2024 Election Thread

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Lol, I mean we are talking about DeSantis. The guy has the appeal of faded 80s wallpaper and does himself zero favors trying to run to the right of Dump on policy. He is no longer even the RNC's lead also-ran, ever since the neocon donors decided to take their chances with Nimrata.

Newsom strikes me as a reasonably bright machine pol, but landing zingers on DeSanctimonious is like dunking on an 8 year-old.

 

[Slap Shot]

And you know some of the ladies watching Fox felt a tingle in a special place when they saw Gavin. doesn’t hurt either. ESP when you see desantis attempt to smile and it looks like he’s malfunctioning

Meatball is selling a replica bobble-head doll, and it perfectly replicates not only his creepy smile, but the fact he actually bobbles his head quite often when speaking.

 

[Handyman]

Lol, I mean we are talking about DeSantis. The guy has the appeal of faded 80s wallpaper and does himself zero favors trying to run to the right of Dump on policy. He is no longer even the RNC's lead also-ran, ever since the neocon donors decided to take their chances with Nimrata.

Newsom strikes me as a reasonably bright machine pol, but landing zingers on DeSanctimonious is like dunking on an 8 year-old.

It is going to be funny when Nimrata has to defend her taking down of the Confederate Flag to a bunch of people who think the Confederates didn't go far enough in their racism and traitorous actions...

It is going to be even funnier when she debates Trump and tries to insult him and he just treats her like he treats all women and (rightfully) says the only reason she has the cache she has is because of him. She is way out of his league...she is Marco Rubio in a skirt.

As for Gavin...he should be on debate prep for every Dem running in a tough election especially the national ticket. He has the charisma needed where even when he gives swarmy answers he finds a way to make it sound matter of fact and helpful. He also knows how to flip a question or answer make his opponent look bad. I would bet on him to win an election against any clown the GOP has and he can out debate them all.

 

[Deutsche Gopher Fan]

Lol, I mean we are talking about DeSantis. The guy has the appeal of faded 80s wallpaper and does himself zero favors trying to run to the right of Dump on policy. He is no longer even the RNC's lead also-ran, ever since the neocon donors decided to take their chances with Nimrata.

Newsom strikes me as a reasonably bright machine pol, but landing zingers on DeSanctimonious is like dunking on an 8 year-old.

I just disagree. I think Gavin is just pretty good at this. Literally- at this. Not saying I want him for president but I think his ability to dunk goes well beyond desantis. To handys point- at least have him helping prep others would be great.

 

[jericho]

Although to me Newsom gives off the vibe of the handsome, popular, funny guy in the first act of every Lifetime movie who turns out to be a psychopathic abusive villain in the third.

so the liberal version of Dean Cain?

 

[Kepler]

so the liberal version of Dean Cain?

Had to look him up.

I was thinking Bobby Nozick.

 

[Kepler]

but landing zingers on DeSanctimonious is like dunking on an 8 year-old.

You would think, but just remember how much trouble Dems have had exposing stupid and/or evil Republicans. Mondale with Reagan. Gore and Kerry with Dubya. Hillary with Dump.

Sometimes a target is so dumb or brutal or disgusting even getting in the ring with them is a loss for you, and every point you make seems like beating up on the retar-ded kid, and you fall behind farther the more reason you use.

Penetrating those guys' Magic Shield of Stupidity is its own skill. Very few intelligent people are good at it, because they have been trained to engage with other intelligent people of good will. Bill Clinton, Al Franken, Bernie Sanders, and Gavin Newsom are among the very few smart people who can win a debate against a dumb person in front of a dumb audience. It's hard.

I would think litigators would be a good place to go for those people. They have to win their cases in front of rock stupid jurors.

 

[Swansong]

You would think, but just remember how much trouble Dems have had exposing stupid and/or evil Republicans. Mondale with Reagan. Gore and Kerry with Dubya. Hillary with Dump.

Sometimes a target is so dumb or brutal or disgusting even getting in the ring with them is a loss for you, and every point you make seems like beating up on the retar-ded kid, and you fall behind farther the more reason you use.

Penetrating those guys' Magic Shield of Stupidity is its own skill. Very few intelligent people are good at it, because they have been trained to engage with other intelligent people of good will. Bill Clinton, Al Franken, Bernie Sanders, and Gavin Newsom are among the very few smart people who can win a debate against a dumb person in front of a dumb audience. It's hard.

I would think litigators would be a good place to go for those people. They have to win their cases in front of rock stupid jurors.

I don't know that these are great comps. Reagan was way smarter than he let on (... until he wasn't, obviously), and used that "oh gee shucks" thing as pure cover. And Mondale was part of that "I have all the facts, and it's self-evident, and people will obviously see that" pie-in-the-sky thinking that Dukakis shared (and led to him losing in MA, and then nationally).

W Bush was similarly much smarter than the derp exterior he portrayed. Watch some of his speeches and debates as governor of Texas. It was like he was a different person than the one that ran for President and won twice. And Gore and Kerry are like... charisma black holes.

And Hillary... the less said about her the better. When she allegedly asked rhetorically why she wasn't beating Trump by 50, we should have known she was going to lose.



I agree with your last point though. I read something interesting today on the debate last night. Newsome and DeSantis came in with two wildly different approaches to debate, complete with different languages, audiences, and thresholds for victory. You see Fox News declaring DeSantis a resounding victor, while the rest of the country is like "uhhh... dude... that was a massacre the other way". Why? Because DeSantis wasn't trying to debate in the traditional sense. Anecdotes. Smudged numbers. Buzzwords. "Fake News" over and over. That was his method because that's what his people want. Meanwhile, Newsome debated... like an actual debate. He's quick on his feet, had his facts straight despite Fox's lame attempts at "nuh uh!!!".

And ultimately, that's a big problem. Our country is so divided that not only do we not agree on a fundamental set of facts, we don't even speak the same language to each other. It's a real problem, considering these people vote and they are utterly unmoored from reality.

 

[Handyman]

Hillary exposed Trump just fine...the problem was too many people like what she exposed and didn't like her because they had been conditioned not to. As someone who fell for that crap (though I obviously voted for her) I have looked back at what it was that she said or did or how she acted that was so off putting. The truth is, it was all bs. I am not talking policy now (and lets be honest she didn't lose because of policy) but everything else. Everything she got ripped for being a wonk, being too machine like, hell speaking her mind and being a climber are all things that we praise politicians for. Yet she always got destroyed for it. Same crap a lot of people are doing with Kamala Harris, where the qualities we love in male politicians we just hate in females.

The weird thing is women I know are harder on female politicians than even men are. That just boggles my mind. That would be like me ripping Jews in politics for being too Jewy or something.

The truth is, whether we like it or not, Hillary was the only person who had the stones to call a spade a spade in front of the whole world. While the media was looking for every way to prop Trump up (until it was too late) and pretending he was some cute little story that was not going to be much harm to the country she was pointing out not just that he was a clownshow but that he was using the media way more than they were using him. She was the one telling us he was in bed with Putin long before it became common knowledge. She was the one saying he was dogwhistling racism/misogyny/antisemitism/Islamophobia and always brought the receipts. Only one doing that besides her early on were comedians like Jon Stewart. She shined a light early on on everything that became the rallying cry against Trump but we were all too stupid to give her any credit because we didn't like the messenger. (and many believed he was too dumb to do as much damage as she rightfully said he would) Meanwhile all our allies were on her side from the word jump that is how she knew all this stuff...well that and the fact she knew Donald for years.

Unlike Mondale or Dukakis, history will look favorably on Hillary after we are all gone. It will not look so favorably on those of us that trafficked in the BS that put us on the precipice of disaster. (again I am not talking policy that is a different argument) That is why I am enjoying a lot of the non-media types who are going back and really digging into how these things are coming about. (**cough**media**cough**) My fave example is still when those packages with bombs started showing up at judges houses and at CNN and other Dems and the NY Times, when discussing how one showed up at Hillary's home had to get in a shot at Hillary about some controversy that had zero to do with the issue. Two faced crap like that has been going on since Bill was in office and it has subconsciously poisoned us to just never give her any credit. Its stupid, and the media is doing the same crap again. (Biden is old and senile...economy is good but no one cares)

It should be noted this is nothing new. Why is it we think of Jimmy Carter as a failure of a President but somehow Reagan was a Saint? What was HW's undoing? (besides Perot) The media has been falling for this BS for longer than I have been alive and they have been shaping the narratives for those who they like over those who maybe aren't as good with them for even longer. That is why they kiss up to people like Jon Boehner (he throws great cocktail parties ask Politico!) but side eye people like Nancy Pelosi. Its why everyone had millions of laughs over Clinton and his affairs but conveniently ignored that the people preaching the loudest like Newt were not just having affairs. The media even let him go on an apology tour when he ran for President.

 

[RaceBoarder]

Swan has this right.

Debating makes no gains for you, only losses. We're in an environment where 90%+ has already made up their mind. The 10% that can be persuaded aren't gonna be persuaded based on who can out talk the other person. They are gonna latch onto whatever issue is closest to their heart and base their choice on that particular stance.

2024 is going to be an election where you basically "got what you got" on July 4th and only monumental, blinding stupidity for or against you will make a dent in the numbers.

 

[WeAreNDHockey]

Swan has this right.

Debating makes no gains for you, only losses. We're in an environment where 90%+ has already made up their mind. The 10% that can be persuaded aren't gonna be persuaded based on who can out talk the other person. They are gonna latch onto whatever issue is closest to their heart and base their choice on that particular stance.

2024 is going to be an election where you basically "got what you got" on July 4th and only monumental, blinding stupidity for or against you will make a dent in the numbers.

This is correct except for one thing. I think your 90% should probably be a lot higher. Nothing is going to change the minds of trump voters. Not even a conviction and prison (which ain't gonna happen. No way can you find 12 random citizens who will vote to convict, too many Americans think the guy is actually a f uc king god) There are a few people who wouldn't vote for trump for a million bucks who might waver on Biden, or pull a third party useless vote or staying home because Biden's old, or can't speak effectively, or the best president in your lifetime except for the fact eggs were too expensive for 9 months in 2022 and 2023. My guess is well more than 95% of the votes that are going to be cast in 2024 are already decided. I doubt there is more than 1% of the electorate that will be truly persuadable next year.

 

[Kepler]

This is correct except for one thing. I think your 90% should probably be a lot higher. Nothing is going to change the minds of trump voters. Not even a conviction and prison (which ain't gonna happen. No way can you find 12 random citizens who will vote to convict, too many Americans think the guy is actually a f uc king god) There are a few people who wouldn't vote for trump for a million bucks who might waver on Biden, or pull a third party useless vote or staying home because Biden's old, or can't speak effectively, or the best president in your lifetime except for the fact eggs were too expensive for 9 months in 2022 and 2023. My guess is well more than 95% of the votes that are going to be cast in 2024 are already decided. I doubt there is more than 1% of the electorate that will be truly persuadable next year.

Everybody already knows who they will vote for. 100%. It's Nazis vs other -- nobody's on the fence.

It's just a matter of who turns out, and whose votes aren't counted.

 

[dxmnkd316]

Make this his full time job for the next year. He’s exceptionally good at it

Him and Pete just have that mastered.

 

[dxmnkd316]

Hillary exposed Trump just fine...the problem was too many people like what she exposed and didn't like her because they had been conditioned not to. As someone who fell for that crap (though I obviously voted for her) I have looked back at what it was that she said or did or how she acted that was so off putting. The truth is, it was all bs. I am not talking policy now (and lets be honest she didn't lose because of policy) but everything else. Everything she got ripped for being a wonk, being too machine like, hell speaking her mind and being a climber are all things that we praise politicians for. Yet she always got destroyed for it. Same crap a lot of people are doing with Kamala Harris, where the qualities we love in male politicians we just hate in females.

The weird thing is women I know are harder on female politicians than even men are. That just boggles my mind. That would be like me ripping Jews in politics for being too Jewy or something.

The truth is, whether we like it or not, Hillary was the only person who had the stones to call a spade a spade in front of the whole world. While the media was looking for every way to prop Trump up (until it was too late) and pretending he was some cute little story that was not going to be much harm to the country she was pointing out not just that he was a clownshow but that he was using the media way more than they were using him. She was the one telling us he was in bed with Putin long before it became common knowledge. She was the one saying he was dogwhistling racism/misogyny/antisemitism/Islamophobia and always brought the receipts. Only one doing that besides her early on were comedians like Jon Stewart. She shined a light early on on everything that became the rallying cry against Trump but we were all too stupid to give her any credit because we didn't like the messenger. (and many believed he was too dumb to do as much damage as she rightfully said he would) Meanwhile all our allies were on her side from the word jump that is how she knew all this stuff...well that and the fact she knew Donald for years.

Unlike Mondale or Dukakis, history will look favorably on Hillary after we are all gone. It will not look so favorably on those of us that trafficked in the BS that put us on the precipice of disaster. (again I am not talking policy that is a different argument) That is why I am enjoying a lot of the non-media types who are going back and really digging into how these things are coming about. (**cough**media**cough**) My fave example is still when those packages with bombs started showing up at judges houses and at CNN and other Dems and the NY Times, when discussing how one showed up at Hillary's home had to get in a shot at Hillary about some controversy that had zero to do with the issue. Two faced crap like that has been going on since Bill was in office and it has subconsciously poisoned us to just never give her any credit. Its stupid, and the media is doing the same crap again. (Biden is old and senile...economy is good but no one cares)

It should be noted this is nothing new. Why is it we think of Jimmy Carter as a failure of a President but somehow Reagan was a Saint? What was HW's undoing? (besides Perot) The media has been falling for this BS for longer than I have been alive and they have been shaping the narratives for those who they like over those who maybe aren't as good with them for even longer. That is why they kiss up to people like Jon Boehner (he throws great cocktail parties ask Politico!) but side eye people like Nancy Pelosi. It's why everyone had millions of laughs over Clinton and his affairs but conveniently ignored that the people preaching the loudest like Newt were not just having affairs. The media even let him go on an apology tour when he ran for President.

I think you're right exactly right with Hillary. She had been the target of hate radio for 20+ years. It was an absolutely Pavlovian response by 2016. It even bled into the left side of the spectrum. Just this absolute "oh yeah I hate her" response. She was a bad bad bad, historically bad campaigner but was probably the best policy wonk this country has seen reach that level in a very long time. I hope for the world's sake, that goes down as the largest electoral failure our country ever commits. 2024 could eclipse it though.

 

[dxmnkd316]

Swan has this right.

Debating makes no gains for you, only losses. We're in an environment where 90%+ has already made up their mind. The 10% that can be persuaded aren't gonna be persuaded based on who can out talk the other person. They are gonna latch onto whatever issue is closest to their heart and base their choice on that particular stance.

2024 is going to be an election where you basically "got what you got" on July 4th and only monumental, blinding stupidity for or against you will make a dent in the numbers.

In principle you're right. But 10% might as well be 50% when national and statewide elections are decided by a few percent.

 

[Handyman]

I think you're right exactly right with Hillary. She had been the target of hate radio for 20+ years. It was an absolutely Pavlovian response by 2016. It even bled into the left side of the spectrum. Just this absolute "oh yeah I hate her" response. She was a bad bad bad, historically bad campaigner but was probably the best policy wonk this country has seen reach that level in a very long time. I hope for the world's sake, that goes down as the largest electoral failure our country ever commits. 2024 could eclipse it though.

If 2024 goes sideways you can count set the countdown to the end of Democracy because it is over. If Trump can openly campaign on the things he is and win despite us knowing he will do all of that and more then no one will be able to stop him when he really burns things down.

 

[Kepler]

In principle you're right. But 10% might as well be 50% when national and statewide elections are decided by a few percent.

The question is is there any risk? Honestly, I don't think so. Get these stupid f-cks on mic as much as possible. Republicans aren't even gaffe machines at this point, they are full on self-reporting Nazis. Righties have gotten so used to saying stupid, vile garbage to each other in their Echo Chambers with no fear of criticism that they are likely to let their derp loose in front of normal people. They don't even realize anymore that they sound like lunatics to 70% of the public.

These reptiles believe exclusionary stuff that makes Romney's 47% look like Thomas Paine.

 

[WeAreNDHockey]

The question is is there any risk? Honestly, I don't think so. Get these stupid f-cks on mic as much as possible. Republicans aren't even gaffe machines at this point, they are full on self-reporting Nazis. Righties have gotten so used to saying stupid, vile garbage to each other in their Echo Chambers with no fear of criticism that they are likely to let their derp loose in front of normal people. They don't even realize anymore that they sound like lunatics to 70% of the public.

It's just too bad that about 50% of the electorate LOVES lunatics.

 

[RaceBoarder]

It's just too bad that about 50% of the electorate LOVES lunatics.

I think it's 60/40... It's just a matter of how much of the 60% stays home.

The '18/'20/'22 elections give me faith in the numbers.

 

[Handyman]

https://www.threads.net/@yasharali/post/C0X3g1sRvgf/?igshid=NTc4MTIwNjQ2YQ==

Muslim leaders from several swing states on Saturday descended on Dearborn, Michigan, to launch a national campaign against the reelection of President Joe Biden — a response to his handling of the Israel-Hamas conflict.
Organizers from Michigan, Minnesota, Arizona, Wisconsin, Florida, Georgia, Nevada and Pennsylvania are calling the campaign #AbandonBiden, vowing to ensure that Biden is a one-term president.

Same day Trump said he would institute a Muslim Ban. If Trump gets elected dont come to me looking for help when they kick you out...