The 2024 US Presidential Election

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yowser, Biden storms back in Wisconsin, new poll shows him up by 6. Whoopsie, in the 5-way version of the poll Biden loses 5 more points to the field than Trump. Yet, that one point would win the state. Gonna be a long election night week.
 
Once in a while a politician does something genuinely smart. Even if an aide thought it up, Biden's invitation to Trump to debate early was brilliant. It will almost certainly come before Kennedy can hit the milestones necessary to participate. He has essentially refused the weakened flank.

I am in awe of whoever thought up this move.
 
If they can stop Trump from interrupting and remove his audience yeah I can't imagine it'll go well for him.
 
That could go a long way. Trump feeds off an audience.

He'll yell so loud as to be picked up by Biden's mic, though. Sound-proof booth!
 
I'm not dismissing the possibility that Trump backs out at the last minute. I can't shake the suspicion that the only reason we have a two-debate schedule, with agreed rules and dates locked in so quickly, is that both candidates essentially got caught bluffing and calling each other's bluff. Trump had to be thinking Biden might refuse to debate, citing Trump's refusal to debate during the primaries as his excuse... while Biden had to be thinking Trump might refuse to debate, using the ongoing criminal trials and the gag Order he is under as his excuse... Both were probably thinking "I'll challenge him / accept his challenge and he will back down/ back out of it... then I'll get to campaign on his refusal to face me in a debate"... only it backfired and both candidates are now stuck with a debate(s) that neither of them really want. :cringe:

Neither of them has much to gain from a debate... its going to be an unmitigated disaster... just like the last one.
 
Neither of them has much to gain from a debate... its going to be an unmitigated disaster... just like the last one.

Meh, it'll be worth it if we can get another "would you shut up, man?" moment
 
Neither of them has much to gain from a debate
Some author in the NYT today had some plausible ideas. First, for how early it is. This guy thought that both sides are thinking, "If I stumble in the debate, there's a long time to make it up." Then as to Biden specifically, the thinking is that people need to be reminded of how repulsive Trump is--that they've blocked him out of their minds. And when they see him again, they'll remember.
I'm not dismissing the possibility that Trump backs out at the last minute.
If he doesn't see an advantage to himself, he will absolutely do this on some pretext of the whole thing being "unfair."
 
The Libertarian Party invited Trump, Kennedy, and Biden to speak at their upcoming convention: I understand Trump and Kennedy accepted, and Biden ignored it so Vivek Ramaswamy is coming. Apparently the two big geezers are also going to do a seperate debate, with no inclusion of Kennedy or the LP candidate (why they're waiting so late is beyond me). The LP is hoping that people watching Trump will be exposed to libertarian ideas. Kennedy wanted to do a debate between him and Trump on the LP stage, which is...interesting, but borderline offensive given that the LP has never been invited to join the debates between the Pepsi-Coke parties.
 
WaPo article on the History of US immigration policy. It tells a tale you might not be familiar with. It is long with lots of charts.

Excerpt:
"Migration today, again, has taken a new turn. Migrants are no longer mostly single Mexicans crossing the border surreptitiously to melt into the U.S. labor force. They are families, and they come from Venezuela, Haiti, Cuba and Ecuador, China and India. Mexicans accounted for fewer than a quarter of migrant encounters with U.S. agents along the border in the first half of fiscal 2024.

The most explosive difference is that immigration today is much more visible than it has possibly ever been. Immigrants don’t try to squeeze across the border undetected. They cross it without permission, turn themselves in and ask for asylum, overwhelming immigration courts and perpetuating the image of a border out of control.

Americans’ sense of threat might have more to do with the chaos at the border than with immigration itself. Still, the sense of foreboding draws from that same old well of fear. That fear is today arguably more acute than when ethnic quotas were written into U.S. immigration law in 1924. Because today, the White, Anglo-Saxon Americans who believe this nation to be their birthright are truly under demographic siege.

Twenty years from now, White, non-Hispanic Americans will slip below 50 percent of the population and become just another, albeit big, minority. For Trump’s electoral base of older, White rural voters, the prospect of non-Whites acquiring power to challenge their status as embodiments of American identity amounts to an existential menace that may justify radical action.

Immigration has re-engineered U.S. politics. Non-White voters account for some 40 percent of Democrats. Eighty-one percent of Republican voters, by contrast, are both White and not Hispanic. The nation’s polarized politics have become, in some nontrivial sense, a proxy for a conflict between different interpretations of what it means to be American."



 
As funny as it is to see shade thrown at the WaPo, you've got to at least make it substantial. "I think they benefit one party more than the other" is a silly line of reasoning that basically rules out everything outside of the talking gnome at the bottom of my neighbour's garden.
 
The Washington Post is a Democrat operation. Should be disregarded.
Do you think that FoxNews is a GOP operation and should be equally disregarded? What about the WSJ?

What is more interesting to me is that you made no comment about the actual article. Did you read it? I guess you just assume it is full of lies but you would be wrong. It walks the reader through 150 years of US government immigration policy and tracks the impacts of the various laws enacted over time.
 
Last edited:
Some author in the NYT today had some plausible ideas. First, for how early it is. This guy thought that both sides are thinking, "If I stumble in the debate, there's a long time to make it up." Then as to Biden specifically, the thinking is that people need to be reminded of how repulsive Trump is--that they've blocked him out of their minds. And when they see him again, they'll remember.
I think the early schedule is due to this. Both sides are hoping the debates are so far away from the election that anything embarrassing for their candidate will be forgotten about* and anything embarrassing for the other candidate will set the tenor for the campaign.
Over on SNL Michael Che had a good joke about how if we wanted to make the debate interesting, we would have both candidates have to get up from a bean-bag chair.

*Seriously, who watches a presidential debate in the summer? Only politics nerds who knew who they were voting for since 2020!
 
WaPo article on the History of US immigration policy. It tells a tale you might not be familiar with. It is long with lots of charts.

Excerpt:
"Migration today, again, has taken a new turn. Migrants are no longer mostly single Mexicans crossing the border surreptitiously to melt into the U.S. labor force. They are families, and they come from Venezuela, Haiti, Cuba and Ecuador, China and India. Mexicans accounted for fewer than a quarter of migrant encounters with U.S. agents along the border in the first half of fiscal 2024.

The most explosive difference is that immigration today is much more visible than it has possibly ever been. Immigrants don’t try to squeeze across the border undetected. They cross it without permission, turn themselves in and ask for asylum, overwhelming immigration courts and perpetuating the image of a border out of control.

Americans’ sense of threat might have more to do with the chaos at the border than with immigration itself. Still, the sense of foreboding draws from that same old well of fear. That fear is today arguably more acute than when ethnic quotas were written into U.S. immigration law in 1924. Because today, the White, Anglo-Saxon Americans who believe this nation to be their birthright are truly under demographic siege.

Twenty years from now, White, non-Hispanic Americans will slip below 50 percent of the population and become just another, albeit big, minority. For Trump’s electoral base of older, White rural voters, the prospect of non-Whites acquiring power to challenge their status as embodiments of American identity amounts to an existential menace that may justify radical action.

Immigration has re-engineered U.S. politics. Non-White voters account for some 40 percent of Democrats. Eighty-one percent of Republican voters, by contrast, are both White and not Hispanic. The nation’s polarized politics have become, in some nontrivial sense, a proxy for a conflict between different interpretations of what it means to be American."



Yeah my 83yo mom always reading NY post (now on her phone) and often randomly going off about immigrants, I have to redirect her
 
The rules announced (so far) for the 2 debates... which Trump has already agreed to... is that there will be no audience and that the microphones will only be turned on when it is a candidate's "turn" to speak.
What's the bet ?

After agreeing to mics off he'll claim 'they' silenced him because 'they want to silence you'.
 
What's the bet ?

After agreeing to mics off he'll claim 'they' silenced him because 'they want to silence you'.
That's one hundred percent true though, am I right? Close to one hundred percent of Trump's appeal is the righteous grudge the people have against the elites. I think supporting Trump is a more elegant and graceful arc of action that getting out the guillotine but it's the same. More like blood libel but I pray we stay away from the violence, so I shudder to use that language.
 
so I shudder to use that language
Core, you're constantly talking about violence. You have no hesitation on this point whatsoever. You almost seem to relish contemplating the possibility of violence, for as often as you bring it up.

After agreeing to mics off he'll claim 'they' silenced him because 'they want to silence you'.
And one more thing: "they cut me off just as I was about to make my main point." So his base can imagine the brilliant thing he was just about to say (rather than the incoherent garbage he did manage to utter).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom