2024 U.S. Elections | Trump v Harris

The more I hear about Walz, the more awesome he sounds - both in terms of policy record and his presentation. There might be tactical reasons to go with someone else, but purely in terms of the candidate themselves, he seems the strongest.
 
gaffs said:
This is really scary stuff....

Click to expand...


Chist. I have no idea who this 'reporter' is and what she is saying may well be accurate, but it could not possibly have been delivered in a more irritatingly mannered way. Absolutely unwatchable.
 
I know i'm like a broken record on Wisconsin, but they did in fact prefer a traitor as senator, over a person that is black.

Not a state to be trusted, i can see Harris winning Michigan and PA, but for Wisconsin to go republican because "reasons", Georgia or Arizona might be needed to win this election for dems.
 
Mike Smalling said:
The more I hear about Walz, the more awesome he sounds - both in terms of policy record and his presentation. There might be tactical reasons to go with someone else, but purely in terms of the candidate themselves, he seems the strongest.
Click to expand...

I like him too, but he doesn't help bring a State with him. And do people think he is "Presidential" given he would be one accident away from the big job?

Picking him would be like how Hillary picked Tim Kaine.
 
MarylandMUFan said:
I wouldn't say that. There are some hard core Trumpers that now have a lot of power in the state election certification process. While I would like to think our systems are strong enough to handle these issues, I also think we need to be aware of them and be prepared.
Click to expand...

Mike Pence was the only person that stopped them last time.

I bet these "false electors" prevent the certification of votes in their counties again, if they are not Trump wins. It will result in a whole load of legal challenges. And you know where that will end up? In the 6-3 SCOTUS.
 
Morty_ said:
I know i'm like a broken record on Wisconsin, but they did in fact prefer a traitor as senator, over a person that is black.

Not a state to be trusted, i can see Harris winning Michigan and PA, but for Wisconsin to go republican because "reasons", Georgia or Arizona might be needed to win this election for dems.
Click to expand...

I think they know that. I believe Harris is in Georgia today.
 
gaffs said:
I like him too, but he doesn't help bring a State with him. And do people think he is "Presidential" given he would be one accident away from the big job?

Picking him would be like how Hillary picked Tim Kaine.
Click to expand...
Kaine was very much an electoral pick, when Virginia was still seen as a big swing state before the rust belt switch, and he spoke Spanish. I can't even remember who the alternatives were, Evan Bayh was one I think? Either way, it was Hillary that lost it not him.
 
Morty_ said:
I know i'm like a broken record on Wisconsin, but they did in fact prefer a traitor as senator, over a person that is black.

Not a state to be trusted, i can see Harris winning Michigan and PA, but for Wisconsin to go republican because "reasons", Georgia or Arizona might be needed to win this election for dems.
Click to expand...
I am pretty confident that Wisconsin will go to Harris. Baldwin is very popular and will drive turnout and Johnson is an exception in WI where all the major statewide offices (Gov, Lt Gov, SOS, AG) are Dems.
 
WI_Red said:
I am pretty confident that Wisconsin will go to Harris. Baldwin is very popular and will drive turnout and Johnson is an exception in WI where all the major statewide offices (Gov, Lt Gov, SOS, AG) are Dems.
Click to expand...

I don't think its a coincience that all of these positions are held by people who are white, do you?
 
Ubik said:
Kaine was very much an electoral pick, when Virginia was still seen as a big swing state before the rust belt switch, and he spoke Spanish. I can't even remember who the alternatives were, Evan Bayh was one I think? Either way, it was Hillary that lost it not him.
Click to expand...

I disagree. Virginia wasn't really in play in 2016. Hillary thought she had won it already, so picked an old friend.

Sherrod Brown would have been a better pick as he wouldn't have forgotten about the working class in Ohio, MI, PA, WI like she did.
 
Morty_ said:
I know i'm like a broken record on Wisconsin, but they did in fact prefer a traitor as senator, over a person that is black.

Not a state to be trusted, i can see Harris winning Michigan and PA, but for Wisconsin to go republican because "reasons", Georgia or Arizona might be needed to win this election for dems.
Click to expand...

None of the states should be trusted. It is true that the Dems have a decent shot at all the rust belt states (turnout dependent), but it is also likely true that Harris is targeting NC and GA because they have heavy black populations and may (as in 2020 for GA) land for the Dems. If she manages PA and either WI or MI, and one of the latter two southern states, its over.
 
I'm surprised the republicans didn't pick a woman for a VP candidate, to be honest. It might have made them look a little more rational for any fence sitting voters and it might have alleviated some concerns about Trump being a big dirty rapist by giving a woman a powerful position.

Instead they got some character from The Boys.
 
Shane88 said:
I'm surprised the republicans didn't pick a woman for a VP candidate, to be honest. It might have made them look a little more rational for any fence sitting voters and it might have alleviated some concerns about Trump being a big dirty rapist by giving a woman a powerful position.

Instead they got some character from The Boys.
Click to expand...

Haley would've been the best option for them, but that was never a realistic given that she and Trump are beefing.
 
gaffs said:
I like him too, but he doesn't help bring a State with him. And do people think he is "Presidential" given he would be one accident away from the big job?

Picking him would be like how Hillary picked Tim Kaine.
Click to expand...
With respect to the "one heartbeat away from the Presidency" angle, I really don't think a large share of voters think like that. It should be fairly low on the list of criteria.

The way the race is looking right now, it does seem like picking someone that will help in a key state could be crucial. If Josh Shapiro didn't have real Zionist streak, I'd say he was the obvious choice, but it's an issue Harris needs to be more moderate on than Biden.
 
gaffs said:
Mike Pence was the only person that stopped them last time.

I bet these "false electors" prevent the certification of votes in their counties again, if they are not Trump wins. It will result in a whole load of legal challenges. And you know where that will end up? In the 6-3 SCOTUS.
Click to expand...
These are not "fake electors' though, they are elected/appointed election officials - that's a whole different thing
 
gaffs said:
Also, very strange to say Maddow is. "Full on through into the crazy space. She’s lost all journalistic right headedness."

Yet two sentences later say "There are genuine concerns in some of what is said".
Click to expand...

That’s not strange at all. Some of the subject matters are valid concerns. She then pulls in irrelevant and out of context information to make her overarching point, seem far bigger.

It’s sensationalist bollocks that helps nobody. She’s been this way since at least mid-Trump term 1.

If you lead with sensationalist stories, you’re just doing what Fox does, and she does it all the time.
 
UnrelatedPsuedo said:
That’s not strange at all. Some of the subject matters are valid concerns. She then pulls in irrelevant and out of context information to make her overarching point, seem far bigger.

It’s sensationalist bollocks that helps nobody. She’s been this way since at least mid-Trump term 1.

If you lead with sensationalist stories, you’re just doing what Fox does, and she does it all the time.
Click to expand...
What Fox does is outright lie, and pander to fearmongering and hatred. Their lies cost them almost a billion dollars and they still aren't done with the other cases. Is the substance of what Maddow reports on lies? I get not liking her personally, or her delivery. But, as long as she has her actual facts correct and sourcing on the stories it is not "Fox of the left".

When the GOP actually had schemes for false electors, when they literally spread election fraud lies far and wide for years. It is not hyperbole to report the seriousness of the future scheming, and the actual laws and party platforms they are promoting.
 
gaffs said:
He would be great as Sec of State, but as is Blinken.

It is a shame, but Kamala has to balance the ticket out and that means a white guy from a swing state. Shapiro was great last night....

Click to expand...

It's a bit funny the GOP are calling Harris a diversity hire when the actual diversity hire will be the heterosexual white man who will be her running mate.
 
Infra-red said:
Chist. I have no idea who this 'reporter' is and what she is saying may well be accurate, but it could not possibly have been delivered in a more irritatingly mannered way. Absolutely unwatchable.
Click to expand...
She's Rachel Maddow, and yes - like the vast majority of US TV journalists and commentators, she is deeply, deeply irritating. We should send the an army of Krishnan Guru-Murthys as replacements and maybe their democracy would be fairing much better.
 
Jev said:
It's a bit funny the GOP are calling Harris a diversity hire when the actual diversity hire will be the heterosexual white man who will be her running mate.
Click to expand...

Its actually a new GOP talking point they are testing out - that the Dems are the new party of segregating by race.
 
Jev said:
It's a bit funny the GOP are calling Harris a diversity hire when the actual diversity hire will be the heterosexual white man who will be her running mate.
Click to expand...

In the same way that Mike Pence was a DEI hire, in order to help bring Trump the Christian vote.

We know who the real DEI candidate is though.

Trump, as he is ....

Deranged
Incompetent
Egomaniacal
 
Morty_ said:
I know i'm like a broken record on Wisconsin, but they did in fact prefer a traitor as senator, over a person that is black.
Click to expand...
It was the only important state last year where the Dem senator was outspent. With such thin margins, it would absolutely have made a difference.
I do hope Harris' campaign gives up on rubbish like Florida.
 
Hamnat said:
What Fox does is outright lie, and pander to fearmongering and hatred. Their lies cost them almost a billion dollars and they still aren't done with the other cases. Is the substance of what Maddow reports on lies? I get not liking her personally, or her delivery. But, as long as she has her actual facts correct and sourcing on the stories it is not "Fox of the left".

When the GOP actually had schemes for false electors, when they literally spread election fraud lies far and wide for years. It is not hyperbole to report the seriousness of the future scheming, and the actual laws and party platforms they are promoting.
Click to expand...
Fox often does exactly what she’s doing. They’re worse. But it’s still common enough to compare. Starting with facts and statements, then attaching barely connected dotted lines to dramatic nonsense.

As I said, there are issues there. Let the facts stand alone. It’s juvenile what she does. We can call it out. We owe her nothing.

If you held a party on a hill and invited everyone that thought 2024 Maddow was a trustable, Ethically robust journalist… I’d be able to cater it with the change in my pocket.

I only bother commenting as you’ve only got to go back a decade and she was a far more lucid and considered human. The Trump-Covid period seemed to see her chase engagement and validation rather than focus on real reporting. The bollocks and histrionics are childish.
 
UnrelatedPsuedo said:
Fox often does exactly what she’s doing. They’re worse. But it’s still common enough to compare. Starting with facts and statements, then attaching barely connected dotted lines to dramatic nonsense.

As I said, there are issues there. Let the facts stand alone. It’s juvenile what she does. We can call it out. We owe her nothing.

If you held a party on a hill and invited everyone that thought 2024 Maddow was a trustable, Ethically robust journalist… I’d be able to cater it with the change in my pocket.

I only bother commenting as you’ve only got to go back a decade and she was a far more lucid and considered human. The Trump-Covid period seemed to see her chase engagement and validation rather than focus on real reporting. The bollocks and histrionics are childish.
Click to expand...
What was the 'dramatic nonsense?'
 
UnrelatedPsuedo said:
Fox often does exactly what she’s doing. They’re worse. But it’s still common enough to compare. Starting with facts and statements, then attaching barely connected dotted lines to dramatic nonsense.

As I said, there are issues there. Let the facts stand alone. It’s juvenile what she does. We can call it out. We owe her nothing.

If you held a party on a hill and invited everyone that thought 2024 Maddow was a trustable, Ethically robust journalist… I’d be able to cater it with the change in my pocket.

I only bother commenting as you’ve only got to go back a decade and she was a far more lucid and considered human. The Trump-Covid period seemed to see her chase engagement and validation rather than focus on real reporting. The bollocks and histrionics are childish.
Click to expand...

Fox are 1000x worse. They are not even pretending to be neutral.

When President, Trump used to take calls from Fox news anchors like Hannity and Lou Dobbs, advising him on policy. You have Tucker Carlson speaking at this years RNC.

What are these badly sourced, untrustable stories that Maddow has spun? Please enlighten.
 
Jev said:
She reads a lot into throwaway lines that are probably just Trump bragging about being so popular he doesn’t need any more votes.
Click to expand...

If you watch and listen to the whole report, she links those same lines from Trump to this article...

https://www.rollingstone.com/politi...-state-officials-election-deniers-1235069692/

Trump is the one that is out there saying "we dont need the votes, we have so many votes". Why would he say that?

As usual, he says the quiet part out loud.

He is setting the stage to say that the election is rigged, again.

He is already saying the only way that Democrats can win in Minnesota is if the Democrats cheat.
Yes Minnesota, which has not voted for a Republican for President since 1972. The only way Trump can lose that is if Democrats cheat.

Post election, there will be legal fights and don't be surprised if those court cases tie back to the aforementioned Election Deniers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.