U.S. Presidential Election 2024 Part II: 象対ロバ

[Lexicus]

@Sommerswerd i know you'll find this one funny

 

[SemiLazyGamer]

Considering the number of endorsements, it's likely Biden made sure that Harris had enough of a backing of the party before announcing his pull back.

 

[Kyriakos]

Wow.
The most memorable moment in all this was when Biden repeatedly stated he made up his mind to run, and then Pelosi and the other goons said that they will support him when he makes his decision.
Anyway, I hope Biden can enjoy the time he has left in peace

Prepare for the Trump camp to attack Kamala Harris now and spread the worst kind of lies and propaganda to undermine her.

Lies aren't needed. She was cut to pieces the last time she faced a multi-region election... I wonder if she is more popular than Biden with any group - eg Biden was very popular afaik with african american voters.
It might be interesting if she went for a leftist vp, but I suppose it's highly unlikely.

 

[GenMarshall]

Bold of you to assume it'll be that calm!

See the campaign of Trump v. Hillary during that election. History may not repeat, but has a weird way of rhyming.

If Harris gets the nomination it'll be worse.

Eventhough I don’t have very much enthusiasm for a candidate that would have woke politics. The dunking she would get, would make Kamala getting the Tulsi treatment a slap fight.

 

[Kaitzilla]

That 1st Presidential debate sure was something.

Looking forward to the 2nd debate.
The VP debate too.

 

[Birdjaguar]

I do not think Harris is automatic. The convention isn’t until August 19

 

[Sommerswerd]

That 1st Presidential debate sure was something.

Looking forward to the 2nd debate.
The VP debate too.

My prediction is Trump isn't going to debate Harris , nor is JD Vance going to debate whoever Harris picks for VP.

@Lexicus - I've been on the road, just catching up on your posts.

 

[Sommerswerd]

I refuse to believe such a place as Ohio exists.

Its real...I've been many times... In many ways Ohio is the most Murican place in the country.

 

[GenMarshall]

Its real...I've been many times... In many ways Ohio is the most Murican place in the country.

Nope, the entire planet is Ohio!!

 

[Sommerswerd]

View attachment 697463

(for the record, Biden is 81)

What I'm anticipating, and looking forward to seeing (and repeatedly calling out) is all the folks who were going on-and-on about the age of the candidates, complaining about and mocking Biden's age, BSAB'ing the age issue for American politicians... suddenly going quiet as church mice about Trump's age. My guess is all the concern trolling about "age" and "cognitive decline" and similar... is getting ready to come to a screeching halt, in favor of a steady stream of hate/videos etc., about Kamala Harris... her appearance, her laugh, the sound of her voice, vague references to unlikeability and so on...

 

[Lexicus]

What I'm anticipating, and looking forward to seeing (and repeatedly calling out) is all the folks who were going on-and-on about the age of the candidates, complaining about and mocking Biden's age, BSAB'ing the age issue for American politicians... suddenly going quiet as church mice about Trump's age. My guess is all the concern trolling about "age" and "cognitive decline" and similar... is getting ready to come to a screeching halt, in favor of a steady stream of hate/videos etc., about Kamala Harris... her appearance, her laugh, the sound of her voice, vague references to unlikeability and so on...

Yep

 

[Gorbles]

What I'm anticipating, and looking forward to seeing (and repeatedly calling out) is all the folks who were going on-and-on about the age of the candidates, complaining about and mocking Biden's age, BSAB'ing the age issue for American politicians... suddenly going quiet as church mice about Trump's age. My guess is all the concern trolling about "age" and "cognitive decline" and similar... is getting ready to come to a screeching halt, in favor of a steady stream of hate/videos etc., about Kamala Harris... her appearance, her laugh, the sound of her voice, vague references to unlikeability and so on...

I mean I was equally critical on the age front, but yeah I have no doubt hypocrites are gonna hypocrite!

 

[Birdjaguar]

Kamala Harris would be unlikely to after a Trump on age. Gavin Newsome would rip him a new one.

 

[Voidwalkin]

I wonder if she is more popular than Biden with any group - eg Biden was very popular afaik with african american voters.

There'll be a brief period where hopefuls feel out how strong her position is. A few days, at least. If any decide there's a possibility of snagging some of her delegates, we will hear whispers.

May take only one challenger to break it wide open. And, if the polls now being conducted post-haste show her as weaker v Trump than other contenders, we probably will see a challenger.

 

[Sommerswerd]

Unlike some, I don't go for histrionics.

Really?

If you reject other peoples' claims of damage as histrionics, but suggest that you know the actual damage, it's nothing more than vibes, right? Your own histrionics.

Let's check... in 2024, wrt calling Trump out for being a dangerous wannabe dictator/autocrat... "its histrionics"...

Not getting into off-topic stuff, but people who think Trump is going to impose himself as dictator are indulging in histrionics. He was already in power for four years and did nothing in that direction, even when COVID could have given him an opportunity. The damage I'm referring to has been slow and accumulative over the course of decades, and not pinned on any one person. It's not exciting, merely depressing.

But See, In 2016

Of course you haven't. Authoritarians, to the modern media, to the academy, to the modern mind, bring to mind Darth Vader, or Hitler. They're obvious. They wear military uniforms, they have personality cults, etc. But tyranny can be soft and subtle. It can hide itself in warm, pastel-walled offices, in daring blazers-hung-over-a-peace-sign t-shirts. The supporters of modern tyranny have no idea they are supporting an authoritarian structure. They believe every variety of tax is simply 'fair share', and justify confiscating half a person's wealth automatically on that basis. They believe people have no rights other than those which the 'government', which is to say the people in power, find it more convenient to tolerate than to disallow. Thus property is a myth, and all levels of 'government' can dictate to people exactly how they can use their property, how to run their business, how to keep their homes. If their children enjoy the outside world unattended, then hello Child Protective Services. Etc.

I speak as someone who used to be a progressive, someone who read the Frankfurt School devotedly. I came to realize, however, while studying the life of Gandhi, that the aggressive control of other people's lives, even in the pursuit of justice, was morally wrong. I believe in progress, but it must be voluntary; I believe in justice, but it must be achieved through cooperation, not coercion. I believe in order, but it must be sustained from throughout society, not imposed from the top down.

TL;DR - progressives are wannabe authoritarians

Also June 2016 (for context, when Hillary seemed poised to win the election)-

Trump's positions shift with the wind. He is authoritarian and ugly. Clinton is also authoritarian and ugly, but she has a track record of supporting awful military adventures in the middle east. This isn't a lesser of two evils question, it's a "Saddam for President: Yes or No" question. There is no real room for dissent here, unless you kick over the table and vote third party. That's what I'm doing. Gary Johnson is boring and makes sexy ideas like liberty sound pedestrian, but at least he is civil, sane, and competent.

TL;DR "Trump is an authoritarian, but Clinton is a worse authoritarian" (because BSAB of course)

Also, February 2013 (for context, when Obama had just won the election and been sworn in for his second term as POTUS)

What continues to baffle me about many who criticize the government is their ability to rage against the system and simultaneously fawn over the people who promote it. Obama, Bush -- any president or governor you despise would have been impotent were it not for the soldiers who did their bidding. The soldiers bear responsibility for enabling tyranny. They do the work of empire, and often happily.

TL;DR - Obama is a tyrant, using the military to enable his tyranny, (also Bush too, because BSAB of course)

So it seems like when the Democrats are either in the White House or seem poised to win the White House... calling them authoritarian, dictator, tyrants and similar is not "histrionics"... but when the Republicans are in office or seemed poised to win the POTUS election... well then referencing them being authoritarian, dictators, tyrants and similar is scoffed at, as "histrionics".

Am I missing something?

 

[Lexicus]

Really?

Let's check... in 2024, wrt calling Trump out for being a dangerous wannabe dictator/autocrat... "its histrionics"...

But See, In 2016

TL;DR - progressives are wannabe authoritarians

Also June 2016 (for context, when Hillary seemed poised to win the election)-

TL;DR "Trump is an authoritarian, but Clinton is a worse authoritarian" (because BSAB of course)

Also, February 2013 (for context, when Obama had just won the election and been sworn in for his second term as POTUS)

TL;DR - Obama is a tyrant, using the military to enable his tyranny, (also Bush too, because BSAB of course)

So it seems like when the Democrats are either in the White House or seem poised to win the White House... calling them authoritarian, dictator, tyrants and similar is not "histrionics"... but when the Republicans are in office or seemed poised to win the POTUS election... well then referencing them being authoritarian, dictators, tyrants and similar is scoffed at, as "histrionics".

Am I missing something?

Real tyranny is when people pay taxes, not when the government forcibly relocates 20 million

 

[Smellincoffee]

Really?

Let's check... in 2024, wrt calling Trump out for being a dangerous wannabe dictator/autocrat... "its histrionics"...

But See, In 2016

TL;DR - progressives are wannabe authoritarians

Also June 2016 (for context, when Hillary seemed poised to win the election)-

TL;DR "Trump is an authoritarian, but Clinton is a worse authoritarian" (because BSAB of course)

Also, February 2013 (for context, when Obama had just won the election and been sworn in for his second term as POTUS)

TL;DR - Obama is a tyrant, using the military to enable his tyranny, (also Bush too, because BSAB of course)

So it seems like when the Democrats are either in the White House or seem poised to win the White House... calling them authoritarian, dictator, tyrants and similar is not "histrionics"... but when the Republicans are in office or seemed poised to win the POTUS election... well then referencing them being authoritarian, dictators, tyrants and similar is scoffed at, as "histrionics".

Am I missing something?

I'm a libertarian. Pretty much every politician is authoritarian to me. There's a difference between saying someone is authoritarian without saying "They're Hitler and democracy is doomed". You're missing the obvious fact that Trump was in power for 4 years and then left, so suggesting he's going to go Adolf in 2025 is not a opinion that I can take seriously. And yes, progressives are authoritarians -- but that's not a topic for this thread. If you're interested check out the book Domestic Imperialism. It's free at the Libertarian Institute.

 

[Voidwalkin]

Here's Obama.

"We will be navigating uncharted waters in the days ahead. But I have extraordinary confidence that the leaders of our party will be able to create a process from which an outstanding nominee emerges."

Interestingly, no Harris endorsement.

 

[amadeus]

Do you all suspect that Biden will really drop out?

I, the World’s Worst Prognosticator, hereby decree that Joe Biden will stay in the race and not drop out, nor resign his office. amadeus has spoken!

 

[Sommerswerd]

I mean I was equally critical on the age front, but yeah I have no doubt hypocrites are gonna hypocrite!

Of course. My point... that I don't want to lose sight of... is for everyone to remember, and don't let anyone forget, that "age/cognitive decline" was...

*booming echoing voice* THE MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE OF THE 2024 CAMPAIGN!!!... CAMPAIGN!!!... CAMPAIGN!!!...CAMPAIGN!!!...

So now the Democrats have done what everyone wanted... Nancy Pelosi specifically* heroically went ahead and:

Biden is gone. So are folks (here on CFC included), going to keep pounding the age/cognitive decline issue, giving it the same level of constant attention and focus that they were giving it before? Or is it going to be suddenly quietly abandoned, as no longer important/relevant somehow?

*(As an aside... picturing Nancy Pelosi as Gollum in the above pic is even funnier than imagining Bernie or Kamala Harris )