2024 US Presidential Election Thread

[Famine]

What? You don’t think I understand the points you’re trying to make? I know my view in terms of abortion is complicated. I’m fine with that. I’m not looking to have an online epiphany, nor am I looking to change anyone’s mind myself.

Cool.

Not trying to make points. Literally asking you straightforward yes/no questions. The last one took three posts before you attempted it, the current one four. Haven't even mentioned abortion.

You’re still, the only one that’s trying to have a conversation about it.

That rather being the thrust of the original comment, still. You're evading entirely rational questioning because you cannot have a rational conversation. Rational conversations with people who deny bodily autonomy are impossible, and every response you make where you evade it is further proof.

"QED" means "Quod Erat Demonstrandum", or "that which was to be demonstrated". In short, what you subsequently did matched the expectations of the earlier statement on what you would do.


It's not a hard question: do you, regardless of what legislation says, have an expectation of bodily autonomy?

As you're Mustafaing it bigly, here's the question again to make it three times the exact same question has been asked of you: do you, regardless of what legislation says, have an expectation of bodily autonomy?

It's "yes" or "no", as any equivocation from "yes" means "no" because it's all or nothing. Bear in mind that I already elaborated on what "bodily autonomy" means, so there's no need to act confused about it.

One word is all it takes to answer, not a post full of reasons why you won't answer, have forgotten the question, don't know what's asked of you, or calling people names.

Yes or no?

 

[Joey D]

Christ on a cracker this dude is off his rocker, no wonder he makes love to couches:

Ohio bans abortion … you know, in let’s say 2024. And then, every day, George Soros sends a 747 to Columbus to load up disproportionately Black women to get them to go have abortions in California. And of course, the left will celebrate this as a victory for diversity./

That's certainly a stance.

 

[HenrySwanson]

@Yard_Sale

 

[Danoff]

Christ on a cracker this dude is off his rocker, no wonder he makes love to couches:

I'm starting to see headlines about Trump moving to Haley for VP. I don't know if she's willing, and I don't know if he's actually willing to make that change, but Vance looks like such a loser that I'm concerned that he'll pivot to someone better.

The stakes are high for the democrats - losing the country and all. But the stakes are also high for Trump - staying out of jail. And I do not put it past him to dump vance for someone that makes the picture look better.

 

[Joey D]

I'm starting to see headlines about Trump moving to Haley for VP. I don't know if she's willing, and I don't know if he's actually willing to make that change, but Vance looks like such a loser that I'm concerned that he'll pivot to someone better.

The stakes are high for the democrats - losing the country and all. But the stakes are also high for Trump - staying out of jail. And I do not put it past him to dump vance for someone that makes the picture look better.

I don't know if Trump would do that. The Republicans are already bitching about Biden dropping out and it would be a bad look for them to boot their VP since it doesn't show the unity message they're attempting to preach. My guess is that Trump asked Haley to be the VP, and she told him to get bent. I know she "supports" him and everything, but she clearly doesn't like him and seems to be toeing the line to keep her political career moving forward. Or maybe the Republicans are just that stupid and/or hate women too much never to have asked the intelligent woman with an impressive background and is a minority to be the VP.

I'm still worried about Harris's VP pick too. If she picks anti-free speech and Netanyahu puppet Josh Shapiro, I will absolutely not vote for her, that's really my only line in the sand at this point. She just need to pick Mark Kelly and be done with it. Even though Kelly is more anti-2A than I'd like, he has a ton of positions that seem very reasonable, plus he's an astronaut. They don't pick stupid and unstable people to go into space.

 

[Roo]

I don't know if she's willing

I doubt that's a concern Republicans generally and Trump specifically would hold. She's female, after all.

 

[Touring Mars]

I'm starting to see headlines about Trump moving to Haley for VP. I don't know if she's willing, and I don't know if he's actually willing to make that change, but Vance looks like such a loser that I'm concerned that he'll pivot to someone better.

The stakes are high for the democrats - losing the country and all. But the stakes are also high for Trump - staying out of jail. And I do not put it past him to dump vance for someone that makes the picture look better.

I just cannot fathom how Trump has managed to select a VP that makes him look like the brains of the operation.

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

I think Vance is toast. I bet Trump is on the phone with Nikki Haley & Marco Rubio right now.

 

[Joey D]

I think Vance is toast. I bet Trump is on the phone with Nikki Haley & Marco Rubio right now.

It can't be Rubio since they're both from Florida. I'm not sure what the process is to change your residence though from an election perspective.

 

[Danoff]

I don't know if Trump would do that. The Republicans are already bitching about Biden dropping out and it would be a bad look for them to boot their VP since it doesn't show the unity message they're attempting to preach.

This what they do. They complain about the other side doing something (even if they just invent that out of thin air), and then they do it and say "well they did it first".

Vance has been nothing but bad for Trump since he was introduced. It would make Trump look indecisive and vulnerable to move away from him after having trotted him out. But I can see Trump just taking his lumps on that and moving on if he can find a better play. I think Vance was picked because Trump felt that he would help do unconstitutional things rather than for political reasons. But Trump now probably wants a VP pick for political reasons.

I'm not sure who is actually willing to be VP. Trump tried to kill the last one.

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

It can't be Rubio since they're both from Florida. I'm not sure what the process is to change your residence though from an election perspective.

Marco would move to Ohio, change his name to Mark Roberts, pick up a midwestern accent and profess his love for deep dish to be VP.

 

[Joey D]

This what they do. They complain about the other side doing something (even if they just invent that out of thin air), and then they do it and say "well they did it first".

Vance has been nothing but bad for Trump since he was introduced. It would make Trump look indecisive and vulnerable to move away from him after having trotted him out. But I can see Trump just taking his lumps on that and moving on if he can find a better play. I think Vance was picked because Trump felt that he would help do unconstitutional things rather than for political reasons. But Trump now probably wants a VP pick for political reasons.

I'm not sure who is actually willing to be VP. Trump tried to kill the last one.

I think plenty of people would kiss the ring, so to speak, but how many of them are electable? Like MTG would jump at the chance to be Trump's VP, but she would be literal cancer.

I'm also not sure how the rules work if the candidate has already been picked at the convention. I know the Democrats don't have this problem yet since they haven't actually nominated anyone (no matter how much the Republicans bitch), but the Republicans have already pledged their delegates. Or maybe I'm just completely wrong on how the whole thing works.

 

[Danoff]

I think plenty of people would kiss the ring, so to speak, but how many of them are electable? Like MTG would jump at the chance to be Trump's VP, but she would be literal cancer.

Yea MTG would do it. Not sure that's a step up from Vance cancer though.

I'm also not sure how the rules work if the candidate has already been picked at the convention. I know the Democrats don't have this problem yet since they haven't actually nominated anyone (no matter how much the Republicans bitch), but the Republicans have already pledged their delegates. Or maybe I'm just completely wrong on how the whole thing works.

Yea it might be tricky. I'm not sure how easy it is, but if anyone is going to get any rules bent for them, it's going to be the GOP.

 

[Joey D]

Yea it might be tricky. I'm not sure how easy it is, but if anyone is going to get any rules bent for them, it's going to be the GOP.

So I've been looking and per this source, which cites the GOP Rules, it's actually not possible to fire Vance:

Polls Demonstrate Vance Is Deeply Unpopular Among Voters — Could the RNC Remove Him From the Ticket?

Some Republicans privately worry that Vance as the vice presidential nominee “doesn’t add much” to Trump’s chances.

truthout.org

If Trump and/or Republicans eventually determine that they do have buyer’s remorse over Vance, there isn’t much they can do about it: Republican National Committee (RNC) bylaws do not allow a person at the top of the ticket, nor the party itself, to remove a vice presidential candidate once they are selected.

 

[Danoff]

So I've been looking and per this source, which cites the GOP Rules, it's actually not possible to fire Vance:

Polls Demonstrate Vance Is Deeply Unpopular Among Voters — Could the RNC Remove Him From the Ticket?

Some Republicans privately worry that Vance as the vice presidential nominee “doesn’t add much” to Trump’s chances.

truthout.org

I was going to suggest that maybe the way to prevent Haley from being Trump's VP is for her to be Kamala's.

 

[McLaren]

My guess is that Trump asked Haley to be the VP, and she told him to get bent. I know she "supports" him and everything, but she clearly doesn't like him and seems to be toeing the line to keep her political career moving forward.

I think it's this.

She wants to run again in 2028. Staying out of Trump's circle in the event he loses, gives her the ability to distance herself from it whilst still appealing to his base by going, "Hey, I endorsed him at the RNC. But, he couldn't get it done". Also keep in mind that she was apart of his administration before; he wanted her as Secretary of State which she declined and took U.N. Ambassador. And then stepped aside a year or so later, citing, "You have to know when to step aside". She probably knew something was going on and wanted to get away from it. So, in a sense, she's already worked under Trump & doesn't want to do it again. imo.

I just cannot fathom how Trump has managed to select a VP that makes him look like the brains of the operation.

Because the guy only picked Vance due to Junior's influence & Thiel's backing. They thought they had the election locked up, so they weren't seriously taking their VP nomination into account.

 

[Danoff]

Because the guy only picked Vance due to Junior's influence & Thiel's backing. They thought they had the election locked up, so they weren't seriously taking their VP nomination into account.

I think it has to do with carrying out orders in congress. The VP was in some sense the most direct line of defense of the US against the Jan. 6th insurrection. Without pence holding strong, it's a good deal of chaos. The US doesn't have a backup plan for if the right things don't happen on the right days. If pence does what he's told, Trump could keep the ball in the air. I have to think this betrayal at the VP was on his mind when considering his next VP.

I wonder how many republicans are even thinking about why Trump needs a new VP in the first place.

Trump's VP candidate probably really only needed to answer one question - would they have followed orders on Jan. 6th.

 

[Duke]

I don't know if Trump would do that. The Republicans are already bitching about Biden dropping out and it would be a bad look for them to boot their VP since it doesn't show the unity message they're attempting to preach.

And being hypocrites would bother them... how, exactly? I'm not seeing that kind of self-serving about-face as an issue for the Republicans at all.

It can't be Rubio since they're both from Florida. I'm not sure what the process is to change your residence though from an election perspective.

It can be Rubio, actually I was wrong about that. That's not to say it should be Rubio.

 

[Joey D]

And being hypocrites would bother them... how, exactly? I'm not seeing that kind of self-serving about-face as an issue for the Republicans at all.

I don't think the Republicans themselves would be bothered by it, but I do think some swing voters might be, or at the very least, it'd push some right-leaning voters to vote for RFK. The Republicans need every single vote they can get to win the election since it's going to be an uphill battle for them. The far right Tumpers are already locked up, as are pretty much most Republicans. But you need a decent chunk of swing voters to win and they need to provide good optics to them. It's why the whole RNC was about unity despite the party being broken beyond repair.

 

[TexRex]

I'm starting to see headlines about Trump moving to Haley for VP.

ThiS iS a LiTeRaL cOuP!!i!

...

 

[McLaren]

I think it has to do with carrying out orders in congress. The VP was in some sense the most direct line of defense of the US against the Jan. 6th insurrection. Without pence holding strong, it's a good deal of chaos. The US doesn't have a backup plan for if the right things don't happen on the right days. If pence does what he's told, Trump could keep the ball in the air. I have to think this betrayal at the VP was on his mind when considering his next VP.

I wonder how many republicans are even thinking about why Trump needs a new VP in the first place.

Trump's VP candidate probably really only needed to answer one question - would they have followed orders on Jan. 6th.

Yeah, but I think if that was a major concern for Trump, I'm sure there were other GOP candidates that would tell him they would go the opposite of Pence. I'm sure all of those sorts of candidates were there at the RNC & probably on the stage at certain points.

 

[TB]

ThiS iS a LiTeRaL cOuP!!i!

...

Couches, dolphins. What's next? Vice grips?

 

[McLaren]

Since we've been discussing Nikki, let's see how she's doing today.

Former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley cautioned fellow Republicans over their “DEI” attacks toward Vice President Kamala Harris in the days since President Joe Biden dropped his reelection bid.

“It’s not helpful. It’s not helpful,” the former U.N. ambassador told CNN’s Jake Tapper on Thursday.

Nikki Haley Scolds Republicans Over Kamala Harris 'DEI' Attacks

"The American people are smarter than that," said the former South Carolina governor of talk surrounding the vice president.

www.huffpost.com

 

[UKMikey]

Couches, dolphins. What's next? Vice grips?

For any The Boys fans reading he sounds more like aquatic superhero The Deep (who co-habits with an octopus voiced by Tilda Swinton) by the day.

 

[eran0004]

I believe the unborn are humans and are entitled to rights too. That’s seriously my stance

Sure, it’s a human embryo/foetus and it certainly does have some rights. But when there is a conflict between the rights of the foetus and the rights of the woman, why should the rights of the foetus trump the rights of the woman? What’s the rationale behind that?

For anti-abortion conservatives, the rationale is that the purpose of women is to have children and that the child is the property of her husband and/or the state and/or God and therefor she is not allowed to control her own body and make decisions about her own pregnancy. In other words, it’s a view that doesn’t recognise women as free persons with full rights. It’s not even about the rights of the unborn child, but about the rights of the husband or the prosperity of the society.

And if you are confused about it, it’s probably because you’ve been raised in this environment and haven’t really thought about the reason why you think abortion is bad, you just know that it’s bad because the people around you think so. Probably none of them have actually thought it through, but it derives from the rationale mentioned above.

 

[Yard_Sale]

Cool.

Not trying to make points. Literally asking you straightforward yes/no questions. The last one took three posts before you attempted it, the current one four. Haven't even mentioned abortion.

That rather being the thrust of the original comment, still. You're evading entirely rational questioning because you cannot have a rational conversation. Rational conversations with people who deny bodily autonomy are impossible, and every response you make where you evade it is further proof.

"QED" means "Quod Erat Demonstrandum", or "that which was to be demonstrated". In short, what you subsequently did matched the expectations of the earlier statement on what you would do.


It's not a hard question: do you, regardless of what legislation says, have an expectation of bodily autonomy?

As you're Mustafaing it bigly, here's the question again to make it three times the exact same question has been asked of you: do you, regardless of what legislation says, have an expectation of bodily autonomy?

It's "yes" or "no", as any equivocation from "yes" means "no" because it's all or nothing. Bear in mind that I already elaborated on what "bodily autonomy" means, so there's no need to act confused about it.

One word is all it takes to answer, not a post full of reasons why you won't answer, have forgotten the question, don't know what's asked of you, or calling people names.

Yes or no?

O

M

G



Mister...... I'm not interested*.



Now do I need to go get the whistle out of my niece's purse??

So I've been looking and per this source, which cites the GOP Rules, it's actually not possible to fire Vance:

Polls Demonstrate Vance Is Deeply Unpopular Among Voters — Could the RNC Remove Him From the Ticket?

Some Republicans privately worry that Vance as the vice presidential nominee “doesn’t add much” to Trump’s chances.

truthout.org

Even if they could, fat chance in hell Trump would. No way he'd be willing to take that big of bruise to his ego, and admit he's made a mistake. Regardless, this was predictable that'd they start going after Vance right away. This news cycle, just like the lock step honeymoon that the media is showering Kamala with currently, will subside and pass.

On a personal note, I was always scratching my head with vance, even before he got hired. I know the majority of the MAGA base seems to like it, but no one has ever accused the garden variety MAGA base of thinking bigger picture from an optics, future and strategy perspective.









* clearly the conversation (wether rational, irrational, hypothetical, in depth, in ummmm....shallow) having to do with bodily autonomy and abortion rights is of much more of a front and center issue for you than to me. Although I think your given examples are rather equivocal. (at least the way I see it), I generally agree with what you're saying. Which is why Abortion and everything that relates to it, is complicated...for me. Whatever your, or anyone else's personal stance is in regards to the aforementioned, I respect

 

[Famine]

O

M

G



Mister...... I'm not interested*.



Now do I need to go get the whistle out of my niece's purse??

More evasion, instead of a simple yes or no. Why do you go to such lengths to reply over and over again without any substantive engagement?

If you're not interested, stop quoting me and stop responding to me. It won't stop me asking you whether you think you should have the expectation of bodily autonomy or not; only answering it will. Whistle as much as you want.

I've also still not mentioned abortion (other than to say I've not mentioned it), and my next yes/no question won't either.

 

[UKMikey]

evasion

 

[Joey D]

Kamala Harris crushes Donald Trump among Gen Z voters: new poll

Support for Kamala Harris has been creeping up in recent polls and she now appears to be Gen Z's candidate of choice for president.

www.newsweek.com

Not running someone old enough to have an autographed Bible apparently speaks to younger people. Imagine that.

 

[TexRex]

Is "Gen Z voters" an oxymoron?