2024 U.S. Elections | Thread Closed

Status
Not open for further replies.
matherto said:
Food and gas prices are affected by COVID and the war in Ukraine plus OPEC. We're gonna be paying out of our arse for the foreseeable future because of COVID for one.

Something that wouldn't have changed under Trump for the last four years and won't for his next four/eight/whatever the feck happens next.

The simple fact is that the right are very good at blaming the left and the left are fecking shocking at replying back in kind hence people believe it solely down to Biden/Harris and that Trump will change it.

People cannot see beyond the end of their noses about why gas and food prices are the way they are. They're idiots.
Click to expand...

Trump said it best

"If you need another 4 years to fix it, why dont you fix it now"
 
SmallCaine said:
Those immigrants are there because of western wars, wars germany was a willing participant in, if you don't want immigrants running for their lives travelling to your country maybe don't bomb the shit out of theirs.
Click to expand...

Hal9000 said:
Those immigrants are also welcomed in Germany because they have an aging and declining working population, so much so they can't prop up supporting their workforce nor support pension spending on retirees because, as like everywhere, the current generation pays for the previous generations pension.
Click to expand...

Yes, but she has to be nice to trans people by using their preferred pronouns, so really she's the victim.
 
VorZakone said:
Trump's policies are said to be inflationary (tariffs etc). Guess we'll see if voters punish the Republicans in 2028.
Click to expand...
I think it will be cyclic for the foreseeable future and the indications of that will be seen in the mid terms.

One thing is certain - Donald Trump has grabbed Americans by their p’s.


Edit:

The result shows that the Democratic establishment is completely out of touch with the daily lives of your average Joe.

Houses are unaffordable, rents are sky high, food prices are high. Income is low. Yes the number of jobless people is low, but the number of people working more than one job is high.

I think this vote is a “protest vote”, against the current government than for the belief in Trump’s policies (which are just concepts anyway )
 
Last edited:
America is in for some serious shit if the Republicans find a more competent candidate to push forward their religious ethno-state agenda in the next 4 years. Trump happy to fully support them as he can't do another terms, with years to wittle away at whatever checks and balances that currently exist to stop the quasi-fascism they seem to be extra thirsty for these days.
 
Hal9000 said:
Those immigrants are also welcomed in Germany because they have an aging and declining working population, so much so they can't prop up supporting their workforce nor support pension spending on retirees because, as like everywhere, the current generation pays for the previous generations pension.
Click to expand...
I wish they were.
 
Iker Quesadillas said:
My issue is I've heard this stuff before.

Clinton was believed to have superior ground game to Trump in 2016. See for example these headlines: Clinton holds huge ground game advantage over Team Trump, Trump’s get-out-the-vote effort 'not even close' to Clinton’s, experts say, Hillary Clinton's secret weapon: her ground game, Ground Game: Democrats Started Fall with 5-to-1 Paid Staff Advantage, Exit poll of early voters shows Clinton's huge ground game advantage over Trump. And then what happened? Trump won the presidency. He outperformed Clinton in the swing stages and won the electoral college comprehensively, but Clinton performed better in other states where it didn't matter. Hence her substantial advantage in the popular vote.

Then as time went by we found out the ground game was not as good as hyped. Hence why I call it a myth. It's an Obama-era holdover.
Click to expand...
The thing is with Clinton we can agree that it's a myth precisely because she did better in states that had fairly minimal resources or campaign presence, like the shift in Texas and Georgia, while states she spent heavily in, both time and money, like Ohio or Iowa, still ended up going by large margin to Trump, surging right of the national average swing.

Now, we have an average of 5 points swing nationally and even worse in deep blue and deep red states, like ~10 pts from 2020, while the average margin in the battlegrounds were uniformly lower, suggesting that their campaign operation did do something right, and that robust GOTV operation probably is true.

However, my point all along, was that it didn't matter much. The poster that I replied to said Trump won because he's had more time to do rallies than Harris in those swing states, and voters are persuadable by those public appearances. If an extensive operation that involved a lot of intimate, in person conversations and targeted persuasion didn't move the electorate much, what difference could a few rallies with 10-20k people in a state of millions could have achieved? The environment was simply too hostile that any traditional campaign activity like ad spend or ground operation are simply just arranging deck chair on the Titanic.
 
Will Starmer now get rid of Lammy?
Lammy is a disgrace to the office of Foreign Secretary and his past remarks about Trump were an uneducated disgrace.
 
matherto said:
Food and gas prices are affected by COVID and the war in Ukraine plus OPEC. We're gonna be paying out of our arse for the foreseeable future because of COVID for one.

Something that wouldn't have changed under Trump for the last four years and won't for his next four/eight/whatever the feck happens next.

The simple fact is that the right are very good at blaming the left and the left are fecking shocking at replying back in kind hence people believe it solely down to Biden/Harris and that Trump will change it.

People cannot see beyond the end of their noses about why gas and food prices are the way they are. They're idiots.
Click to expand...

The bolded part is as on point as it gets. I don't get why democrats shoulder all the blame and don't retaliate for all the bullshit from the Trump camp. You need to hammer those arguments in the head of the voters. Republicans do exactly that. If you repeat something dumb often enough, many idiots will repeat it without further questions. As sad as it is, arguments don't convincd those folks, they aren't even needed.
 
RedC said:
America is in for some serious shit if the Republicans find a more competent candidate to push forward their religious ethno-state agenda in the next 4 years. Trump happy to fully support them as he can't do another terms, with years to wittle away at whatever checks and balances that currently exist to stop the quasi-fascism they seem to be extra thirsty for these days.
Click to expand...

Don't be naive. He'll run 2028, mark my words. Laws will be adjusted to allow it and the Trump fanbase will love it.
 
Melville Red said:
Will Starmer now get rid of Lammy?
Lammy is a disgrace to the office of Foreign Secretary and his past remarks about Trump were an uneducated disgrace.
Click to expand...

If Lammy deserves to be ridden of due to his comments about Trump, then Trump deserves to be ejected into space for his comments on other politicians over the years.
 
RedSky said:
Don't be naive. He'll run 2028, mark my words. Laws will be adjusted to allow it and the Trump fanbase will love it.
Click to expand...

I mean, if he does that would presumably allow Obama to run again too.

Would that inadvertently give the Democrats a better chance in the next election than they would have if they had to find a fresh candidate?
 
TheGame said:
Will Trump get ride of JD Vance as he has made similar comments? Do you think his comments are an uneducated disgrace?
Click to expand...

No, but the US is far more valuable a partner to the UK than the other way round. The government will need to woo Trump to a fair extent, and if having to dump Lammy is the way to do it, they eventually will.
 
Melville Red said:
Will Starmer now get rid of Lammy?
Lammy is a disgrace to the office of Foreign Secretary and his past remarks about Trump were an uneducated disgrace.
Click to expand...
"And I was talking about, you know, what is the first truly Islamist country that will get a nuclear weapon, and we were like, maybe it’s Iran, you know, maybe Pakistan already kind of counts, and then we sort of finally decided maybe it’s actually the UK, since Labour just took over.” - JD Vance
 
Melville Red said:
Will Starmer now get rid of Lammy?
Lammy is a disgrace to the office of Foreign Secretary and his past remarks about Trump were an uneducated disgrace.
Click to expand...

Why single out Lammy.

Starmer sent 100 party members to campaign for harris in this election. Including sitting MPs.

I mostly objected because MPs should be working for their constituents, but the lack of foresight of what would happen if trump won was just as big a problem. I believe the turmp team filed a lawsuit about the labour team being there.
 
The Democratic party has no choice now but to have a serious restructuring. A majority of the country looked at what they were selling and said "nah, we'll go with the bigot with no real policy positions".

If last night proved anything it is that policies, even if they will benefit the very people you need, mean jack shit. People no longer (if they ever did) vote on what can actually help them live better in the long run, but instead on what makes them feel better in the moment. Ground games and ads and all that traditional stuff won't work if the only political currency that matters is the vibes. I don't know how the fix this, but something has to change.
 
Quality control
Tom Van Persie said:
"And I was talking about, you know, what is the first truly Islamist country that will get a nuclear weapon, and we were like, maybe it’s Iran, you know, maybe Pakistan already kind of counts, and then we sort of finally decided maybe it’s actually the UK, since Labour just took over.” - JD Vance
Click to expand...
Well if you were not aware London has been known as Londonistan for some time now.
 
Nogbadthebad said:
Why single out Lammy.

Starmer sent 100 party members to campaign for harris in this election. Including sitting MPs.

I mostly objected because MPs should be working for their constituents, but the lack of foresight of what would happen if trump won was just as big a problem. I believe the turmp team filed a lawsuit about the labour team being there.
Click to expand...

Starmer didn't send anyone, the activists went of their own accord as did MPs.
 
Nogbadthebad said:
Why single out Lammy.

Starmer sent 100 party members to campaign for harris in this election. Including sitting MPs.

I mostly objected because MPs should be working for their constituents, but the lack of foresight of what would happen if trump won was just as big a problem. I believe the turmp team filed a lawsuit about the labour team being there.
Click to expand...

Any source for Starmer sending them there?
 
Pughnichi said:
Is anyone really surprised at merrick garlands incompetence
Click to expand...
Nope. Who'd of thought that the worse thing to come out of McTurtle's shenanigans would not be a stolen SCOTUS seat, but instead freeing up this limp noodle to become AG and continue on being a limp noodle.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.