Jump to content

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


bolverk

Recommended Posts

21 minutes ago, Willfully Horn said:

I guess “divorced from reality” doesn’t move the NYT’s needle.

"Less focused" got me. 

"They're eating the dogs. They're eating the pets. Biden took all of FEMAs money and gave it to illegal immigrants, who btw are all murderers." 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the point was made upthread, but how often are there many instances of prominent people publicly going against their party for an election, especially a prominent one much less the presidency?  
 

Common sense tells me that if this is happening, it must be an opinion that is held by quite a few and that will bear itself out at the ballot box. But we are America, so we can’t rely on common sense with these things. And I also see things like the fact that he won the nomination with ease and no effort, and that the polls do not reflect a Republican voting block that has a statistically significant break to Harris.  
 

So what can we make of these opposing data points?

Edited by Pato del Muerto
  • Hook 'Em 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

I think the point was made upthread, but how often are there many instances of prominent people publicly going against their party for an election, especially a prominent one much less the presidency?  
 

Common sense tells me that if this is happening, it must be an opinion that is held by quite a few and that will bear itself out at the ballot box. But we are America, so we can’t rely on common sense with these things. And I also see things like the fact that he won the nomination with ease and no effort, and that the polls do not reflect a Republican voting block that has a statistically significant break to Harris.  
 

So what can we make of these opposing data points?

It’s a continuation of this. 
 

image.thumb.jpeg.e54a138d718e24cf4c1e687904fed97a.jpeg

 

The voices you hear are likely to be educated.  You can see more every day what those people think of the right. 

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

37 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

I think the point was made upthread, but how often are there many instances of prominent people publicly going against their party for an election, especially a prominent one much less the presidency?  
 

Common sense tells me that if this is happening, it must be an opinion that is held by quite a few and that will bear itself out at the ballot box. But we are America, so we can’t rely on common sense with these things. And I also see things like the fact that he won the nomination with ease and no effort, and that the polls do not reflect a Republican voting block that has a statistically significant break to Harris.  
 

So what can we make of these opposing data points?

Trust but verify

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

I totally understand that college isn’t for everyone, but there still needs to be some amount of history/literature type courses to foster critical thinking for people who go through the trade school route. 

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

23 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

You should have to pass the same civics tests immigrants must pass every 4 years to get a voting card. 

Yeah!  Or at least a basic literacy test.

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

1 hour ago, YChang said:

I totally understand that college isn’t for everyone, but there still needs to be some amount of history/literature type courses to foster critical thinking for people who go through the trade school route. 

If you grow up in a small town and at 5 years old forward are told Obama is a Muslim as if even if it were true that made him automatically a bad person- its hard for even facts or statistics to break them out of it.

Really takes them moving to a city and being exposed personally to people of all different backgrounds and cultures for the light bulb to go off. At least thats my thought growing up around rural MAGA.

Edited by Loch Ness Monster
  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BehoId, The Underminer! said:

It’s a continuation of this. 
 

image.thumb.jpeg.e54a138d718e24cf4c1e687904fed97a.jpeg

 

The voices you hear are likely to be educated.  You can see more every day what those people think of the right. 

 

1 hour ago, Red Five said:


Look at where that starts to really take off…. Birth of the internet, Fox, and prime Rush Limbaugh.

Eh, not sure I agree with your police work there.  The point of inflection is 1992, and since then every successful candidate has been a newcomer or outsider perceived as disruptive 
 

Obama was broadly perceived in the same terms as Trump by the people who have been damaged the most by the consolidation of productivity gains- disruptive to the establishment order. And you can go back further than that.

Think about it this way: these are the presidents elected since WWII:

- sitting president/VP/Senator

- Supreme Allied Commander

- Sitting Senator

- Sitting President/VP/Senate Maj Leader

- Former VP
Vietnam ends

- Outsider Governor

- Radical Governor

- sitting VP CIA Director, VP, congressman, ambassador, son of powerful senator (return to establishment via next man up)

1992

- Southern Governor

- Southern Governor 

- First term senator

- Notorious Celebrity

 

The relevant historical Trend here is that the white working class has been in political and cultural rebellion since the end of Vietnam and starting with Bill Clinton through Obama to Trump you see the recipe being refined to its essentials.

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

3 hours ago, Red Five said:

"Less focused" got me. 

"They're eating the dogs. They're eating the pets. Biden took all of FEMAs money and gave it to illegal immigrants, who btw are all murderers." 

Shortly into Trump’s term, I attended a talk by James Baker. He was asked for his thoughts on the Trump Admin and his response stuck with me: “He just needs more discipline.”

Normalcy bias and giving Trump the benefit of the doubt conspired to fuck the world over. These professional clowns repeatedly reacted to an empty, narcissistic parasite as if he were a normal human being that they, as seasoned politicians and manipulators of powerful people, could control. Whether naïveté or willful blindness or pure hubris, it screwed us.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 2
  • Rage+1 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, BrickHorn said:

Shortly into Trump’s term, I attended a talk by James Baker. He was asked for his thoughts on the Trump Admin and his response stuck with me: “He just needs more discipline.”

Normalcy bias and giving Trump the benefit of the doubt conspired to fuck the world over. These professional clowns repeatedly reacted to an empty, narcissistic parasite as if he were a normal human being that they, as seasoned politicians and manipulators of powerful people, could control. Whether naïveté or willful blindness or pure hubris, it screwed us.

This was November 10th, 2020:

“What is the downside for humoring him for this little bit of time? No one seriously thinks the results will change,” the official said. “He went golfing this weekend. It’s not like he’s plotting how to prevent Joe Biden from taking power on Jan. 20. He’s tweeting about filing some lawsuits, those lawsuits will fail, then he’ll tweet some more about how the election was stolen, and then he’ll leave.”

  • Rage+1 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

 

Eh, not sure I agree with your police work there.  The point of inflection is 1992, and since then every successful candidate has been a newcomer or outsider perceived as disruptive 
 

Obama was broadly perceived in the same terms as Trump by the people who have been damaged the most by the consolidation of productivity gains- disruptive to the establishment order. And you can go back further than that.

Think about it this way: these are the presidents elected since WWII:

- sitting president/VP/Senator

- Supreme Allied Commander

- Sitting Senator

- Sitting President/VP/Senate Maj Leader

- Former VP
Vietnam ends

- Outsider Governor

- Radical Governor

- sitting VP CIA Director, VP, congressman, ambassador, son of powerful senator (return to establishment via next man up)

1992

- Southern Governor

- Southern Governor 

- First term senator

- Notorious Celebrity

 

The relevant historical Trend here is that the white working class has been in political and cultural rebellion since the end of Vietnam and starting with Bill Clinton through Obama to Trump you see the recipe being refined to its essentials.

Eh, Governor is a pretty conventional candidate.  Neither Clinton nor Obama were, in my opinion, particularly "outsider" candidates other than Obama being black, and Clinton faking it pretty well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Pancho said:

Had no idea Harris was going on the Howard stern show this week. 

Well the campaign didn’t announce it until like 11 hours ago

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Eh, Governor is a pretty conventional candidate.  Neither Clinton nor Obama were, in my opinion, particularly "outsider" candidates other than Obama being black, and Clinton faking it pretty well.

Your opinion is wrong and you should feel bad. Clinton was a marginal candidate and mostly unknown outside of the state of Arkansas except by politics junkies in the spring of 1992. His candidacy was only possible because when Bush looked unbeatable going into the early fall of 1991, all the top contenders on the Democratic side declined to run including the top two “next generation” candidates.  Clinton ran as an insurgent outsider change candidate appealing to working class people on the losing end of the Reagan revolution. 
And I can’t even imagine how to argue that Obama was anything other than THE change candidate and a deep outsider in the early spring of 2008. I mean, that’s a wild take. His blackness was symbolically important, obviously but his candidacy represented rejection of both the Bush doctrine of foreign policy AND the Clintonomic economic doctrine of globalization and financial neoliberalism. 

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

In those days I was not very politically aware.  I had a couple of close friends and coworkers who asked me if I wanted to go see Obama speak in Austin during his intial campaign runup.  I had no idea who the guy was (and didn't go).  He was the very definition of an "outsider".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Your opinion is wrong and you should feel bad. Clinton was a marginal candidate and mostly unknown outside of the state of Arkansas except by politics junkies in the spring of 1992. His candidacy was only possible because when Bush looked unbeatable going into the early fall of 1991, all the top contenders on the Democratic side declined to run including the top two “next generation” candidates.  Clinton ran as an insurgent outsider change candidate appealing to working class people on the losing end of the Reagan revolution. 
And I can’t even imagine how to argue that Obama was anything other than THE change candidate and a deep outsider in the early spring of 2008. I mean, that’s a wild take. His blackness was symbolically important, obviously but his candidacy represented rejection of both the Bush doctrine of foreign policy AND the Clintonomic economic doctrine of globalization and financial neoliberalism. 

Harris will be the president of collapse or the president of breaking the fourth turning. 

A reset has to happen, when was the last graceful reset? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Your opinion is wrong and you should feel bad. Clinton was a marginal candidate and mostly unknown outside of the state of Arkansas except by politics junkies in the spring of 1992. His candidacy was only possible because when Bush looked unbeatable going into the early fall of 1991, all the top contenders on the Democratic side declined to run including the top two “next generation” candidates. 

https://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/campaign-92-the-race-to-avoid-being-the-guy-who-loses-to-bush/2859836

As evidence, this Saturday Night Live skit. "The fact is I couldn't beat David Duke in Harlem."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, wood said:

 

Why isn’t Tillis calling out individuals who are lying about the situation and creating chaos? Hmmm.

The only brave republicans are the ones who are retiring. There have been exceptions but they realize that it’s the end of their gop career.

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

4 hours ago, YChang said:

I totally understand that college isn’t for everyone, but there still needs to be some amount of history/literature type courses to foster critical thinking for people who go through the trade school route. 

Agree 100%, but the last thing our corporate overlords want is a highly literate proletariat.

  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...