2024 US Presidential Election Thread

[opelgt1969]

Wut?

Fixed that for you

 

[Scaff]

Fixed that for you

It's still a wut.

You've replied to yourself, and that reply makes no sense in regard to the quote.

 

[Strittan]

I don't need to pretend. I watched it unfold live on TV, and there are numerous photographs and recordings of Congressmen and women's phone calls available.

I meant shooting and hanging the rioters.

Would the country be better off? Yes, it would have fewer treasonists because they'd be dead. Fewer people would actively want to engage in that behavior again because they saw the consequences. Right now, they know they can effectively get a slap on the wrist. A few months in jail isn't going to dissuade someone, but a fully armed soldier and being labeled an enemy of the state might convince some that it's not worth it.

I don’t know, but that just seems very naive to me. Sure, they would be dead, but the crazy, delusional and violent alt-right movement as a whole wouldn’t be. Or maybe I’m the one who’s naive, who knows, but as a pacifist (Yeah I know, silly, right?) I’d like to think that violence feeds more violence.

Would Trump supporters be less violent? Who knows, maybe? But if we followed the letter of the law, Trump would be in prison for treason (I don't think they would've executed him), or at the very least, he would be ineligible to run for office.

Now that however, wouldn’t be bad at all actually.

 

[Danoff]

Personally I still think the military should court martial Trump as commander in chief for treason. His sentence could be carried out by the weekend.

 

[Blitz24]

Personally I still think the military should court martial Trump as commander in chief for treason. His sentence could be carried out by the weekend.

Biden is too weak to do that + nobody in any of the judicial or legislative branch will support it. All that can be done is to pass or enact as many things as possible to prevent Trump from doing more destruction. Failure to do so could end up destroying Biden's legacy as well.

 

[Danoff]

Biden is too weak to do that + nobody in any of the judicial or legislative branch will support it. All that can be done is to pass or enact as many things as possible to prevent Trump from doing more destruction. Failure to do so could end up destroying Biden's legacy as well.

No there's nothing that can be passed that can't be unpassed.

Military Tribunals operate outside of the judiciary. But Trump was a military officer as commander in chief during the insurrection. He can be held to account in a military court for his actions. Biden is too weak? I dunno. I'd like to see this at this point.

 

[dylansan]

Biden and the Democratic party are too unwilling to violate unspoken norms to actually use the full scope of their power to do damage control and take preventative measures.

 

[HenrySwanson]

From an AUA (Ask Us Anything).

Is anyone who works with kids around the world seeing this. I know my 13 year old (male) student is more Trump than Harris.

 

[Danoff]

Biden and the Democratic party are too unwilling to violate unspoken norms to actually use the full scope of their power to do damage control and take preventative measures.

I don't think that's true. In fact, I imagine a lot of things have been considered. But it is not my job to understand the fallout from various actions.

Also, I think maybe you were too unwilling to violate unspoken norms and actually use the full scope of your power to do damage control and take preventative measures by voting for Kamala.

 

[Sprite]

View attachment 1403503

From an AUA (Ask Us Anything).

Is anyone who works with kids around the world seeing this. I know my 13 year old (male) student is more Trump than Harris.

I wouldn’t be at all surprised if it’s how they both come across on TV etc.

Harris is your A-Typical politician, stuffy, little to no charisma and quite a cold fish.

Trump on the other hand, comes across as a joker, larger than life, arms waving etc.

While most people of a certain age and up will look more into the policies and what these people stand for and can get passed the personality, but I’d hazard a guess that younger people just like the song and dance.

A bit like how really young children and babies like bright coloured and fast moving things on TV no matter how stupid and moronic the story, dialogue etc. is.

 

[Danoff]

I wouldn’t be at all surprised if it’s how they both come across on TV etc.

Harris is your A-Typical politician, stuffy, little to no charisma and quite a cold fish.

Trump on the other hand, comes across as a joker, larger than life, arms waving etc.

While most people of a certain age and up will look more into the policies and what these people stand for and can get passed the personality, but I’d hazard a guess that younger people just like the song and dance.

A bit like how really young children and babies like bright coloured and fast moving things on TV no matter how stupid and moronic the story, dialogue etc. is.

The mock election at my kid's school went for Harris.

 

[Liquid]

I teach in Slovakia and of those who did pay attention to the election, I found that boys generally liked Trump and girls generally liked Harris.

Why? The "he tells it like it is" impressionability that kids and teenagers would fall for was a frequent trope that came up from the edgelord boys who want to make racist remarks in an attempt to be 'funny' in front of their classmates.

Trump obviously has a more braggard personality and his grandstanding gets him noticed more. What nuances of the US constitution, constitutionality, due process, states' rights, tariffs, trade deficits, diplomacy, Senators, impeachment, etc. could you reasonably expect young teenagers in a non-English speaking country to understand?

We are just getting over the kids being obsessed with Andrew Tate and (this happened) telling female teachers and classmates to " shut up and get back to the kitchen, your opinion is worthless", so even sensible conversations about sexual respect and Trump's candidacy are difficult.

On a tangent from that last point, for all you might hear about gen alpha being wishy-washy namby-pambies, you'd be disturbingly surprised how many of them also think women are property and how it's funny to upset and bully other people. Children, by which I also specifically include mid-teenagers, consume online media at an increased rate and it does have a strong effect. If what they're consuming is junk, and god knows there is abominable junk out there, their brains are going to believe junk.

 

[Sprite]

The mock election at my kid's school went for Harris.

Clearly well educated then.

Out of interest was it a close run thing or landslide?

 

[TexRex]

arms waving

Less waving, more jacking off two dudes at the same time.

Edit: Based on the stroke length, well...good for them. I suppose he would get hung studs the likes of which have never been seen.

 

[Danoff]

Clearly well educated then.

Out of interest was a close run thing or landslide?

I'm really not sure. It should not be used as proof of anything really. The teachers prepare the mock election with summaries of policy positions that angry parents will tolerate, and try to get the kids interested and educated in those issues.

 

[TheHun99]

View attachment 1403503

From an AUA (Ask Us Anything).

Is anyone who works with kids around the world seeing this. I know my 13 year old (male) student is more Trump than Harris.

My teenage daughters clearly support Harris, Trump is basically a curse word in our house. My older one also regularly comments on the GOP's religion-related ideas that those are unconstitutional as the state and church are separate. They will be able to vote in 2028, I don't see them turning towards the GOP as it stands today.

 

[HenrySwanson]

I teach in Slovakia and of those who did pay attention to the election, I found that boys generally liked Trump and girls generally liked Harris.

Why? The "he tells it like it is" impressionability that kids and teenagers would fall for was a frequent trope that came up from the edgelord boys who want to make racist remarks in an attempt to be 'funny' in front of their classmates.

Trump obviously has a more braggard personality and his grandstanding gets him noticed more. What nuances of the US constitution, constitutionality, due process, states' rights, tariffs, trade deficits, diplomacy, Senators, impeachment, etc. could you reasonably expect young teenagers in a non-English speaking country to understand?

We are just getting over the kids being obsessed with Andrew Tate and (this happened) telling female teachers and classmates to " shut up and get back to the kitchen, your opinion is worthless", so even sensible conversations about sexual respect and Trump's candidacy are difficult.

On a tangent from that last point, for all you might hear about gen alpha being wishy-washy namby-pambies, you'd be disturbingly surprised how many of them also think women are property and how it's funny to upset and bully other people. Children, by which I also specifically include mid-teenagers, consume online media at an increased rate and it does have a strong effect. If what they're consuming is junk, and god knows there is abominable junk out there, their brains are going to believe junk.

I'm getting this with the 13yo too.

Is the Gen Z bro media diet to blame?

You can’t understand Trump’s win without understanding what young men are doing online.

www.vox.com

Early exit poll data from swing states shows that 18- to 29-year-old men favored Trump 49 percent to 47 percent, while 18- to 29-year-old women favored Harris by 24 points — the largest gender gap within any age group, and one that defies conventional wisdom that once painted young people as broadly progressive.

 

[Joey D]

I don’t know, but that just seems very naive to me. Sure, they would be dead, but the crazy, delusional and violent alt-right movement as a whole wouldn’t be. Or maybe I’m the one who’s naive, who knows, but as a pacifist (Yeah I know, silly, right?) I’d like to think that violence feeds more violence.

It's more about sending a message to those who decide to take up arms against the US from a domestic standpoint. Most of Trump's supporters are cowards and aren't going to do anything that will endanger themselves. Now that they see they could essentially just waltz right into the Capitol building with minimal resistance and then if they're caught, get a slap on the wrist, they're going to be emboldened to do it again. If Harris had won, I suspect the assault on the Capitol this coming January would've been much, much more orchestrated with a strong intent actually to kill members of Congress.

While I get being a pacifist and I get not wanting to go to a violent resolution, with Trumpers, especially the Trumpers who attacked the Capitol, there was no reasoning with them. They were just as much of an enemy force as Al Qaeda or ISIS. Now those who wanted to shoot the people merely outside screaming at the Capitol, I don't think that was right. The violence option should be reserved for combating the first strike. The Trumpers made the first strike. Or in other words if you 🤬 around, you need to find out.

Less waving, more jacking off two dudes at the same time.

Edit: Based on the stroke length, well...good for them. I suppose he would get hung studs the likes of which have never been seen.

I suspect a conversation between Vance and Trump would go like this:

"What would you do if you won the presidency?"

"I'll tell you what I'd do, man: stroke two dudes at the same time, man!"

"That's it? If you won the presidency, you'd stroke two dudes at the same time?"

"Damn straight! I've always wanted to do that, man! And I think if I were the president, I could hook that up, too; cause dudes dig dudes with power."

"Well, not all dudes."

"Well, the type of dude that wants to get doubled up by a president like me do!"

"Good point."

"Well, what about you now? What would you do?"

"Besides, stroke two dudes off at the same time?"

"Well, yeah."

 

[sw3g005]

You didn't follow her campaign very well and you want me to accept your criticism of it anyway? You're part of the problem then. A big problem in the last election is that people weren't listening. You also weren't listening, and you want to excuse people who weren't listening because you weren't. It doesn't seem to stop you (or them) from having opinions on the matter.

Uhh… I think alot of people did listen, they just came to the conclusion that with what she said, combined with their experience of Biden’s term, she wasn’t a terribly convicing candidate in their eyes – hell, she could’ve been a white man and she would’ve still lost out. It wouldn’t surprise me if that’s what happend with the 15 odd million who voted Biden last election but decided to stay home this time around.

I'm just refusing to go along with your misplaced blame. You wanted to play the blame game, but you blamed the wrong people. I'm just helping you to understand that you need to move your finger over if you want to get it right. Feel free to put it down if you want.

That's just absurd. I'm not blaming Kamala for the fact that people voted for a rapist.

Isn’t there this idea in business that the ”customer is always right” (as in people not buying your product because they don’t like your product)? For some reason, this seems to not be a thing in politics, even though candidates try to ”sell” themselves to the public when campaigning. If anything, I think you’re the one who’s blame is misplaced, I’m afraid.

The thesis here is that people are ungovernable other than through force and stripped freedom.

No. The thesis here is that parties like the Dems are so ineffectual at campagining and providing and promising policy to effectively fight back their opposition that they're bound to frequently lose out. I’m not that abstract.

You're doing this in order, for some reason that I cannot fathom, to avoid putting the blame on the people who make the poor decision.

When stories of relatively-reasonable people getting brainwashed by Fox News into Trump-loving bigots pop up from time to time, it’s difficult not to. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, most people voting for Trump and politicians like him are not the crazy neonazi Evangelical types, since they almost always constitute a small (if loud) minority, most are otherwise reasonable people who have been brainwashed into their ideology. They often have legitimate frustrations about the way the country is led, they’ve just been misplaced by virtue of propaganda. The UK riots that happened earlier this year is a textbook example of this. People are (rightfully) pissed off with their living conditions and the then-recent terrorist attack, combine that with carefully crafted misinformation by neonazis and… well, the rest speaks for itself doesn’t it.

Apparently so. Turning to untested solutions in a tough situation is one thing but if there no attempt to assess the validity of these alternatives at all then people are just waiting to be taken advantage of. The unwillingness to evaluate information before accepting it needs to be done away with. Unless that happens I don't see how you can rely on people to vote sensibly.

Once again, desperation is a thing. People doensn’t always think rationally when desperate. I’m no psychologist but even I know that much.

 

[Danoff]

Uhh… I think alot of people did listen, they just came to the conclusion that with what she said, combined with their experience of Biden’s term, she wasn’t a terribly convicing candidate in their eyes – hell, she could’ve been a white man and she would’ve still lost out. It wouldn’t surprise me if that’s what happend with the 15 odd million who voted Biden last election but decided to stay home this time around.

If they listened, then they know that one of the candidates was a felon insurrectionist rapist who wanted to execute innocent Americans. If they still voted for him, they're insane.

This is in response to me saying YOU didn't listen, and you not listening is evidence by the fact that you explained that you did not follow Harris's campaign closely and appear to be unaware of some basic facts about it. This does not seem to be giving you any pause about finding fault with it, though, which is your own critical thinking misfiring. If you admit that you do not know something very well, but you jog on finding fault with it, you have missed a step.

Isn’t there this idea in business that the ”customer is always right” (as in people not buying your product because they don’t like your product)? For some reason, this seems to not be a thing in politics, even though candidates try to ”sell” themselves to the public when campaigning. If anything, I think you’re the one who’s blame is misplaced, I’m afraid.

You're basing your argument on the middle-management platitude "the customer is always right" for getting employees not to argue with customers? This is your reasoning for why I can't blame the adult voters who made an insane choice?

Uh... yea I don't feel the need to respond to something that vacuous.

No. The thesis here is that parties like the Dems are so ineffectual at campagining and providing and promising policy to effectively fight back their opposition that they're bound to frequently lose out. I’m not that abstract.

They're bound to frequently lose out to liars and manipulators and authoritarians. Which is exactly what I said your thesis was isn't it?

When stories of relatively-reasonable people getting brainwashed by Fox News into Trump-loving bigots pop up from time to time, it’s difficult not to. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, most people voting for Trump and politicians like him are not the crazy neonazi Evangelical types, since they almost always constitute a small (if loud) minority, most are otherwise reasonable people who have been brainwashed into their ideology.

...and they're adults and can be held responsible for that.

 

[Tornado]

Would the Trump supporters be less violent, let alone less delusional?

The ones who were shot on the day of certainly would be.

 

[TexRex]

Three years, ten months since Ashli Babbitt last engaged in an act of rebellion against the United States of America. Bullets work.

 

[opelgt1969]

Why? You're not receptive to outside information (you still don't seem to grasp that @Sprite isn't American and doesn't live in the USA, despite four attempts), so it'd be a waste of effort.

Plus you just did it yourself:

Unless you think murder is "the right thing" "in some cases" too, you've just given yourself a difference.

What'd be fun is for you to explain what you think is the moment that someone who has been murdered or aborted is dead...

💩

 

[Famine]

💩

Amusing response to the idea you're non-receptive.

Funnier that you posted it twice too.

 

[MatskiMonk]

💩

Is this the nuanced opinion of an articulate Trump supporter I heard about?

 

[sw3g005]

This is in response to me saying YOU didn't listen, and you not listening is evidence by the fact that you explained that you did not follow Harris's campaign closely and appear to be unaware of some basic facts about it. This does not seem to be giving you any pause about finding fault with it, though, which is your own critical thinking misfiring. If you admit that you do not know something very well, but you jog on finding fault with it, you have missed a step.

Ok I’ll admit, when I said I ”didn’t listen”, I said I did hear and see bits of her. Nevermind that she wasn’t Trump, she seemed likeable enough at first. Then she went down the ”tough on border control” kind of overton-window-shifting mode and got endorsed by Dick Cheney and thought ”uuhhh IDK about that. Hopefully it doesn’t matter”. Given that she lost the election, it clearly must’ve mattered, especially when combined with the Gaza situation and people’s experiences of the Biden administration. You may not think Biden was bad, but not everyone's you.

They're bound to frequently lose out to liars and manipulators and authoritarians. Which is exactly what I said your thesis was isn't it?

The way I understood your interpretation was that people simply shouldn’t live in, nor deserve, a democracy, that society doesn’t work unless people live in a dictatorship. Which is probably the morale most dictatorships justify themselves with as we speak.

 

[Kriptical]

Don't tell me you're not smart enough to understand that the planes are to transport them back to their homeland. Our air defense would not allow an unknown plane from coming in ,unless it so low that it's under the radar.

Do you just kinda throw a single comma in most of your posts, as a low key middle finger, to the english language?

 

[Famine]

Oh, is that what "don't tell me you're ite" was about?

Anyway:

MAN THE AIR DEFENCES!

 

[Terronium-12]

Less waving, more jacking off two dudes at the same time.

Edit: Based on the stroke length, well...good for them. I suppose he would get hung studs the likes of which have never been seen.

 

[dylansan]

I don't think that's true. In fact, I imagine a lot of things have been considered. But it is not my job to understand the fallout from various actions.

Also, I think maybe you were too unwilling to violate unspoken norms and actually use the full scope of your power to do damage control and take preventative measures by voting for Kamala.

In this scenario, voting third party is the unspoken norm, and voting for Kamala was thinking outside the box?

Harris won Massachusetts decisively. There is zero causal link between my vote and Trump's win.