USA Election 2024

NYT editorial quote on Trump:

You already know Donald Trump. He is unfit to lead. Watch him. Listen to those who know him best. He tried to subvert an election and remains a threat to democracy. He helped overturn Roe, with terrible consequences. Mr. Trump’s corruption and lawlessness go beyond elections: It’s his whole ethos. He lies without limit. If he’s re-elected, the G.O.P. won’t restrain him. Mr. Trump will use the government to go after opponents. He will pursue a cruel policy of mass deportations. He will wreak havoc on the poor, the middle class and employers. Another Trump term will damage the climate, shatter alliances and strengthen autocrats. Americans should demand better. Vote.
Click to expand...
 
GMmttlOXUAAObb0.jpg
GMmttlPWwAA5fPO.jpg
 
GermanSuplex said:
Harris is doing really well in states that she’s not supposed to win. Even if she doesn’t flip any states, I think this is a good sign for the swing states.

www.desmoinesregister.com

Iowa Poll: Kamala Harris leapfrogs Donald Trump to take lead near Election Day. Here's how

The new Iowa Poll shows Kamala Harris leading Donald Trump by 3 points. Pollster J. Ann Selzer: “It’s hard for anybody to say they saw this coming.”
www.desmoinesregister.com
Click to expand...

ArgoDuck said:
This article advances some ideas to explain the surprisingly close tie in the polls. I agree, based on increasingly poor response rates and the very large problem of getting a statistically sufficient pool of genuinely undecided voters in the swing states.

Based on nothing more than hunch I pick Harris for a comfortable win. (But hey, I’m often wrong - just ask my partner…).
Click to expand...
Similar article on how polls are not only herding but may be underestimating women voters as recently they have been post-Dobbs.

www.emptywheel.net

Male Pollsters Shocked - Shocked!! - When a Woman Pollster Discovers Women Voters - emptywheel

This entire election has been disproportionately viewed through the lens of polling that has deliberately weighted to ensure that polling doesn't miss Trump voters, but not (as far as we know) weighted to adjust for post-Dobbs polling misses. And the Ann Selzer came along.
www.emptywheel.net www.emptywheel.net

Truthfully given how abhorrent Trump is, the fact that this is close at all means almost no margin is comfortable and I remain dour about the long term prospects of electoral normalcy, but this is the sliver of hope I cling to that our democracy may get yet another reprieve.
 
Roller said:
Let’s stipulate that Trump was referring to Cheney’s stance on foreign policy and sending US troops into battle, setting aside his own disdain for the military and his record of avoiding service.

What do you think he means when he talks about the “enemy within,” threatens to prosecute his political opponents, use US forces against citizens, or jail reporters? Are we misunderstanding his meaning there too?
Click to expand...

Given that most of you would not know the truth about his what he actually said had I not posted it, why do you think what you have been told about those issues are any more truth that the “execution” comment?

Also, I want a government so small that it doesn’t have time to spend 5 hours raiding a house to execute a pet squirrel.
 
Herdfan said:
Given that most of you would not know the truth about his what he actually said had I not posted it, why do you think what you have been told about those issues are any more truth that the “execution” comment?

Also, I want a government so small that it doesn’t have time to spend 5 hours raiding a house to execute a pet squirrel.
Click to expand...
Because I've heard the threats from Trump, Vance, and their surrogates directly from them, not from "what I've been told." As usual, you didn't respond to my questions, you deflected.

As for small government, you trotted out an extreme example that none of us would find appropriate or reasonable. But if Trump wins, maybe you'll get your wish when he appoints RFK, Jr. as the healthcare czar and he does away with the FDA, vaccination, and more.
 
Roller said:
Because I've heard the threats from Trump, Vance, and their surrogates directly from them, not from "what I've been told." As usual, you didn't respond to my questions, you deflected.

As for small government, you trotted out an extreme example that none of us would find appropriate or reasonable. But if Trump wins, maybe you'll get your wish when he appoints RFK, Jr. as the healthcare czar and he does away with the FDA, vaccination, and more.
Click to expand...
Funny thing is Trump wants to eliminate all that but will also need a massive government apparatus to be able commit his planned mass deportations - far closer to what our resident Trumpist claims he doesn’t want and yet votes for anyway. (Oh wait those are people Trump is threatening with the government not a pet squirrel, so I guess it's okay)

All while saying that WE aren’t the ones actually listening to Trump’s words and only getting them through a filter.
 
Last edited:
Herdfan said:
Given that most of you would not know the truth about his what he actually said had I not posted it, why do you think what you have been told about those issues are any more truth that the “execution” comment?

Also, I want a government so small that it doesn’t have time to spend 5 hours raiding a house to execute a pet squirrel.
Click to expand...

I saw the damn video long before your post. The idea that he wasn’t using rhetoric to portray violent imagery instead of simply saying “Anyone who pushes for war should have to fight in it” is sanitizing his garbage. We know what he meant.

Today, he talked about his bulletproof glass, and how to get to him, they’d have to shoot through the media first, which he wouldn’t mind. His campaign said he was looking out for the media and lamenting that they had no such protection.

This is a joke.

And that’s before we get into how much you ignore what Trump “actually says” and substitute it for your personal interpretation.

“I have this piece of glass here. But all we have really over here is the fake news, right? And to get me, somebody would have to shoot through the fake news,” Trump said at a rally in Lititz, Pennsylvania. “And I don’t mind that so much. I don’t mind.”

A Trump campaign spokesman said after the rally that the former president was actually musing about how the press was protecting him.

“President Trump was stating that the Media was in danger, in that they were protecting him and, therefore, were in great danger themselves, and should have had a glass protective shield, also. There can be no other interpretation of what was said. He was actually looking out for their welfare, far more than his own!” Steven Cheung said in a statement.

Which do you think is more likely - Trump was joking that he wouldn’t mind if someone shot up the media (and I’m being generous by calling it a joke), or was he discouraged the press had no such protection?

If it’s the former, he’s a POS. And if it’s the latter, then it goes back to the word salad debate. He can’t convey his thoughts or emotions without them giving the opposite effect of his intent.

Would you stand for someone speaking this way about your family?
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Huntn
2020 USA Election Day
Replies
14
Views
967
GermanSuplex
GermanSuplex
Back
Top