2024 US Presidential Election Thread

  • Thread starter ryzno
  • 5,504 comments
  • 294,280 views

Have you voted yet?

  • Yes

  • No, but I will be

  • No and I'm not going to

  • I can't - I don't live in the US

  • Other - specify in thread

Results are only viewable after voting.
vance was really good and confident at lying and pushing fake narrative.

Walz was struggling a bit at conveying the truth and calling out on the BS spewed on the other side.

That's my take on it.
People on the other side, we know how they saw the debate, they be mixing lies for truths.... Sad reality.
 
Last edited:
:lol: He can't even answer the question about why he didn't answer the previous question:

 
Last edited:
TexRex
Bitch your pedo running mate relitigates it at every single speaking engagement and you even advocated for the constitutionally illiterate alternate electors scheme.
Click to expand...
It's hard not to imagine Bill Hicks's voice saying "Yeah, 'cause've yewww!" after everything "JP" says...
 
Last edited:
“I would have asked the states to submit alternative slates of electors and let the country have the debate about what actually matters and what kind of an election that we had,” Vance said in an interview with the All-in Podcast on Monday, when asked multiple times what he would have done if he was in former Vice President Mike Pence’s position on Jan. 6, 2021.

When asked to clarify whether that means he would not certify the election results, he repeated that he would ask states to “submit alternative slates of electors.”
Click to expand...

Loading…

www.politico.com

He had no problem speaking on 2020 election less than a month ago, but I guess you have to put him in a "safe space" to get an answer now.
 
Last edited:
It's all getting a bit much for 45, who's continuing to lose it bigly. I know he's beginning to resemble Beetlejuice but does he have to repeat everything three times over?:

Screenshot_20241003-004108.png
 
Last edited:
Joey D
I really wish the media would talk about Trump's mental state. We talked about it with Biden and we need to talk about it with Trump.
Click to expand...
Since he backed out of the 60 Minutes interview & was recently caught mixing up Iran & Kim Jong Un at his last rally, there have been a few media articles once again talking about his mental decline.

But yeah, I agree with you that there needs to be even more coverage. I'd never actually heard the term before, but a lot of folks have been saying media keeps sane-washing him.
 
This is an excellent discussion and analysis of the political situation:

Worth every second of it, to listen and fully understand
Very well understood by the two persons:



And this one too:
 
Walz won, but it wasn't nearly a slam dunk in the way that Harris/Trump was.

Let's address the elephant in the room: Vance performed better than expected. Walz didn't do badly at all, though the Democrats scored an own goal by painting Vance as a bumbling idiot and setting expectations so low. Let's be honest, the median voter has never even seen the man speak until now. Most people seemed caught off guard by how good Vance was at speaking. More energy should have been spent on portraying Vance as a disingenuous and capricious grifter, which is nakedly valid criticism. Vance is adroit in making Trump's stale and unpopular policies sound sophisticated, novel, even wonky. He's just enough well-spoken to inject a modicum of clarity and elaboration into his policies. Not particularly surprising, given that an Ivy League-educated lawyer would learn how to argue persuasively. Though, he still does struggle with trying to look uncontrived or empathetic, let alone with comedy. And unfortunately, while vice presidential debates- notable exception being Biden/Palin- are mostly inconsequential, Vance's performance could be just enough to rub enough undecided swing voters in the right way, whereas Trump's intensity and broad manner is futile in doing so for usually just confusing people. Vance's slickly-worded responses were well-executed and achieved what I can only assume the goal was: reshaping the radical MAGA ideology to be less charged and hateful, palatable to the median voter.

I sincerely feel bad for Walz; he's too "Minnesota nice" for this, an honest man more interested in action than talking smack, an encapsulation of the public servant. He's stated before even getting the VP pick that he's bad at debating, so it's not terribly surprising that he came off as a bit stiff, anxious, and not forceful enough. Perhaps the bar was mistakenly set too high for Walz, with many taking for granted that he'd brilliantly scorch Vance for his weirdness and associations with Project 2025, but he focused too much on finding ways in which he agrees with Vance and rarely went on the offense. There's just too much material and missed opportunities to clown on Vance to justify this. The whole "weird" arc really rings hollow when you seem to have tried your hardest to make Vance seem like a decent man who ultimately also wants to help America. At times it even seems like Walz been neutered on his more progressive ideology and talking points. Since the mics were on, the best way to deal with Vance was to just ask him yes or no questions, which was refreshing to watch toward the end, as Vance is allergic to pointed questions because he doesn't actually believe in anything. And it is actually quite disappointing how civil the debate was, despite it appearing refreshing after almost 10 years of Donald Trump writing the rules. Vance coming off as a reasonable guy, in some instances facilitated by Walz, inevitably conflates his abysmal and frankly fascistic policy agenda with being reasonable to a degree. Nevertheless, Walz did come out in the debate as a genuine, relatable guy who speaks his mind, is policy-focused and actually answers questions, which is why he won.

I'd even argue that a debate as such is Vance's best time to shine; as unlikeable and uncharismatic as he may be when it comes to giving canned speeches, interviews, and interacting with everyday Americans, he is a good, sharp rhetorician, which oftentimes matters more in a debate performance than being factually correct and having the superior policy agenda. Whereas Walz plays well to the Democratic base- especially young voters- in campaign rallies and on social media, he's just not as acclimated and experienced in front of larger crowds. This is also Walz's first media... anything since the interview he and Harris did about a month ago.
 
Last edited:
GranTurNismo
I'd even argue that a debate as such is Vance's best time to shine; as unlikeable and uncharismatic as he may be when it comes to giving canned speeches, interviews, and interacting with everyday Americans, he is a good, sharp rhetorician, which oftentimes matters more in a debate performance than being factually correct and having the superior policy agenda.
Click to expand...

I wonder though...

The reason Trump is popular is because he seems rough around the edges. He seems genuine (even though he isn't) to his fans. A lot of people despise politicians sounding like politicians. From that perspective, Vance's used car salesman demeanor might have been polished, but it may have put off more people than Walz.
 
An American was killed in Lebanon by an Israeli strike yesterday.

Brings to mind something Biden said:

1000004518.jpg


I won't hold my breath...

Edit: just realized I meant to post this in the Israel thread. Feel free to move it.
 
Last edited:
Danoff
I wonder though...

The reason Trump is popular is because he seems rough around the edges. He seems genuine (even though he isn't) to his fans. A lot of people despise politicians sounding like politicians. From that perspective, Vance's used car salesman demeanor might have been polished, but it may have put off more people than Walz.
Click to expand...
I don't know what to think about people's perception of Vance. To me he comes across as a smarmy ambulance chaser / used car salesman. But there are probably a significant amount of people out there that detest Donald Trump but would allow themselves to vote for him if only some of his more insane actions and positions could be presented to them in a more palatable way - it gives them plausible deniability to hold their nose and pull the trigger. I see Vance as doing the work of pulling the lean-right people off the fence or off the sidelines. I don't see him pulling too many moderates or left leaning people the way Tim Waltz could with his sincerity and genuine affability.
 
Vance being a more typical right-wing politician in presentation is quite different from Trump's "I'm not a politician" thing. Trump presented and prided himself as not being one of the usual Washington suits. His followers often list that as one of his positive attributes so I find it quite telling that he needs someone with that image on his ticket.
 
Vance gives the answer we all knew he would anyway.
On Thursday, comedian Jason Selvig posted a clip of an interaction he had with Vance on X. During their brief encounter, Selvig repeatedly asked Vance if Trump won in 2020. The settled issue of who won the 2020 election came up again after Vance told viewers who tuned into Tuesday’s vice presidential debate that he would have helped Trump carry out his “alternative electors” scheme to maintain power in the White House.

“Who won the 2020 election? Could you just answer? Did Donald Trump win?” Selvig asked.

“Yes,” Vance replied.

After asking Vance to confirm that he was saying Trump won in 2020, Vance replied “Yep.”

The comedian then pressed Vance, asking if he would concede if he and Trump lose in the 2020 election.

Vance did not answer directly, instead just saying “I really feel bad for you man.”

Selvig continued to push, asking “if your opponent gets more votes, will you concede,” after which Vance walked away without answering.
Click to expand...
www.independent.co.uk

Vance says Trump won the 2020 election - then doubles down on the lie in new clip

During the vice presidential debate, Vance similarly refused to answer if he would contest this year’s election if Trump loses
www.independent.co.uk www.independent.co.uk
 
Trump, Florida: "this little hurricane"
Trump, Michigan: no state in America will be permitted to ban gas-powered cars or trucks

Trump, President of the underwater States of America.
 
Last edited:
But one Bible fits perfectly: Lee Greenwood’s God Bless the U.S.A. Bible, endorsed by former President Donald Trump and commonly referred to as the Trump Bible.
Click to expand...
GIF by Giphy QA
 
John Oliver takes a look at how Trump impacted the Federal courts during his first term and the damage he could do if reelected.

LANGUAGE WARNING

 
@Joey D , will this have any impact in Utah?
Four prominent and politically active members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints believe they know whom God would not endorse for president: Donald Trump.

The faith’s scriptures, they reason, spell out divine qualifications for public service.

“Honest men [and women] and wise men [and women] should be sought for diligently, and good men [and women] and wise men [and women] ye should observe to uphold…” it reads in Doctrine and Covenants 98. “I give unto you a commandment, that ye shall forsake all evil and cleave unto all good.”


These members — Christine Durham, a past chief justice of Utah’s Supreme Court; Brent Ward, former U.S. attorney for Utah; Richard N.W. Lambert, a retired assistant U.S. attorney for Utah; and James W. McConkie II, a civil rights attorney — declared in interviews Thursday at the Utah Capitol that Trump is not “honest, wise or good” and thus should not get Latter-day Saint support.

It is not just a general recommendation, they argued, but rather by way of “commandment.” Nor is it a partisan issue, they believe, as the foursome includes two Democrats, a Republican and an independent.
Click to expand...
www.sltrib.com

Thou shalt not vote for Trump. These prominent Latter-day Saints view that as a command from God.

A group of prominent Utahns have created a petition, "Latter-day Saints Opposed to Trump," calling on all church members to sign it and oppose Trump based on moral grounds. It notes that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints believe sacred teaching calls to support candidates who...
www.sltrib.com www.sltrib.com
 
McLaren
@Joey D , will this have any impact in Utah?

www.sltrib.com

Thou shalt not vote for Trump. These prominent Latter-day Saints view that as a command from God.

A group of prominent Utahns have created a petition, "Latter-day Saints Opposed to Trump," calling on all church members to sign it and oppose Trump based on moral grounds. It notes that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints believe sacred teaching calls to support candidates who...
www.sltrib.com www.sltrib.com
Click to expand...
Interesting to see if evangelicals wake up anytime soon (huge doubt).
 
McLaren
@Joey D , will this have any impact in Utah?

www.sltrib.com

Thou shalt not vote for Trump. These prominent Latter-day Saints view that as a command from God.

A group of prominent Utahns have created a petition, "Latter-day Saints Opposed to Trump," calling on all church members to sign it and oppose Trump based on moral grounds. It notes that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints believe sacred teaching calls to support candidates who...
www.sltrib.com www.sltrib.com
Click to expand...

Probably not. Republicans support abortion bans and that's all that matters.
 
Joey D
Probably not. Republicans support abortion bans and that's all that matters.
Click to expand...
Compared to nationwide views it sounds like they're setting themselves up to be a perpetual minority party. "You gd baby murderers. Why won't you vote for us?"

Worse still, if it's all that matters to evangelicals then GOP candidates can behave progressively worse in all other aspects and never get punished by their base at the ballot box. I wonder how sustainable this is. Perhaps pro-lifers are hoping to outbreed the rest of the country? Or maybe bring about the end times so the good Lord can sort everything out.

chart-166646.png
chart-186309.png
 
Last edited:
Raw milk rich in vitamin R?

Put your hedges and futures on gastro-digestive medicine.
 

Similar threads

ryzno
2022 US Mid-Term Elections Thread
14 15 16
Replies
459
Views
30K
Eunos_Cosmo
Eunos_Cosmo
Com Fox
  • Poll
Voting in Elections. Should it be Mandatory, Optional, Restricted, or none at all?
2
Replies
46
Views
4K
Danoff
Danoff
Biggles
The GTP Unofficial 2021 Canada Election Thread
Replies
5
Views
835
Keef
Keef
Famine
Black Friday 2024 Sim Racing Equipment Deals
Replies
0
Views
1K
Famine
Famine
wfooshee
Electoral College: Discuss!
3 4 5
Replies
120
Views
7K
TheCracker
TheCracker

Latest Posts

Back