grobyfox1990

Election interference by various sources is not false equivalence, multiple nations engage in it via soft and hard methods for a variety of reasons. We have our very own Farage and Labour members doing it. Although of course Russian methods have been proven in a court of law. What is mind-blowing in this thread is the number of posts suggesting a second Trump term precipitates the end of civilisation. I don't know how far down the media rabbithole you have to be to believe that, but I'd seriously suggest the posters need professional help to survive in our modern world. That being said it could all be Phil Bowman with these exaggerated and overblown posts as I can only seen the usernames of Leicmac when quoting my post.

Ok sure and drawing the line is where we disagree I guess. I am sure we agree Tate and Yaxley are certain morons. But I think when such important people like Hilary and Trump start questioning our democracy, they should be immediately put in a box with action following.

Are you condoning Hilary's continuous election denial? Because if do, you do not believe in the core of Western democracy, which is an extremely dangerous viewpoint. The actions Hilary and Trump engaged in were out of order. Excusing Hilary of any blame for her words of incitement is akin to Andrew Tate and Yaxley-Lennon tweeting out their bile and excusing themselves of any blame because no one takes action. You can be absolutely sure, given how tight this race is, that Harris and the Dems will call foul play if they lose this election. They have form for it. Let's hope their incitement is not met by violence

So a subsect of idiots, perhaps 0.00001% of Trump voters engaging in action is a critical difference and reason not to vote from McDonald's man. I'm sorry but that is far fetched and unconvincing. They both engaged in very dangerous rhetoric and continually denied the results of the election. They both tried to incite violence via the media.

There is no difference between Hilary and Trump in this matter. They both continuously tried to incite action by questioning the integrity of a democratic election process through their words. They knew their words had deep meaning. The only difference is that Trump supporters are so stupid that they actually engaged in action.

Ok that's a great point. If you wanted info on the extremes, it was all there. I guess I have spent too much time laughing at the extreme Trump supporters. I am more interested in how he appeals to urbanites, young people and highly qualified types

Edit just gone through our analyst newsletters - she was denying the 2016 results and trying to incite action up until 2020. Here's the last denial quote I can find from the JPM research desk from October 2020 "There was a widespread understanding that [the 2016] election was not on the level. We still don’t know what happened … but you don’t win by 3 million votes and have all this other shenanigans and stuff going on and not come away with an idea like, ‘Whoa, something’s not right here.’" A good one from 2017: Trump "knows he’s an illegitimate president," Clinton said. "I believe he understands that the many varying tactics they used, from voter suppression and voter purging to hacking to the false stories — he knows that — there were just a bunch of different reasons why the election turned out like it did … I know he knows this wasn’t on the level."

Hilary also denied the election results in 2016, claimed Russian interference and did not rule out continuing to question the results until Xmas 2017. I am referring to the BBC documentary which was hyperboilc, they want to incite extreme views and get viewers next Tuesday, the panorama doc yday was an advert, the last thing it is was insightful lol. It said nothing net

The posts on here are hugely dramatic, almost like an anxiety prescription is needed for a lot of people. Burgerman's intentions are clear. He wants to win, clear himself of all his criminality, get revenge on his political opponents, get a load of buildings over the line, eat lots of McDonalds and drink lots of diet coke. He can promote his media company (up 45% since the first debate btw) and get all foreign dignitaries to stay in his properties. Musk will get all tech-related and clean energy contracts. He will try and build a Bush or Clinton like dynasty and get Eric in next, but the GOP won't have that. He's not going to drill baby drill as its completely uncommercial to do so.

Yeh was the usual terrible TV hyperbole. Featuring a range of supporters at the extremes with television editing, with a British slant to it, telling you nothing new. 2016 was the biggest election ever, then it was 2020, now its 2024. Largely uninformative of any substantive issues. It was just an advert to get people to watch the BBC election coverage next Tuesday.

I can tell you. The wildly successful Biden IRA has created over 300k jobs in renewable energy with over $200bn in private investment. Tax credits generated over $8bn in savings for American families. USA primary energy mix has varied hugely and wind is almost doubling per year. This obvs creates more energy security, something we know is quite important after the events of Feb 2022. The total cost of the IRA for 10 years is expected to be $780bn. Drop in the ocean compared to the huge riches that can be made from the transition

At this stage I know you have not read the manifesto, what is contained in section 5, have no idea what policy for a successful transition means or probably what Paris 2030 even is

I have not seen any coherent environmental policy advocated by Harris away from 'we'll save the environment.' I might be missing it. The USA could be really bold and lead the transition, as Biden did with the genius IRA, but Harris is not. She will make no tangible difference to 2030 targets. This has genuinely been a very good back n forth between us all, what social media for adults should be used for! As I said earlier, we should whack some beers at one of the xmas home matches with atmosphere thread Guesty

This is totally vacuous. 'I will save the environment.' How?

'Pledges', 'defends' and 'supports' - this is all empty rhetoric. I'll ask again, it's not that difficult, fleshed out hard policies to vote for Harris. She is also campaigning on being pro-gun so point 5 is largely mute.

No tax on tips, social security and overtime. Tax deductible interest payments if you have a car on finance. Policies designed for the working family battered by inflation Still waiting to hear any coherent reason as to vote for Harris. I fear my wait will go on too long as there are 8 days to go.

That's a great point. The herding principles of the basic man on the street will see some loon on Twitter shouting about something, so they'll shout about the same thing. They'll have no way of empathising with Americans, or Brits facing the budget on Wednesday, but have formed an opinion on it and start shouting about it. Whereas if you met a yank or a Brit on the street you'd likely empathetically listen to which way they are voting, and would not be so stupid as to think you know better about their life than they do. That link is nuts, just shows the only winner in all this is media $$$

I think the labour campaign was refreshingly different, they didn't do much, just let the car crash of the Tory party speak for themselves. Since 2016 media outlets have figured out that you can split people into 'left' and 'right.' The 'left' can tell you how clever they are and the 'right' can tell you only they can save the world from further destruction and media makes tonnes of cash. When in reality we're all a bunch of slaves who exist for a pay cheque from our overlords to pay bills to our other overlords. It's a shame us as a population are so stupid that we've bought into it all with such gusto. You'll have people on here who've likely never set foot in the USA thinking the yanks are idiots for voting Trump. Unimaginable levels of stupidity.

The pitch is simple to understand and very similar to Labour's. The Harris campaign is similar to the amateur rubbish we saw from Sunak in July and leading up to Wednesday's budget. GOP - 'We've both had the same amount of time in office, where you better off under me or her.' Dimocrats/Tories - 'he's gonna ruin the world, you have no idea how bad it'll get!!!' Lots of people - 'Life is quite bad for us right now dude' Fortunately for us, Starmer is a whole lot more impressive than Trump.

Aye true and I’ve just noticed your username so I get your position on this. You’re clearly forthright in your view which is cool but I’m still yet to hear a decent argument for voting FOR Harris. I’ll be back and have time during the Xmas home matches, we should slam a few beers with Guesty from the atmosphere thread and dr Singh. Once a prowling Phil bowman has vindicated me via an emoji I’ll be happy!!

Well not really. Because you talk about trying to one up the buyer and the agent, so that could be a feint from your side. But then it also seems you’re angry, so you may have fainted. Spelling error or linguistic genius!!

Reality is biting for them, right now. Much like it did for many of us in the uk. It’s also frustratingly annoying how the Harris campaign works on trump rhetoric. All of his vote winning policies = he’s lying, he won’t do anything. All of his conservative policy = omg he’s gonna kill the world!!! Funny how he’ll be competent enough to destroy the world, but nothing else. Woeful campaign and they’ve a lot to answer for

But those working families crushed by inflation will happily understand that. We saw in July that campaigning on the current administrations ineptness is sufficient.

Im genuinely trying to figure out if you mean feinted or fainted

It’s not surprising imo, bezos owns them. Plus the Dimocrats haven’t made a case as to why you should vote for them. Apart from ‘the other side is bad’ - woefully poor campaigning