So, the ballots are set

[TaKinGDeePanal]

On 7/19/2024 at 10:36 AM, TaKinGDeePanal said:

Vance is Trump's more coherent echo chamber - and Harris screwed the pooch in Mexico and Guatemala in 2021 (plus she has a history of overzealously prosecuting Black defendants).

Having said this, all (presumably) Harris has to do is say one word: Charlottesville.

[TaKinGDeePanal]

On 7/20/2024 at 3:08 AM, BootmanLA said:

An astute point I read this morning: virtually every national Democrat calling for Biden to withdraw is from a deep blue district or state. Why is that important?

These people are used to fighting in primaries for the base vote, not for competing for swing voters. Their perception of what sells is informed by their experience in those districts/states, and they're not used to having to appeal to the middle, which is where Biden's strength lies.

I realize that there are some Democratic voters who are frustrated that bigger advances haven't been made in some areas, and other Democratic voters angry about the situation in Gaza. Both of those groups are substantially to the left of the middle, though, and any candidate who pulls closer to them is pulling away from the persuadable center.

Ironically, Harris herself is also in that middle (with her less-than-liberal approach to law enforcement in CA as a guide). Most of those calling for Biden to step aside seem to think the answer is a more progressive white guy - which might energize the base but alienate the edge voters.

But the base can also be motivated by means other than a really progressive candidate, as we saw in 2020. Fear of a right-wing takeover might well get a lot of them out to vote, if that's capitalized on sufficiently. That fear doesn't work as well on edge voters, but a more center-left candidate can be appealing enough to get them to vote Democratic.

The question is: which nets more votes, switching to a progressive candidate and praying that the base turns out in more-than-record numbers to offset the loss of centrists, or keeping a centrist candidate and trying to motivate the base to turn out heavily? I'll admit I don't know the answer, but I'm not sure I'd trust politicians from deep blue districts to know, either.

They were also looking at what happened in the UK with the Conservative vote. They lost around 20% of their vote - and 251 of their 363 seats - and almost ended up as the "third party".

[BlackDude]

On 7/20/2024 at 10:45 PM, BootmanLA said:

Your profile doesn't say where you live. And if you live in a reliably red or blue state it doesn't matter much if you throw away your vote on a third party candidate or don't vote at all for president.

But if you live in a swing state, understand that not voting for Biden means one more vote for the racist party not offset by a vote for the other side. Given your interest in racial issues and recognition of the racist agenda on the Republican side, I'd think that would be enough motivation to hold your nose and vote for Biden.

But you do you.

No one would dare  tell a Jewish person to vote for a man who gave Josef Mengele’s eulogy. 
 

But I should hold my nose, suck it up and vote for a man who gave Strom Thurmon’s eulogy? 

[NWUSHorny]

13 hours ago, BlackDude said:

But I should hold my nose, suck it up and vote for a man who gave Strom Thurmon’s eulogy

Possibly, as a vote for the least of the evils. I see it as a choice between the guy who gave Strom Thurmond's eulogy and a guy who was running on Strom Thurmond's 1948 segregationist presidential platform. I am in no way contradicting that Thurmond was a racist or defending him, but he did moderate some on segregation between 1948 and his death/retirement in 2003. Biden didn't get to know him until 1973.

Whether or not to vote for either major party candidate has been a choice many of us have wrestled with, especially in the last 8 years, I didn't vote for either in 2016. I know for a fact that I have wrestled with it, and don't fault those that are still where I was 8 years ago.

Edited July 22 by NWUSHorny

[PozBearWI]

Of course, we are under a different playbook today.  Dems most likely will have Harris paired with someone; undoubtedly a younger ticket.  My hope is they choose the most vote getting combination.  Hopefully if we can break the cult hold on the Republican party we can return to some better political balance - which makes for a more satisfying life for MOST.  There is absolutely no way we are going to satisfy everyone, and certainly compromise is essential to get most of what we desire.

So the contest now between a younger team who makes way fewer gaffs vs an old guy who rambles and seeks to be dictator like the guys he most admires.  

[NicNorth]

On 7/22/2024 at 12:54 AM, TaKinGDeePanal said:

They were also looking at what happened in the UK with the Conservative vote. They lost around 20% of their vote - and 251 of their 363 seats - and almost ended up as the "third party".

The party that won here in the UK was careful in its campaign to stay on the middle ground and to emphasise good governance, openness & fiscal responsibility. Their leader a bit dull and certainly not flashy offered a period of stability.  The Conservatives here were tainted by a period of Trumpian activity and irresponsible financial plans that spooked the market.  It now looks like the grown ups are in charge.

We also saw a small number of nationalist right wing candidates (5) elected but  hugely outnumbered by a large number (72) Liberal Democrat MPs who are more progressive than Labour on some issues. 

Our system is different so I don’t know how much there is a read through to the US from this.  
 

I hope the reset with Kamala Harris gets the Democrats back on track

[hntnhole]

On 7/22/2024 at 2:11 AM, BlackDude said:

But I should hold my nose, suck it up and vote for a man who gave Strom Thurmon’s eulogy?

I don't quite understand the connection of who gave Thurmon's eulogy and the current election cycle.  Would you please explain?  Thanks.

The fact that the President (while he was a Senator, of course) made friends (or at least worked with in good faith) with everyone in Congress he possibly could, for the benefit of "working across the aisle" to advance the causes important to him, has nothing to do with fulfilling a promise to give a eulogy, 

Would you please explain that in greater detail?  Thanks.  

[BlackDude]

8 hours ago, hntnhole said:

I don't quite understand the connection of who gave Thurmon's eulogy and the current election cycle.  Would you please explain?  Thanks.

The fact that the President (while he was a Senator, of course) made friends (or at least worked with in good faith) with everyone in Congress he possibly could, for the benefit of "working across the aisle" to advance the causes important to him, has nothing to do with fulfilling a promise to give a eulogy, 

Would you please explain that in greater detail?  Thanks.  

He should have declined.

That wasn’t some guy he worked with. That was his friend. And a friend to segregationist and white supremacist is no friend of mine and will never receive my vote. 
 

Again, if this were Josef Melgene, I would be questioned. Everyone else is allowed to “never forget.” 

Edited July 23 by BlackDude

[BootmanLA]

51 minutes ago, BlackDude said:

He should have declined.

That wasn’t some guy he worked with. That was his friend. And a friend to segregationist and white supremacist is no friend of mine and will never receive my vote. 
 

Again, if this were Josef Melgene, I would be questioned. Everyone else is allowed to “never forget.” 

I agree everyone is allowed to "never forget". I would say that Mengele was several orders of magnitude worse than Thurmond, but you're also allowed to think otherwise.

But again, this is, for all intents and purposes, a two-party system. If someone I know in a swing state were to vote third-party, and Trump won a second term because he carried that state, I would "never forget" that this person I know had a chance to help stop it, and deliberately chose not to. I would also "never forget" to remind that person EVERY FUCKING TIME he complained about something the administration was doing that he should shuck the absolute fuck up about it because he forfeited his right to complain by wasting his vote.

For better or worse, however, Biden has chosen not to run. I'll be interested to see all the people who complained about Biden's age or the fact that he was friends with a centenarian racist to start telling me that they can't vote for Harris because she used to be an attorney general who didn't unlock all the prisons and let all the felons loose.

I'm just sick of purists who have no interest in taking the steps we CAN take to make things better because they aren't happy with anything less than 100% of their demands. Your mileage may vary. Tax, title and license extra. Void where prohibited.

[BlackDude]

28 minutes ago, BootmanLA said:

I agree everyone is allowed to "never forget". I would say that Mengele was several orders of magnitude worse than Thurmond, but you're also allowed to think otherwise.

But again, this is, for all intents and purposes, a two-party system. If someone I know in a swing state were to vote third-party, and Trump won a second term because he carried that state, I would "never forget" that this person I know had a chance to help stop it, and deliberately chose not to. I would also "never forget" to remind that person EVERY FUCKING TIME he complained about something the administration was doing that he should shuck the absolute fuck up about it because he forfeited his right to complain by wasting his vote.

For better or worse, however, Biden has chosen not to run. I'll be interested to see all the people who complained about Biden's age or the fact that he was friends with a centenarian racist to start telling me that they can't vote for Harris because she used to be an attorney general who didn't unlock all the prisons and let all the felons loose.

I'm just sick of purists who have no interest in taking the steps we CAN take to make things better because they aren't happy with anything less than 100% of their demands. Your mileage may vary. Tax, title and license extra. Void where prohibited.

Well, hopefully you will forgive Trump voters in 30 years just like Biden voters expected people to forgive him for the ‘94 crime bill.

 

 

[BootmanLA]

3 hours ago, BlackDude said:

Well, hopefully you will forgive Trump voters in 30 years just like Biden voters expected people to forgive him for the ‘94 crime bill.

In 30 years I will almost certainly be dead. 

But if the voters apologize for voting for Mango Mussolini, as Biden did when he acknowledged it was a mistake, then I might forgive them. I don't think any of them will, though, because to vote for him today after knowing all we know about him means that the voter is a shithole of a person.

[NEDenver]

9 hours ago, BlackDude said:

Well, hopefully you will forgive Trump voters in 30 years just like Biden voters expected people to forgive him for the ‘94 crime bill.

 

 

There are always two options with Trump voters.  The stupid ones, there’s nothing to forgive, and you hope they’re pretty, at least.  The evil ones can fuck themselves.  They have enough brain power and choose to starve children and lock babies in cages and destroy the economy to satisfy their hate.  Fuck.  Them.

Fortunately, with my family, I’ve known them our whole lives, and most of them are barely bright enough to have a favorite beer. 

[hntnhole]

1.  Magaroid enters a bar, plops down on a barstool and orders "a beer" -

2.  Bartender asks what kind -

3.  Magaroid gets pissed off because the bartender can't remember the M's favorite brand -

4.  Magaroid hollers back something like "I left you a quarter for a tip two months ago, and you can't remember that?" -

5.  Bartender replies 'yeah, I remember the tip, and I remember you too'.  Turns on his heel and walks away.  🤣

[BootmanLA]

Trump today, at a rally:

"You have to get out and vote. You won’t have to do it anymore. Four years, it will be fixed, it will be fine. You won’t have to vote anymore.. In four years, you won’t have to vote again."

How much clearer does the man have to be? Elect him, and you won't ever have to worry about voting again, because that will be the end of voting. He'll fire any general (or lower level officer) who stands up to him, and simply stay in power till he dies. And hand it off to whoever is the MAGA heir-apparent. 

I know it's considered bad form to compare anyone to Hitler, but bear in mind, this is exactly what happened in Germany. They turned to someone who happily took power when it was offered to him, and then he made sure he would never have to give it up. Ditto the installation of the Kim dynasty in North Korea - dictators come to power more or less legitimately, but seize the reins of that power to keep in office.

That's what you Trumpanzees are supporting. 

[viking8x6]

Here's a link to a news article re. the rally referenced above:

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/trump-if-reelected-wont-have-to-vote-fixed-1235069397/

Believe him when he says this. He really does mean it.