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

[atomheartbevo 89619]

Speaking of Bible stuff..

https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-opinion/christians-kamala-can-pull-evangelical-voters-away-donald-trump-rcna167561

How I’ve been convincing Christians they don’t have to vote Republican

Democrats need to embrace the idea that evangelicals, and especially white male evangelicals, are worth winning and can be won.

By Doug Pagitt, executive director of Vote Common Good

During the last month, Christians for Kamala joined the ranks of groups supporting Vice President Kamala Harris and her running mate, Gov. Tim Walz of Minnesota. In so doing, they stand beside groups as wide-ranging as Comics for Kamala and Deadheads for Kamala. Because Harris has shown she will include us all in her vision for the United States and bring together what has been torn apart, all of these groups have seized upon the newfound enthusiasm among the electorate since President Joe Biden dropped out of the race in July and endorsed Harris.

A religious coalition such as this entering the chat is an important step in the right direction, and, if built upon, could help sway enough movable religious voters in critical battleground states such as Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. What’s more, it could mean breaking the stronghold that MAGA forces have on many of our country’s evangelical voters. Thanks in part to the cooperation of so many self-identified Christian voters, the MAGA movement has seized control of the Republican Party and helped lead our country down a dark, democracy-threatening path.

Central to our work at Vote Common Good, I spend a lot of my time traveling the country speaking to voters, particularly evangelical and Catholic voters who are hardwired into voting Republican, working to get them to break out of those patterns. What I’ve learned is that most don’t want or need their elected leader to be like them, but they really do want their leader to like them. It wasn’t clear that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton liked evangelical and Catholic men when she ran for president in 2016, and it remains largely unclear to many of these voters in 2024 if Kamala Harris does. Trump, on the other hand, probably doesn’t like them, but he put his arms around these voters in a transactional exchange, and he promised and in some cases delivered them power.

But on the trail in 2020, 2022 and this year, I’ve gleaned the reason many evangelical and Christian voters ultimately leave Trump: his obvious lack of kindness. A poll that my organization Vote Common Good commissioned in 2020 showed that in swing states, Trump’s lack of kindness was driving evangelical and Catholic voters away in large enough numbers to potentially affect the outcome of the election.

Voters typically realize that the way they vote reflects on them. And those religious voters who defected from Trump didn’t like the way his unkindness reflected on them, whether it be putting migrant children in cages, the way he treats women, the way he treats the press, the way he treats nearly everyone who left his administration and the way he treats democracy itself. Many of these voters know that’s not the behavior they want their children to emulate.

The Harris campaign clearly knows it has an opportunity here. The choice of Tim Walz as vice presidential nominee is in no small part evidence of that. But it isn’t nearly enough. Democrats more broadly need to embrace the idea that evangelicals, and especially white male evangelicals, are worth winning and can be won without the party compromising its values.

What it’s going to take is a concerted, grassroots effort to reach these voters, listen to them and bring them along on a journey to help them understand it’s OK for them to let concern for the common good, and not allegiance to a political party, determine how they vote. We need to tell them that what Democrats are pushing for lines up with the values evangelicals hold dear — making the world better and bringing people together. Those policies include commonsense gun reform to keep kids safe, engaging solutions at the border and lowering the cost of child care. Many Christians are heartbroken at the idea that they have to choose between a faith that’s meaningful to them and a political identity that has been wedded to it. They don’t know what to do, and we need to help them separate those two identities.

---

More at the link above.

[Horn Under a Bad Sign 20390]

 

 

 

[WhatTheBuck 28772]

23 minutes ago, Horn Under a Bad Sign said:

 

 

 

Definitely shot backstage at the Late Show with Stephen Colbert. Those were all guests of his last week when he was broadcasting in Chicago after the DNC. The Melania lookalike is Laura Benanti who had a recurring role on the show during the Trump admin. I posted her segment from last Tuesday in the DNC thread but here it is in case you missed it:

 

[SydneyCarton 48053]

6 hours ago, linux said:

It not even like the debates fucking matter, it is just screaming the stupid bullshit and the MAGA side will declare him the winner regardless.

I have NEVER seen a real presidential debate in my lifetime, and never will, that they have devolved into literaly shitslinging is expected, that the shit slinger in chief is scared to do it in person instead of behind his fat twitter fingers is what is shocking.

This is wrong. Trumps behavior towards Biden in their debate and the fallout absolutely hurt him in 2020. 

Edited August 26 by SydneyCarton

[Francisco 2.0 32386]

https://www.politico.com/newsletters/playbook/2024/08/26/scoop-the-secret-debate-about-the-trump-harris-debate-00176296?nname=playbook&nid=0000014f-1646-d88f-a1cf-5f46b7bd0000&nrid=0000014e-f0fd-dd93-ad7f-f8fde5bf0000&nlid=630318

 

Quote

IS THIS THING ON? — Last night, former President DONALD TRUMP posted on Truth Social, tearing into ABC News for a “This Week” panel he disliked (which Rachael happened to be on) and asking aloud whether he will go through with his scheduled Sept. 10 debate against VP KAMALA HARRIS. 

But behind the scenes, well before he clicked the “publish” button on that post, the two campaigns hit an impasse over the rules of the debate, according to four sources familiar with the issue.

The holdup? Whether or not the candidates’ microphones will be muted when it isn’t  their turn to speak.

 

Quote

Back when President JOE BIDEN was still running for reelection, his campaign came to an agreement with Trump’s: There would be two debates — CNN’s on June 27 and ABC’s on Sept. 10 — conducted by mutually negotiated rules. One of Biden world’s red lines — which the Trump team agreed to — was that microphones would “be muted throughout the debate except for the candidate whose turn it is to speak,” as CNN announced on June 15.

Now, the sides have flipped.

Harris’ campaign wants the mics to be hot at all times during the ABC debate, as has historically been the case at presidential debates.

 

Quote

“We have told ABC and other networks seeking to host a possible October debate that we believe both candidates’ mics should be live throughout the full broadcast,” BRIAN FALLON, the Harris campaign’s senior adviser for communications, told Playbook in a text message last night, confirming our reporting. “Our understanding is that Trump’s handlers prefer the muted microphone because they don’t think their candidate can act presidential for 90 minutes on his own. We suspect Trump’s team has not even told their boss about this dispute because it would be too embarrassing to admit they don’t think he can handle himself against Vice President Harris without the benefit of a mute button.”

It’s clear the veep’s team is hoping to get Trump to lose his cool on mic.

 

 

Spoiler

“She’s more than happy to have exchanges with him if he tries to interrupt her,” one person familiar with the negotiations tells Playbook. “And given how shook he seems by her, he’s very prone to having intemperate outbursts and … I think the campaign would want viewers to hear [that].”

For its part, the Trump campaign sees this all as a bait-and-switch. They want the ABC debate governed by the CNN rules, according to two sources.

“Enough with the games. We accepted the ABC debate under the exact same terms as the CNN debate. The Harris camp, after having already agreed to the CNN rules, asked for a seated debate, with notes, and opening statements. We said no changes to the agreed upon rules,” JASON MILLER, senior adviser for Trump, told Playbook last night. “If Kamala Harris isn’t smart enough to repeat the messaging points her handlers want her to memorize, that’s their problem. This seems to be a pattern for the Harris campaign. They won’t allow Harris to do interviews, they won’t allow her to do press conferences, and now they want to give her a cheat-sheet for the debate. My guess is that they’re looking for a way to get out of any debate with President Trump.”

There are a few points here worth noting: 

The rules for the CNN debate were never agreed to by Harris’ campaign; they happened when Biden was still the candidate. 

Trump himself has sought additional debates with rules different from the CNN standard, including proposing a Fox News-hosted debate on Sept. 4 with “a full arena audience,” as Trump posted on Truth Social earlier this month. (The CNN debate had no in-person audience.)

In 2020, the Trump campaign wanted mics to remain on during the whole debate. “It is our understanding … that you will soon be holding an internal meeting to discuss other possible rule changes, such as granting an unnamed person the ability to shut off a candidate’s microphone,” Trump’s then-campaign manager, BILL STEPIEN, wrote to the Commission on Presidential Debates on Oct. 19, 2020. “It is completely unacceptable for anyone to wield such power. … This is reminiscent of the first debate in 2016, when the President’s microphone was oscillated, and it is not acceptable.”

As for Miller’s assertion that Harris wanted a seated debate with notes, Fallon pushed back vigorously. “All three parties (Trump, Harris and ABC) have agreed to standing and no notes, and we never sought otherwise,” he said. Another source familiar with the negotiations laughed when we asked if Harris ever asked to be seated, saying it wasn’t true. 

Moreover, we are told that at the time they accepted ABC’s invitation, the Harris campaign did so while making clear to the network that the rules themselves were up for debate. And if this current snag is any indication, that debate is far from settled.

 

 

[linux 1660]

10 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

This is wrong. Trumps behavior towards Biden in their debate and the fallout absolutely hurt him in 2020. 

I already mentioned this when it was happening, but it was a a panic attack more than an actual needle shift.

Let me put this in other words if Kamala came out with the exact same performance 2 weeks from now I doubt the needle would move at all. The candidates are set, people will reinforce their beliefs even if entering denial, and we would move exactly as we are today.

There are no knives being sharpened for her in the democratic camp.

[Hank Kingsley 20903]

I mean, the Biden debate performance a few months ago was catastrophic and seismic. It completely changed the race and eventually forced him out. 

Which makes the Harris/Trump debate that much more important in the eyes of voters and overall public. 

 

[Chuckie Finster 22692]

https://www.politico.com/newsletters/playbook/2024/08/26/scoop-the-secret-debate-about-the-trump-harris-debate-00176296?nname=playbook&nid=0000014f-1646-d88f-a1cf-5f46b7bd0000&nrid=0000014e-f0fd-dd93-ad7f-f8fde5bf0000&nlid=630318
 

IS THIS THING ON? — Last night, former President DONALD TRUMP posted on Truth Social, tearing into ABC News for a “This Week” panel he disliked (which Rachael happened to be on) and asking aloud whether he will go through with his scheduled Sept. 10 debate against VP KAMALA HARRIS. 
But behind the scenes, well before he clicked the “publish” button on that post, the two campaigns hit an impasse over the rules of the debate, according to four sources familiar with the issue.
The holdup? Whether or not the candidates’ microphones will be muted when it isn’t  their turn to speak.

 

Back when President JOE BIDEN was still running for reelection, his campaign came to an agreement with Trump’s: There would be two debates — CNN’s on June 27 and ABC’s on Sept. 10 — conducted by mutually negotiated rules. One of Biden world’s red lines — which the Trump team agreed to — was that microphones would “be muted throughout the debate except for the candidate whose turn it is to speak,” as CNN announced on June 15.
Now, the sides have flipped.
Harris’ campaign wants the mics to be hot at all times during the ABC debate, as has historically been the case at presidential debates.

 

“We have told ABC and other networks seeking to host a possible October debate that we believe both candidates’ mics should be live throughout the full broadcast,” BRIAN FALLON, the Harris campaign’s senior adviser for communications, told Playbook in a text message last night, confirming our reporting. “Our understanding is that Trump’s handlers prefer the muted microphone because they don’t think their candidate can act presidential for 90 minutes on his own. We suspect Trump’s team has not even told their boss about this dispute because it would be too embarrassing to admit they don’t think he can handle himself against Vice President Harris without the benefit of a mute button.”
It’s clear the veep’s team is hoping to get Trump to lose his cool on mic.

 
 
Spoiler

“She’s more than happy to have exchanges with him if he tries to interrupt her,” one person familiar with the negotiations tells Playbook. “And given how shook he seems by her, he’s very prone to having intemperate outbursts and … I think the campaign would want viewers to hear [that].”
For its part, the Trump campaign sees this all as a bait-and-switch. They want the ABC debate governed by the CNN rules, according to two sources.
“Enough with the games. We accepted the ABC debate under the exact same terms as the CNN debate. The Harris camp, after having already agreed to the CNN rules, asked for a seated debate, with notes, and opening statements. We said no changes to the agreed upon rules,” JASON MILLER, senior adviser for Trump, told Playbook last night. “If Kamala Harris isn’t smart enough to repeat the messaging points her handlers want her to memorize, that’s their problem. This seems to be a pattern for the Harris campaign. They won’t allow Harris to do interviews, they won’t allow her to do press conferences, and now they want to give her a cheat-sheet for the debate. My guess is that they’re looking for a way to get out of any debate with President Trump.”
There are a few points here worth noting: 
The rules for the CNN debate were never agreed to by Harris’ campaign; they happened when Biden was still the candidate. 
Trump himself has sought additional debates with rules different from the CNN standard, including proposing a Fox News-hosted debate on Sept. 4 with “a full arena audience,” as Trump posted on Truth Social earlier this month. (The CNN debate had no in-person audience.)
In 2020, the Trump campaign wanted mics to remain on during the whole debate. “It is our understanding … that you will soon be holding an internal meeting to discuss other possible rule changes, such as granting an unnamed person the ability to shut off a candidate’s microphone,” Trump’s then-campaign manager, BILL STEPIEN, wrote to the Commission on Presidential Debates on Oct. 19, 2020. “It is completely unacceptable for anyone to wield such power. … This is reminiscent of the first debate in 2016, when the President’s microphone was oscillated, and it is not acceptable.”
As for Miller’s assertion that Harris wanted a seated debate with notes, Fallon pushed back vigorously. “All three parties (Trump, Harris and ABC) have agreed to standing and no notes, and we never sought otherwise,” he said. Another source familiar with the negotiations laughed when we asked if Harris ever asked to be seated, saying it wasn’t true. 
Moreover, we are told that at the time they accepted ABC’s invitation, the Harris campaign did so while making clear to the network that the rules themselves were up for debate. And if this current snag is any indication, that debate is far from settled.
 

 

This is absolutely the right call. Biden’s performance obviously generated the headlines, but it was equally obvious that the muted mics were a huge gift to Trump.

[linux 1660]

8 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

I mean, the Biden debate performance a few months ago was catastrophic and seismic. It completely changed the race and eventually forced him out. 

Which makes the Harris/Trump debate that much more important in the eyes of voters and overall public. 

 

Again I disagree, had he had his grandpa moment in the state of the union, or in an interview, or in a major speech it would have been the same. The debate in itself had absolutely nothing to do with it.

People are not logical, when you have a candidate like Trump who wants to end democracy the logical thing is to vote 100% for the opponent with perfect turnout. Instead we have hateful bigots in MAGA so we need to discard 45%, then we have the unwieldly Democratic tent at 55%.

Don't get me wrong Kamala IS the smart choice when dealing with ilogical actors, but at the same time you just have to feel contempt on how once again logic does not matter, how real debates (where evidence is presented and evaluated) really don't matter. Its all a god damn nihilistic reality TV show, you just have to deal with imperfect reality.

[linux 1660]

“We have told ABC and other networks seeking to host a possible October debate that we believe both candidates’ mics should be live throughout the full broadcast,” BRIAN FALLON, the Harris campaign’s senior adviser for communications, told Playbook in a text message last night, confirming our reporting. “Our understanding is that Trump’s handlers prefer the muted microphone because they don’t think their candidate can act presidential for 90 minutes on his own. We suspect Trump’s team has not even told their boss about this dispute because it would be too embarrassing to admit they don’t think he can handle himself against Vice President Harris without the benefit of a mute button.”

When dealing with someone incredibly stupid you do reverse psychology. (Microphones OFF!)

When dealing with the above plus a narcissist you appeal to his frail masculinity (Microphones ON!)

How much lower can we go?

[Hank Kingsley 20903]

17 minutes ago, linux said:

Again I disagree, had he had his grandpa moment in the state of the union, or in an interview, or in a major speech it would have been the same. The debate in itself had absolutely nothing to do with it.

This is wrong. That they were on stage together is what made it such a disaster. 

 

[Post Oak 20204]

6 hours ago, Horn Under a Bad Sign said:

 

 

 

Pete

 

[Sawbonz 27527]

53 minutes ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

https://www.politico.com/newsletters/playbook/2024/08/26/scoop-the-secret-debate-about-the-trump-harris-debate-00176296?nname=playbook&nid=0000014f-1646-d88f-a1cf-5f46b7bd0000&nrid=0000014e-f0fd-dd93-ad7f-f8fde5bf0000&nlid=630318

 

 

 

 

 

  Hide contents

“She’s more than happy to have exchanges with him if he tries to interrupt her,” one person familiar with the negotiations tells Playbook. “And given how shook he seems by her, he’s very prone to having intemperate outbursts and … I think the campaign would want viewers to hear [that].”

For its part, the Trump campaign sees this all as a bait-and-switch. They want the ABC debate governed by the CNN rules, according to two sources.

“Enough with the games. We accepted the ABC debate under the exact same terms as the CNN debate. The Harris camp, after having already agreed to the CNN rules, asked for a seated debate, with notes, and opening statements. We said no changes to the agreed upon rules,” JASON MILLER, senior adviser for Trump, told Playbook last night. “If Kamala Harris isn’t smart enough to repeat the messaging points her handlers want her to memorize, that’s their problem. This seems to be a pattern for the Harris campaign. They won’t allow Harris to do interviews, they won’t allow her to do press conferences, and now they want to give her a cheat-sheet for the debate. My guess is that they’re looking for a way to get out of any debate with President Trump.”

There are a few points here worth noting: 

The rules for the CNN debate were never agreed to by Harris’ campaign; they happened when Biden was still the candidate. 

Trump himself has sought additional debates with rules different from the CNN standard, including proposing a Fox News-hosted debate on Sept. 4 with “a full arena audience,” as Trump posted on Truth Social earlier this month. (The CNN debate had no in-person audience.)

In 2020, the Trump campaign wanted mics to remain on during the whole debate. “It is our understanding … that you will soon be holding an internal meeting to discuss other possible rule changes, such as granting an unnamed person the ability to shut off a candidate’s microphone,” Trump’s then-campaign manager, BILL STEPIEN, wrote to the Commission on Presidential Debates on Oct. 19, 2020. “It is completely unacceptable for anyone to wield such power. … This is reminiscent of the first debate in 2016, when the President’s microphone was oscillated, and it is not acceptable.”

As for Miller’s assertion that Harris wanted a seated debate with notes, Fallon pushed back vigorously. “All three parties (Trump, Harris and ABC) have agreed to standing and no notes, and we never sought otherwise,” he said. Another source familiar with the negotiations laughed when we asked if Harris ever asked to be seated, saying it wasn’t true. 

Moreover, we are told that at the time they accepted ABC’s invitation, the Harris campaign did so while making clear to the network that the rules themselves were up for debate. And if this current snag is any indication, that debate is far from settled.

 

 

I take from this article that Trump wants a sit down debate, with notes, and he wants to give a canned speech to open 

[Sawbonz 27527]

56 minutes ago, linux said:

I already mentioned this when it was happening, but it was a a panic attack more than an actual needle shift.

Let me put this in other words if Kamala came out with the exact same performance 2 weeks from now I doubt the needle would move at all. The candidates are set, people will reinforce their beliefs even if entering denial, and we would move exactly as we are today.

There are no knives being sharpened for her in the democratic camp.

Polls are literally changing by the week. This is just wrong 

[Sawbonz 27527]

35 minutes ago, linux said:

The debate in itself had absolutely nothing to do with it.

Wat 

[immamac 42834]

1 minute ago, Sawbonz said:

Wat 

He's saying Joe didn't lose the debate, he lost Americas confidence in his ability to even basically function. 

[Bullneck 19070]

I don't know, man.  Powerfunnlz sounds kinda cool.

 

Edited August 26 by Bullneck

[Js1 85260]

18 minutes ago, immamac said:

He's saying Joe didn't lose the debate, he lost Americas confidence in his ability to even basically function. 

That’s correct. It’s an image thing. Now go put fat old Trump up against Kamala on a debate stage. 

[Upgrayedd 5810]

1 minute ago, Bullneck said:

I don't know, man.  Powerfunnlz sounds kinda cool.

Saw Powerfulnnz at the Whiskey back in the day

[mdmost 42998]

Pwerfulnnz Border covfefe

 

[TeeDubya 3362]

12 minutes ago, mdmost said:

Pwerfulnnz Border covfefe

 

With a delicious hamberber. 

[Bozo_Casanova 26432]

One time in college I ate an entire bag of powerfulnnz

[Pescado_Rojo 19413]

3 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

One time in college I ate an entire bag of powerfulnnz

I hear the sugar free ones will give you the shits. 

[Hank Kingsley 20903]

[SydneyCarton 48053]

1 minute ago, Hank Kingsley said:

That's some quality baiting right there. Just dragging their nuts all over his face. 

[Js1 85260]

5 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

[Biff Tannen 45661]

7 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

Speaking of Bible stuff..

https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-opinion/christians-kamala-can-pull-evangelical-voters-away-donald-trump-rcna167561

How I’ve been convincing Christians they don’t have to vote Republican

Democrats need to embrace the idea that evangelicals, and especially white male evangelicals, are worth winning and can be won.

By Doug Pagitt, executive director of Vote Common Good

During the last month, Christians for Kamala joined the ranks of groups supporting Vice President Kamala Harris and her running mate, Gov. Tim Walz of Minnesota. In so doing, they stand beside groups as wide-ranging as Comics for Kamala and Deadheads for Kamala. Because Harris has shown she will include us all in her vision for the United States and bring together what has been torn apart, all of these groups have seized upon the newfound enthusiasm among the electorate since President Joe Biden dropped out of the race in July and endorsed Harris.

A religious coalition such as this entering the chat is an important step in the right direction, and, if built upon, could help sway enough movable religious voters in critical battleground states such as Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. What’s more, it could mean breaking the stronghold that MAGA forces have on many of our country’s evangelical voters. Thanks in part to the cooperation of so many self-identified Christian voters, the MAGA movement has seized control of the Republican Party and helped lead our country down a dark, democracy-threatening path.

Central to our work at Vote Common Good, I spend a lot of my time traveling the country speaking to voters, particularly evangelical and Catholic voters who are hardwired into voting Republican, working to get them to break out of those patterns. What I’ve learned is that most don’t want or need their elected leader to be like them, but they really do want their leader to like them. It wasn’t clear that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton liked evangelical and Catholic men when she ran for president in 2016, and it remains largely unclear to many of these voters in 2024 if Kamala Harris does. Trump, on the other hand, probably doesn’t like them, but he put his arms around these voters in a transactional exchange, and he promised and in some cases delivered them power.

But on the trail in 2020, 2022 and this year, I’ve gleaned the reason many evangelical and Christian voters ultimately leave Trump: his obvious lack of kindness. A poll that my organization Vote Common Good commissioned in 2020 showed that in swing states, Trump’s lack of kindness was driving evangelical and Catholic voters away in large enough numbers to potentially affect the outcome of the election.

Voters typically realize that the way they vote reflects on them. And those religious voters who defected from Trump didn’t like the way his unkindness reflected on them, whether it be putting migrant children in cages, the way he treats women, the way he treats the press, the way he treats nearly everyone who left his administration and the way he treats democracy itself. Many of these voters know that’s not the behavior they want their children to emulate.

The Harris campaign clearly knows it has an opportunity here. The choice of Tim Walz as vice presidential nominee is in no small part evidence of that. But it isn’t nearly enough. Democrats more broadly need to embrace the idea that evangelicals, and especially white male evangelicals, are worth winning and can be won without the party compromising its values.

What it’s going to take is a concerted, grassroots effort to reach these voters, listen to them and bring them along on a journey to help them understand it’s OK for them to let concern for the common good, and not allegiance to a political party, determine how they vote. We need to tell them that what Democrats are pushing for lines up with the values evangelicals hold dear — making the world better and bringing people together. Those policies include commonsense gun reform to keep kids safe, engaging solutions at the border and lowering the cost of child care. Many Christians are heartbroken at the idea that they have to choose between a faith that’s meaningful to them and a political identity that has been wedded to it. They don’t know what to do, and we need to help them separate those two identities.

---

More at the link above.

Well that certainly looks like a lot of words.  I don't know any evangelicals, so I'll leave it to you guys.

[Pancho 44687]

14 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

[atomheartbevo 89619]

8 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

I don't know any evangelicals,

[The Dog 44017]

33 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

I understand this line of thinking but it also looks like the Harris team is breaking the agreement and wanting to get out of the debate. It gives Trump an opening to bail. 

[chainsaw 9851]

11 hours ago, tx 3 putt said:

Someone had their first debate prep and I can tell it went well

[Js1 85260]

1 minute ago, The Dog said:

I understand this line of thinking but it also looks like the Harris team is breaking the agreement and wanting to get out of the debate. It gives Trump an opening to bail. 

No it doesn’t. The muted mics was what the Biden team wanted and demanded. The Harris team, which is not the Biden team any longer, wants them hot. 

[The Dog 44017]

Just now, Js1 said:

No it doesn’t. The muted mics was what the Biden team wanted and demanded. The Harris team, which is not the Biden team any longer, wants them hot. 

You are correct in that point.

However, they've used the argument that the agreement was settled before in order to keep Trump from bailing and doing additional debates. Now they are trying to flip the script and make changes? 

The Harris campaign is trying to have it both ways.

[Js1 85260]

I think there's a huge difference between settling on the date/time/network (2 debates, one in June on CNN and one in September on ABC) and the nit picky rules of each debate.  

[Francisco 2.0 32386]

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/26/opinion/republican-donors-money-ttump.html

Republican Donors: Do You Know Where Your Money Goes?
 

Quote

We long ago blew past any meaningful controls on political giving in American elections. Now we should focus on the rules governing political spending, which are in equally terrible shape. For that we can blame the Trump campaign and the federal government’s feeble enforcement efforts.

Anyone who has spent time reviewing Donald Trump’s campaign spending reports would quickly conclude they’re a governance nightmare. There is so little disclosure about what happened to the billions raised in 2020 and 2024 that donors (and maybe even the former president himself) can’t possibly know how it was spent.

 

Quote

Federal Election Commission campaign disclosure reports from 2020 show that much of the money donated to the Trump campaign went into a legal and financial black hole reportedly controlled by Trump family members and close associates. This year’s campaign disclosures are shaping up to be the same. Donors big and small give their hard-earned dollars to candidates with the expectation they will be spent on direct efforts to win votes. They deserve better.

During the 2020 election, almost $516 million of the over $780 million spent by the Trump campaign was directed to American Made Media Consultants, a Delaware-based private company created in 2018 that masked the identities of who ultimately received donor dollars, according to a complaint filed with the F.E.C. by the nonpartisan Campaign Legal Center. How A.M.M.C. spent the money was a mystery even to Mr. Trump’s campaign team, according to news reports shortly after the election.

 

Quote

All but 18 of the 150 largest expenditures on a Trump campaign’s 2020 F.E.C. report went to A.M.M.C. None of the expenses were itemized or otherwise explained aside from anodyne descriptions including “placed media,” “SMS advertising” and “online advertising.” F.E.C. rules require candidates to fully and accurately disclose the final recipients of their campaign disbursements, which is usually understood to include when payments are made through a vendor such as A.M.M.C. This disclosure is intended to assure donors their contributions are used for campaign expenses. Currently, neither voters nor law enforcement can know whether any laws were broken.

 

Spoiler

A.M.M.C.’s first president was reported to be Lara Trump, the wife of Mr. Trump’s son Eric. The New York Times reported that A.M.M.C. had a treasurer who was also the chief financial officer of Mr. Trump’s 2020 presidential campaign. Jared Kushner, Mr. Trump’s son-in-law, signed off on the plan to set up A.M.M.C., and one of Eric Trump’s deputies from the Trump Organization was involved in running it.

Ms. Trump is now co-chair of the Republican National Committee, which, soon after her arrival, announced it would link up with the Trump campaign for joint fund-raising. The joint entity prioritizes a PAC that pays Mr. Trump’s legal fees over the R.N.C., The Associated Press has reported, making assurances from Mr. Trump’s campaign co-manager that R.N.C. funds wouldn’t be used to pay Mr. Trump’s legal bills seem more hollow.

This election, the Trump campaign and four of its PACs have paid Red Curve Solutions, another private company, at least $18 million. The Campaign Legal Center says Red Curve appears to pay Mr. Trump’s legal bills and then gets reimbursed by the PACs. (The law is murky on what types of legal bills can be paid by campaigns, but some are allowed.) The head of Red Curve also serves as the treasurer for the Trump campaign as well as the affiliated PACs.

What percentage of donor contributions go to lawyers defending Mr. Trump? It’s impossible to know.

In June, NBC revealed the existence of a new mystery company, called Launchpad Strategies. Launchpad took in almost $15 million in Trump political cash via the Trump Save America Joint Fundraising Committee and the Trump National Committee. Little is known about this new group. It was created in 2023 and the Trump campaign says it is related to fund-raising. We don’t know who owns it, who runs it or where the $15 million went.

It seems likely Mr. Trump is keeping close tabs on donations flowing through campaign vehicles controlled by family members and loyalists. But from early March through July of this year, the Biden and now Harris campaign outspent the Trump campaign three to one on advertising. By late May, the Democratic campaign had opened 200 field offices and hired 1,000 staff members in key states. The Trump campaign didn’t open its first office in the crucial battleground of Pennsylvania until June. The Biden campaign had 24 there in April.

Biden’s campaign also spent donor cash on legal bills, though apparently in far smaller quantities. It paid over $1 million for attorneys during a special counsel probe of the president’s handling of classified documents, The Associated Press reported in April.

Maybe the Trump campaign is saving up for a post-Labor Day blitz to the finish line. Or perhaps Brad Parscale, whose strategy firm took in $94 million from Trump-affiliated groups in the 2016 campaign, spent every cent of that to re-elect the president. We know he seems to have paid himself handsomely. He bought a $2.4 million Fort Lauderdale waterfront property, a BMW X6, a Range Rover and a Ferrari. When Mr. Trump learned of Mr. Parscale’s high-rolling lifestyle, he reportedly exclaimed, “That’s my money!” according to Michael Bender’s book on the Trump campaign. Concerns about Mr. Parscale reportedly drove Mr. Kushner to ensure A.M.M.C. was fully controlled by the Trump family and trusted lieutenants.

Donors should demand more information about how their money is spent. But that would most likely offend the Trump family and confidants running the campaign. And the whole point of donating to Mr. Trump is to get on his good side.

And — just hypothetically, of course — if Vice President Kamala Harris opens up her lead in the polls and the odds fall that Mr. Trump could win, who would be surprised if the unknown owners of the mystery companies paid themselves more while the campaign spigots are blasting cash and the future uncertain?

The Federal Election Commission should demand that all campaigns disclose recipients of more than $200 in campaign cash. At least that’s what the law says. Campaign Legal Center tried to get the F.E.C. to enforce disclosure rules on the Trump campaign. The commissioners voted 3 to 3 to dismiss the matter, and federal courts have declined to step in. The legal center has appealed the case to the full U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

The commission, long famous in Washington for its dysfunction, now seems incapable of its most basic enforcement role. The agency reportedly had only three open investigations in June despite the proliferation of hundreds of new campaigns and PACs. Congress should demand it better police the recipients of campaign contributions. And if the law is inadequate, Congress should make new ones.

 

[HenryJames 66034]

[atomheartbevo 89619]

6 minutes ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/26/opinion/republican-donors-money-ttump.html

Republican Donors: Do You Know Where Your Money Goes?
 

  Reveal hidden contents

A.M.M.C.’s first president was reported to be Lara Trump, the wife of Mr. Trump’s son Eric. The New York Times reported that A.M.M.C. had a treasurer who was also the chief financial officer of Mr. Trump’s 2020 presidential campaign. Jared Kushner, Mr. Trump’s son-in-law, signed off on the plan to set up A.M.M.C., and one of Eric Trump’s deputies from the Trump Organization was involved in running it.

Ms. Trump is now co-chair of the Republican National Committee, which, soon after her arrival, announced it would link up with the Trump campaign for joint fund-raising. The joint entity prioritizes a PAC that pays Mr. Trump’s legal fees over the R.N.C., The Associated Press has reported, making assurances from Mr. Trump’s campaign co-manager that R.N.C. funds wouldn’t be used to pay Mr. Trump’s legal bills seem more hollow.

This election, the Trump campaign and four of its PACs have paid Red Curve Solutions, another private company, at least $18 million. The Campaign Legal Center says Red Curve appears to pay Mr. Trump’s legal bills and then gets reimbursed by the PACs. (The law is murky on what types of legal bills can be paid by campaigns, but some are allowed.) The head of Red Curve also serves as the treasurer for the Trump campaign as well as the affiliated PACs.

What percentage of donor contributions go to lawyers defending Mr. Trump? It’s impossible to know.

In June, NBC revealed the existence of a new mystery company, called Launchpad Strategies. Launchpad took in almost $15 million in Trump political cash via the Trump Save America Joint Fundraising Committee and the Trump National Committee. Little is known about this new group. It was created in 2023 and the Trump campaign says it is related to fund-raising. We don’t know who owns it, who runs it or where the $15 million went.

It seems likely Mr. Trump is keeping close tabs on donations flowing through campaign vehicles controlled by family members and loyalists. But from early March through July of this year, the Biden and now Harris campaign outspent the Trump campaign three to one on advertising. By late May, the Democratic campaign had opened 200 field offices and hired 1,000 staff members in key states. The Trump campaign didn’t open its first office in the crucial battleground of Pennsylvania until June. The Biden campaign had 24 there in April.

Biden’s campaign also spent donor cash on legal bills, though apparently in far smaller quantities. It paid over $1 million for attorneys during a special counsel probe of the president’s handling of classified documents, The Associated Press reported in April.

Maybe the Trump campaign is saving up for a post-Labor Day blitz to the finish line. Or perhaps Brad Parscale, whose strategy firm took in $94 million from Trump-affiliated groups in the 2016 campaign, spent every cent of that to re-elect the president. We know he seems to have paid himself handsomely. He bought a $2.4 million Fort Lauderdale waterfront property, a BMW X6, a Range Rover and a Ferrari. When Mr. Trump learned of Mr. Parscale’s high-rolling lifestyle, he reportedly exclaimed, “That’s my money!” according to Michael Bender’s book on the Trump campaign. Concerns about Mr. Parscale reportedly drove Mr. Kushner to ensure A.M.M.C. was fully controlled by the Trump family and trusted lieutenants.

Donors should demand more information about how their money is spent. But that would most likely offend the Trump family and confidants running the campaign. And the whole point of donating to Mr. Trump is to get on his good side.

And — just hypothetically, of course — if Vice President Kamala Harris opens up her lead in the polls and the odds fall that Mr. Trump could win, who would be surprised if the unknown owners of the mystery companies paid themselves more while the campaign spigots are blasting cash and the future uncertain?

The Federal Election Commission should demand that all campaigns disclose recipients of more than $200 in campaign cash. At least that’s what the law says. Campaign Legal Center tried to get the F.E.C. to enforce disclosure rules on the Trump campaign. The commissioners voted 3 to 3 to dismiss the matter, and federal courts have declined to step in. The legal center has appealed the case to the full U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

The commission, long famous in Washington for its dysfunction, now seems incapable of its most basic enforcement role. The agency reportedly had only three open investigations in June despite the proliferation of hundreds of new campaigns and PACs. Congress should demand it better police the recipients of campaign contributions. And if the law is inadequate, Congress should make new ones.

 

[SimonBolivar 10957]

47 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Well that certainly looks like a lot of words.  I don't know any evangelicals, so I'll leave it to you guys.

You lucky son of a bitch. Oh and lol at the idea of Evangelicals leaving Trump over anything at this point. They're full on the hate machine as much as any other MAGAite.

[Tuco 5076]

Translation: We’re going to get him to say the n word.

[lemonlime 5503]

20 minutes ago, The Dog said:

I understand this line of thinking but it also looks like the Harris team is breaking the agreement and wanting to get out of the debate. It gives Trump an opening to bail. 

No, it doesn't. It makes Trump either admit he needs a mute button, or feed into Trump bailing on the debate.  Or to get trump to further commit to the debate.  His team could easily we want to stick to the rules agree to earlier with Biden, and I'm sure Harris would accept that.  Harris is saying she wants to change the rules, something trump could agree to or not.  And if he doesn't, then it's obvious his handlers think he needs a mute button.

[atomheartbevo 89619]

1 minute ago, Tuco said:

Translation: We’re going to get him to say the n word.

Or call her a cunt under his breathe.  That would do wonders for independent and moderate women.

[ConferenceRoom 6141]

13 minutes ago, HenryJames said:

 

[tx ind 7006]

I just want there to be some actual fact checking on Trump.

[Js1 85260]

3 minutes ago, tx ind said:

I just want there to be some actual fact checking on Trump.

Same But if the moderators won’t, KH can’t get bogged down in it. She just needs to retort that’s a lie (better if she’s keeping count and can say, well that was Donald’s 14th lie so far) and go into her response 

[Michael Knight 12976]

On 8/24/2024 at 6:25 PM, cactusflinthead said:

 

That just keeps going

[cactusflinthead 27598]

20 minutes ago, HenryJames said:

Editor in Chief of the National Review gets an opinion in the NYT.

 

[Js1 85260]

tldr; 

In the last week and a half PPP has done over 30 polls both statewide and in various districts in Arizona, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Texas.

That represents a pretty broad swath of the country and in the polls that included the Presidential race Kamala Harris is doing an average of one point better than Joe Biden did in the same places.

That’s great news for Democrats! If that held across the board she would win by a commanding 5 point margin in the popular vote and win the Electoral College 303-235 while just falling the slightest bit short in North Carolina.

[Gatorubet 30183]

1 hour ago, Bullneck said:

I don't know, man.  Powerfunnlz sounds kinda cool.

“Powerful nuts”.  Obama’s convention speech jab at his mushroom has him rattled.

[softlynow 1812]

47 minutes ago, The Dog said:

You are correct in that point.

However, they've used the argument that the agreement was settled before in order to keep Trump from bailing and doing additional debates. Now they are trying to flip the script and make changes? 

The Harris campaign is trying to have it both ways.

Good. Finally a Dem campaign that understands they’re in a street fight not a beauty pageant. 

[Gatorubet 30183]

52 minutes ago, The Dog said:

The Harris campaign is trying to have it both ways.

I think their goal is to get Trump to cancel the debate.   He will look old and cowardly if he bails over a disagreement over terms, no matter what the earlier terms were.  

True, his myrmidons will believe whatever he says, but to independent ( and whatever undecided are remaining) voters he will look weak and old for ducking.

I think this is part of the playbook that they are successfully running to make him look small and non-threatening.