins by a surprising number, this will be why pollsters didn’t see it coming.

The other reason is new voters who will be mostly women. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

In fairness, the national narrative outside of the surly safe space is that Harris is blowing it.

That doesn't mean she is, but that's the narrative.

you could absolutely be correct. I guess it depends on how you take the statement.” I’m trying to understand the enthusiasm for Kamala. “

I took at that as questioning why anyone would, not that people are reporting Trump will win.   As you correctly point out, he could be saying ‘why is everyone saying Trump will win when they were all these enthusiastic supporting Kamala.’

If that’s what he meant then I’ll apologize to him right now.  But also saying “venture in CR” has a negative undertone/implication, which is also shared by everyone Maga who does not post anymore. 

 

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

I dunno dude. I wandered in here for the first time in 2018 asking questions about Michael Bloomberg. I knew I hated trump and he was a clown but I didn’t know much else. Before that I was as violent of a “take your bullshit politics to the cesspool that is the cloak room” as anyone having never even been here. It happens. 

well, I assume anyone reading my posts knows me after all these years and gives it the tenuous worth it deserves.  You are absolutely right that my gut reaction after reading that post is insufficient evidence of anything.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Liberal media.

 

This is stupid for several reasons,  but the number one reason is it’s based on a premise that if Cheney is working on republicans, somehow it means Harris can’t be doing other things at the same time, like you can only do one. 
 

ARE MY EFFORTS TO READ ON MY PHONE WHIKE I TAKE A SHIT A BOLD GAMBIT, OR HAIL MARY!?!?

Edited by SydneyCarton
  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

In fairness, the national narrative outside of the surly safe space is that Harris is blowing it.

That doesn't mean she is, but that's the narrative.

I'm outside a surly safe space. I just don't watch cable news. It's not a narrative I'm frequently seeing and when I do, it's easily dismissed as trying to drive clicks and viewers and readers. The news needs a story, especially when corporate profits are involved. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Chopper said:

I'm outside a surly safe space. I just don't watch cable news. It's not a narrative I'm frequently seeing and when I do, it's easily dismissed as trying to drive clicks and viewers and readers. The news needs a story, especially when corporate profits are involved. 

You’re not outside a surly safe space. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

This is stupid for several reasons,  but the number one reason is it’s based on a premise that if Cheney is working on republicans, somehow it means Harris can’t be doing other things at the same time, like you can only do one. 
 

ARE MY EFFORTS TO READ ON MY PHONE WHIKE I TAKE A SHIT A BOLD GAMBIT, OR HAIL MARY!?!?

You see the problem. It's everywhere and it pisses me off to no end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Trump wins he's found a new way to do it by somehow getting the least enthusiastic base I can ever remember in any election in my adult life to get out there and carry him to a win.  

….while going to various swing states and shit talking their largest cities.
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

In my lifetime, I’ve never seen a campaign where a significant number of politicians publicly endorse the candidate for president from the other party.   And I’m supposed to see that and think it’s Harris who is in trouble?

This as well.  Open revolt from fairly prominent members of a candidate's party isn't something we have ever seen at these levels.  

Edited by Surly Bevo
  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

In fairness, the national narrative outside of the surly safe space is that Harris is blowing it.

That doesn't mean she is, but that's the narrative.

Just another data point showing how worthless mainstream news media has become. They don’t call the ridiculous, are always surprised by everything and have no clue how to analyze anything other than the smell of their own farts.

But I guess they make money, and that’s all that matters now. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Surly Bevo said:

If Trump wins he's found a new way to do it by somehow getting the least enthusiastic base I can ever remember in any election in my adult life to get out there and carry him to a win.  

I don't think that's it, at least not entirely.  What you have is the Maga people that are big, loud and stupid, and they've gotten the media's attention.  As a result, and because of 2016 and polling misses, these folks are grossly skewing the narrative.  

Basically, what everyone, and I mean everyone seems to have forgotten is that the silent majority is what really carries the day, not the loud and brash.  That is what is under-represented in everyone's modeling.  It's fairly ironic as well, for most of my life, every time I'v heard someone mention the silent majority in the past when discussing politics its been someone making a Republican point; that isn't the reality this time around.  

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

In my lifetime, I’ve never seen a campaign where a significant number of politicians publicly endorse the candidate for president from the other party.   And I’m supposed to see that and think it’s Harris who is in trouble?

Apparently. 

 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Apparently. 

 

LOL at the notion that the fucking New Republic's opinion at this point means a goddamn thing.  This is just tried and true end of the race liberal bed wetting/hand wringing.  

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

In my lifetime, I’ve never seen a campaign where a significant number of politicians publicly endorse the candidate for president from the other party.   And I’m supposed to see that and think it’s Harris who is in trouble?

But Tulsi Gabbard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Tbh she should go on Mr Beast and do a challenge 

She and Trump need to keep one hand on the Constitution. First one who drops out loses. Trump has an advantage though because he wears diapers and is used to shitting and peeing himself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Surly Bevo said:

This as well.  Open revolt from fairly prominent members of a candidate's party isn't something we have ever seen at these levels.  

I think it’s important in that, while that will never sway the true cultists, the former normal Republicans seeing these Republican officials support Harris will give them cover - support for their internal justification to make the same decision.  The polls don’t address this, but we do have anecdotal evidence in numerous cases.  Even a 1 or 2% flip from registered likely voter Republicans would be great. 

And if the race winds up being closer than we suspect, that could mean everything. 

Edit: and as many of the independents seem to be former Republicans, this may have a greater effect on them than the registered Republicans.

Edited by Gatorubet
  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Surly Bevo said:

LOL at the notion that the fucking New Republic's opinion at this point means a goddamn thing.  This is just tried and true end of the race liberal bed wetting/hand wringing.  

So I just read the report from the Center for Working Class Politics that this "article" references.  What it all boils down to is that "the working class" favors lies over the truth on the campaign trail.

image.png.82eee136331cca2816f73fecabc5e4f9.png

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, SydneyCarton said:

Yes. But you’re still here. You post and read here. And you’re influenced by what you see here. We all do/are. 

Yes. Perhaps incorrectly, I thought the intent of whomever posted that originally was implying "exclusively."

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Chopper said:

Oh yeah I have an admission: sometimes I forget xitter exists. And I really wish some of you would, as well.

image.thumb.png.2b50f96c0036af639c386c16832ca802.png

 

People should listen to me 

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Haha 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, SubliminalHorn said:

Ok I’m gonna let you in on a secret. No bro who listens to Rogan is undecided, nor will their minds be changed 

Ya that's just blatantly false. I know several and I am by no means extroverted. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look she might not appear on Rogan, and really I guess that is alright. Biden didn't appear on Rogan and Trump didn't exactly knock it out of the park.

But I really think it would be useful if she did. Joe wouldn't push too hard on her and plenty of his listeners would hear what she has to say. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Surly Bevo said:

Then you know some stupid motherfuckers.  Anybody undecided at this juncture is a fucking moron.  

Well that's true. And with so many people already having voted it might be too late to make a huge difference anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm about 25 mins into the Trump Rogan interview. Rogan has asked just a few questions and basically just lets Trump ramble. And for the most part Trump comes off as harmless. Like your dipshit boomer uncle who is always embellishing stories and injecting hot takes to the point you just laugh and blow him off. obviously a lot of what he says is nonsense but that's always the case and Rogan certainly doesn't push back. Although as I type this Rogan is getting a little sycophant-y talking about how dangerous the job of POTUS is, especially for Trump.

Probably not going to listen to this while thing because it's almost 3 hours. Did get a Kamala ad lol. I don't think this will move the needle much at all. Maybe get a few Rogan listeners off their ass to vote for Trump.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Surly Bevo said:

Then you know some stupid motherfuckers.  Anybody undecided at this juncture is a fucking moron.  

Rogan reaches millions among a demographic who tends to be one of the least engaged in politics. Anyone thinking there's no undecideds in that group is a fucking moron. 

 

Edit: For clarity, I'm a college professor. Rogan is by far the most popular podcast among my male students. 

Edited by LTbear
  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, LTbear said:

Rogan reaches millions among a demographic who tends to be one of the least engaged in politics. Anyone thinking there's no undecideds in that group is a fucking moron. 

 

Edit: For clarity, I'm a college professor. Rogan is by far the most popular podcast among my male students. 

So also least likely to vote at all then

Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...