US Presidential Election 2024

[bovril]

27 minutes ago, Detroit Blues said:

 

I don't know that Harris will win, nobody knows that, but she certainly can win. In fact, it wouldn't really even be a huge surprise. Polling has it basically as a coin flip a week before the election. All Harris needs is for Democrats to turn out and she will likely win. 

 

Perhaps it is not evident over the pond, but the Democratic base is significantly larger than the Republican base.

Trump's appeal is exaggerated here. We like to tell ourselves our electorate is reasonably sensible compared to others and that our political system isn't totally boned. A lot of that is projected onto the US because obviously the vast majority of people here only speak English. 

 

You see this also with British coverage of le Pen.

Edited 30 October 2024 by bovril

[grobyfox1990]

1 hour ago, Detroit Blues said:

 

I don't know that Harris will win, nobody knows that, but she certainly can win. In fact, it wouldn't really even be a huge surprise. Polling has it basically as a coin flip a week before the election. All Harris needs is for Democrats to turn out and she will likely win. 

 

Perhaps it is not evident over the pond, but the Democratic base is significantly larger than the Republican base. The only way Republicans win elections at the national level, is by lowering turnout (gerrymandering, purging voters from voting rolls prior to the election, good ol' fashion voter intimidation of ethnic minorities, burning ballot boxes, restricting the number of polling locations and polling hours, sabotaging the United States Postal Service to reduce voting by mail), bankrolling 3rd party candidates to pull away progressive/young voters (JFK Jr in 2024, Jill Stein in 2016/2024, Ralph Nader in 2000), Partisan Supreme Court tactics (Florida 2000),  and their electoral college advantage which allows them to win the presidency without winning the popular vote. Republicans can and will do anything they can, legal or otherwise to win elections, and yet they still lose time and time again because they are less popular and have a smaller voting bloc. This is a minority party attempting to control national politics.

 

So the gameplan is simple, if all the Democrats show up and vote for Harris, she'll probably win in a similar manner as Biden in 2020. She needs to win the blue wall (Pennsylvania-Michigan-Wisconsin) which almost always votes in the same direction. One of the big late factors in Harris possibly winning Pennsylvania is the Republicans calling Puerto Rico a garbage island. There are something like 200k Puerto Rican voters in Pennsylvania.  If she gets that, she probably wins the election. She probably won't win Georgia, like Biden did in 2020, but North Carolina is definitely in play because the Republican running for governor is literally a black Nazi. She might lose Arizona and or Nevada, but she can still win without them. 

 

I expect it to look something like this - 

 

If she lost North Carolina, she would still win 270-268. 

 

 

I don't think he cares what people will think about him down the line. Nothing from his 2016 presidency, or 2020 insurrection leads me to believe that. However, even if he somehow decides to care about Space, NASA already has like the next 2 decades of missions planned. You don't just decide to do something in space and then do it within the same Presidential term. JFK challenged America to land on the moon by the end of the decade, back in 1962, and they landed on the moon in 1969, 7 years later. 

 

The more likely scenario is that he'll just take credit for whatever NASA does, like the moon landings scheduled in 2026 via the Artemis program. He'll probably like make them stick a MAGA flag on the moon, or something stupid

 

 

Deport millions of Illegal immigrants, utilizing ICE like the Gestapo. 

Persuing retribution against his political rivals.

Using the office of the Presidency to personally enrich himself (again).

Appoint more MAGA cronies at all levels of government - Judges, Generals, Beaurocrats.

Roll back environmental protections (again).

Strike a "peace agreement" with Ukraine, that allows Russia to consolidate their gains and give them time to regroup and re-arm for their next European invasion.

Significantly weaken NATO. 

Start up another trade war with China.

Great post, although I fear Phil Bowman is going to read this and have a severe panic attack

[chuddy8]

1 hour ago, Detroit Blues said:

 

I don't know that Harris will win, nobody knows that, but she certainly can win. In fact, it wouldn't really even be a huge surprise. Polling has it basically as a coin flip a week before the election. All Harris needs is for Democrats to turn out and she will likely win. 

 

Perhaps it is not evident over the pond, but the Democratic base is significantly larger than the Republican base. The only way Republicans win elections at the national level, is by lowering turnout (gerrymandering, purging voters from voting rolls prior to the election, good ol' fashion voter intimidation of ethnic minorities, burning ballot boxes, restricting the number of polling locations and polling hours, sabotaging the United States Postal Service to reduce voting by mail), bankrolling 3rd party candidates to pull away progressive/young voters (JFK Jr in 2024, Jill Stein in 2016/2024, Ralph Nader in 2000), Partisan Supreme Court tactics (Florida 2000),  and their electoral college advantage which allows them to win the presidency without winning the popular vote. Republicans can and will do anything they can, legal or otherwise to win elections, and yet they still lose time and time again because they are less popular and have a smaller voting bloc. This is a minority party attempting to control national politics.

 

So the gameplan is simple, if all the Democrats show up and vote for Harris, she'll probably win in a similar manner as Biden in 2020. She needs to win the blue wall (Pennsylvania-Michigan-Wisconsin) which almost always votes in the same direction. One of the big late factors in Harris possibly winning Pennsylvania is the Republicans calling Puerto Rico a garbage island. There are something like 200k Puerto Rican voters in Pennsylvania.  If she gets that, she probably wins the election. She probably won't win Georgia, like Biden did in 2020, but North Carolina is definitely in play because the Republican running for governor is literally a black Nazi. She might lose Arizona and or Nevada, but she can still win without them. 

 

I expect it to look something like this - 

 

If she lost North Carolina, she would still win 270-268. 

 

 

I don't think he cares what people will think about him down the line. Nothing from his 2016 presidency, or 2020 insurrection leads me to believe that. However, even if he somehow decides to care about Space, NASA already has like the next 2 decades of missions planned. You don't just decide to do something in space and then do it within the same Presidential term. JFK challenged America to land on the moon by the end of the decade, back in 1962, and they landed on the moon in 1969, 7 years later. 

 

The more likely scenario is that he'll just take credit for whatever NASA does, like the moon landings scheduled in 2026 via the Artemis program. He'll probably like make them stick a MAGA flag on the moon, or something stupid

 

 

Deport millions of Illegal immigrants, utilizing ICE like the Gestapo. 

Persuing retribution against his political rivals.

Using the office of the Presidency to personally enrich himself (again).

Appoint more MAGA cronies at all levels of government - Judges, Generals, Beaurocrats.

Roll back environmental protections (again).

Strike a "peace agreement" with Ukraine, that allows Russia to consolidate their gains and give them time to regroup and re-arm for their next European invasion.

Significantly weaken NATO. 

Start up another trade war with China.

[MPH]

3 hours ago, Detroit Blues said:

 

I don't know that Harris will win, nobody knows that, but she certainly can win. In fact, it wouldn't really even be a huge surprise. Polling has it basically as a coin flip a week before the election. All Harris needs is for Democrats to turn out and she will likely win. 

 

Perhaps it is not evident over the pond, but the Democratic base is significantly larger than the Republican base. The only way Republicans win elections at the national level, is by lowering turnout (gerrymandering, purging voters from voting rolls prior to the election, good ol' fashion voter intimidation of ethnic minorities, burning ballot boxes, restricting the number of polling locations and polling hours, sabotaging the United States Postal Service to reduce voting by mail), bankrolling 3rd party candidates to pull away progressive/young voters (JFK Jr in 2024, Jill Stein in 2016/2024, Ralph Nader in 2000), Partisan Supreme Court tactics (Florida 2000),  and their electoral college advantage which allows them to win the presidency without winning the popular vote. Republicans can and will do anything they can, legal or otherwise to win elections, and yet they still lose time and time again because they are less popular and have a smaller voting bloc. This is a minority party attempting to control national politics.

 

So the gameplan is simple, if all the Democrats show up and vote for Harris, she'll probably win in a similar manner as Biden in 2020. She needs to win the blue wall (Pennsylvania-Michigan-Wisconsin) which almost always votes in the same direction. One of the big late factors in Harris possibly winning Pennsylvania is the Republicans calling Puerto Rico a garbage island. There are something like 200k Puerto Rican voters in Pennsylvania.  If she gets that, she probably wins the election. She probably won't win Georgia, like Biden did in 2020, but North Carolina is definitely in play because the Republican running for governor is literally a black Nazi. She might lose Arizona and or Nevada, but she can still win without them. 

 

I expect it to look something like this - 

 

If she lost North Carolina, she would still win 270-268. 

 

 

I don't think he cares what people will think about him down the line. Nothing from his 2016 presidency, or 2020 insurrection leads me to believe that. However, even if he somehow decides to care about Space, NASA already has like the next 2 decades of missions planned. You don't just decide to do something in space and then do it within the same Presidential term. JFK challenged America to land on the moon by the end of the decade, back in 1962, and they landed on the moon in 1969, 7 years later. 

 

The more likely scenario is that he'll just take credit for whatever NASA does, like the moon landings scheduled in 2026 via the Artemis program. He'll probably like make them stick a MAGA flag on the moon, or something stupid

 

 

Deport millions of Illegal immigrants, utilizing ICE like the Gestapo. 

Persuing retribution against his political rivals.

Using the office of the Presidency to personally enrich himself (again).

Appoint more MAGA cronies at all levels of government - Judges, Generals, Beaurocrats.

Roll back environmental protections (again).

Strike a "peace agreement" with Ukraine, that allows Russia to consolidate their gains and give them time to regroup and re-arm for their next European invasion.

Significantly weaken NATO. 

Start up another trade war with China.

 

I admire your optimism, but I don’t share it. From what I can work out, the polls that have it neck and neck are the national polls. From what I have been reading, Trump is leading in most of the swing states. So even if she wins the popular vote ( most votes in the nation) she is still likely to lose because of the swing states.

[MPH]

Also, traditionally, early voting has been dominated by the Dems and the republicans usually claw back that lead during the regular voting day. Whilst  the Dems still leading the early voting, republicans are polling  noticeably more at this stage than 2020. That could just mean  of course that republicans voters have caught on to the fact you can skip the circus and the queues of voting day..

Edited 30 October 2024 by MPH

[Detroit Blues]

I am going to try and stay optimistic for another week before the dread and panic sets in

 

[leicsmac]

If Trump does win, I wonder if there will be more questions asked about the electoral college system and its fairness (or lack thereof)?

 

I doubt anything on that score will change for the time being (would need a constitutional amendment, I think) but there may be more feeling about it going forward.

 

For example, the entire reason that in some parts of the US women now have more rights dead than alive is because of that system electing presidents that then chose Supreme Court judges to make it possible.

Edited 30 October 2024 by leicsmac

[Sly]

1 hour ago, leicsmac said:

If Trump does win, I wonder if there will be more questions asked about the electoral college system and its fairness (or lack thereof)?

 

I doubt anything on that score will change for the time being (would need a constitutional amendment, I think) but there may be more feeling about it going forward.

 

For example, the entire reason that in some parts of the US women now have more rights dead than alive is because of that system electing presidents that then chose Supreme Court judges to make it possible.

I do wonder if the Trump support comes from the fact he’s louder, in your face etc, so it’s over exaggerated by the media as he’s sound bite central. 

[leicsmac]

4 minutes ago, Sly said:

I do wonder if the Trump support comes from the fact he’s louder, in your face etc, so it’s over exaggerated by the media as he’s sound bite central. 

I think that was the case when he first broke onto the political scene, but the whole thing took on a life of its own not long after imo.

 

Social media may have had a large part to play in that though imo.

[urban.spaceman]

 

 

 

[The Horse's Mouth]

On 30/10/2024 at 00:58, LiberalFox said:

I struggle to see how Kamala Harris wins the election. Biden only narrowly won last time out. 

 

I've heard anecdotal evidence that people are switching to Trump in small numbers citing economic concerns and small numbers on the left are planning to protest by either not voting or voting for a no hoper.

 

I haven't heard a single person say they are switching to Dem based on Trump's legal issues. 

 

This would be enough to reverse the Dem gains last time out and deliver a similar result to 2016.

 

Would be interested in why there would be a different outcome. 

 

 

 

 

You literally only would vote Kamala through just blind hatred of Trump or the case of just political loyalty , for a campaign that’s spent a billion dollars she hasn’t landed in terms of who she really is and why she really represents. she’s now trying  to land Hilary tactics which didn’t work then and won’t work now 
 

[leicsmac]

3 hours ago, The Horse's Mouth said:

You literally only would vote Kamala through just blind hatred of Trump or the case of just political loyalty , for a campaign that’s spent a billion dollars she hasn’t landed in terms of who she really is and why she really represents. she’s now trying  to land Hilary tactics which didn’t work then and won’t work now 
 

... or if you looked past the two figurehead and actually cared about a woman's right to bodily autonomy and the future of the biosphere, to name but two things.

 

Yes, I know short term economic pocketbook thinking is prevalent, though.

[The Horse's Mouth]

19 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

... or if you looked past the two figurehead and actually cared about a woman's right to bodily autonomy and the future of the biosphere, to name but two things.

 

Yes, I know short term economic pocketbook thinking is prevalent, though.

Kind of my point really, anybody who considers that a vital part of a campaign will be in either of those two camps I mentioned 

[leicsmac]

1 minute ago, The Horse's Mouth said:

Kind of my point really, anybody who considers that a vital part of a campaign will be in either of those two camps I mentioned 

Not sure what either of those things have to do with blind hatred or political loyalty tbh.

 

I would have thought fundamental women's rights and the future of our environment wouldn't really be matters of disagreement politics.

[The Horse's Mouth]

5 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Not sure what either of those things have to do with blind hatred or political loyalty tbh.

 

I would have thought fundamental women's rights and the future of our environment wouldn't really be matters of disagreement politics.

It’s clearly an issue that isn’t going to cause a floating voter who may have voted republican in the past to switch to democrat is the main point. The people who consider that a vital policy when making a vote will be firmly in those two camps 

[leicsmac]

8 minutes ago, The Horse's Mouth said:

It’s clearly an issue that isn’t going to cause a floating voter who may have voted republican in the past to switch to democrat is the main point. The people who consider that a vital policy when making a vote will be firmly in those two camps 

At the risk of sounding repetitive, no, they may not be.

 

It is entirely possible to make a decision based on policy without partisan feeling coming into matters.

 

Of course floating voters are more fixated on the $$$, as is often the case, but that's not really relevant to the initial argument, I don't think.

 

NB. I really hope that you're wrong about floating voters not caring if women have more rights dead than alive and about the consequences of what we're doing to the biosphere tbh - doesn't exactly bode well for the future.

[The Horse's Mouth]

5 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

At the risk of sounding repetitive, no, they may not be.

 

It is entirely possible to make a decision based on policy without partisan feeling coming into matters.

 

Of course floating voters are more fixated on the $$$, as is often the case, but that's not really relevant to the initial argument, I don't think.

 

NB. I really hope that you're wrong about floating voters not caring if women have more rights dead than alive and about the consequences of what we're doing to the biosphere tbh - doesn't exactly bode well for the future.

The problem is that America is the only western country i can think of where it is a partisan issue, people with strong feelings will already be in either or camp.
 

for the record as well, I’m not saying floating voters that don’t vote purely on that issue don’t care, it’s just the other factors take more pressing issue. Immigration, the economy and America standing on the world stage have been the key focal points from both sides really. And will be the key three issues I think most people who don’t have a dog in the fight, will vote based on 

[leicsmac]

3 minutes ago, The Horse's Mouth said:

The problem is that America is the only western country i can think of where it is a partisan issue, people with strong feelings will already be in either or camp.
 

for the record as well, I’m not saying floating voters that don’t vote purely on that issue don’t care, it’s just the other factors take more pressing issue. Immigration, the economy and America standing on the world stage have been the key focal points from both sides really. And will be the key three issues I think most people who don’t have a dog in the fight, will vote based on 

Yeah, what you state there is obviously true given the evidence.

 

I think we've talked about this before though, but I simply question both the motive and the idea that those three points are anywhere near the top of what should be considered morally or pragmatically. It's incredibly short sighted.

[The Horse's Mouth]

6 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Yeah, what you state there is obviously true given the evidence.

 

I think we've talked about this before though, but I simply question both the motive and the idea that those three points are anywhere near the top of what should be considered morally or pragmatically. It's incredibly short sighted.

I slightly disagree on that, in terms of I do think Americas foreign policy couldn’t be more important currently. With the world as unstable as it is, that should be one of the most important, for myself the most important but that’s easy for me to say as someone who’s not effect my domestic policies. However I do think the other two I mentioned will be more important to most voting as naturally you’ll always be inclined to vote for what will improve your day to day rather than neccessairly a pure moral decision.

 

 

[leicsmac]

2 hours ago, The Horse's Mouth said:

I slightly disagree on that, in terms of I do think Americas foreign policy couldn’t be more important currently. With the world as unstable as it is, that should be one of the most important, for myself the most important but that’s easy for me to say as someone who’s not effect my domestic policies. However I do think the other two I mentioned will be more important to most voting as naturally you’ll always be inclined to vote for what will improve your day to day rather than neccessairly a pure moral decision.

 

 

Speak for yourself and not for everyone there, mon ami. Some folks do - have to - think beyond their own four walls and lifetimes, not out of any moral concept, but pragmatism as in that's the way your four walls and lifetime stay stable and safe.

 

Fair point on foreign policy at the present time, though I'm not sure what Trump does there beyond stopping wars by the method of giving autocrats whatever they ask for at the expense of other people.

 

 

Edited 31 October 2024 by leicsmac

[MPH]

9 hours ago, urban.spaceman said:

 

 

 

 

Nice big fine, which he can pay and he’s helped to influence a few things brazenly and openly. And without any noticeable comeback for him..

[MPH]

So  the comedian  who was at trumps Rally called Puerto Rico a floating island of trash. No bueno. Even Trumps campeign distanced themselves from that comment.  But then  Biden, who claims he misspoke,   shot back saying “ the only garbage he sees are  his supporters”

 

cue outrage from the trump team and the MAGA brigade. Later that day Trump is seen doing an interview wearing a high vis jibber sitting in a refuse lorry

 

that was mildly entertaining.

[Wymsey]

Have to state that quite enjoy Trump's sense of humour at times, in particular with the latest bin one swipe to Biden and Harris.

[leicsmac]

3 minutes ago, Wymsey said:

Have to state that quite enjoy Trump's sense of humour at times, in particular with the latest bin one swipe to Biden and Harris.

Which just goes to show how smooth "humour" can cover up real feelings and sway audiences, given it was a guest signed off by the Trump campaign that basically stated what they really think of brown-skinned people and the places where they live in the first instance.

[The Horse's Mouth]

1 hour ago, leicsmac said:

Speak for yourself and not for everyone there, mon ami. Some folks do - have to - think beyond their own four walls and lifetimes, not out of any moral concept, but pragmatism as in that's the way your four walls and lifetime stay stable and safe.

 

Fair point on foreign policy at the present time, though I'm not sure what Trump does there beyond stopping wars by the method of giving autocrats whatever they ask for at the expense of other people.

 

 

Think it’s lose lose regarding the Ukraine situation, the way to end the proxy war will result in some concessions but I’m not sure what that’ll look like. The potential escalation in the Middle East is the one I’m more concerned with, war with Iran is probably inevitable under Harris.