2024 US Presidential Election Thread

  • Thread starter ryzno
  • 3,448 comments
  • 179,826 views
Jesus.

Screenshot-20240823-104248-Samsung-Internet.jpg


There was a time when Dred Scott, a decision which held that black Africans were not beneficiaries of Constitutional protections, was deemed toxic by Republicans. Two (2) amendments were ratified to render it null and void. But I recognize that that was a long time ago and those were different Republicans.
...but there is one candidate who is ineligible. It's just not Harris.
 
RFK Jr. dropped out and the belief is a lot of those votes will go to Trump.
Like Nikki Haley, I think a lot of those supporters were there because of how they felt about Trump. It's not like they were unaware of him, or were unaware of the low chances of success with RFK. I'm not sure it's a slam dunk that most of them go to Trump, or even vote at all. They were not with Trump for a reason.
 
Last edited:
One thing I agree with RFK on is that the DNC is toxic. Country would be so much better if the DNC, the Neocons, and the weirdos who infiltrated the Heritage Foundation went away.
 
Last edited:
Care to elaborate on exactly what it is that you find toxic about the DNC? I assume you mean the entire democratic party rather than the democratic national convention.
Toxic? They didn't even announce Britney Spears as a special guest. I'd've liked to see W. Bush show up so he and the Chicks could reconcile on stage and unite against Trump.

Seriously, though, what's so insidious about reproductive freedom? I thought it was what most of the country wanted.
 
Last edited:
Trump:
Also Trump:
Meanwhile:
 
Last edited:
It's possible Trump could avoid getting in trouble if he learns to close his mouth. Unfortunately, it is more possible he avoids getting in trouble than him learning how to close his mouth.
 
So he agrees initially to the Sept. 10th debate, then flouts an "agreed" Fox News debate as an excuse to back out if Harris didn't agree (rightly so), then reassures he will be there Sept. 10th. And now, he's again, putting the idea out there he might back out.

I think Donny's just desperate to stay in the news cycle for some reason b/c actually pulling out of the debate after this back-and-forth from him & him alone would probably have a negative effect on his chances.
 
Seems to be a lot of chatter about what it means that Harris is asking that the microphones remain unmuted during the debate after Biden asked for them to be muted. As far as I can tell, the chatter misses the point. Biden complained that Trump kept yelling after his microphone cut out, and that Biden had to respond while Trump yelled next to him. The audience at home couldn't hear Trump but Biden could. I can see why the Harris campaign would rather that you heard him ignore the instructions.
 
Last edited:
Seems to be a lot of chatter about what it means that Harris is asking that the microphones remain unmuted during the debate after Biden asked for them to be muted. As far as I can tell, the chatter misses the point. Biden complained that Trump kept yelling after his microphone cut out, and that Biden had to respond while Trump yelled next to him. The audience at home couldn't hear Trump but Biden could. I can see why the Harris campaign would rather that you heard him ignore the instructions.
Trump can't follow directions. He has to make the directions.
 
Jack Smith has returned with the election interference case against Trump.
Cliffs from Reddit:
  • Jack Smith's team says that the superseding indictment was "presented to a new grand jury that had not previously heard evidence in this case," which separately charged Trump with the same crimes.
  • Rather than go through the evidentiary hearing in DC, Jack Smith goes back to a grand jury and gets a superseding indictment based on what it believes satisfies the Supreme Court immunity decision. This resets the case, requires a new arraignment, and Court process.
  • The news is an entirely new grand jury decided to re-indict Trump on the same election subversion counts without seeing the evidence that the Supreme Court barred from consideration—i.e. the DOJ corruption stuff and any other conspiring with federal officials.
  • Jack Smith added "private" to all of the co-conspirators, to highlight their clearly non-official roles — and got rid of Jeffrey Clark, the DOJ guy who was willing to be acting AG and pursue Trump's fake election fraud claims if Trump let him.
  • Judge Tanya Chutkan remains the judge on the case

Trump's response.
 
What a landscape the Supreme Court has made where evidence of the President of the United States conspiring with stooges he put in the Department of Justice to commit a crime that people in his administration across the board told him was a crime is now legally inadmissible; including stuff that he literally said to the public.
 
Last edited:
What a landscape the Supreme Court has made where evidence of the President of the United States conspiring with stooges he put in the Department of Justice to commit a crime that people in his administration across the board told him was a crime is now legally inadmissible; including stuff that he literally said to the public.
Justice.
 
Back