[Politics] The 2024 US Election - *MATCH DAY*

[Crawley Dingo]

i would just like to mention that when I posted about abuse of laughter emojis it was as an example of poor behaviour not that I was bothered by it I am not.

It does provide a handy bookmark from my last post and I see over half the ones are by people I have blocked, they dont show up in notifications.

I got the right people, carry on.

 

[Albion my Albion]

Third Way

www.thirdway.org

Is Illegal Immigration Really a Democratic Plot to Sway Congressional Apportionment?​

 

[Zeberdi]

It really depends on who you're listening to and how much value you put in their thoughts. It's all noise that will be forgotten when the votes are counted, the results are in and president-elect Harris is preparing to take office. The biggest problem with the election is the amount of coverage and the desperate need for all of the "news" outlets to fill time throughout the day. So they put on people who will say something that gets traction, but it's all just noise and irrelevance.

People can panic as much as they want and it's not out of proportion - the world needs the Democrats to win the presidency and hopefully win the Senate and the House as well. If Trump sleepwalks into another presidential term then all hell will break loose, again. I am confident history is going to show the Trump campaign as one of the biggest failures in political history and just purely an opportunity for him to grift off his supporters - which, to be fair, he is absolutely incredible at.

I hope you are right of course - I’m sure most of us do.

I could hedge my bets on Harris too but unfortunately I have followed American politics for too long to know that it is impossible to predict a winner when the polls are this close and even if we think we can, the polls/media/campaigns can be caught out as they were in 2016. The difference now, you are dealing with nearly half an electorate that has literally lost all reason and prepared to put a convicted felon, a Putin collaborator and sexual predator in the WH - that kind of support is going no where.

Even if he narrowly loses (and it will be narrow), the damage that man has done in recent years in destroying the faith the electorate has in the reliability of the voting system is disgraceful and I dread to think of the civil unrest that a close result will incite amongst MAGAers if Trump loses.

He “will not go gentle into that good night” that is for sure.

 

[pb21]

i would just like to mention that when I posted about abuse of laughter emojis it was as an example of poor behaviour not that I was bothered by it I am not.

It does provide a handy bookmark from my last post and I see over half the ones are by people I have blocked, they dont show up in notifications.

I got the right people, carry on.

 

[Albion my Albion]

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/16/us/politics/kamala-harris-fox-news-interview.html

6 Takeaways From Harris’s Contentious Interview on Fox News​

 

[US Seagull]

Not the left with their "white men evil" shtick?

That's not a thing. That's another of your deranged fantasies.

 

[Pavilionaire]

I'm very well away it's not a game.

How, exactly, do you think Trump is gaining momentum? Is it from swaying around on a stage for 40 minutes listening artists who have demanded he not play their music? Is it declaring himself the father of IVF at a women-only Town Hall? Genuinely, I have no idea what people are worrying about, other than nervousness at the seriousness of the outcome of the election. He narrowly won the Electoral College in 2016 with tiny majorities in the small handful of states necessary because the elections are heavily weighted in favour of the Republican party. That's an undeniable fact of the current system so even when they nominate the absolute worst candidate imaginable, they're going to be basically neck and neck.

He lost the vote in 2016, lost everything in 2020 and he will do so again in 2024. He is the worst major party candidate in modern history and will be remembered as a shitstain on American political history.

I wish I was as confident as you in the outcome. This election reminds me of the Brexit Referendum, in as much as one side is telling voters what they want to hear, making it sound easy, running the other side down and going for cheap populism.

Sooner or later, voters get fed up with the guy saying all the 'real' stuff because they like hearing about the 'good' and funny stuff like deporting migrants, ending wars, cutting taxes, Hannibal Lecter and eating pets.

In the USA there is no obligation to produce costings for policies, so you can promise anything. This - in turn - drags the election debate down into an uncosted, unworked mess, i.e. Trump says he won't tax tips so Harris has to promise something similar, but anyone involved in tax, accounting, social security or benefits knows that would be a red tape shitshow.

 

[US Seagull]

In the USA there is no obligation to produce costings for policies, so you can promise anything. This - in turn - drags the election debate down into an uncosted, unworked mess, i.e. Trump says he won't tax tips so Harris has to promise something similar, but anyone involved in tax, accounting, social security or benefits knows that would be a red tape shitshow.

On taxing tips, you can bet that some enterprising CEO will suddenly discover that their wages are only $1 and the rest is a "Tip" coming from the company in appreciation of their hard work.

 

[Withdean South Stand]

On taxing tips, you can bet that some enterprising CEO will suddenly discover that their wages are only $1 and the rest is a "Tip" coming from the company in appreciation of their hard work.

And this is one of the differences between Trump and Harris talking about "no tax on tips". You KNOW a Trump concept of a plan would result in corporations cutting other benefits for employees, but Harris and the campaign have already addressed the potential for employers abusing that benefit and having policies to try and safeguard against lower basic wages, for example.

Concept vs actual plan.

 

[nicko31]

I wish I was as confident as you in the outcome. This election reminds me of the Brexit Referendum, in as much as one side is telling voters what they want to hear, making it sound easy, running the other side down and going for cheap populism.

Sooner or later, voters get fed up with the guy saying all the 'real' stuff because they like hearing about the 'good' and funny stuff like deporting migrants, ending wars, cutting taxes, Hannibal Lecter and eating pets.

In the USA there is no obligation to produce costings for policies, so you can promise anything. This - in turn - drags the election debate down into an uncosted, unworked mess, i.e. Trump says he won't tax tips so Harris has to promise something similar, but anyone involved in tax, accounting, social security or benefits knows that would be a red tape shitshow.

I think what is disturbing though is Trump has autocratic aspirations.

He sees Orban in Hungary as the blue print of how to rig the system. The system is already rigged against the Dems with no popular GOP majority for 3 decades now. They will rig it further. Just look at the supreme court for starters.

This isn't a normal election, one side no longer believes in the basic rule of law and democracy.

Incidentally we if had another bite at Brexit 8 years on Leave wouldn't be in the game.

 

[Seagull58]

He's done it again! 34 felony convictions are not enough to stop him

 

[Seagull58]

and he's still lying

https://edition.cnn.com/2024/10/16/politics/trump-fact-check-john-deere-economy/index.html

 

[nwgull]

I'm very well away it's not a game.

How, exactly, do you think Trump is gaining momentum? Is it from swaying around on a stage for 40 minutes listening artists who have demanded he not play their music? Is it declaring himself the father of IVF at a women-only Town Hall? Genuinely, I have no idea what people are worrying about, other than nervousness at the seriousness of the outcome of the election. He narrowly won the Electoral College in 2016 with tiny majorities in the small handful of states necessary because the elections are heavily weighted in favour of the Republican party. That's an undeniable fact of the current system so even when they nominate the absolute worst candidate imaginable, they're going to be basically neck and neck.

He lost the vote in 2016, lost everything in 2020 and he will do so again in 2024. He is the worst major party candidate in modern history and will be remembered as a shitstain on American political history.

I don’t disagree with all the stuff you say, and you’ve not even mentioned the convicted felon stuff. However, he seems to be untouchable in terms of what he can get away with. I think he literally could shoot someone on 5th Av and his supporters would still crawl over glass to get to the polls and vote for him.

The whole business of the worse he is, the more fervent his support is a phenomenon that at I don’t understand. You could, I suppose, compare it to Brexit in that the more it’s shown to be a shit show, the more Brexit fans will tell you how amazing it is.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I don’t disagree with all the stuff you say, and you’ve not even mentioned the convicted felon stuff. However, he seems to be untouchable in terms of what he can get away with. I think he literally could shoot someone on 5th Av and his supporters would still crawl over glass to get to the polls and vote for him.

The whole business of the worse he is, the more fervent his support is a phenomenon that at I don’t understand. You could, I suppose, compare it to Brexit in that the more it’s shown to be a shit show, the more Brexit fans will tell you how amazing it is.

Indeed.

I would add (as I have before) that there is a good narrative that the Democrats have been spinning a load of old bollocks for decades, so it boils down to whose bollocks will affect your wealth in the most beneficial way.

(I remember hearing Hilary address a union in Chicago and was shocked by the Mick Lynch-style rhetoric and class-war claptrap she was using to woo that particular audience. This, a person whose servants barely get their hands dirty, let alone herself.

I was still sanguine about Hilary myself, but I'm an old lefty. For the non-doctrinaire voter, I can see how Trumps old bollocks may seem less of a problem than the lefty tax pro-immigrant narrative as the alternative.)

Don't forget, if 80 million vote for Trump, only a proportion will be MAGA oafs. The swing voters need better persuasion than on offer, it seems. Harris is slightly less inspiring than Starmer, and the US is a nation more addicted to the cult of leadership than the UK.

 

[Bodian]

You are not getting this at all. If you have say 10 immigrants where 2 vote GOP and 4 vote DNC and in a generation say that flips to 6 of them GOP and 2 DNC then you have to keep increasing the first gen immigrants to maintain a DNC advantage. A Ponzi scheme.

Put it another way, new immigrants lean left because of more friendly faces and support they get. When they fully assimilate they don't need this as they are natives now and may object on taxes spent on new comers. Also they are more likely to retain the social conservatism they come with.

The only way the left can stop this is to prevent assimilation, divisive politics and flooding the country with immigrants. this election will be the death of democracy or the death of identity politics imo.

This is counter-argumentative. If second-generation immigrants vote 6-2 Republican, then gradually the country will turn more and more Republican. And this would never be outweighed by greater levels of immigration because you simply could not have enough 'new' immigrants to outweigh the second generational shift. Unless you are saying that they then switch back again at a later date?

It's also a myth that immigration is Democrat led. There is little correlation whatsoever - it was a Republican President 1969-76, 1981-93, 2001-08, 2016-20. The levels of immigration in those periods seem very similar to the level of immigration in the intervening Democratic periods. In fact the 'boom' in immigration appears to have begum in about 1970 - during a Republican presidential period.

So - where is your evidence that it is the Democrats that are allowing / encouraging higher immigration than the Republicans??

As for your comment that people vote Democrat because of more friendly faces and support. Yes indeed. It seems to me as though you are saying that Republican voters are unfriendly and unsupportive.

I know the type of person I would prefer.

 

[Greg Bobkin]

Indeed.

I would add (as I have before) that there is a good narrative that the Democrats have been spinning a load of old bollocks for decades, so it boils down to whose bollocks will affect your wealth in the most beneficial way.

(I remember hearing Hilary address a union in Chicago and was shocked by the Mick Lynch-style rhetoric and class-war claptrap she was using to woo that particular audience. This, a person whose servants barely get their hands dirty, let alone herself.

I was still sanguine about Hilary myself, but I'm an old lefty. For the non-doctrinaire voter, I can see how Trumps old bollocks may seem less of a problem than the lefty tax pro-immigrant narrative as the alternative.)

Don't forget, if 80 million vote for Trump, only a proportion will be MAGA oafs. The swing voters need better persuasion than on offer, it seems. Harris is slightly less inspiring than Starmer, and the US is a nation more addicted to the cult of leadership than the UK.

Time to move on, H...

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Time to move on, H...

Mmmm....I had to look up my book of those I have mentally scarred to find the context for that.

Top work.

 

[Bodian]

He's won an environmental award for mixing sand for his golf-course apparently

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

This is counter-argumentative. If second-generation immigrants vote 6-2 Republican, then gradually the country will turn more and more Republican. And this would never be outweighed by greater levels of immigration because you simply could not have enough 'new' immigrants to outweigh the second generational shift. Unless you are saying that they then switch back again at a later date?

It's also a myth that immigration is Democrat led. There is little correlation whatsoever - it was a Republican President 1969-76, 1981-93, 2001-08, 2016-20. The levels of immigration in those periods seem very similar to the level of immigration in the intervening Democratic periods. In fact the 'boom' in immigration appears to have begum in about 1970 - during a Republican presidential period.

So - where is your evidence that it is the Democrats that are allowing / encouraging higher immigration than the Republicans??

View attachment 190451

As for your comment that people vote Democrat because of more friendly faces and support. Yes indeed. It seems to me as though you are saying that Republican voters are unfriendly and unsupportive.

I know the type of person I would prefer.

I salute your indefatigability.

Incidentally I think I may have been the first person Dingbat put on ignore, when I pointed out that he was posting arsehattery.

I don't fancy your chances, using facts and reason to pursue a narrative.

Meanwhile, why would someone who has gone Full Trump feel the need to justify themselves? Self Doubt into Fake News doesn't go.

Maybe if you tell him you are definitely persuaded and will vote for Trump, he will go away.

 

[Bodian]

I salute your indefatigability.

Incidentally I think I may have been the first person Dingbat put on ignore, when I pointed out that he was posting arsehattery.

I don't fancy your chances, using facts and reason to pursue a narrative.

Meanwhile, why would someone who has gone Full Trump feel the need to justify themselves? Self Doubt into Fake News doesn't go.

Maybe if you tell him you are definitely persuaded and will vote for Trump, he will go away.

I know they are trolling - but I can't help but try!