2024 U.S. Presidential Election Thread: Donald Trump wins & will return to the White House; GOP wins U.S. Senate & U.S. House

[Sghost597]

Dumbasses couldn't use the right font.

 

[Piff Huxtable]

400k firewall almost complete

look I like the mail vote numbers that are coming out of PA
but there is no "400k Firewall"

Kamala could lose with a 500k D advantage
just like she could win with only a 300k D advantage

 

[Sghost597]

 

[King Kreole]

I think it's partially a choice made from pragmatism and the reality of how the parties are currently realigning. If the Dems could rely on a mass of progressive voters focused specifically on class issues and that was a coalition that would be the most likely to win, they would probably do it!

I feel that a lot of the time, and I'm not trying to knock you personally, people ascribe too much power to the party apparatus and not enough to the actual voters who influence the party apparatus's strategies for winning elections. I wish there were a bunch of progressives ready to vote en masse for all the stuff I want like universal Medicare, fully-paid family leave, nationalization of the drug industry, nationalization of the telecoms, the breakup of Amazon, etc., but there simply are not.

I mentioned Jeremy Corbyn because his Labour party couldn't win an election despite promising an economically superior approach to revitalizing the UK than Boris Johnson did. Outside of the fact that he, like BoJo, supported Brexit, he was better in every way and by every metric regarding economic programs. Yet, he didn't beat Theresa May and then got washed by BoJo. This should be instructive as to why...


...it actually makes perfect strategic sense to be pragmatic and to inch forward with what you offer to the coalition of voters that you are forging because it's the most likely one to win you elections so that you can actually maybe do something that is economically progressive rather than promising the most you can and doing nothing because it lost you the election.

Again, in the UK, people looked at Corbyn saying similar things: "If you are uncomfortable with free high-speed internet for everyone in the UK, you don't have a choice because the alternative is a guy like Boris Johnson who will continue to transgress our political system and dump waste into your water, etc." Did that work? No, because those voters are quick to call "high-speed internet/Medicare for everyone" and "fascist/true oligarch" as equally extreme and then vote for the conservative or not vote at all.

I feel what you're saying. In theory, it makes sense. In practice, people will sit out or just vote the party they're comfortable voting. Do I like this? No. Do I accept that it is what it is and that this sort of political acculturation is deep-seeded in a lot of these voters? I have to; that's the world I live in.

That's my perspective, but we can agree to disagree.

This is a good, fair post and I appreciate your perspective. And I must admit, although I don't believe the Corbyn situation to be completely analogous to what's happening here, it is a valid, real life counterexample to what I'm saying. I think what's undergirding our discussion/disagreement is a question of what role the politicians play and what role the voters/public play. A kind of chicken and egg, who is leading who situation. I don't think there's a clear 1 sided answer to this, I think it's an interplay in which one side may lead in a specific context and follow in another. But yeah, agree to disagree.

 

[MAKAVELI25]

Eh, there's nothing salient in the purported Harris agenda that would make Manchin or Romney blanch. The whole campaign is designed to make disaffected center right Republicans feel comfortable supporting her. She's not fighting for any structural change, she's making technocratic modifications to the existing system that has already ceded ground to the right on the big issues. Besides abortion, she's not talking about any big issues like universal healthcare or a major overhaul to the taxation system or or environmental catastrophe or reshaping the country or even increasing the minimum wage past the ask from last cycle. This is 3rd time in a row we're being faced with the "great fascist menace" and the end of democracy and all we're able to muster up is modestly lowering prescription drug prices and homecare benefits? Something doesn't add up here.

Honest question, and I'm not being facetious:

Are there any Presidents or Presidential candidates in the history of the US that you actually support?

I know you're cynical of Presidents in general, so let's say, strictly on a policy level, what Presidents or Presidential candidates come the closest to receiving a thumbs up from you?

 

[MushroomX]

Pretty obvious they're destroying the ballots cause they know what's about to happen

True, but even then Democrats ground-game usually on top of it to notify people of their ballots.

Republicans, not so much.

 

[AquaCityBoy]

Why even lie about this?

Explain in detail how she's not running to the right of Biden.

 

[King Kreole]

Relax your ego. My dig at the left and messaging was more so pointed towards you Kreole saying she’s not running on anything to materially improve people’s lives which is a lie. Kamala’s policies can improve a lot of people’s lives and actually has a chance to pass a Republican senate if the party decides to turn the page on Trump.

For the record, I never said this.

 

[CEO of Morgan Industries]

If a ballot box is destroyed and your ballot is now moot, is it possible to vote on election day ?

In WA, where Vancouver is, all voting is mail-in. I assume Clark County will notify all voters in the area that if they dropped a ballot off Sunday or Monday, it may have been destroyed and to get in touch ASAP and request a replacement ballot.

Edit: And most of the counties there have pretty sophisticated system. They text you when they mail your ballot, when they receive it, and when they verify and count it. They'll probably text blast their voters and make sure everyone sees it.

 

[Joe Sixpack]

I just realized this

Where the fukk is Greenblatt!!!?

They on everyone else head in seconds normally when shyt like this happens

 

[King Kreole]

They can stay home or vote third party

Funny how this threat only applies when trying to appeal to centrists instead of the scolding we see when applied to the left. Whenever it's brought up that the left is being disaffected by the political program of the Democratic Party, the constant refrain I hear from centrists is "who cares because they're inconsistent voters anyway". But now that it's moderates who are being told to take a back seat and suck it up, we're terrified they're going to stay home or vote third party. Interesting.

 

[King Kreole]

Damn, Joe really got that shyt on

 

[Sghost597]

She's on

 

[Jesus H. Christ]

'Murica brehs

 

[Outlaw]

Funny how this threat only applies when trying to appeal to centrists instead of the scolding we see when applied to the left. Whenever it's brought up that the left is being disaffected by the political program of the Democratic Party, the constant refrain I hear from centrists is "who cares because they're inconsistent voters anyway". But now that it's moderates who are being told to take a back seat and suck it up, we're terrified they're going to stay home or vote third party. Interesting.

If you are on the left you should have a more vested interest in not allowing a fascist in the white house because the probability of the progressive policies you would like to be implemented in your lifetime declines dramatically.

It’s more imperative that those on the left suck it up and vote for Kamala because you essentially agree with most of her policies, you just don’t think it’s enough.

The centrist she’s trying to court disagree with her policies but she’s trying to get them to vote for her despite that to save democracy. You already know all of this though.

So yes you lefties need to stop being babies, shut up and go vote.