Election 2024 Part III: Out with the old!

Who do you think will win in November?


  • Total voters
    101
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
An insane clown with orange hair vs a general attorney. The result shouldn't surprise anyone.
Except we live in a world where there is an insane clown with orange hair as a possible winner for the Presidential election. Even worse, this happen in a world were said insane clown already clowned at the helm for 4 years and yet has close to 50 % of the population STILL wanting to vote for him.
So well, getting surprised is more or less out of the equation by now.
 
The conventional wisdom has been that the VP can be a bit of an attack-dog, making the case for the ticket a little more aggressively, while the presidential candidate remains more measured and dignified, maintaining "likeability." Since Harris threw that conventional wisdom out the window, I wonder if Walz (who is perfectly happy in the role of the attack dog), might come in with the aim of simply presenting the platform in a positive, upbeat way--no attacks (and his Midwestern dad vibe makes him perfectly able in that mode as well). Vance will predictably come in in attack mode (and trying to make up for Trump's failings in his debate), and Walz could keep presenting him as needlessly aggressive: "Dude, we're each just trying to share our message with the American people; why you gotta be so hostile all the time?"

(In any case, don't use the word "weird" at any point during the debate, unless you get the final closing statement; they'll have all sorts of pre-planned responses for the word "weird," and the longer you deny Vance the pretext for using them, the more restless he'll get.)

The debate will not matter to the eventual election results, sylvan.
 
Last edited:
Will the vice presidential debate change things? Vance might have more debate experience than Walz.
I hope it happens, I would probably watch the whole thing (whereas I can't stomach watching Trump for two hours), I think Vance will fall pretty flat, he doesn't represent most of the US and doesn't seem to have much charisma
 
This was an eye opening read into the heart of being MAGA.

I've Traveled Across The Country To Attend Trump Rallies. Here's What You Won't See On TV.​

"The real action takes place while everyone is waiting for the rally to start, not during the actual speech."


....The real action takes place while everyone is waiting for the rally to start, not during the actual speech. It’s free to attend and anyone can request tickets. People are admitted on a first-come-first serve basis. Tickets do not guarantee you a seat, and if the venue fills — which, despite what Trump says, does not always happen — people are refused entry.

Doors to the venue open hours before the program begins, and people line up hours before that to secure a spot. In Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, the parking lot opened at 9 a.m., the arena doors opened at 2 p.m., the program began at 4 p.m., and Trump was scheduled to speak at 6 p.m. If you want to know what experiencing a Trump rally is like, you need to get in line.

Around the rally site, music blares from every direction, sometimes from speakers, and often from live performers. In Johnstown, one musician was dressed in Revolutionary War garb.
Another was playing oldies and yacht rock under an umbrella. I passed him early in the day while he was singing a rendition of Jimmy Buffett’s “Margaritaville,” and when he sang “…searching for my lost shaker of salt” and pointed to me, I returned the obligatory audience response of “Salt! Salt! Salt!” Others also returned his call, but their response was “Trump! Trump! Trump!”

As the day wore on, the performer adapted to his audience. I passed him again around 2 p.m., and he had changed most of the lyrics to the songs he had chosen to make them Trump-oriented, like singing The Temptations’ “My Girl” as “My Trump.” His cup overflowed with tips....

...Almost everyone wants to talk about 2016 and how they’d been waiting for someone like Trump to come along with the guts to say what they were thinking but they weren’t “allowed” to say out loud. “Is he an *******? Sure. But he’s our *******,” one man emphatically told me, and those around him nodded in agreement. They love that Trump created a space to speak their minds, which, in many cases, means being able to spout racist, sexist, hate speech that was all but forbidden in public life just a decade ago.

These individuals fully embrace the former president’s crass, offensive, disrespectful way of speaking, and imitate it, too. The mainstream media does not show the obscenity and profanity of these rallies, but it is everywhere and, for me, a defining characteristic of these events.

“fudge BIDEN” flags are still for sale from most vendors (even though Joe Biden dropped out of the race weeks ago) and appear on cars across the parking lots near the venues. Families wear matching T-shirts reading, “The Hoe is worse than Joe.” Kids wander around in “No more bullfeathers” visors with fake Trump hair attached, and browse bumper stickers that read, “I like big boobs and small government,” or show a naked woman’s torso with pistols resting on her hard nipples and the slogan “I <3 guns, titties, & whiskey.” After the assassination attempt in July, graphics featuring Trump with two raised middle fingers have popped on every type of merchandise you can imagine with taunts like, “You missed, *****ES.”

 
Last edited:
Will the vice presidential debate change things? Vance might have more debate experience than Walz.
i'll be eating popcorn to this. i have never seen vance speak well or even read soft pitches and such. walz so far has been sharp and natural. i was honestly worried about harris-trump, but walz-vance is really not a concern of mine. vance's biggest issue is likeability, so if he goes aggressively at walz, looking even crueler, i don't think that will go well.
 
Almost everyone wants to talk about 2016 and how they’d been waiting for someone like Trump to come along with the guts to say what they were thinking but they weren’t “allowed” to say out loud. “Is he an *******? Sure. But he’s our *******,” one man emphatically told me, and those around him nodded in agreement. They love that Trump created a space to speak their minds, which, in many cases, means being able to spout racist, sexist, hate speech that was all but forbidden in public life just a decade ago.

These individuals fully embrace the former president’s crass, offensive, disrespectful way of speaking, and imitate it, too. The mainstream media does not show the obscenity and profanity of these rallies, but it is everywhere and, for me, a defining characteristic of these events.

I once started in on one of my mini-essays about Trump with this as the basic premise. The title would have been "All Talk." And what I meant by that was the the only thing they look for in Trump is exactly this: defying PC speech taboos.

If I've spared you all the full disquisition, I've at least said it briefly, e.g.:

But yeah to the whole article: his rallies have the same appeal as Grateful Dead of Phish concerts, or football tailgating. (For people who like to congregate with others who value unfettered racist speech.)
 
Last edited:
Woke is the new PC. It may not be enough to win, but Trump can certainly expand his appeal in that area to moderates who also have grievances about 'censorship.'
 
I think Harris should put some Ohio stops on her rally tour, with the slogan "I want Ohio." "I want to take small town Ohio out of the hands of a guy who wants to make you afraid of your neighbors. Who treats you like you are afraid of your neighbors. I'm gambling that small town Ohioans are not afraid of their neighbors, and they don't want a presidential candidate to cast them as such." I'm not necessarily saying I think she could win Ohio, but she might leverage the momentum she's already built to open a new line in the campaign. One thing I said about the election of Obama was that people mostly care about two things--pocketbook issues and security--and a candidate should always hammer both of those things. But they care somewhat about one more thing, and that is how they can think of themselves. Some Americans voted for Obama because they wanted to tell themselves, "see, we're not an irredeemably racist society." I think she might have some traction with a "No, that [how Trump is casting us] is not us" style of campaign. It jibes with her overall message, so it's not so much of a departure. And one remembers how the people in MI and WI and PA spoke after Clinton: we just wish she'd visited. Who knows what a couple of rally stops might do. Put Iowa in the mix, too, on the strength of Walz's popularity one state north.
 
I'm gambling that small town Ohioans are not afraid of their neighbors, and they don't want a presidential candidate to cast them as such.

Trump is the guy for people who are afraid of their neighbors and proud of it. This strategy is doomed to failure.
 
Woke is the new PC. It may not be enough to win, but Trump can certainly expand his appeal in that area to moderates who also have grievances about 'censorship.'
Except that the censorship that has been going on is right wingers censoring books, beer, and anything else that disturbs their snowflakery.
 
I think Harris should put some Ohio stops on her rally tour, with the slogan "I want Ohio." "I want to take small town Ohio out of the hands of a guy who wants to make you afraid of your neighbors. Who treats you like you are afraid of your neighbors. I'm gambling that small town Ohioans are not afraid of their neighbors, and they don't want a presidential candidate to cast them as such." I'm not necessarily saying I think she could win Ohio, but she might leverage the momentum she's already built to open a new line in the campaign. One thing I said about the election of Obama was that people mostly care about two things--pocketbook issues and security--and a candidate should always hammer both of those things. But they care somewhat about one more thing, and that is how they can think of themselves. Some Americans voted for Obama because they wanted to tell themselves, "see, we're not an irredeemably racist society." I think she might have some traction with a "No, that [how Trump is casting us] is not us" style of campaign. It jibes with her overall message, so it's not so much of a departure. And one remembers how the people in MI and WI and PA spoke after Clinton: we just wish she'd visited. Who knows what a couple of rally stops might do. Put Iowa in the mix, too, on the strength of Walz's popularity one state north.
Not this election. Opportunity cost is too high. It can't be won back in this timeframe.

In 4 years, it is winnable. There are two things necessary for a Dem to win Ohio
1. Reversal of class pessimism. This is really deep. A large scale, federal jobs and adult retraining program could probably do it, though. The idea should be twofold: to bring the tech sector to the Columbus greater area. It's already moving there, somewhat, because OSU provides a large number of well educated workers annually. But this does little for you on the I77 corridor, the southern half of which you need to return to the Dem fold. Here, you'll want to update infrastructure, subsidize existing factories, incentivizing modernization of equipment. State investment in developing fields coupled with adult retraining programs to actually employ locals in said fields.

The plan is more important than the actual ability to get it passed. Recognition that there is a deep hopelessness with legitimate causes and cascading social ills is far more valuable than vague optimism. A plan makes people feel seen better than vibes do.

Conspicuously absent is SW Ohio. Do not bother. This is Dixie and cannot be won, perhaps not even Cincy itself.

2. The piety.
Although I'm not sure Dems are aware of this, they are perceived by many in the rural lower classes in a manner akin to an unpaid bourgeois HR department. This is generally not well received. I don't think it's reasonable to actually counter this - it's a natural social evolution in an environment of ambiguity, which incentivizes X to condemn behaviors Y and Z exist simply to establish good guy bonafides.

You probably have to win a substantial part of the rural working class back to change this perception, simply by addition of voters less pious on most of these issues. If you want to do that, of course. Most Dems probably don't, for better or worse.
 
the idea should be twofold: to bring the tech sector to the Columbus greater area. It's already moving there, somewhat, because OSU provides a large number of well educated workers annually. But this does little for you on the I77 corridor, the southern half of which you need to return to the Dem fold. Here, you'll want to update infrastructure,
The Chips Act addressed the first. The Infrastructure Bill addressed the second. She has stuff to run on now.
 
Anyway, again, it's not fundamentally about winning the state. It's about expanding the scope of her central message. That message is already partly about "what kind of country do you want to live in?" (hopeful vs grim, tolerant vs intolerant). She should go to Ohio now just to plant the message, "my campaign believes that most Americans don't think their neighbors are eating their pets." Trump insulted Ohio with that reference, and she should deliver a contrasting message while the insult is fresh.

Oh, and one other little bonus. It sends the message "I care about other states than just the battleground states."

Oh, and it might rattle the Trump campaign: "What does she know? What is her polling telling her?"
 
Last edited:

Trump vows mass deportations from town rocked by 'pet-eating' lies​

Donald Trump has said he will mass deport migrants in a small Ohio town that has been rocked by baseless claims that its Haitian influx are eating pets and park animals.
"We're going to start with Springfield," Trump said on Friday, adding the town had been "destroyed" by immigration. He mentioned a second city in Colorado, which right-wing commentators have falsely claimed is in the hands of a Venezuelan gang.
Springfield officials say that the debunked claim of pet-eating has sent shockwaves through its community, and has led to violent threats that have shut schools.
President Joe Biden appealed for calm on Friday, calling criticism of Haitians in Springfield "simply wrong".

"This has to stop, what he’s doing. It has to stop," Mr Biden said of Trump's statements.
The Republican candidate's promise comes after nearly a week of false claims about migrants killing pets and children in Springfield.
The claims of animal eating, which Trump repeated in his debate with Kamala Harris on Tuesday, has been debunked by Springfield's police chief and mayor, as well as Ohio Governor Mike DeWine.
On Friday, three schools in Springfield were evacuated due to bomb threats. At least one of the threats made disparaging comments about Haitians, according to Springfield Mayor Bob Rue.
It comes after city hall and several other buildings, as well as one school, were evacuated on Thursday due to threats.
Trump was asked whether he was considering a visit to the town during a press conference at his golf course in Los Angeles on Friday.
"I can say this, we will do large deportations from Springfield, Ohio – large deportations. We're going to get these people out. We're bringing them back to Venezuela," he said.
The migrants in Springfield are mostly from Haiti, and have legal permission to be in the US under a federal programme for Haitians.
It was not immediately clear why Trump mentioned Venezuela. Although throughout his remarks he made references to an influx of Venezuelan migrants to Aurora, Colorado, and said deportations would also begin there if he won the presidential election in November.
On Friday, Ohio Lieutenant Governor Jon Husted posted a photo online of two migratory Canadian geese. "Most Americans agree that these migrants should be deported," he said.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c3wp6q132p2o
 
Not this election. Opportunity cost is too high. It can't be won back in this timeframe.

In 4 years, it is winnable. There are two things necessary for a Dem to win Ohio
1. Reversal of class pessimism. This is really deep. A large scale, federal jobs and adult retraining program could probably do it, though. The idea should be twofold: to bring the tech sector to the Columbus greater area. It's already moving there, somewhat, because OSU provides a large number of well educated workers annually. But this does little for you on the I77 corridor, the southern half of which you need to return to the Dem fold. Here, you'll want to update infrastructure, subsidize existing factories, incentivizing modernization of equipment. State investment in developing fields coupled with adult retraining programs to actually employ locals in said fields.

The plan is more important than the actual ability to get it passed. Recognition that there is a deep hopelessness with legitimate causes and cascading social ills is far more valuable than vague optimism. A plan makes people feel seen better than vibes do.


Trade economists do talk about this. A couple generations back, they were all gung ho for the benefits of trade. It does make things less expensive to the end user. But trade does also displace some workers from their jobs. Now the sum total gain to those who gain (in $$$ terms) is larger than the sum total loss to the losers. Now some economists admit that they were naive. The money is there, as predicted. But they assumed that some of the gain to the winners would be taxed off to help the losers.

That didn't happen.

Because the big gains from trade were coming in at the same time as the big government cutbacks to welfare programs. So the retraining and other things that would have helped never happened, as American politics turned further to the right.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom