2024 U.S. Elections | Trump wins

Mike Smalling said:
Holding anyone personally responsible for what happens following a vote is of course stupid. Don’t see anyone doing that.
Click to expand...

Perhaps it's a matter of interpretation, but stuff like this, from this very page, sounds to me like attributing responsibility to people.

Beachryan said:
As I said previously I hope you enjoy your purity prize as young women die suffering as dead fetuses decay them from the inside out. Or millions of children see their parents ripped from their houses by armed forces and sent to internment camps before being deported to countries they may never have even been to. Or watching as Russia storms through Ukraine and seeks Warsaw.
Click to expand...

If people who abstain are responsible for this, then it's only fair biden voters be called genocide supporters.

Now I don't buy any of this of course, it's the double standard that annoys me or the idea that someone who sets supporting genocide as their own personal red line for a politician is simply trying to be pure, on a high horse or whatever nonsense.
 
Again, come next January you have two choices: a Biden Presidency or a Trump Presidency. (Obviously barring something radical). Like most other posters on here, I've argued strongly against Bidens position on Gaza, amd that he should step down and let someone else run. Even support the Ezra Klein push to letting delegates decide in August.

None of that changes the situation. And it's even crazier using the Gaza lens to evaluate this. What has ever been said, done or suggested by a Trump term that leads you to believe he'll be better than Biden? And before the whole 'what could be worse' line, there's plenty that could be worse. The most likely Trump response is he doesn't care, let Israel down whatever it wants. And if they'll buy some US goods, even better.

As for the smug crap about if you really feared a Trump Presidency that much you'd just move: wow, what a suggestion, that's far more sensible than trying to convince people to vote and prevent it.
 
maniak said:
Perhaps it's a matter of interpretation, but stuff like this, from this very page, sounds to me like attributing responsibility to people.



If people who abstain are responsible for this, then it's only fair biden voters be called genocide supporters.

Now I don't buy any of this of course, it's the double standard that annoys me or the idea that someone who sets supporting genocide as their own personal red line for a politician is simply trying to be pure, on a high horse or whatever nonsense.
Click to expand...
Ffs, how hard is this. I don't support Bidens policies on Gaza. Fact 1. Fact 2: a Trump second term is worse for everything I care about, including Gaza.

Those are two things that are true. Therefore I very much believe anything we can do to avoid a second Trump term is sensible. That includes pointing out the fact that abstaining only helps Trump.
 
maniak said:
Perhaps it's a matter of interpretation, but stuff like this, from this very page, sounds to me like attributing responsibility to people.



If people who abstain are responsible for this, then it's only fair biden voters be called genocide supporters.

Now I don't buy any of this of course, it's the double standard that annoys me or the idea that someone who sets supporting genocide as their own personal red line for a politician is simply trying to be pure, on a high horse or whatever nonsense.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, that does seem a bit excessive to me. Reasonable people should be able to disagree on the principles behind a vote without attributing personal responsibility to outcomes.

But I can understand Americans who are anxious and frustrated that progress on a range of topics might be rolled back, because of Biden’s poor handling of a foreign conflict that Trump would largely have handled the same.

It’s a mess. People who can vote should do what feels right to them - the rest of us can only hope.
 
The Mitch might endorse Trump after everything is typical. They coddle him, they encourage his behavior. Then they wonder why their party is completely taken over by crazies. Barely any of them stand up to him and stick to it. When Nikki Haley finally quits expect the same thing from her. Which means even their small criticisms of Trump mean nothing.
 
Hamnat said:
The Mitch might endorse Trump after everything is typical. They coddle him, they encourage his behavior. Then they wonder why their party is completely taken over by crazies. Barely any of them stand up to him and stick to it. When Nikki Haley finally quits expect the same thing from her. Which means even their small criticisms of Trump mean nothing.
Click to expand...

All of them, except Mitt(who is retiring anyway) will probably endorse him in the end, even Susan "deeply concerned" Collins.
 
surf said:
LBJ ran for re-election in 1964, and won.
Click to expand...
And didn’t in 1968 when he was still eligible. Despite the default position being incumbent run for re-election, there’s precedent when a deeply unpopular sitting president can be pressured to not run by the party.

Alas, the party this time has chosen to fall in line so Biden will be the nominee, and that’s just dandy when he already went against the base and alienated a core voting bloc in one of the most important battleground state.
 
Hamnat said:
The Mitch might endorse Trump after everything is typical. They coddle him, they encourage his behavior. Then they wonder why their party is completely taken over by crazies. Barely any of them stand up to him and stick to it. When Nikki Haley finally quits expect the same thing from her. Which means even their small criticisms of Trump mean nothing.
Click to expand...
Nimrata will only kiss the ring if he wins the general imo, otherwise she can continue on with her charade of staunch defender of Republican values and position herself for 28.

I don’t think Trump will stomach offering her VP to tempt her back into the fold, he needs a docile Pence like figure, most likely Tim Scott this time around.
 
Shez said:
May I ask :

If it’s ok for the biden team to threaten of the bleak outcomes in case people don’t vote for him

Then why is it not ok for people to counter that with a threat of the same bleak outcomes if he doesn’t stop arming a genocide

There is a clear win win here - stop arming the genocidal war criminals, hold them accountable, win back the trust and votes of people and stop everything trump stands for.

I don’t see why stopping Israel from committing war crimes is the hill he wants to die on. Surely doing so won’t lose him the election but not doing so clearly might
Click to expand...
Gaza is a far more niche issue for Biden than most people realize. Outside of Michigan, its impact will be felt far less some are anticipating. However, Biden can't win the election without winning Michigan.
 
calodo2003 said:
Gaza is a far more niche issue for Biden than most people realize. Outside of Michigan, its impact will be felt far less some are anticipating. However, Biden can't win the election without winning Michigan.
Click to expand...

Not disputing that.
If the argument is support me otherwise trump comes in, it’s equally valid to argue stop aiding a genocide otherwise trump comes in
 
Iker Quesadillas said:
If I believed the leading presidential candidate in my country was preparing to unleash a fascist nightmare upon winning the election, what I would do is move to another country. To me that is the degree of seriousness the matter would imply.
Click to expand...

So what you are saying is the people who are in fear of a repressive government gaining or increasing power should move. Let's be clear here, those most likely to be worst affected will be those with the least means to leave. Do you apply this same mentality to people in other countries?
 
Beachryan said:
Ffs, how hard is this. I don't support Bidens policies on Gaza. Fact 1. Fact 2: a Trump second term is worse for everything I care about, including Gaza.

Those are two things that are true. Therefore I very much believe anything we can do to avoid a second Trump term is sensible. That includes pointing out the fact that abstaining only helps Trump.
Click to expand...
Yeah but you said "I hope you enjoy your purity prize as young women die suffering as dead fetuses decay them from the inside out".

Would it be fair for me to say "I hope you enjoy your pragmatism prize as your tax dollars are used to blow palestinian babies to pieces"?

You can't accuse those who don't vote for biden of being ok with those horrible things potentially happening under trump (let's not forget the fact they're also happening under biden, but ok...) unless you're willing to admit you're ok with the way biden is dealing with gaza.

You can't pick and choose if that's the way you look at democracy.
 
Mike Smalling said:
Fair enough, that does seem a bit excessive to me. Reasonable people should be able to disagree on the principles behind a vote without attributing personal responsibility to outcomes.

But I can understand Americans who are anxious and frustrated that progress on a range of topics might be rolled back, because of Biden’s poor handling of a foreign conflict that Trump would largely have handled the same.

It’s a mess. People who can vote should do what feels right to them - the rest of us can only hope.
Click to expand...
I have no issue with people voting for biden, that's democracy, my beef is with the double standards when this topic is discussed. If an american feels biden is best for their lives and the lives of their communities, yeah go ahead.

But they don't get to accuse others of being ok with women dying during pregnancy or kids in cages because they don't vote for biden. Unless of course they also think it's fair to say they are ok with genocide being sponsored by their taxes.
 
maniak said:
No, and I'm not talking about supporting biden in itself, but this mythological idea that you either vote for him regardless of what he does or you are personally responsible for women dying because they can't get an abortion. At the same time, palestinian genocide is mentioned and all of a sudden it's all very complex. This selective blindness is very maga like.
Click to expand...

Whilst I would deeply sympathise with someone who had to vote for Biden despite feeling he is supporting genocide in Palestine, would Trump do any differently? In fact he would support genocide in various other places on top of the genocide in Palestine, including within the US (forced displacement based on ethnic grounds).

Now if you genuinely thought there was no chance of Trump winning fair enough, vote for the tooth fairy, don't vote, do whatever you like. But when your not voting adds to the very real possibility of an incredibly dangerous person taking office, I don't see that not voting for the opponent is your best option.

As long as Biden believes in democracy, there's a genuine possibility of being able to vote him and his party out at the end of the term, and you don't think he's openly spoiling to ruin everyone's lives, your best option is surely to vote for him but then lobby, campaign and protest against the policies you don't like and/or for the things you do want that aren't being done. What you need to do is make sure the extremist republican party as it has steadily become gets utterly annihilated at the polls so that they can re-evaluate their positions and hopefully start to contribute to a functional democratic system once again. The way to fix a democracy isn't to protest against the half sensible ones who've gone in a direction you don't like, it's to force the absolute loony tunes that have hijacked the discourse to bugger off and let somebody sensible have a go. If the loony tune in question hadn't already been president and you didn't already know exactly what a dickhead he is then I'd have some sympathy, but you've already had the inoculation so now it's 100% on you if you help let him in.

(I know you're not from the States btw, this is a hypothetical "you".)
 
TwoSheds said:
Whilst I would deeply sympathise with someone who had to vote for Biden despite feeling he is supporting genocide in Palestine, would Trump do any differently? In fact he would support genocide in various other places on top of the genocide in Palestine, including within the US (forced displacement based on ethnic grounds).

Now if you genuinely thought there was no chance of Trump winning fair enough, vote for the tooth fairy, don't vote, do whatever you like. But when your not voting adds to the very real possibility of an incredibly dangerous person taking office, I don't see that not voting for the opponent is your best option.

As long as Biden believes in democracy, there's a genuine possibility of being able to vote him and his party out at the end of the term, and you don't think he's openly spoiling to ruin everyone's lives, your best option is surely to vote for him but then lobby, campaign and protest against the policies you don't like and/or for the things you do want that aren't being done. What you need to do is make sure the extremist republican party as it has steadily become gets utterly annihilated at the polls so that they can re-evaluate their positions and hopefully start to contribute to a functional democratic system once again. The way to fix a democracy isn't to protest against the half sensible ones who've gone in a direction you don't like, it's to force the absolute loony tunes that have hijacked the discourse to bugger off and let somebody sensible have a go. If the loony tune in question hadn't already been president and you didn't already know exactly what a dickhead he is then I'd have some sympathy, but you've already had the inoculation so now it's 100% on you if you help let him in.

(I know you're not from the States btw, this is a hypothetical "you".)
Click to expand...

Once again, make those tactical vote arguments, all good, but the bit in bold is is patronizing and disconnected from reality.

We've seen historically large protests in many cities, and we've seen opinion polls suggesting that large majorities of his base oppose his Gaza policy, and he has not budged one inch.
After all, why should he- have you seen the opposing candidate? :smirk:
 
TwoSheds said:
As long as Biden believes in democracy, there's a genuine possibility of being able to vote him and his party out at the end of the term, and you don't think he's openly spoiling to ruin everyone's lives, your best option is surely to vote for him but then lobby, campaign and protest against the policies you don't like and/or for the things you do want that aren't being done. What you need to do is make sure the extremist republican party as it has steadily become gets utterly annihilated at the polls so that they can re-evaluate their positions and hopefully start to contribute to a functional democratic system once again.
Click to expand...

Generally speaking, anti-democratic forces are not stopped through democracy... since they don't believe in it.

This is the fundamental tension of Trump era politics: 1) that Trump is a grave threat to democracy and fascism personified and the nation will end if he takes over, but that 2) the solution is to just go through the proper channels like it's a normal Tuesday. "Vote him out."
 
Last edited:
Iker Quesadillas said:
Generally speaking, anti-democratic forces are not stopped through democracy... since they don't believe in it.

This is the fundamental tension of Trump era politics: 1) that Trump is a grave threat to democracy and fascism personified and the nation will end if he takes over, but that 2) the solution is to just go through the proper channels like it's a normal Tuesday. "Vote him out."
Click to expand...

This doesn't make any sense. It's not "vote him out". It's "don't vote him in you absolute fecking wallopers".
 
berbatrick said:
Once again, make those tactical vote arguments, all good, but the bit in bold is is patronizing and disconnected from reality.

We've seen historically large protests in many cities, and we've seen opinion polls suggesting that large majorities of his base oppose his Gaza policy, and he has not budged one inch.
After all, why should he- have you seen the opposing candidate? :smirk:
Click to expand...

It's literally the only thing you can do. Civil disobedience, that sort of thing if you like. But voting for (or allowing in) someone who would do that and worse is just stupid. It won't help anyone in any way, it will just lead to more violence and more suffering.

Trump isn't a democrat conspiracy, he is his own problem.
 
maniak said:
I have no issue with people voting for biden, that's democracy, my beef is with the double standards when this topic is discussed. If an american feels biden is best for their lives and the lives of their communities, yeah go ahead.

But they don't get to accuse others of being ok with women dying during pregnancy or kids in cages because they don't vote for biden. Unless of course they also think it's fair to say they are ok with genocide being sponsored by their taxes.
Click to expand...

I disagree with this, people should be aware and held accountable for the consequences of their actions.
 
Raoul said:
Trump. Pre COVID the economy was doing very well. His not being elected of course didn’t have anything to do with the pandemic economy briefly tanking.
Click to expand...

Voters don't think this way, true swing voters only care about is how the economy is doing the day they vote, not how it was doing several months ago. The early COVID economy was relatively bad.
 
Shez said:
Not disputing that.
If the argument is support me otherwise trump comes in, it’s equally valid to argue stop aiding a genocide otherwise trump comes in
Click to expand...
The impact of both scenarios on the average American isn't even remotely associative, so the two scenarios aren't of equal import in the slightest. About 179 degrees difference.
 
sport2793 said:
Voters don't think this way, true swing voters only care about is how the economy is doing the day they vote, not how it was doing several months ago. The early COVID economy was relatively bad.
Click to expand...

I suppose you would need to define relatively bad. Unemployment and inflation were low. Current dollar GDP was up 4.1% and the market was near an all time high, as was median household income.
 
Last edited:
Raoul said:
I suppose you would need to define relatively bad. Unemployment and inflation were low. GDP was up 4.1% and the market was near an all time high, as was median household income.
Click to expand...
GDP growth in 2019 was 2.1%.
Under Trump, the annual GDP growth rate never reached 3%, let alone 4%.

2023 had faster growth than 2017-2019.
 
Calling us “cult” for voting for Biden because he’s facing Trump? Well, that means that you don’t understand the meaning of the word.

Let me be clear: get Trump out of the way, and I don’t mind Biden stepping aside too before the convention. I don’t mind. I just believe that Biden has the best chance of beating Trump. I like Newsom and Whitmer (was hoping to see her on the ticket 4 years ago). But, the country won’t vote for a guy from California at this point, nor for a woman. Besides, when a party replaces its president, it loses. As long as Trump is on the other side, we can’t afford losing, hence my vote for Biden.
 
TwoSheds said:
It's literally the only thing you can do. Civil disobedience, that sort of thing if you like. But voting for (or allowing in) someone who would do that and worse is just stupid. It won't help anyone in any way, it will just lead to more violence and more suffering.

Trump isn't a democrat conspiracy, he is his own problem.
Click to expand...

Once again, you can make the case for Trump vs Biden in that he'll do less damage.
But we have very very good evidence that protesting etc to make him shift his positions does NOT work. It was silly when this was said when these same back-and-forths happened in 2020, it is downright malicious when said in the midst of the proof that it has 0 effect.
"It's literally the only thing you can do." - you can protest during Trump too! It will have the same effect on his policies! (Once again, we have proof of that from the widespread pussy hat and immigration protests throughout his term - in fact they were slightly more effective than these, since the courts weren't fully on board with the immigration agenda
 
Last edited:
Sweet Square said:
The average voter is interesting
Click to expand...


The average voter would be “yes” for should “x” be a government service, where “x” is medical coverage, social security, safety net, etc. The average voter has moved too far left for the average voter.
 
maniak said:
OK, so when you vote for biden do you share the responsibility in palestinian genocide?
Click to expand...
Not in my opinion, no. It's idiotic to think every single voter is responsible for everything and everyone around the world. It's not even worth discussing, to be honest.
 
Sweet Square said:
The average voter is interesting
Click to expand...

I wonder how much that has changed since the Israel conflict because I know a handful of people myself who consider themselves socially progressive, fiscally conservative Republicans (aka the American middle/center right) who seemed to have little problem with things moving to the "left", until they heard of some Dems or Dem voters for even suggesting there are two sides of the story in Israel/Gaza. I guess somehow *that* is too progressive/too far left. :wenger:
 
Last edited:
Wait a second. I didn't really pay attention to SC results, but Trump only carried the state 60% to 40%? And he has no weaknesses?

:lol:
 
Iker Quesadillas said:
If I believed the leading presidential candidate in my country was preparing to unleash a fascist nightmare upon winning the election, what I would do is move to another country. To me that is the degree of seriousness the matter would imply.
Click to expand...

How do you suggest a single mother on minimum wage in rural Iowa "move to another country"? Moving to another state is probably unrealistic enough.
 
Iker Quesadillas said:
If I believed the leading presidential candidate in my country was preparing to unleash a fascist nightmare upon winning the election, what I would do is move to another country. To me that is the degree of seriousness the matter would imply.
Click to expand...




Same vibes.
 
SirAF said:
How do you suggest a single mother on minimum wage in rural Iowa "move to another country"? Moving to another state is probably unrealistic enough.
Click to expand...

I'm not talking about single mothers on minimum wage in rural Iowa.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.