2024 Presidential Elections: the schadenfreude commences

[Insipid]

8 minutes ago, 1pooh4u said:

If Trump wins, and it’s a very strong possibility, he will get more SC picks and those pics will change the country for, no joke, 50, maybe even 100 years.  His picks have another 40 years left in them. It could take who knows how long to get the court balanced again so saying the country could be fucked for a century is not an exaggeration 

Democrats would have no choice but to "pack the court" at that point. Yeah, it would set a precedent for Republicans to abuse, blah blah, but I think we're past that point. There was a vacant Sipreme Court spot in Obama's last year that McConnell blocked from being filled. How is that fair? It's not.

[1pooh4u]

5 minutes ago, Insipid said:

Democrats would have no choice but to "pack the court" at that point. Yeah, it would set a precedent for Republicans to abuse, blah blah, but I think we're past that point. There was a vacant Sipreme Court spot in Obama's last year that McConnell blocked from being filled. How is that fair? It's not.

That move by the senate was what killed roe v Wade. We didn’t know it then but in retrospect I say yeah 

[Insipid]

Honestly, I'm glad I brought up that McConnell shit. As bad as Biden was during the debate, what the fuck is this?

 

Edited July 1 by Insipid

[PenguinBoss]

3 hours ago, Master-Debater131 said:

Again, the problem with the current talking point is that its asking everyone to not believe their own eyes.

Trump said "What you're seeing and what you're reading isn't what's happening" and you voted for him, so I don't see why you have such a problem now.

[discolé monade]

going according to plan, it would seem?

[Jman]

40 minutes ago, discolé monade said:

going according to plan, it would seem?

They’re pretty arrogant spelling out their evil plan for all to see.

[scoobdog]

23 hours ago, 1pooh4u said:

For some reason people really hate her

There are any number of excuses for saying she’s a bad candidate but most of it is bullshit.  She certainly wasn’t the progressive AG Bonta is, but for all the performative display he doesn’t have any better results at curbing killer cops.  I really don’t get the lack of personality thing; she’s just fine all the times she’s shown up on the local news (since she lives in LA).  It maybe more that she keeps a low national profile.  When it comes down to it, she a moderate democrat WOC which is antithetical to “safe” white male democrats and progressive democrats looking for a true liberal.

That doesn’t mean she’s a good candidate, just that the only reason she’s personally disliked is because she’s a woman.  It’s for that reason she would still have to be the front runner to replace Biden this election.  She’s close enough to Biden to be a seemless transition with the same platform, and she’s a proven politician that has national credentials while being a non-white woman.

[rpgamer]

I think, and this is probably more personal impression, what feels most off-putting is just.. pretty much what you said. "Moderate." "Safe." She strikes me as just another politician with a D next to her name, for all the difference that makes, and will continue to get absolutely fuckall done, as is the norm.

I get it. The country is so fucked, that's about as "progressive" as we can manage. By all rights, you are basically correct in that she's as good as we can possibly get in the immediate. And by no means will she be "bad."

I just personally want to see us collectively do better than "doesn't suck." As a potential candidate (or inheritor), she doesn't suck. She just doesn't give me confidence in a positive outlook for the near future.

Admitted bias: as you said, "low national profile." I might just not be seeing the right things that could get me a little more optimistic about her.

[rpgamer]

However, it is worth recognizing that, right now, in the face of Trump, "doesn't suck" is comparatively a glowing review. It's undeniable that there's too much at stake to hold out for better.

Which does suck. But, welcome to the shitshow.

[matrixman124]

I'll say it again, literally anyone can run against Trump. I'll vote for them so we don't get more conservative justices.

[Belize]

Looking back at the 2022 midterm elections, it was late July and August when the polls began to change. Before that, the conventional wisdom was a big red wave where Republicans where going to sweep to victory. But beginning in late July-early August, Democrats began to improve in the polls. Biden's job approval rating went from about -17 to -9. 

The narrative then was still red wave, but it was clear Democrats had gained. 

It makes sense. Late summer would be when Americans finally started to pay attention to the upcoming election. 

Edited July 1 by Belize

[discolé monade]

1 hour ago, matrixman124 said:

I'll say it again, literally anyone can run against Trump. I'll vote for them so we don't get more conservative justices.

yup. 

[scoobdog]

14 hours ago, rpgamer said:

I just personally want to see us collectively do better than "doesn't suck." As a potential candidate (or inheritor), she doesn't suck. She just doesn't give me confidence in a positive outlook for the near future.

Well yeah, but that's not something that happens in a polarized political space.  There are too many people actively voting against our collective well being, and i mean that in the sense they're voting to tear down the government rather than voting for someone that represents their values.  The problem all along has been irresponsible Trump voters - as much as the complain about being disrespected, they are fundamentally anti-democratic and should be eliminated from the voting bloc in order for the democracy to survive.

[1pooh4u]

15 hours ago, scoobdog said:

There are any number of excuses for saying she’s a bad candidate but most of it is bullshit.  She certainly wasn’t the progressive AG Bonta is, but for all the performative display he doesn’t have any better results at curbing killer cops.  I really don’t get the lack of personality thing; she’s just fine all the times she’s shown up on the local news (since she lives in LA).  It maybe more that she keeps a low national profile.  When it comes down to it, she a moderate democrat WOC which is antithetical to “safe” white male democrats and progressive democrats looking for a true liberal.

That doesn’t mean she’s a good candidate, just that the only reason she’s personally disliked is because she’s a woman.  It’s for that reason she would still have to be the front runner to replace Biden this election.  She’s close enough to Biden to be a seemless transition with the same platform, and she’s a proven politician that has national credentials while being a non-white woman.

My complaint with Harris is she opposed DNA testing when she was a DA that could have gotten a man off death row. It’s not a deal breaker though. If possible complicity to genocide isn’t a deal breaker,her decades old decision on DNA testing can’t be one either. I’ll hate myself forever because I’m voting Biden (if he’s not replaced) but the truth is any decision I could have made would lead to that anyway. It’s not like I love myself anyway. What’s a little self hate for the rest of my life gonna harm? 🫠

Edited July 1 by 1pooh4u

[Belize]

The last three incumbent presidents who lost reelection (Trump in 2020, Bush in 1992 and Carter in 1980) all had economic recessions occurring two years before the election. 

Biden has not had that. 

[matrixman124]

2 hours ago, Belize said:

The last three incumbent presidents who lost reelection (Trump in 2020, Bush in 1992 and Carter in 1980) all had economic recessions occurring two years before the election. 

Biden has not had that. 

We have never worried about a candidate this old before

[1pooh4u]

Trump confuses solar power and electricity saying the military wants electric planes that will drop out of the sky on a cloudy day but Biden is the one too brain dead for the job. In 50 years we will have Futurama and our president will just be a head in a jar 

both picks suck but only one was declared king by SCOTUS rule and will abuse the shit out of that ruling 

[scoobdog]

20 hours ago, 1pooh4u said:

My complaint with Harris is she opposed DNA testing when she was a DA that could have gotten a man off death row. It’s not a deal breaker though. If possible complicity to genocide isn’t a deal breaker,her decades old decision on DNA testing can’t be one either. I’ll hate myself forever because I’m voting Biden (if he’s not replaced) but the truth is any decision I could have made would lead to that anyway. It’s not like I love myself anyway. What’s a little self hate for the rest of my life gonna harm? 🫠

That's a valid complaint.  Most DAs in that position would oppose anything that might jeopardize a conviction for reasons that have nothing to do with actually serving justice, and that isn't something that should be ignored because of the ultimately self-serving motivation.  (Thankfully, Gavin Newsome is making sure the death penalty isn't a factor, so there's that.)

That being said, we're in this position because progressives haven't done nearly enough to build a vision for America's future, and by progressives I mean progressive voters.  We can't spend our way of getting rid of student debt or having true universal healthcare or protecting social safety nets, but we won't survive without all three.  We, the voters, need to take a more active role in deciding not just what we need as a country but how to go about achieving those needs, and we need to elect people who reflect that hard work.  Like it or not, we're in a polarized country because for too long there were too many voters who were hands off on the practical administration of government and voting solely for personal needs and vague ideals.

Biden buys us more time to start taking our democracy seriously, nothing more.

[Belize]

18 hours ago, matrixman124 said:

We have never worried about a candidate this old before

 

Maybe, but past elections have had plenty of moments where people said, "This is the thing that is going to change the election." Biden being old is well within that traditional of election game-changers we've heard people point out.

There's even a precedent of just this such a thing (Reagan in 1984). 

 

edit: Yes, I am using "game-changers" sarcastically. 

Edited July 2 by Belize

[Belize]

The November election is going to be about whether month-over-month inflation remains near 0%, what quarterly GDP growth is going to be the first three quarters of 2024, and how low the unemployment rate is going to be. 

It's not going to be about Biden being old and losing a debate. 

[Belize]

Trump's sentencing in the New York trial has been postponed from July 11 to September 18. 

That's two days before the first states beginning early voting. 

[Belize]

 

 

[1pooh4u]

5 hours ago, scoobdog said:

That's a valid complaint.  Most DAs in that position would oppose anything that might jeopardize a conviction for reasons that have nothing to do with actually serving justice, and that isn't something that should be ignored because of the ultimately self-serving motivation.  (Thankfully, Gavin Newsome is making sure the death penalty isn't a factor, so there's that.)

That being said, we're in this position because progressives haven't done nearly enough to build a vision for America's future, and by progressives I mean progressive voters.  We can't spend our way of getting rid of student debt or having true universal healthcare or protecting social safety nets, but we won't survive without all three.  We, the voters, need to take a more active role in deciding not just what we need as a country but how to go about achieving those needs, and we need to elect people who reflect that hard work.  Like it or not, we're in a polarized country because for too long there were too many voters who were hands off on the practical administration of government and voting solely for personal needs and vague ideals.

Biden buys us more time to start taking our democracy seriously, nothing more.

It’s infuriating when you learn how difficult it is to prove someone’s innocence once they’re convicted. District attorneys will refuse to look at evidence no matter how compelling. A lot of it is ego shit. I hate it. 
 

Blaming Progressive voters is a little unfair considering Progressive candidates often get shit on and don’t make it on the ballot. Progressives are also often outspent as well.  We’re also dealing with a system stacked against progressives and really Dems in general. I often wonder if it’s intentional incompetence. 
 

I do agree however that we also have to go out and actually vote which is not something democrat and progressive voters seem to be good at. 

[Raptorpat]

lol

https://x.com/atrupar/status/1808227499756683693

[discolé monade]

 

"The photo’s metadata dates it to 2010 – the same year Kennedy was diagnosed with a dead tapeworm in his brain.

During his 2012 divorce proceedings, the 70-year-old claimed he may have contracted the parasite during a trip to South Asia.

Kennedy’s family, however, generally believed that his cognitive issues stemmed from his 14 years as a heroin user, Vanity Fair reported."

[1pooh4u]

1 hour ago, discolé monade said:

 

"The photo’s metadata dates it to 2010 – the same year Kennedy was diagnosed with a dead tapeworm in his brain.

During his 2012 divorce proceedings, the 70-year-old claimed he may have contracted the parasite during a trip to South Asia.

Kennedy’s family, however, generally believed that his cognitive issues stemmed from his 14 years as a heroin user, Vanity Fair reported."

Oh snap is the worm brain Kennedy the same Kennedy that used to cop heroin in Harlem?   I thought that Kennedy had died 

[scoobdog]

1 hour ago, 1pooh4u said:

Blaming Progressive voters is a little unfair considering Progressive candidates often get shit on and don’t make it on the ballot. Progressives are also often outspent as well.  We’re also dealing with a system stacked against progressives and really Dems in general. I often wonder if it’s intentional incompetence. 

I get why it might sound like blame, but that's not the intent here.  There is a much larger burden on all voters because of the fact that there are enough idiots out there who vote to just to be self destructive, which is neither fair nor avoidable to those who are responsible.  At the same time, progressives haven't just been outspent, they've largely been ignored because they don't have simple solutions to difficult problems.  As an example, one of the biggest issues for middle and lower income Americans is wealth distribution, yet there isn't a cohesive plan to redistribute wealth from corporate investors to the middle class workers who need it to survive.  It's one thing to recognize the system is stacked against you, and another to recognize why it's stacked that way which, I think, not a lot of voters are fully aware of.  Again using the corporate profits example, its almost impossible to know what exactly drives that, for lack of a better word, greed - the big investors are the million / billion dollar funds that entities like your property insurance provider, your HMO, or your retirement fund uses to provide basic necessities to you.  Something as simple as curtailing a CEO's multimillion dollar yearly salary has not real correlation with the push to trim corporate budgets.  Knowing all that, what is the best approach for releasing that corporate wealth to the people who need it?  Do you force a petroleum company to reinvest its oil wealth in clean energy technology, cutting into the all important dividends and stock value, or do you force an insurance carrier to divest in that petroleum company and, in the process, force it to cut back on coverage in areas with high fire or flood danger?  There is no good answer, and its one of the reasons that progressives have been struggling to come up with a plan that voters will get behind and why moderates who are not offering any sort of solution are seen as safe votes.

To put it more simply, it is unfair.  We're not asking voters to just be responsible, we're asking them to come up with a solution for a system that offers no recourse.  And we're asking them to come up with that solution in a time when there are people out there who not only are ignorant to the dangers of systemwide collapse but are actively blocking any attempt to fix the system so they can personally benefit.  In that sense, its intentional but for the most part we're simply living with previous generations failing to address issues like the climate and wealth inequality because no one wanted to spend political capital on issues voters likely wouldn't resonate with.  Progressives are being asked to do the impossible.

[scoobdog]

1 hour ago, discolé monade said:

 

"The photo’s metadata dates it to 2010 – the same year Kennedy was diagnosed with a dead tapeworm in his brain.

During his 2012 divorce proceedings, the 70-year-old claimed he may have contracted the parasite during a trip to South Asia.

Kennedy’s family, however, generally believed that his cognitive issues stemmed from his 14 years as a heroin user, Vanity Fair reported."

It must be nice having a fall back excuse like "I contracted a brain disease by eating the family dog" instead of "I fried my brain in college with heroin because meth hadn't been invented yet."

[katt_goddess]

...are we sure this Kennedy isn't also suffering from a gunshot wound to the head? 

Dude looks and sounds like he's a walking Edgar suit. You can almost smell him through the screen. 

[1pooh4u]

Oh shit Kennedy is married to Cheryl Hines. Idk she was bat shit too 😮

[Seight]

2 hours ago, Raptorpat said:

lol

https://x.com/atrupar/status/1808227499756683693

god damn that's a quality thumbnail

[discolé monade]

2 hours ago, 1pooh4u said:

Oh snap is the worm brain Kennedy the same Kennedy that used to cop heroin in Harlem?   I thought that Kennedy had died 

no...you're thinking of the group known as the dead kennedy's. 

[Master-Debater131]

 

Edited July 3 by Master-Debater131

[Belize]

A common theme for years:

Medical experts in the field of geriatrics: No, there's nothing wrong with Biden. He's just a normal 80-year-old man with no serious conditions that people often stereotype seniors with.

 

Political people: *continues to offensively talk about Biden's age*

 

The "Biden is too old" narrative completely ignores expertise in favor of ignorant groupthink. It's also bigotry against seniors, but it's considered an acceptable prejudice.

 

 

""According to Dr. Bradley Willcox, geriatrics expert and researcher at the Kuakini Medical Center in Hawaii, Biden's debate blunders were not a sign of a person in mental decline. Rather, given the president's well-documented struggle with a stutter for most of his life, Willcox pointed to the impact that aging has on motor and speech functions and how that shone through last week.

 

"His stutter is coming back," Willcox told Newsweek. "It's just common as you age ... As you get older, the brain connections that are the cause of stutters, and inhibit the stutter when you're younger, are not as strong."

 

 

 

[Master-Debater131]

Democrats are starting to leak some post-debate internal polling, and its brutal.

Do I fully believe this? Nah, not really. This screams a combination of trying to scare the Democrat base into holding their nose and voting for Biden as well as a potential effort to get Biden to drop out.

However, this does line up with other post-debate polling which has shown a 2% swing toward Trump. Multiple reputable polls are showing this same swing since the debate. Bidens performance last week has clearly hurt him, and no amount of gaslighting by the White House is going to convince people to not believe their eyes.

When you look at 2020 and then today, all Trump needs is a 1% swing from 2020 to his direction to become President. Thats it. That would get him the EC win 272-266. The current RCP no tossup map has it 312-226 for Trump.

Biden is clearly in deep, deep, trouble as of today. Can he turn things around? Bidens biggest enemy now is time, so its not likely, but his opponent is also Trump and that idiot has a remarkable ability to fuck things up. So Trump might blow his own campaign up and save Biden in the process.

 

[Belize]

A 2% swing, you say? That would be from polls that have margins of error of like 3%-5%. 

"A swing toward Trump" or "polls are unchanged"? 

 

Edit: nevermind that polls in June are meaningless. I'm pretty sure Dukakis and Hillary Clinton would have been elected if we followed summer polls

 

Edited July 3 by Belize

[Belize]

To illustrate my point:

A poll like this: Trump 52%, Biden 48%

is the same as this: Biden 52%, Trump 48%.

 

Statistically these two say the same thing. 

[MasqueradeOverture]

Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck

[Jman]

6 minutes ago, MasqueradeOverture said:

Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck

Broadcasting the evil plan is very stupid, because it unites your opposition.  You had to get greedy, you sycophantic fucks.

[scoobdog]

2 hours ago, Belize said:

""According to Dr. Bradley Willcox, geriatrics expert and researcher at the Kuakini Medical Center in Hawaii, Biden's debate blunders were not a sign of a person in mental decline. Rather, given the president's well-documented struggle with a stutter for most of his life, Willcox pointed to the impact that aging has on motor and speech functions and how that shone through last week.

"His stutter is coming back," Willcox told Newsweek. "It's just common as you age ... As you get older, the brain connections that are the cause of stutters, and inhibit the stutter when you're younger, are not as strong."

This is exactly what I was saying after a few seconds of the debate.  What's troubling is that Democrats are quick to pile on which plays into a Republican narrative of low-key calling the President mentally handicapped:  it's far easier to call an old man "senile" or saying he has dementia, even in the absence of actual evidence, than it is to flat out call him "retarded."  But, you know a party that has a recent  history of derogatory and abusive behavior is going to have members that harbor these ableist thoughts.

[1pooh4u]

Other than the beginning of the debate I didn’t think Biden was a disaster. He just was bad, with some strong moments, not brain dead. With that said, since the “disastrous performance” narrative has fully taken over, Biden should drop out, but it has to be RIGHT NOW. There isn’t time for delay. 
 

Trump is a 34 felony count convicted candidate but all we are talking about is Biden. That cannot happen.  Trump should not have a chance, yet here we are. All I can say is “jfc not again” This is insane, where we are….

[MasqueradeOverture]

42 minutes ago, 1pooh4u said:

Other than the beginning of the debate I didn’t think Biden was a disaster. He just was bad, with some strong moments, not brain dead. With that said, since the “disastrous performance” narrative has fully taken over, Biden should drop out, but it has to be RIGHT NOW. There isn’t time for delay. 
 

Trump is a 34 felony count convicted candidate but all we are talking about is Biden. That cannot happen.  Trump should not have a chance, yet here we are. All I can say is “jfc not again” This is insane, where we are….

And you don't think CNN and MSNBC don't want Trump back? That shit's ratings and ratings = $$$

Never trust anything with a CEO.

[scoobdog]

22 minutes ago, MasqueradeOverture said:

And you don't think CNN and MSNBC don't want Trump back? That shit's ratings and ratings = $$$

Never trust anything with a CEO.

No, they don't.  It was fine when Trump was a novelty act and a former reality show star, but now he's an empty lie machine and his antics have rubbed off on all of his surrogates, who are doing the exact same thing.  At this point, the damage Trump has done to the GOP is done, making him somewhat unnecessary.  That being said, if he were to come back, the likelihood he suppresses media outlets far outweighs the benefits of whatever sideshow he creates.  We also have to shed this ridiculous belief that the media is enamored with Trump's dystopian display.

[Belize]

This is one of those cases where reporters will keep asking the question despite it already being answered. Until they get bored and move on, that is.

People don't realize it yet, but Biden dropping out would mean Trump gets elected in November. So I consider it a relief that Biden will not. 

 

 

[naraku360]

3 hours ago, scoobdog said:

This is exactly what I was saying after a few seconds of the debate.  What's troubling is that Democrats are quick to pile on which plays into a Republican narrative of low-key calling the President mentally handicapped:  it's far easier to call an old man "senile" or saying he has dementia, even in the absence of actual evidence, than it is to flat out call him "retarded."  But, you know a party that has a recent  history of derogatory and abusive behavior is going to have members that harbor these ableist thoughts.

I don't think it's ableist to be concerned that Biden looks like he's already half in the grave.

😐

[Belize]

Just now, naraku360 said:

I don't think it's ableist to be concerned that Biden looks like he's already half in the grave.

😐

But it is. An acceptable prejudice but prejudicial nonetheless. I always was uncomfortable with this kind of language. 

[rpgamer]

What if best of both worlds? Biden stays in... and just keels over in October or something, and we get to say "welp, gotta postpone the election now" and we put it off and Trump is convicted of more crimes and we don't have to deal with any of this.

[scoobdog]

15 minutes ago, naraku360 said:

I don't think it's ableist to be concerned that Biden looks like he's already half in the grave.

😐

It kind of is, only because it's presuming he's ill when he's not.  But that isn't really the point:  people aren't just saying he's old and slow as  would be appropriate for his age, they're calling him senile and demented.

[scoobdog]

17 minutes ago, rpgamer said:

What if best of both worlds? Biden stays in... and just keels over in October or something, and we get to say "welp, gotta postpone the election now" and we put it off and Trump is convicted of more crimes and we don't have to deal with any of this.

You can't postpone an election.

[naraku360]

1 hour ago, Belize said:

But it is. An acceptable prejudice but prejudicial nonetheless. I always was uncomfortable with this kind of language. 

He doesn't look like someone who will be around for 4 more years. He's 81 years old. He looks and acts 81 years old. I don't think you can seriously call Biden's mannerisms a "stutter." That's openly dishonest. He wasn't this bad 4 years ago, and he wasn't as bad as 4 years ago when he was VP. It is a decline and you are lying, either to yourself or otherwise, to say it isn't what it obviously is to anyone with half a brain cell. This isn't a fucking stutter. A stutter is tripping over words. It isn't going into completely incoherent ramblings.

Quit lying.