2024 U.S. Elections | Trump v Harris

Ubik said:
He may not have said that particular line, but do you not think these quotes are racist and say much the same thing?



Or how about


https://www.inquirer.com/politics/e...aza-peace-column-vice-president-20240802.html

And the below tweet suggests he may not have had a change of heart until some point after 2011

Click to expand...


Whether he has or hasn't, his views have always been consistent with mainstream US politics over the years - staunchly pro-Israel and generally suspicious of everyone from Arafat to Sinwar. What's more noteworthy is where he is in the present, which is still in complete sync with the general Dem policy of pro-Israel, critical of Bibi, and pro-two state. None of this of course matters much given that VPs are an implementer of the President's policy and they rarely get assigned the middle east portfolio because that is the domain of SecState.
 
Ubik said:
He may not have said that particular line, but do you not think these quotes are racist and say much the same thing?



Or how about


https://www.inquirer.com/politics/e...aza-peace-column-vice-president-20240802.html

And the below tweet suggests he may not have had a change of heart until some point after 2011

Click to expand...


Were talking about an 30 year old essay, written by a 21 year old Jewish kid that attended a Hebrew school. How much credence do you want to give to that?

And personally I don't think that his "battle-minded" quote is inherently "racist". Although, as it was from 30 years ago, i wont pretend to know or understand the exact context of the comments in terms of what the political situation was at that time.

Fast forward to today, I would in fact agree that some Palestinians, namely Hamas, would wish to fight Israel regardless of any peaceful solution provided. Unless that solution be every Jew leaves Israel.

Plus, it is very much fair to say that Netanyahu has shifted further and further right, in an attempt to hold onto power. Would it be unfair for ones opinions of him to change as he has done so?
 
Raoul said:
Whether he has or hasn't, his views have always been consistent with mainstream US politics over the years - staunchly pro-Israel and generally suspicious of everyone from Arafat to Sinwar. What's more noteworthy is where he is in the present, which is still in complete sync with the general Dem policy of pro-Israel, critical of Bibi, and pro-two state. None of this of course matters much given that VPs are an implementer of the President's policy and they rarely get assigned the middle east portfolio because that is the domain of SecState.
Click to expand...

Well said.

Comments from 30 years ago are just noise. What does he think now - he is pro a two state solution and critical of Netanyahu.

Republicans will not be spending any time pouring over comments made by Trump or Vance even 3 months ago, never mind 30 years ago.
 
Why does Trump always mention “The Late Great Hannibal Lecter”? Is there some hidden meaning?
 
Tincanalley said:
Why does Trump always mention “The Late Great Hannibal Lecter”? Is there some hidden meaning?
Click to expand...
He is almost certainly conflating the kind of asylum Hannibal Lecter was kept in with asylum seekers. Why he thinks he is dead, I couldn’t tell you.
 
So bottomline:

Kelly's Pro: (likely) Delivers Arizona.
Kelly's Con: (likely) Loses Nevada (union issues).

Walz's Pro: no evident weaknesses.
Walz's Con: no evident strengths either.

Shapiro's Pro: (likely) Delivers Pennsylvania.
Shapiro's Con: (likely) Loses close races where palestinian/arab votes are a factor (Michigan?).

That's about it?
 
DOTA said:
It's all looked like they're picking Shapiro to me, not sure why punters are so split.

You want polling on who the public thinks the VP pick will be?
Click to expand...

No, but I'd take polling on who the public want the pick to be in a pinch. That a betting market has one candidate at 53% and the other at 47% means nothing.
 
nimic said:
No, but I'd take polling on who the public want the pick to be in a pinch. That a betting market has one candidate at 53% and the other at 47% means nothing.
Click to expand...
Sure, it's not exactly to be taken seriously but I do prefer it to all that 538 style nonsense that people seem to love. Actual polls are certainly far better though, for all their flaws, I agree.
Raoul said:
What is polymarket ?
Click to expand...
It's just an online betting market, I assumed?
 
DOTA said:
Sure, it's not exactly to be taken seriously but I do prefer it to all that 538 style nonsense that people seem to love. Actual polls are certainly far better though, for all their flaws, I agree.

It's just an online betting market, I assumed?
Click to expand...

It was a joke. The whole polymarket thing has become a bit of a meme in this thread.
 
What’s this talk about US jobs reports and the dreaded R-word? Is the US economy slowing down and helping Trump (like a protest vote against the incumbent party?)
 
iKnowNothing said:
What’s this talk about US jobs reports and the dreaded R-word? Is the US economy slowing down and helping Trump (like a protest vote against the incumbent party?)
Click to expand...
The notion is Americans care mostly about the current price of living and the other notion is they believe the current president / ruling party have direct control over that . I don't know how representative this viewpoint is but I've seen them mentioned a lot.
 
iKnowNothing said:
What’s this talk about US jobs reports and the dreaded R-word? Is the US economy slowing down and helping Trump (like a protest vote against the incumbent party?)
Click to expand...
It was literally the first jobs report that didn't meet expectation in months.
 
The Firestarter said:
The notion is Americans care mostly about the current price of living and the other notion is they believe the current president / ruling party have direct control over that . I don't know how representative this viewpoint is but I've seen them mentioned a lot.
Click to expand...

Maybe they can just do what the Tory party have done in the UK at various points in the past 14 years. Boris Johnson was basically considered as being from a different party to the Cameron lead one just a few years earlier. He didn't campaign on his parties recorded at all, just what he would do going forward. Just re-brand and distance yourself form anything done before.
 
gaffs said:
I didn't say the criticism of Shapiro was "antisemitic". It is just a fact right now that there are some on the left that would not be happy with a Jewish pick, given the current war.
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure that, age aside, 'the left' would be happy if Bernie Sanders was the VP choice.

gaffs said:
This has been pointed out before....

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2024/07/josh-shapiro-netanyahu-jewish-vp/679300/
Click to expand...
This article states:
The “Genocide Josh” campaign is not about applying a single standard on Palestine to all VP contenders; it’s about applying them to one person, who just so happens to be the only Jew on the shortlist.
Click to expand...

This is clearly insinuating that the criticism is because Shapiro is Jewish. It's a false point, as JB Pritzker was in the shortlist and he is Jewish.

gaffs said:
So what would you call the campaign against Shapiro from some in the left wing of the party? They didn't brand him No School Vouchers Josh. They are labeling him Genocide Josh, because somehow they feel he is "pro war"......
Click to expand...

I am guessing they branded him 'Genocide Josh' because it's an obvious play on Genocide Joe, which is what they have been calling Joe Biden. Is it excessive? Absolutely. But you don't let accuracy get in the way of some good wordplay.

Anyway,

 
Last edited:
calodo2003 said:
It was literally the first jobs report that didn't meet expectation in months.
Click to expand...
Years, in fact. But the media exists to fck us all, so unlike the last 8 odd times it beat expectations, this is what breaks through.
 
So looks like we'll get a decision today on the VP pick. Given the general energy, momentum and 'vibes' of the last month, feels like a good choice would be Walz. I'm still hoping it's Pete, but that seems an impossiblity at this stage. Either way, pretty much everyone is a good choice from the shortlist.

Also more good polling coming out, and I think they handled the response to Trump's attempt at dodging the debate really well. Say whatever you want about Harris and her staff, but they've been impressive over the past few weeks, in pretty unprecedented territory. 90 more days of that please.
 
Beachryan said:
So looks like we'll get a decision today on the VP pick. Given the general energy, momentum and 'vibes' of the last month, feels like a good choice would be Walz. I'm still hoping it's Pete, but that seems an impossiblity at this stage. Either way, pretty much everyone is a good choice from the shortlist.

Also more good polling coming out, and I think they handled the response to Trump's attempt at dodging the debate really well. Say whatever you want about Harris and her staff, but they've been impressive over the past few weeks, in pretty unprecedented territory. 90 more days of that please.
Click to expand...
Walz is a very uninspiring choice. There is nothing bad about him, but there is also nothing particularly exciting. A bit like Tim Kaine (or in the reverse side, Mike Pence).

It is obviously going to be Shapiro, and rightly so. With Whitmer ruling herself out, and probably never being an option cause Harris likely wanted a man on the ticket, it has to be Shapiro.
 
Revan said:
Walz is a very uninspiring choice. There is nothing bad about him, but there is also nothing particularly exciting. A bit like Tim Kaine (or in the reverse side, Mike Pence).

It is obviously going to be Shapiro, and rightly so. With Whitmer ruling herself out, and probably never being an option cause Harris likely wanted a man on the ticket, it has to be Shapiro.
Click to expand...

I think Walz is a far more interesting, inspiring candidate than Kaine. Agree that it is going to be Shapiro. Disagree that this is "rightly so".
 
Ekkie Thump said:
I think Walz is a far more interesting, inspiring candidate than Kaine. Agree that it is going to be Shapiro. Disagree that this is "rightly so".
Click to expand...
This is America we are talking about, obsessing over policies is a lost cause.

Shapiro will be chosen because he’s more photogenic and talks like Obama, that’s about it.
 
Revan said:
Walz is a very uninspiring choice. There is nothing bad about him, but there is also nothing particularly exciting. A bit like Tim Kaine (or in the reverse side, Mike Pence).

It is obviously going to be Shapiro, and rightly so. With Whitmer ruling herself out, and probably never being an option cause Harris likely wanted a man on the ticket, it has to be Shapiro.
Click to expand...

If it’s Walz, he better get going. The first event is in Philly today and he’s still in Minnesota.
 
InfiniteBoredom said:
This is America we are talking about, obsessing over policies is a lost cause.

Shapiro will be chosen because he’s more photogenic and talks like Obama, that’s about it.
Click to expand...

I think that's a mistake here. My preference for Walz isn't so much policy based (even though I align with him more). Shapiro's capable and a good orator, but I don't think he's as persuasive a speaker and interviewee as Walz. There's an authenticity and relatability to Walz that I think plays better with folk than the slick proclamations of yet another well oiled, well rehearsed lawyer.

Just the way I see it of course.
 
I hope I’m wrong but I reckon it’s inevitably Shapiro.
 
Raoul said:
If it’s Walz, he better get going. The first event is in Philly today and he’s still in Minnesota.
Click to expand...
I know you put great stock by them: Polymarket and PredictIt have Walz at 83 86 and 73 87....



I still think it'll be Shapiro.
 
Pexbo said:
I hope I’m wrong but I reckon it’s inevitably Shapiro.
Click to expand...

Me too. Don't see the logic of leaving it so late, choosing to campaign in one of the candidate's states, announcing a different candidate and then having to go on stage in front of a disappointed crowd. Makes much more tactical sense to make the late reveal if it's going to be a choice that energises the crowd your about to engage.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.