2024 Elections: One Last Chance for Democracy

[Handyman]

Saw the most brutal and succinct political takedown on Facebook of all places.

It was on one of those meme, lefty, millennial pages with an image of “Kamala is in league with radical leftists! Actual radical leftists: *image of someone acting disgusted*”

Top comment was “Yeah, you radical leftists spent a lot of time telling us ‘liberals’ how great Tulsi Gabbard was so forgive me if I don’t think y’all have the best judgment on leaders.”

Ah Russian disinformation...

 

[Handyman]

With regard to polling:

Where is DUMPY getting new votes? That's the $1 million question that needs to be answered for him to be successful. The D's are getting the Under 30 crowd 4 or 5 to 1. Dump has been losing voters to old age/death every day since 2020.

We've seen the results in '18, '20, and '22. Those people that came out for those elections sure as hell ain't staying home now.

That is the question people have been struggling to answer. Certain media types are jumping on the "Black People and Latinos are flocking to Trump" but there is no empirical evidence of that short of some questionable polling as far as I have ever seen.

I think a lot of this is coming from the early voting numbers...I think people (myself included) thought that it was going to be mostly Dems voting early and so, much like pundits taking history into account) the fact that this isn't 2020 on steroids when it comes to Dems voting right away they are trying to find the pattern in the noise. What we forgot was that in a lot of states the ones who vote the earliest are older people, which is obviously going to skew Republican depending where you are talking about. (Nevada for sure)

Since Battleground States are mostly run by Dems...there is not the fear that votes won't be counted or issues will arise. (my commentary) Even GA which is run by Republicans, showed last time they aren't going to play games with the election no matter who wins. I know the idea of banking votes is big, but I feel better today than I did yesterday.

 

[Handyman]

That's what I've thought, though in reverse.

The Democrats can win if everyone who voted for Biden in 2020 votes for Harris in 2024; maybe not a huge win but a win's a win; and as you mention they are likely helped in that manner but older more-GOP voters dying in those 4 years and younger more-Dem voters becoming eligible in those 4 years. So did they lose anyone in those 4 years? I'm not going to pretend they lost zero voters; there's always people willing to pull the plug on the incumbent party because they did not fix everything and kneejerk vote for the opposition believing the grass is greener and they will fix everything (and then vice versa in another four years); and inflation is probably their biggest reason this time around (though the side proposing 500% tariffs will only reignite inflation which is already back to normal levels but whatever). I don't think Hillary/Biden voters in 2016/2020 are likely to change in significant numbers; but I do wonder about Trump/Biden voters and where they go; on one hand, it's easier to have more tangible problems to point to for the incumbent party, on the other hand it's not like Trump has gotten more palatable in the last four years and this is the first election after 1/6, lest we forget, so for that crown it honestly might come down to who they can stomach more versus who they like more. That said, the Dems also should have some non-age gains, specifically moderate Republicans following the Cheney mold, but the question again there is how many.

My overall point, if there is one, is that 2020 was enough to win, so where and how much are gains and losses coming from that baseline?

(non-expert commentary)

I cannot fathom a Trump-Biden-Trump voter at this point. Trump voters dont flip flop like that. I mean obviously it is possible but that seems farfetched. To me the Trump-Biden Voter moved to Nikki Haley or someone like that. (like Assassin #2) That seems to be the group Harris is trying to peel voters off from.

 

[Jimjamesak]

With regard to polling:

Where is DUMPY getting new votes? That's the $1 million question that needs to be answered for him to be successful. The D's are getting the Under 30 crowd 4 or 5 to 1. Dump has been losing voters to old age/death every day since 2020.

We've seen the results in '18, '20, and '22. Those people that came out for those elections sure as hell ain't staying home now.

Dump’s strategy is almost wholly dependent upon voters that only show up to vote for Dump and driving out those voters. The polls missed this group huge in 2016 and somewhat in 2020 and have skewed their models to try to anticipate this and are likely missing huge swaths of new voters going for Harris. The problem with the strategy is:

1) How many of these people are actually alive and voting?

2) How enthusiastic are these people about Dump? I know it’s all anecdotal but there’s just too many stories of “I’m not seeing as much Dump flags and signs as I did the last two elections” for it not to at least be a question.

3) How much of the strategy is turning off other potential voters? A big part of the strategy are those creepy “Kamala is giving transgender surgeries to prisoners!” ads during football games and a majority of the reactions seem to be “ugh, nobody ****ing cares about that ****. Why does this ad keep playing?”

 

[Jimjamesak]

That is the question people have been struggling to answer. Certain media types are jumping on the "Black People and Latinos are flocking to Trump" but there is no empirical evidence of that short of some questionable polling as far as I have ever seen.

I think a lot of this is coming from the early voting numbers...I think people (myself included) thought that it was going to be mostly Dems voting early and so, much like pundits taking history into account) the fact that this isn't 2020 on steroids when it comes to Dems voting right away they are trying to find the pattern in the noise. What we forgot was that in a lot of states the ones who vote the earliest are older people, which is obviously going to skew Republican depending where you are talking about. (Nevada for sure)

Since Battleground States are mostly run by Dems...there is not the fear that votes won't be counted or issues will arise. (my commentary) Even GA which is run by Republicans, showed last time they aren't going to play games with the election no matter who wins. I know the idea of banking votes is big, but I feel better today than I did yesterday.

Anecdotal evidence for sure, but the amount of shenanigans and ratf-ing being employed by Republicans here in Alaska (they’re actively trying to suppress mail-in voting and voting in rural areas) has me believing they’re scared of the potential results up here. And if they’re running scared in Alaska, it can’t be good in other places.

 

[rufus]

(non-expert commentary)

I cannot fathom a Trump-Biden-Trump voter at this point. Trump voters dont flip flop like that. I mean obviously it is possible but that seems farfetched. To me the Trump-Biden Voter moved to Nikki Haley or someone like that. (like Assassin #2) That seems to be the group Harris is trying to peel voters off from.

I'm not sure there were all that many people who voted Trump in 2016, and Biden in 2020. Sure there's probably some, but I doubt it was enough to move the electoral needle at all.

Fact is, that the electorate grows larger every four years, and most of those new voters went Biden over Trump. And I can't see that changing in 2024.

Yeah, young stupid white bros are gonna vote Trump, cause they're young stupid white bros. But that ain't gonna be enough to offset the numbers of young women voting for Harris.

 

[unofan]

The gender gap is real, and misogyny is real. I believe the part of the polls that say men are Trump's base, and I can believe that he's making inroads among black and Hispanic men, even if Harris still wins them overall. I also think Harris loses a point off the topline number simply for not having a Y chromosone, as unfair as that is.

The converse is what will make a difference, and about which I've seen very little talk: Have white women fled Trump in numbers sufficient to offset what he's gained among minority men, especially those solidly in the middle class - the nurses, the daycare workers, the waitresses, etc., where abortion isn't a top issue and where they are falling behind economically? Given that women are the majority of the electorate these days, they can carry the election themselves if they split the same as men just in the other direction.

I would hope they have seen and heard enough to jump ship, at least in the privacy of the voting booth, but I can't guarantee it.

 

[mookie1995]

https://x.com/iapolls2022/status/1849765572298313844?s=61&t=Tm_QfNNi1j4RxxFX2KExbw

 

[Handyman]

I dunno, I think you're ignoring how little attention some voters pay to politics. They vote in the out-of-party candidate each time assuming they will fix everything, and when they don't they rinse and repeat the next time around. That's not to say that they will do so forever, a particular strong incumbent or a particular weak challenger might break them out of the cycle. I guess it comes to how each of them subjectively determine that; I would think J6 would be enough to disqualify Trump in some of their minds as a legit enough challenger in this case, but that's me, I can't speak for everyone. (I think part of my point is, don't assume Trump/Biden voters has foresworn Trump forever; they may have (rightly so) disliked his handling of the pandemic enough to vote for Biden; now they might find something they dislike enough to jump right back; a short attention span and the belief that grass is always greener on the other side. That said, I can't pretend to know how they think. But I think that is part of the GOP-defector strategy of the Harris campaign; enough reminders of Trump's extremes to keep Trump/Biden voters in the Harris fold?)

I am not ignoring it...I remember that there were Obama-Trump voters (not to mention Bernie-Trump Voters) so I get it. With any other candidate I would 100% agree with you. Trump is a different animal because the majority of the people voting for him aren't doing it for policy reasons its cultish ideology and it is all for him and not for the party. I mean these people lost the GOP the Senate twice because he told them not to vote for certain Republicans. (and the ones he endorsed tanked) It is a different animal when it comes to him.

If people broke with him because of the various chaos crisis he was responsible for nothing about his behavior now should win them back.

 

[mookie1995]

don’t ever forget people are selfish. If they think prices are high, or someone is stealing their job, or they don’t like the look of their neighbor……the fat guy appeals to them.
and by “people” means ALL people. even AOC looks to bank some coin

 

[Chuck Murray]

 

[Chuck Murray]

 

[Chuck Murray]

 

[Deutsche Gopher Fan]

don’t ever forget people are selfish. If they think prices are high, or someone is stealing their job, or they don’t like the look of their neighbor……the fat guy appeals to them.
and by “people” means ALL people. even AOC looks to bank some coin

I mean we know why you like the fat guy

the good news is, anyone who thinks the fat guy will be better for the economy will be taking it up the ass hard if he wins, so there’s that to look forward to

 

[Handyman]

The gender gap is real, and misogyny is real. I believe the part of the polls that say men are Trump's base, and I can believe that he's making inroads among black and Hispanic men, even if Harris still wins them overall. I also think Harris loses a point off the topline number simply for not having a Y chromosone, as unfair as that is.

The converse is what will make a difference, and about which I've seen very little talk: Have white women fled Trump in numbers sufficient to offset what he's gained among minority men, especially those solidly in the middle class - the nurses, the daycare workers, the waitresses, etc., where abortion isn't a top issue and where they are falling behind economically? Given that women are the majority of the electorate these days, they can carry the election themselves if they split the same as men just in the other direction.

I would hope they have seen and heard enough to jump ship, at least in the privacy of the voting booth, but I can't guarantee it.

Last polling I saw had White Women running away in droves...but you know...polling!

 

[Chuck Murray]

Democrats Warn It May Take At Least 4 Years To Count Ballots

https://babylonbee.com/news/democrats-warn-it-may-take-at-least-4-years-to-count-ballots

NEW YORK CITY (U.S.) — With the presidential election less than two weeks away, top Democrats warned the American people that it could be some time before we know who the winner is because it may take at least four years to count all of the ballots.

Though other, far less-developed countries have been able to count all ballots by hand in much shorter periods of time, Democrats stressed the very real likelihood that counting all the ballots in swing states would probably last until the 2028 presidential election.

"You just can't rush this type of thing," said Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer. "We're talking about a very complicated process of counting. It starts with 1, proceeds on to 2, then 3, and so on. These numbers get very large. When you run out of fingers and toes, it gets even more confusing. Plus, you have to account for the fact that we'll need to wait and find out how many votes we need to come up with. I'm afraid we won't know who the winner of the presidential election is until everyone starts voting to elect the following president."

Political experts agreed that the chances of knowing who won on election night were slim. "You can't expect counting to happen quickly like it's something people have been doing since they were babies," said one analyst. "Asking the most advanced country in the world to be able to count ballots in less than four years is unreasonable."

At publishing time, election officials in swing states assured the public that everyone would almost certainly know the results of the presidential race by the time George R.R. Martin publishes The Winds of Winter.

 

[Handyman]

On one hand, it's good to see how we're all reading the tea leaves differently as it's interesting to see different interpretations. On the other hand, it's merely emphasizing how much we're all reading tea leaves here.

I am trying NOT to read tea leaves. I am stepping back and just trying to observe as if I wasn't a citizen of the US.

 

[Handyman]

don’t ever forget people are selfish. If they think prices are high, or someone is stealing their job, or they don’t like the look of their neighbor……the fat guy appeals to them.
and by “people” means ALL people. even AOC looks to bank some coin

Oh believe me, I never forget the selfishness of the American People.

 

[Chuck Murray]

Democrats At War With Math & Simple Counting ... not exactly a new thing, there is a compelling history of this ...

 

[Chuck Murray]

Tulsi Gabbard Finally Realizes She’s Far Too Attractive To Be A Democrat | Babylon Bee

WASHINGTON, D.C. — There was great rejoicing in the GOP yesterday as former Democrat Tulsi Gabbard finally realized that she's far too good-looking to be a Democrat.

Sources close to Gabbard say the realization was a long time in coming, but that she finally decided to switch sides after realizing that she didn't blend in at all.

"I'd felt very out of place for a while now," Gabbard said as she announced she was now a Republican. "Everyone around me was either a creepy perv like Walz or a mummy like Pelosi or some uggo like Kamala. And then half of the Dems were just trans and pretending to be the other gender, honestly. I'm just glad to be joining the party with all the lookers, you know? Finally settled that one. Second Amendment, can I get an amen?"

Attractiveness experts agreed that Gabbard no longer had a place among the "sea of androgynous bags" that make up the Democrat Party. "We're so glad she finally realizes how gorgeous she is," said attractiveness expert Bubbs Bronson from Fort Wayne, Indiana. "Easy on the eyes, that's for sure!"

Gabbard is currently ranked as 43rd best-looking member of the GOP, 21 spots below Thomas Massie, and far from attractive enough to displace someone at the top of the food chain like Ted Cruz. However, sources at Fox News say that she's more than attractive enough to get a spot at their outlet whenever she retires from politics.

At publishing time, Gabbard had been demoted another three spots on the GOP Attractiveness Index after conservative and ridiculously handsome political commentator Ben Shapiro had called out her abortion policies.