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

[SydneyCarton 49505]

3 minutes ago, G650 said:

The actual laughable part is completely eliding over the fact the actual problem is 45% of the country is voting for Trump.

Sir, I’ve been told that the real problem with this country is the way the founding fathers crafted our government. 

[chainsaw 10293]

2 minutes ago, G650 said:

The actual laughable part is completely eliding over the fact the actual problem is 45% of the country is voting for Trump.

That's human nature though, and to their credit I think the founding fathers realized that a great many people are too stupid for their own good and wanted a government that was able to protect them from themselves.

I just think they didn't do a good enough job with the constitution.

[Jive Turkey 13005]

18 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

Chainsaw’d

Add it to the pile.

Derka’d

slorch’d

Rocko’d

chainsaw’d

who else has earned this dubious distinction?  I know I’m missing several.  

[SydneyCarton 49505]

1 minute ago, Jive Turkey said:

Add it to the pile.

Derka’d

slorch’d

Rocko’d

chainsaw’d

who else has earned this dubious distinction?  I know I’m missing several.  

Gil Bang’d?

Stanco’d?

[chainsaw 10293]

3 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

Literally, LITERALLY, no one who frequents this fucking board believes any of the things bolded above. Fucking no one. Attempting to paint anyone with that fucking brush is laughably pathetic, and most importantly arguing in bad faith. 

I hope you are right, but the mystique is a real thing. I can't think of a politician who doesn't at least pay lip service to how great and wonderful the founding fathers and constitution are.

[SydneyCarton 49505]

2 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

I hope you are right, but the mystique is a real thing. I can't think of a politician who doesn't at least pay lip service to how great and wonderful the founding fathers and constitution are.

Yes it’s a real thing. But not fucking here it isn’t. 

[Goofyboy 3434]

Can we get back on track?? Are there exit polls for early voting?

[David Dennison 19542]

1 hour ago, chainsaw said:

He did and they've all been eroded because of the antidemocratic mechanisms these founding fathers put into the constitution.

Passing laws is one thing, but amending the Constitution as you're no doubt aware is a much higher hurdle to clear that doesn't happen very often without a bloody civil war preceding it

It's happened *checks notes* 27 times.

None of those amendments caused a civil war.

[TwiceHorn 32079]

34 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

It ultimately doesn't matter what you or I think about their intellect. Like Sark in 2021, we're still stuck with the byproducts of our predecessors' shortcomings.

The reason I originally brought up this hard truth is because the mystique that surrounds the founding fathers and the Constitution has the effect of shielding it from meaningful debate. By that I mean, the only places it gets talked about with some objectivity are academia and corners of the internet, places that wield no power to actually do anything.

It's funny because the same people following this thread who are having to constantly watch these polls, after having to force out the presumptive nominee due to his Jackson Arnoldian inability to win, are only in this position because of the hard truth I've pointed out. I love the good parts of our Constitution, but we are deluding ourselves if we think it's the product of a bona fide brain trust.

There is a certain sanctity of the Constitution, yes, that precludes some from entertaining criticism of it.

By the same token, you can seriously discuss and criticize the shortcomings of the Constitution and the form of government it created without short-selling the Founding Fathers.

[chainsaw 10293]

Just now, David Dennison said:

It's happened *checks notes* 27 times.

None of those amendments caused a civil war.

I think you misread what I said. Anyway, the amendments we actually need are going to be a lot more politically unviable than repealing prohibition and regulating Congressional salary changes.

[The Dog 44861]

[chainsaw 10293]

1 minute ago, TwiceHorn said:

There is a certain sanctity of the Constitution, yes, that precludes some from entertaining criticism of it.

By the same token, you can seriously discuss and criticize the shortcomings of the Constitution and the form of government it created without short-selling the Founding Fathers.

Fair enough.

[David Dennison 19542]

5 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

I think you misread what I said. Anyway, the amendments we actually need are going to be a lot more politically unviable than repealing prohibition and regulating Congressional salary changes.

People who want change need to get better at politics. 

[chainsaw 10293]

1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

People who want change need to get better at politics. 

We can hope for and work toward that, but if the system is so rigged that it's practically impossible to accomplish, maybe the greater blame should lie with the rigged system.

[SydneyCarton 49505]

Just now, David Dennison said:

People who want change need to get better at politics. 

Are you surprised that the guy who champions purity tests and a complete unwillingness to even understand the concept of compromise in regards to super left progressive positions doesn’t fundamentally understand the concept of politics?

[Js1 87185]

30 minutes ago, G650 said:

The actual laughable part is completely eliding over the fact the actual problem is 45% of the country is voting for Trump.

I mean. I get the sentiment but even in major blowouts, the major party’s floor is pretty high (37-40%) and 2024 is probably the most polarized we’ve ever been. So Trump with a 45% floor sounds about right - US is 45/45 with 10% that can be swayed 

1964 - 38.5%
1980 - 41%
1984 - 40.6%
1972 - 37.5%
1932 - 39.6%
1936 - 36.5%

[Pato del Muerto 53506]

Your numbers suggest it’s more like 35/35/30

[David Dennison 19542]

12 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

We can hope for and work toward that, but if the system is so rigged that it's practically impossible to accomplish, maybe the greater blame should lie with the rigged system.

You're diminishing all that has been accomplished within this system over the last 237 years.

[Js1 87185]

1 minute ago, Pato del Muerto said:

Your numbers suggest it’s more like 35/35/30

Maybe 30-40 years ago, but in the past few elections? Not a chance either a Dem or Rep is getting under 45% without a major scandal or a Perot-type spoiler

The GOP destroyed the economy in 2008 and McCain still got 45.7%

[Surly Bevo 25748]

The US is something like  30/30/40

The 40 is made up of three groups

1.  They are eligible to vote.....Will they even register to vote

2.  They are registered to vote.....Will they show up and vote?

3.  They are registered to vote and routinely show up to vote....Who will they vote for?

Hell maybe 25/25/50

Edited September 22 by Surly Bevo

[Sawbonz 28223]

2 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

Your numbers suggest it’s more like 35/35/30

But unfortunately popular vote for president is a binary choice 

 

[SydneyCarton 49505]

23 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

You're diminishing all that has been accomplished within this system over the last 237 years.

Imagine being so far left that David Dennison is dunking all over you for being myopic and absurd in your leftism. No offense, David, just stating that you’re left of most here. 

22 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Maybe 30-40 years ago, but in the past few elections? Not a chance either a Dem or Rep is getting under 45% without a major scandal or a Perot-type spoiler

The GOP destroyed the economy in 2008 and McCain still got 45.7%

To be fair, I don’t think the GOP destroyed the economy in 2008. Now, do I think their legislation changes in banking in decades prior made that happen? Absolutely. But what am I missing in 2008 specifically they did to wreck the economy? I always thought it was a combo of banking nonsense and the Clinton changed to Fanny and Freddie?

Edited September 22 by SydneyCarton

[Surly Bevo 25748]

Let's not relitigate the Financial Crises.  EVERYBODY had some degree of culpability there.  Big Financial institutions by far with the most, government for opening the doors (both parties) and not reigning it in, etc etc.  

 

[ConferenceRoom 6214]

10 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

Imagine being so far left that David Dennison is dunking all over you for being myopic and absurd in your leftism. 

 

[G650 14437]

21 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Maybe 30-40 years ago, but in the past few elections? Not a chance either a Dem or Rep is getting under 45% without a major scandal or a Perot-type spoiler

The GOP destroyed the economy in 2008 and McCain still got 45.7%

And that is totally fine. The issue is a large chunk of the country has no qualms about writing off democracy. The constitution has shit to do with that.

 

Insert whatever utopian form over government that dipshit is envisioning into the US, you are more than likely increasing Trumps chances at gaining the levers of power.

[Pato del Muerto 53506]

Well we can certainly scour at the politicians and voters that went through that and are still, or once again, on the path of complete deregulation because it’s how we prosper.   The politicians are bought by corporate interests for their opinions and votes, the people are just dumb animals that follow along. 

[VivaNaranja 466]

We need better progressive populists today. The OG's passed amendments instituting a national sales tax, direct senatorial elections, and women's suffrage (sure Prohibition was a screw up, but they passed yet ANOTHER amendment to fix that).

 

And that was in an equally polarized country where a majority were disenfranchised.

 

We can change things. We've done it before. Blaming the Founding Fathers is lazy and projection.

[Brisketexan 106900]

To get slightly back on topic, I went by the Harris Walz TCDP shop on 53rd 1/2 street earlier today…and had trouble parking. There were easily a dozen volunteers inside working, and probably 15 people in there picking up signs, t-shirts, etc. I got some stuff to send the kids, and got a “COACH” shirt for myself.
Lotta good energy. Was nice to see.
The boy even ran into a guy walking down Dumbarton road in Glasgow, wearing a Harris Walz camo hat. Told him he liked his hat, they chatted a bit. The boy even commented - just good energy.

[TwiceHorn 32079]

24 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

Imagine being so far left that David Dennison is dunking all over you for being myopic and absurd in your leftism. No offense, David, just stating that you’re left of most here. 

To be fair, I don’t think the GOP destroyed the economy in 2008. Now, do I think their legislation changes in banking in decades prior made that happen? Absolutely. But what am I missing in 2008 specifically they did to wreck the economy? I always thought it was a combo of banking nonsense and the Clinton changed to Fanny and Freddie?

Yes and Dems were quite complicit in laying the groundwork for 2008.  Gramm-Leach-Bliley: On November 4, the final bill resolving the differences was passed by the Senate 90–8, and by the House 362–57. The legislation was signed into law by President Bill Clinton on November 12, 1999.

[hookem2010 2700]

9 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

To get slightly back on topic, I went by the Harris Walz TCDP shop on 53rd 1/2 street earlier today…and had trouble parking. There were easily a dozen volunteers inside working, and probably 15 people in there picking up signs, t-shirts, etc. I got some stuff to send the kids, and got a “COACH” shirt for myself.
Lotta good energy. Was nice to see.
The boy even ran into a guy walking down Dumbarton road in Glasgow, wearing a Harris Walz camo hat. Told him he liked his hat, they chatted a bit. The boy even commented - just good energy.

I seem to recall you saying political apparel is lame not too long ago. Hypocrite.

[LTbear 4213]

Hey look, @chainsaw decides to show he understands much less than he thinks he does and zealously defends some moronic takes that derive from that ignorance. News at 10.

Even better that this time his rant actually begins by questioning the intelligence of men who are head and shoulders above him. Irony at its finest. 

[SydneyCarton 49505]

7 minutes ago, LTbear said:

Hey look, @chainsaw decides to show he understands much less than he thinks he does and zealously defends some moronic takes that derive from that ignorance. News at 10.

Even better that this time his rant actually begins by questioning the intelligence of men who are head and shoulders above him. Irony at its finest. 

You just don’t understand how Israel made all of this happen through their genocidal bloodlust and their collusion with our founding fathers to forever fuck us and the Palestinians over /chainsaw  

[Brisketexan 106900]

I seem to recall you saying political apparel is lame not too long ago. Hypocrite.

Huh?
I sure think making a political brand your entire identity is lame, even insane. I’ve never flown a flag of any candidate, ever, for example. And certainly not when I go to the beach or a tailgate. Never wrapped my truck in candidate symbols and photos. But I’ve had a t shirt, bumper stickers, and signs before. You know…normal stuff. Not weird.

[chainsaw 10293]

1 hour ago, David Dennison said:

You're diminishing all that has been accomplished within this system over the last 237 years.

It's a system that has consistently held us back, allows 50-year established constitutional rights to be taken away on a whim, could lead to even more Trump despite losing the popular vote by a record margin, and even staunch liberals like RBG have said "I would not look to the United States Constitution if I were drafting a constitution in the year 2012."

https://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/07/us/we-the-people-loses-appeal-with-people-around-the-world.html

If the last 10 years have taught us anything, it's that everything this system has "accomplished" can be unraveled in an instant. If that's true, is it really me that's diminishing those accomplishments? Or is it the precarious foundation on which they're resting?

[SydneyCarton 49505]

4 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

It's a system that has consistently held us back, allows 50-year established constitutional rights to be taken away on a whim, could lead to even more Trump despite losing the popular vote by a record margin, and even staunch liberals like RBG have said "I would not look to the United States Constitution if I were drafting a constitution in the year 2012."

https://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/07/us/we-the-people-loses-appeal-with-people-around-the-world.html

If the last 10 years have taught us anything, it's that everything this system has "accomplished" can be unraveled in an instant. If that's true, is it really me that's diminishing those accomplishments? Or is it the precarious foundation on which they're resting?

Your life can be unraveled in an instant by a bus as you walk across a street, does that unravel and diminish every good thing you’ve done in your life? 

[chainsaw 10293]

1 minute ago, SydneyCarton said:

Your life can be unraveled in an instant by a bus as you walk across a street, does that unravel and diminish every good thing you’ve done in your life? 

Well, you'd think that a group of guys trying to make a tyranny-proof system of government should be judged on whether the end result was tyranny-proof.

I never marketed myself as being speeding bus-proof and would humbly request that I not be judged on that criteria.

[wood 11766]

On 9/21/2024 at 10:20 AM, Aqua Buddha said:

She’s gonna run a train on his ass.  I think the margin will surprise some people.

This is exactly what I'm thinking, just judging from the momentum I'm seeing in anecdotal evidence and the polls y'all are posting.

Everyone ... JUST GO VOTE.

[SydneyCarton 49505]

11 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

Well, you'd think that a group of guys trying to make a tyranny-proof system of government should be judged on whether the end result was tyranny-proof.

I never marketed myself as being speeding bus-proof and would humbly request that I not be judged on that criteria.

You give someone 250 years to find the chinks in the armor of a system, in a society and species that has evolved in ways the original founders couldn’t possibly have predicted, and I feel pretty confident that chinks will be found an exploited. Given 250 years even you might actually evolve and come up with a good idea. Either way, it’s on us to make adjustments as we go along, which we have many times. 
 

also, I’d love for you to show us all the documentation of the founding fathers sucking each others dicks and proclaiming they authored a full proof government completely impenetrable to tyranny. Like did they do a world tour proclaiming that shit somewhere that we all missed? Oh, no, it’s yet another false assertion that only exists in your secular brain. They never marketed themselves by that criteria either, you fucking liar. 
 

At some point people have to question whether or not you have a fucking agenda. 
 

also, it’s been 250 years and still no tyranny, although it’s getting close. Do you want to measure that against every other nation on earth thoughtout entire human history? Go ahead. We’ll wait. 

Edited September 22 by SydneyCarton

[Gatorubet 30720]

[chainsaw 10293]

These have been huge problems for much longer than just the 2010s. Civil wars are not something that healthy democracies deal with, and the cause of the civil war was not beyond the imagination of the founding fathers.

If you want to debate about the founding fathers, start another thread for that. This thread is about the 2024 election and one of the many antidemocratic consequences of the shitty system they left us with.

[Sawbonz 28223]

2 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

also, I’d love for you to show us all the documentation of the founding fathers sucking each others dicks and proclaiming they authored a full proof government completely impenetrable to tyranny

 I always thought this was apocryphal but apparently it’s a real quote 

Quote

On the page where McHenry records the events of the last day of the convention, September 18, 1787, he wrote: “A lady asked Dr. Franklin Well Doctor what have we got a republic or a monarchy – A republic replied the Doctor if you can keep it.”

https://www.loc.gov/exhibits/creating-the-united-states/convention-and-ratification.html#obj8

[Js1 87185]

ShE iS nOt SpEcIfIc EnOuGh

 

[Zonahorn 8079]

 

[wood 11766]

On 9/21/2024 at 2:30 PM, 4th&Five said:

Hmmm

 

They should go ahead and hold the debate whether he shows up or not. Have Kamala standing up there answering questions, and then when Trump's turn comes up, cut to an unoccupied podium.

[SydneyCarton 49505]

1 minute ago, chainsaw said:

These have been huge problems for much longer than just the 2010s. Civil wars are not something that healthy democracies deal with, and the cause of the civil war was not beyond the imagination of the founding fathers.

If you want to debate about the founding fathers, start another thread for that. This thread is about the 2024 election and one of the many antidemocratic consequences of the shitty system they left us with.

lol. Says the little bitch who started complaining about the founding fathers in this thread and now tucks his dick between his ass cheeks and says “this isn’t the appropriate thread.” 
 

Also, read your last sentence, you insane person. You literally attempt to say “this isn’t the thread for this discussion” which you started, and one sentence later you assert this thread is also about “anti democratic consequences of the shitty system left to us” by the founding fathers.
 

1) that last part is patently untrue, this thread was only about the 2024 election

2) you can’t even stay message for two sentences without lying or being delusional 

3) you started the thread derail in the first place 

4) if this isn’t the thread for it, why is your last sentence continuing to argue your, by your own assessment,  non-topical point in this thread?

[Pato del Muerto 53506]

4 minutes ago, Zonahorn said:

 

There’s no way eggs were 1.50 a dozen in 2021. At least not the large or jumbos that everyone buys. 

[Js1 87185]

4 minutes ago, wood said:

They should go ahead and hold the debate whether he shows up or not. Have Kamala standing up there answering questions, and then when Trump's turn comes up, cut to an unoccupied podium.

It works 

Or convert it to a townhall and let her go unscripted with voters 

[chainsaw 10293]

2 minutes ago, Zonahorn said:

 

Eggs are the worst example, too, because the truth turned out to be greedflation and price fixing

https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20231201112056/en/Cal-Maine-Foods-Inc.-Issues-Statement-on-Jury-Decision

The avian flu thing was always bullshit

[chainsaw 10293]

7 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

you started the thread derail in the first place 

I responded to someone else's rightful complaint about the idiotic tiebreaker system these "head and shoulders" intellectual giants created.

See for yourself:

Spoiler

 

Some people predictably couldn't accept the hard truth I was bringing and thought this thread was a good place to have a broader debate about the supposed intelligence of the founding fathers.

It might make a fine thread, but I prefer to limit the discussion here to the idiocy of the Electoral College and the work Kamala Harris and Tim Walz have been doing in the battleground states to overcome it to save us from fascism.

[aggie08 21800]

On 9/21/2024 at 1:36 PM, aggie08 said:

My in laws are in town for the weekend and they started talking about transsexuals and politics--because they ALWAYS find a way to bring up transsexuals and politics--and stated how much they're "dreading" their lives if "she" wins.

The live on a plot of land in the middle of Podunk cowtown California. Both retired, living off of her long-term disability insurance, staring at their tablets and watching NCIS all day. They only leave their house for Costco, church functions, and a weekly lunch outing to buffet-style sushi. How the fuck do people like this convince themselves that their lives are going to dramatically change because a Democrat is in the White House? Oh right, their tablets have Wi-Fi. Nevermind.

They don't particularly like Trump the man and wish Mike fucking Pence had run (I reminded them that he did, but the cult members weren't too fond of him), but they have no choice.

One added perk of having the in-laws in town: Sundays are a running commentary on black people's hair, tattoo, and celebration choices, and how wussy the new kickoff rule is. Truly some high brow stuff.