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

[South Austin 51,681]

3 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

There’d be the added benefit that Trump would hate getting beat by her more than anyone else in the world. She’s both a black woman AND an Obama! She’s extra nasty!

And she wasn’t even born in America!

[berlinerbaer 670]

It’s Harris as plan B and there is no plan C. She’s the veep and situations like this are what veeps are for, no? She’s been on the ticket and in the cabinet for 4 years already and she’ll have access to all the campaign cash accrued to date.

I doubt the party could unite behind anyone else in four months without some group in the D tent getting their feelings hurt. The base will get behind Harris if only because of succession, and reassuring the base is step 1. Worry about indies later.

[Dbeasy 14,790]

Seeing that Obama poll makes me crazy. That means her presence in the race must bring out a lot more left leaning voters. It’s the only explanation. There aren’t enough middle independents for that type of margin. She sure isn’t going to draw voters from the right. 

So it raises a pretty big question. We have one of the biggest threats to US Democracy in history. The Supreme Court composition for a generation is at stake. The possibility of a full Republican Congress and Presidency is real, with an obliteration of Social Security, Medicare and Abortion in their crosshairs. We have one of the worst human beings on the planet on the ticket. And we can’t get left leaning voters to the polls without Michelle Obama? WTF? What the hell is wrong with people?

[SamsCorner 395]

1 hour ago, South Austin said:

And she wasn’t even born in America!

Who's says she was born a woman?

[GW Hayduke 1,943]

14 hours ago, Snake Diggity said:

I agree the Biden admin has been effective, but just because an administration is running smoothly doesn’t mean Biden has been an effective leader, or even that he has been the leader.  His cabinet is full of competent people who could be working under their own authority.  We don’t have visibility into that; we did have visibility into Biden’s competency on the debate stage and it was clear he’s not fit.

Fwiw, I think the argument that Biden is an empty suit and that Harris/Buttigieg/Blinken/Austin/Sullivan are working as a Voltron President is valid, and a significant justification for continuing to support Biden even though he’s clearly unfit for office.

Makes sense. Your standard is vibes and feelings and doesn't consider the effectiveness of government to make the lives of US citizens better or to increase our standing on the world stage.  

[UpperWestside 6,032]

6 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

Makes sense. Your standard is vibes and feelings and doesn't consider the effectiveness of government to make the lives of US citizens better or to increase our standing on the world stage.  

I am absolutely good with a president like Biden. You delegate out responsibility to subordinates who understand their role in America and the greater world as a whole. You do your job and you make sure that at home and abroad we are taking care of our citizens and strengthening ties with countries we are close to as well as ones we need to have good relationships with.

The alternative is a narcissistic nutjob that thinks airports were around 250 years ago who, and this is kind of a big deal, LEAD AN INSURRECTION to keep control of the government less than four years ago. Give me quiet competency versus a crazy person whose greatest contribution to American society will be the day he no longer walks among the living.

Edited July 3 by UpperWestside

[babysdaddy 2,708]

Seeing that Obama poll makes me crazy. That means her presence in the race must bring out a lot more left leaning voters. It’s the only explanation. There aren’t enough middle independents for that type of margin. She sure isn’t going to draw voters from the right. 
So it raises a pretty big question. We have one of the biggest threats to US Democracy in history. The Supreme Court composition for a generation is at stake. The possibility of a full Republican Congress and Presidency is real, with an obliteration of Social Security, Medicare and Abortion in their crosshairs. We have one of the worst human beings on the planet on the ticket. And we can’t get left leaning voters to the polls without Michelle Obama? WTF? What the hell is wrong with people?

There are some smooth brains posting here that said Kamala can’t win due to racism and misogyny so i eagerly await their explanation why that same racism and misogyny doesn’t apply to Michelle

[David Dennison 17,800]

5 minutes ago, babysdaddy said:

There are some smooth brains posting here that said Kamala can’t win due to racism and misogyny so i eagerly await their explanation why that same racism and misogyny doesn’t apply to Michelle

[Biff Tannen 45,210]

9 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

You're terrified by Biden, but not by Trump.

Okeley, dokely, doo.

This is what I don't get.  We can have a doddering old man as president, propped up by smart, capable, well-meaning people OR we can have a psychotic narcissist hellbent on grifting the shit out of everyone propped up by others just like him.

This isn't a hard choice.

[TexArcher 37,103]

16 minutes ago, babysdaddy said:

There are some smooth brains posting here that said Kamala can’t win due to racism and misogyny so i eagerly await their explanation why that same racism and misogyny doesn’t apply to Michelle

 

Narrator: But no one had actually said that it didn't apply to Michelle.  In fact...

 

Edited July 3 by TexArcher

[Biff Tannen 45,210]

2 hours ago, berlinerbaer said:

It’s Harris as plan B and there is no plan C. She’s the veep and situations like this are what veeps are for, no? She’s been on the ticket and in the cabinet for 4 years already and she’ll have access to all the campaign cash accrued to date.

I doubt the party could unite behind anyone else in four months without some group in the D tent getting their feelings hurt. The base will get behind Harris if only because of succession, and reassuring the base is step 1. Worry about indies later.

This is the most realistic option, imo.

[babysdaddy 2,708]

 
Narrator: But no one had actually said that it didn't apply to Michelle.  In fact...
 

Polling shows her winning by 10.

Regardless, point is I’m happy most of you are not political professionals because the takes on this thread have been embarrassing.

Get on board with Kamala

[Aqua Buddha 14,256]

Harris' problem isn't race or gender.  It's that despite checking all the boxes and looking the part, she's bad at politics and generally unprepared.  

[aggie08 20,486]

6 minutes ago, Aqua Buddha said:

she's bad at politics and generally unprepared.

And, unfortunately, this is only still important to one side.

[Biff Tannen 45,210]

13 minutes ago, babysdaddy said:

Get on board with Kamala WHOEVER IT ENDS UP BEING

fixed to save the country

[CooterBrown 17,760]

12 minutes ago, Aqua Buddha said:

she's bad at politics and generally unprepared.  

Her ego won't let that stand in her way.

If Biden steps aside, and she's not the nomination, she'll go scorched earth out of spite.

[Js1 83,621]

1 minute ago, CooterBrown said:

Her ego won't let that stand in her way.

If Biden steps aside, and she's not the nomination, she'll go scorched earth out of spite.

Really? You think she’s not a team player? She’d go scorched earth and hand it to Trump?

Angry black woman trope 

[Aqua Buddha 14,256]

13 minutes ago, aggie08 said:

And, unfortunately, this is only still important to one side.

Fair point....

[CooterBrown 17,760]

6 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Really? You think she’s not a team player? She’d go scorched earth and hand it to Trump?

Angry black woman trope 

It's not an angry black woman trope. It's a typical shunned politician trope.

 

[Pancho 42,993]

13 minutes ago, CooterBrown said:

Her ego won't let that stand in her way.

If Biden steps aside, and she's not the nomination, she'll go scorched earth out of spite.

You don’t know this. You just made this shit up

[Longhorn_Fan68 33,723]

3 minutes ago, Pancho said:

You don’t know this. You just made this shit up

haven't you heard? feelings are the new truth. 

[mdmost 42,490]

If Biden steps aside, it is with the direct negotiation stipulation that she IS the nominee. But he's not stepping aside.

Edited July 3 by mdmost

[Pancho 42,993]

 

[David Dennison 17,800]

1 minute ago, Pancho said:

 

Counterpoint: Still losing to a failed former president with a known track record and a base that tops out at around 33%.

This should be a lay up.

Gulp.

[Js1 83,621]

But but but he lost the debate so badly, he lost 10 points of support

🙄 

Just now, David Dennison said:

Counterpoint: Still losing to a failed former president with a known track record and a base that tops out at around 33%.

This should be a lay up.

Gulp.

Just like presidential approvals, we are too fucking polarized. There may never be a “layup” again until we get out of this mindset. This country is broken and divided right in half 

[Longhorn_Fan68 33,723]

just about the time Russia announced they would be shifting their troll farms' focus from war in Ukraine to the US election, I braced myself for a lot of bad takes and boy have we gotten them

Edited July 3 by Longhorn_Fan68

[Js1 83,621]

Not to mention Democrats are demoralized right now. I doubt they’re going to pick up the phone for presidential surveys and a decent chunk are probably going “undecided” right now

That Trump barely picked up support in public polls and they’re still within the margin of error tells me this isn’t going to hurt Biden 4 months from now unless he does it again/repeatedly.  

[David Dennison 17,800]

2 minutes ago, Js1 said:

But but but he lost the debate so badly, he lost 10 points of support

🙄

Just like presidential approvals, we are too fucking polarized. There may never be a “layup” again until we get out of this mindset. This country is broken and divided right in half 

Yeah, but the Democrat should be hoovering non-MAGA voters.

Even in a polarized country, it really shouldn't be close given Trump's track record and base.

[Rex Kramer 1,240]

4 hours ago, Dbeasy said:

Seeing that Obama poll makes me crazy. That means her presence in the race must bring out a lot more left leaning voters. It’s the only explanation. There aren’t enough middle independents for that type of margin. She sure isn’t going to draw voters from the right. 

I think she draws a lot. The notion that the Obamas are hard left leaning was dispelled in my mind, and I thought that. Point being, I think she’d grab a LOT of independents. And probably moderate Republicans that do not like Trump. 

[YGIFS 19,445]

I'm not a member of your party, but I bundled a shit-ton of cash for Biden in 2020 to get rid of Trump---like many of you.  

Four fucking months out from the election that decides the fate of our Republic, and questions about who may replace Biden are labeled as "sexist/racist"???  4 months out and this is the focus of your party, who will get their feelings hurt and who is being mean?  We had four fucking goddamn years to settle this shit, but now his age and possible replacements being women of color are a thing?  Court cases against Trump are crumbling in real time, Biden gets older by the day, but the grand strategy is "Well, maybe on-the-fence Trump voters won't turn out if a person of color on the ballot."  I know it hurts to hear, but this is not the election to get clever and progressive.  Almost four fucking years and suddenly the D's get religion, "Hey, what if we rebooted the ticket with somebody that will absolutely piss off 80 million Americans instead of just propping up Joe and winning a narrow one and probably reboot everything during the mid-terms?"  

I know what America y'all live in.  I want a woman President.  But it doesn't happen if there's not an election in 2028 or 2032.  Yeah, we're all sexist assholes.  Keep telling yourselves that when women have what's left of their rights taken away.  I'll think about how savvy you were when my daughter's grow up in Trumplandia because the party's line, "I think Kamala can win over a lot of moderate Republicans in the Rust Belt."  

[Rex Kramer 1,240]

2 hours ago, babysdaddy said:

There are some smooth brains posting here that said Kamala can’t win due to racism and misogyny so i eagerly await their explanation why that same racism and misogyny doesn’t apply to Michelle

Michelle is a lot more likable and always has been. Plus on the misogynistic front, men will view a competent former president husband running her presidency. 

I think Kamala would provide a boost, but not enough that Whitmer or Obama would. 

[Js1 83,621]

You took that very personally.

Take a fucking breath, bro

[David Dennison 17,800]

1 minute ago, YGIFS said:

I'm not a member of your party, but I bundled a shit-ton of cash for Biden in 2020 to get rid of Trump---like many of you.  

Four fucking months out from the election that decides the fate of our Republic, and questions about who may replace Biden are labeled as "sexist/racist"???  4 months out and this is the focus of your party, who will get their feelings hurt and who is being mean?  We had four fucking goddamn years to settle this shit, but now his age and possible replacements being women of color are a thing?  Court cases against Trump are crumbling in real time, Biden gets older by the day, but the grand strategy is "Well, maybe on-the-fence Trump voters won't turn out if a person of color on the ballot."  I know it hurts to hear, but this is not the election to get clever and progressive.  Almost four fucking years and suddenly the D's get religion, "Hey, what if we rebooted the ticket with somebody that will absolutely piss off 80 million Americans instead of just propping up Joe and winning a narrow one and probably reboot everything during the mid-terms?"  

I know what America y'all live in.  I want a woman President.  But it doesn't happen if there's not an election in 2028 or 2032.  Yeah, we're all sexist assholes.  Keep telling yourselves that when women have what's left of their rights taken away.  I'll think about how savvy you were when my daughter's grow up in Trumplandia because the party's line, "I think Kamala can win over a lot of moderate Republicans in the Rust Belt."  

On a related note, I've never given money to a candidate or party and I never will.

[bolverk 29,097]

Biden Told Ally That He Is Weighing Whether to Continue in the Race
The president’s conversation is the first indication that he is seriously considering whether he can recover after a devastating performance on the debate stage in Atlanta on Thursday.

President Biden has told a key ally that he knows he may not be able to salvage his candidacy if he cannot convince the public in the coming days that he is up for the job after a disastrous debate performance last week.

The president, who the ally emphasized is still deeply in the fight for re-election, understands that his next few appearances heading into the holiday weekend — including an interview scheduled for Friday with George Stephanopoulos of ABC News and campaign stops in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin — must go well.

“He knows if he has two more events like that, we’re in a different place” by the end of the weekend, said the ally, referring to Mr. Biden’s halting and unfocused performance in the debate. The person spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive situation.

The conversation is the first indication to become public that the president is seriously considering whether he can recover after a devastating performance on the debate stage in Atlanta on Thursday. Concerns are mounting about his viability as a candidate and whether he could serve as president for another four years.

A top adviser to Mr. Biden, who also spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the situation, said the president was “well aware of the political challenge he faces.”

White House officials did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Campaign officials were nervously watching polls, recognizing that bad numbers could fuel the crisis. A CBS News poll on Wednesday showed former President Donald J. Trump edging ahead of Mr. Biden since the debate with 50 percent to 48 percent nationally and 51 percent to 48 percent in battleground states.

Mr. Biden is slowly reaching out to Democratic elected officials and has a meeting with Democratic governors at the White House scheduled for Wednesday evening. He is also continuing to reach out to people he has long trusted and has told at least one person that he is open to the possibility that his plans to move on from his debate performance — and flip the focus back to his challenger, Mr. Trump — may not work.

Several allies of Mr. Biden, who has huddled with the family and advisers since the debate on Thursday, have underscored that the president is still in the fight of his political life and largely sees this moment as a chance to come back from being counted out, as he has done many times throughout his half-century career.

But he is also cleareyed, they said, about his uphill battle to convince voters, donors and the political class that his debate performance was an anomaly.

[Rex Kramer 1,240]

2 hours ago, Biff Tannen said:

This is what I don't get.  We can have a doddering old man as president, propped up by smart, capable, well-meaning people OR we can have a psychotic narcissist hellbent on grifting the shit out of everyone propped up by others just like him.

This isn't a hard choice.

Because Biden cannot win, and Trump will. It’s not hard to see that THIS is why people are terrified. Teflon Trump and his band of gypsy supporters aren’t going anywhere and there is nothing we can do about it aside from switch candidates. 

[David Dennison 17,800]

1 minute ago, Rex Kramer said:

Because Biden cannot win, and Trump will. It’s not hard to see that THIS is why people are terrified. Teflon Trump and his band of gypsy supporters aren’t going anywhere and there is nothing we can do about it aside from switch candidates. 

Of course he can win.

[WhatTheBuck 28,616]

54 minutes ago, Aqua Buddha said:

Harris' problem isn't race or gender.  It's that despite checking all the boxes and looking the part, she's bad at politics and generally unprepared.  

She’s been a senator and the vice president. Your girl Gretchen has never held national office before. But you think she’s better prepared? I’m thinking you might not be entirely objective in this matter. 

[BehoId, The Underminer! 11,561]

23 minutes ago, Pancho said:

 

you're falling for intentional misrepresentation of how polling works.  it's always a much more lagging indicator than what those that are politics obsessed think is appropriate.

 

Quote

1. It would take a while to see movement.

There’s a weird inconsistency in how many Americans view polling. They expect — thanks in part to often unscrupulous pollsters — to have instant assessments of major events while scoffing at polls they dislike by noting how unlikely it is that anyone would participate in polls.

There’s some truth to that latter point. It’s not the case that modern polls depend on people picking up landlines, a criticism that survives despite having been addressed years ago. Modern polling employs several techniques aimed at reaching respondents, but doing so is slow and time-intensive. In other words, you should not expect a number of quality assessments of an event immediately after that event occurs simply because it takes time to conduct those assessments.

That sits alongside the other obvious point: that the effects of an event are not all immediate. Something like a poor debate performance (or perceptions thereof) take some time to trickle outward, even in the internet age. Views of Thursday’s debate assessed Thursday night will probably not mirror perceptions a few days later.

What’s more, using individual polls as assessments of a significant event means relying on a single pollster’s assessment of who’s likely to vote or how the results should be interpreted. Polling averages often provide a more accurate assessment of the state of an election — but that accuracy necessarily requires more polling. Which means more time.

 

it might be that nothing happens in the polls because of the debate (i very much doubt it), but someone crowing about lack of movement now should know better.

[YGIFS 19,445]

2 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

She’s been a senator and the vice president. Your girl Gretchen has never held national office before. But you think she’s better prepared? I’m thinking you might not be entirely objective in this matter. 

Not saying Gretchen is the ideal choice, but you do realize 40%+ of U.S. Presidents were Governors before taking the Oval?  It's not like everybody had to have federal experience.  That's more than former Vice Presidents, and drastically lower when you take out VP's who assumed office due a POTUS death and ran afterwards as a technical incumbent.  

[Aqua Buddha 14,256]

9 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

She’s been a senator and the vice president. Your girl Gretchen has never held national office before. But you think she’s better prepared? I’m thinking you might not be entirely objective in this matter. 

Whitmer is a governor of a large, purple state and single handedly destroyed the Republican Party in Michigan.  

Harris is similar to Ron DeSantis, who is also bad at politics.  Despite winning multiple statewide elections in a large state, all they really had to do was win a primary.  

[MissingInAction 24,426]

[Pancho 42,993]

8 minutes ago, BehoId, The Underminer! said:

you're falling for intentional misrepresentation of how polling works.  it's always a much more lagging indicator than what those that are politics obsessed think is appropriate.

Falling for intentional misrepresentation? The debate was a week ago. 
 

“it’s always” - no nothing is always the way you want it. It’s almost like you’re upset at the poll. There could be another reason for those polls and that reason is it could be an actual snapshot of the electorate post debate. There are multiple possibilities for those numbers. 

[Rex Kramer 1,240]

24 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

On a related note, I've never given money to a candidate or party and I never will.

Yep. I don’t understand why someone ever would. 

22 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Of course he can win.

Highly doubtful. 

[DixonHur 10,862]

21 minutes ago, Pancho said:

 

This poll seems to show the 7 battleground states in aggregate, which is about as useful as the national poll.

Averages of the polls before the debate and today.

National

June 26th - Trump +0.1%

Today - Trump +2.1%

Arizona

June 26th - Trump +3.2%

Today - Trump +5.7%

Georgia

June 26th - Trump +5.3%

Today - Trump +7.1%

Michigan

June 26th - Biden +0.2%

Today - Trump +2.4%

Minnesota

June 26th - Biden +2.4%

Today - Biden +0.9%

Nevada

June 26th - Trump +3.2%

Today - Trump +4.4%

North Carolina

June 26th - Trump +6.0%

Today - Trump +7.9%

Pennsylvania

June 26th - Trump +0.8%

Today - Trump +2.2%

National : President: general election : 2024 Polls | FiveThirtyEight

[South Austin 51,681]

22 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

She’s been a senator and the vice president. Your girl Gretchen has never held national office before. But you think she’s better prepared? I’m thinking you might not be entirely objective in this matter. 

I missed the part where the current Republican candidate had never before held any elected office -- state or federal -- until winning the presidency in 2016.  And look at G.W., who had only held a state governorship before winning the presidency.  Same with Bill Clinton.

Maybe there are other reasons that Whitmer shouldn't be given the nod in what is currently just a hypothetical scenario.  But lack of a federal office on her resume is not one.

Edited July 3 by South Austin

[Red Five 40,449]

Harris is at 50c on predictit now. Biden is at 30.

For those of you still convinced, here’s your opportunity to make a bunch of money. I personally think Biden will announce he’s not running sometime next week. The question is will he resign.

[Biff Tannen 45,210]

40 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Not to mention Democrats are demoralized right now. I doubt they’re going to pick up the phone for presidential surveys and a decent chunk are probably going “undecided” right now

That Trump barely picked up support in public polls and they’re still within the margin of error tells me this isn’t going to hurt Biden 4 months from now unless he does it again/repeatedly.  

I got a text yesterday with a link asking me if I was still voting for Biden.  I ignored it because I'm trying to stay off of mailing lists.

[Aqua Buddha 14,256]

A Whitmer/Booker ticket would win in a landslide.

Then you'd have Harris who a month ago was the VP on the ticket and now would be a sitting VP who would leave in Jan regardless of what happened.

[DixonHur 10,862]

23 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

She’s been a senator and the vice president. Your girl Gretchen has never held national office before. But you think she’s better prepared? I’m thinking you might not be entirely objective in this matter. 

What the buck are you talking about?  The only national office is the President.  Just because the job is in Washington doesn't mean they won a national election.

[Biff Tannen 45,210]

23 minutes ago, BehoId, The Underminer! said:

you're falling for intentional misrepresentation of how polling works.  it's always a much more lagging indicator than what those that are politics obsessed think is appropriate.

 

 

it might be that nothing happens in the polls because of the debate (i very much doubt it), but someone crowing about lack of movement now should know better.

Or maybe nobody has any clue what is actually going on.