2024 US Presidential Election Thread

[Darla Starch]

Former Trump official Stephanie Grisham to speak at the Democratic convention

Grisham resigned from the Trump administration immediately after the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol.

www.nbcnews.com

 

[TexRex]

Yup, that's it in a nutshell. An "elite" male leader's stress response is stereotypically anger and violence. You're not supposed to think about what it is though, because then you'll identify that eating a bag of Doritos and calming yourself is a more emotionally intelligent stress response. All you're supposed to think about is that it's not the same as what you'd expect from a strong man, and decide that since it's different from what you expect, it's worse.

Harris would be our first female president. She's not going to behave exactly the way stereotypical presidents might be expected to behave, and that's ok. It might even be... gasp... progressive.

With Trump it isn't so much about the food the bitch ate as an emotional response as it is about the food the bitch threw at the wall as an emotional response.

 

[Touring Mars]

It's sad that nothing Trump says shocks me much any more, as I know that he's an utter imbecile with no redeemable qualities whatsoever. I almost feel sorry for him for about a picosecond before remembering what a loathsome fascist he is.

What I find disturbing though is just how many millions of Americans either support him blindly (bad enough), or support him knowing exactly what kind of a person he is.

We've now got right wing nut jobs suggesting 'true Americans' relocate to Russia (it would be funny if it weren't so pathetic and tragic), Christians extolling the supposed virtues of a convicted felon and known rapist, not to mention the fact that Trump himself is, and I quote, "not a Christian", and so-called libertarians supporting by far the most authoritarian presidential candidate in US history.

The irony is that Trump's more 'normal' supporters (i.e. genuine GOP voters who despise Trump but vote for him because he's their only choice) would likely not even be voting in an election at all in 2024 had Trump's insurrection succeeded - and how long before they realised that they personally helped pave the way for their own disenfranchisement?

Fortunately, it seems that a large number of true Republicans and libertarians now know what Trump really stands for, and that they've been sold the proverbial pup. And yet, it remains truly shocking to me that so many Americans still support him, despite his utterly childish comments - like "I'm better looking than Kamala" and "I'm smarter than Kamala" (that's just this week, btw).

Everyone in America, and indeed the world, deserves far better than imbeciles like Trump.

 

[Spacegoat]

Projection. Its all projection.

 

[Keef]

Projection. Its all projection.

Paper plates in his jet? What is this peasantry? I throw away real glassware at the end of every flight.

 

[TB]

Paper plates in his jet? What is this peasantry? I throw away real glassware at the end of every flight.

You haven't head about the PP* tape?

*paper plate

 

[TexRex]

Welp.

 

[McLaren]

Like asking if you like John Wayne or Martin Luther King Jr. at a Klan rally.

 

[TexRex]

 

[Keef]

Fact check: Politifact favors words over actions and appears to be in bed with the Trump campaign. Fact check that, bitches.

 

[UKMikey]

At last Trump is staring to talk about policies lol:

 

[Famine]

At last Trump is staring to talk about policies lol:

Another one that requires his bent SCOTUS to overrule an earlier one.

 

[UKMikey]

To be fair Biden tried to do something similar in 1989.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/101st-congress/senate-bill/1338

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

Flag burning laws: Prioritize the national collective interests/pride over individual rights?
Childless Citizens: Prioritize the national collective over individual choice?

I guess there's a reason the GOP is Red.

 

[McLaren]

At last Trump is staring to talk about policies lol:

He called it for earlier in the year when Netanyahu was in DC & a flag was burned outside. He said, "People saying it's unconstitutional are stupid".

He's been popping off quite a bit lately when it comes to the 1st amendment, as he also said those who criticizes his judges (on the Supreme Court) should be illegal.

“I really think it’s illegal what they do, with judges and justices. They’re playing the ref,” Trump said at a Saturday rally in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania. “Remember the term. Playing the ref with our judges and justices should be punishable by very serious fines and beyond that.”

Remember though, perfectly fine for him.

 

[TexRex]

I want the bitch to lose, not only for the standard reasons, but because I want to see Trumpers riot again and I want to see them put down. I'll make it a drinking game.

 

[Danoff]

I want the bitch to lose, not only for the standard reasons, but because I want to see Trumpers riot again and I want to see them put down. I'll make it a drinking game.

It's Trump's go-to whenever he is in a losing position. "They cheated" is the fallback. This is to be expected from him if he perceives that he's in for disappointment. There was no avoiding this stage if he was to lose. It's simply something we have to move through.

 

[Exorcet]

It's amazing how many people are either oblivious to or complacent in the destruction of the US.

 

[McLaren]

I want the bitch to lose, not only for the standard reasons, but because I want to see Trumpers riot again and I want to see them put down. I'll make it a drinking game.

Someone in the media needs to grow some balls and ask him, “What the **** does we have all the votes we need mean?”

 

[05XR8]

He'll just skate the issue with a quip about how much he likes the drawing of Kamala.

 

[TexRex]

It's Trump's go-to whenever he is in a losing position. "They cheated" is the fallback. This is to be expected from him if he perceives that he's in for disappointment. There was no avoiding this stage if he was to lose. It's simply something we have to move through.

I'm healthy. I'm more fit than I've been in a while thanks to a knee replacement that allowed me to return to moderately vigorous exercise. I eat well, having cut most red meat from my diet, and the red meat that I consume is rather lean. Most of the animal protein I eat is fish and other seafood, with chicken holding up the turf and pork and lamb bringing up the rear. I eat lots of beans and greens. I eat bread and pasta, because they're good, but I bust my ass to compensate. I would like to live a long life and I'm on track to barring the unforeseen. I don't have a strong desire to die. That said, I want to see numbers of dead such that my own death by alcohol poisoning resulting from the aforementioned drinking game is a legitimate concern.

This is hyperbole. I like to think that the language is so sensational that it can't be construed as anything but hyperbole. But the foundational desire is there and I can't say convincingly, to others or myself, that I will be content with peace.

I'm not going to perpetrate an act of physical violence but to neutralize an imminent legitimate threat of the same, I just don't have it in me to because I place so much emphasis on the rights of others. I don't even think I have the thing in me that would have to break for me to be so capable. But that aside, I'm done. They're not people anymore. They're diseased animals and they need to be put down.

 

[Danoff]

They're not people anymore.

Personally I wouldn't phrase it this way. I think human beings are a deeply flawed species that has some real cognitive stumbling blocks that lead to a lot of mistakes and mental traps. Those mental traps sometimes mean that people can't observe the rights of others, and when that happens, they lose some of their own.

 

[TexRex]

Personally I wouldn't phrase it this way. I think human beings are a deeply flawed species that has some real cognitive stumbling blocks that lead to a lot of mistakes and mental traps. Those mental traps sometimes mean that people can't observe the rights of others, and when that happens, they lose some of their own.

Different strokes. Whatever belief I may have, I can't violate the rights of another without acting on whatever belief that I may have in a manner which violates the rights of another. Belief itself violates no rights, no matter the belief. Belief may be stupid and wrong (I don't believe it's either in this instance), but it's not harm in and of itself.

I'm not going to lose my rights because I violated the rights of another, simply because I'm not going to perpetrate the predicate act. If I lose my rights, it's because the rats take them away from me as they so desire. And there's the root of my disdain for them.

 

[Danoff]

If I lose my rights, it's because the rats take them away from me as they so desire. And there's the root of my disdain for them.

Understood, and I agree to an extent. It's really just the characterization of them as sub-human that I can't get on board with. It's true that if someone takes your rights away, or desires to, that they might hold fewer human rights than you would (with an arbitrator like a judicial system or neutral party). But if we're going to call those people rats or non-humans, we're talking about a lot of people in prison that we don't see as human. My idea of human just includes a lot of flawed and generally awful people.

As an aside, I don't necessarily hold to the idea that you are presumed innocent until you do something bad to someone. I think if medically it can be demonstrated that you necessarily are a danger to yourself or others and that you cannot hold reciprocal rights in your mind, regardless of your actions, that you might lose some rights. For example a person in a persistent vegetative state who has violated no rights might not enjoy all of the rights that an otherwise healthy person would be presumed to hold.

 

[TexRex]

Understood, and I agree to an extent. It's really just the characterization of them as sub-human that I can't get on board with. It's true that if someone takes your rights away, or desires to, that they might hold fewer human rights than you would (with an arbitrator like a judicial system or neutral party). But if we're going to call those people rats or non-humans, we're talking about a lot of people in prison that we don't see as human. My idea of human just includes a lot of flawed and generally awful people.

There are a lot of people in prison who don't belong there. I'm talking drug offenses which violated prohibitions enacted by the sort of rats that I so disdain. There are other people who legitimately belong there because they harmed others, and there's a variety of reasons for their having harmed others which don't justify the harms perpetrated but maybe aren't such that the perpetrators are less than human. There are other still what are incarcerated that cannot be redeemed and I'm okay with thinking of them as less than human.

As an aside, I don't necessarily hold to the idea that you are presumed innocent until you do something bad to someone. I think if medically it can be demonstrated that you necessarily are a danger to yourself or others and that you cannot hold reciprocal rights in your mind, regardless of your actions, that you might lose some rights. For example a person in a persistent vegetative state who has violated no rights might not enjoy all of the rights that an otherwise healthy person would be presumed to hold.

Sure but we're talking about what one thinks of others and how one conveys what one thinks of others. What, relevant to that, constitutes a danger? I'd suggest only action.

As for a danger to myself? I mean I did say that I don't actually intend to drink myself to death. That bit was hyperbole and it seems like it's understood as such. I actually drink less now than I have in probably 30 years. I drank a lot in my youth. I drank sort of reflexively after that. Now I drink because I want to enjoy drinking in moderation as well as company in drinking. A lot of things happened to change my drinking habits. Mostly I've lost some friends to their drinking and the effect it had on their bodies, and I've nearly lost others for the same but they took action themselves to prevent loss of life. I don't think I'm a danger to myself because I actually enjoy life and I have two incredible women in my life for whom I would do anything.

...

What those I so disdain desire and what they think of others is what drives my disdian for them. I don't think that's unreasonable even if my disdain for them is such that I don't see them as people, but I also don't need anyone to think the same.

 

[Danoff]

I've been watching a few of the speeches at the DNC this week, and there seems to be a common theme which has emerged - a positive direction that does not require an adversary. As difficult as it is to avoid, the democrats have to avoid campaigning solely on how bad Trump is. He makes it hard, he crosses every line and pisses off everybody and you want to just rant about him and how awful he is. But the speakers at the DNC seem to recognize that it's not enough to sustain a real political movement to just be the alternative to an awful person. Even when that person is a rapist felon bent on overthrowing the principles of the nation. In the short time since Harris became the presumptive nominee, the democrats seem to have found a larger purpose behind their political movement, with actual inspiration and drive that is completely independent of whatever it is Trump is after. I think it's healthy, and sets them up for a much stronger and more motivational political movement. Campaigning on being not-Trump allows Trump to define your campaign, it's automatically a reactionary and dictated position.

Some of my friends have been handwringing over the criticisms of how the democrats have been running their campaign. But from what I can tell, the Harris campaign and others in the democratic party truly understand what they're doing.

The republicans have ceded far too much of American principles to the democrats. It makes inspirational campaigning so easy. When you can say something as simple as keeping the government out of the bedroom and away from your healthcare decisions. When you can say something as simple as respect for others even when they make decisions you don't agree with. And something that simple and universal actually sets you apart! It actually enunciates a real difference! It makes campaigning so straightforward.

 

[TheCracker]

I've been watching a few of the speeches at the DNC this week, and there seems to be a common theme which has emerged - a positive direction that does not require an adversary. As difficult as it is to avoid, the democrats have to avoid campaigning solely on how bad Trump is. He makes it hard, he crosses every line and pisses off everybody and you want to just rant about him and how awful he is. But the speakers at the DNC seem to recognize that it's not enough to sustain a real political movement to just be the alternative to an awful person. Even when that person is a rapist felon bent on overthrowing the principles of the nation. In the short time since Harris became the presumptive nominee, the democrats seem to have found a larger purpose behind their political movement, with actual inspiration and drive that is completely independent of whatever it is Trump is after. I think it's healthy, and sets them up for a much stronger and more motivational political movement. Campaigning on being not-Trump allows Trump to define your campaign, it's automatically a reactionary and dictated position.

Some of my friends have been handwringing over the criticisms of how the democrats have been running their campaign. But from what I can tell, the Harris campaign and others in the democratic party truly understand what they're doing.

The republicans have ceded far too much of American principles to the democrats. It makes inspirational campaigning so easy. When you can say something as simple as keeping the government out of the bedroom and away from your healthcare decisions. When you can say something as simple as respect for others even when they make decisions you don't agree with. And something that simple and universal actually sets you apart! It actually enunciates a real difference! It makes campaigning so straightforward.

Biden vs Trump was always going to be 2020 Election the rematch. It was always set to be nothing other than a slagging match between well established battle-hardened opponents.

As an outsider who misses the nuances of daily US news, just catching the headline stuff that spreads to other shores, i'm tempted to believe that Biden dropping out - at the point that he did just following the RNC, had probably been planned some time in advance to purposefully knock the wind out of the GOP sails and put the spotlight back onto the Democrats.

To suddenly change tack with a new leadership team, who potentially appeal to a wider group of voters, leaves the GOP floundering with a now outdated line of attack that they are obviously struggling to change at this point. The Democrats can go back to a more traditional style of election campaign - campaigning on issues and policy instead of just countering GOP rhetoric. Again, as an outsider, the GOP now appear to be fighting against the ghost of a previous opponent, whilst the Democrats are offering something much fresher without requiring the seismic shift in core beliefs that was the MAGA takeover of the Republican Party.

 

[Blitz24]

Biden vs Trump was always going to be 2020 Election the rematch. It was always set to be nothing other than a slagging match between well established battle-hardened opponents.

As an outsider who misses the nuances of daily US news, just catching the headline stuff that spreads to other shores, i'm tempted to believe that Biden dropping out - at the point that he did just following the RNC, had probably been planned some time in advance to purposefully knock the wind out of the GOP sails and put the spotlight back onto the Democrats.

To suddenly change tack with a new leadership team, who potentially appeal to a wider group of voters, leaves the GOP floundering with a now outdated line of attack that they are obviously struggling to change at this point. The Democrats can go back to a more traditional style of election campaign - campaigning on issues and policy instead of just countering GOP rhetoric. Again, as an outsider, the GOP now appear to be fighting against the ghost of a previous opponent, whilst the Democrats are offering something much fresher without requiring the seismic shift in core beliefs that was the MAGA takeover of the Republican Party.

This is why Trump running was a mistake for the GOP. You've essentially sent yourself down a path that has no point of return. If you lose this election (and I'd say even without polls taking accurate measures it is more likely than not), a lot of the "gains" made in the Supreme Court could laughably go out the window if a Democrat remains in office as you've taken off the guardrails to your enemy thinking you have no chance at losing.

 

[Danoff]

Biden vs Trump was always going to be 2020 Election the rematch. It was always set to be nothing other than a slagging match between well established battle-hardened opponents.

As an outsider who misses the nuances of daily US news, just catching the headline stuff that spreads to other shores, i'm tempted to believe that Biden dropping out - at the point that he did just following the RNC, had probably been planned some time in advance to purposefully knock the wind out of the GOP sails and put the spotlight back onto the Democrats.

To suddenly change tack with a new leadership team, who potentially appeal to a wider group of voters, leaves the GOP floundering with a now outdated line of attack that they are obviously struggling to change at this point. The Democrats can go back to a more traditional style of election campaign - campaigning on issues and policy instead of just countering GOP rhetoric. Again, as an outsider, the GOP now appear to be fighting against the ghost of a previous opponent, whilst the Democrats are offering something much fresher without the seismic shift in core beliefs that was the MAGA takeover of the Republican Party.

That's pretty much what it looks like to an insider. Trump has gutted the republican part so much that it's entirely a cult of personality. In doing so, they lost essentially all of the actual issues, principles, and goals associated with an actual political party. Not only have the democrats emerged with essentially all of what is actually political and principled, but when they win in November, it will leave the republicans with nothing. A total loss.

That's basically what happened in 2020, and look at what they have brought to the party 4 years later, a double-down on the losing strategy.

This is why Trump running was a mistake for the GOP. You've essentially sent yourself down a path that has no point of return. If you lose this election (and I'd say even without polls taking accurate measures it is more likely than not), a lot of the "gains" made in the Supreme Court could laughably go out the window if a Democrat remains in office as you've taken off the guardrails to your enemy thinking you have no chance at losing.

You tree'd what I was saying above.

It's hard for me to say out loud, because the alternative is so damned scary, but I honestly don't see Trump winning this election. At least not without some kind of underhandedness. I can think of ways that he might try to cheat, and they're definitely scary and really do exist. But in a straight forward election, I don't see a whining insecure victim who has broken all of the laws and is running solely on staying out of jail being a winning strategy.

 

[Blitz24]

It's hard for me to say out loud, because the alternative is so damned scary, but I honestly don't see Trump winning this election. At least not without some kind of underhandedness. I can think of ways that he might try to cheat, and they're definitely scary and really do exist. But in a straight forward election, I don't see a whining insecure victim who has broken all of the laws and is running solely on staying out of jail being a winning strategy.

100% agree. There are massive issues with how the elections are contested and the hyper-partisan actions displayed AFTER the elections of 2020 show that Trump-GOP cannot admit they were wrong or made a mistake. Humility doesn't exist for that group of politicians and either they will need to lose again and again or they will have to realize that maybe they are part of what's wrong with America.

(This is coming from someone who hates both candidates.)