It's gotta sting that an odious creature like Trump eviscerated him nationally and he later crawled back to lick the boots of his victorious rival. I suspect Cruz's kids have little affection for him.
2024 U.S. Elections | Trump wins
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
It's gotta sting that an odious creature like Trump eviscerated him nationally and he later crawled back to lick the boots of his victorious rival. I suspect Cruz's kids have little affection for him.
4-5 is probably a bit extreme. I think a 2 pt lead for Harris would be basically dead even. There has already been some encouraging polls in Georgia which have her within a point, and that's on the national vote being as close as it is.
Biden won the popular vote by 4.5 and barely squeaked by in the EC. She is therefore going to need at least comparable numbers to offset the popular vote disparity that is lopsidedly weighted towards including California and New York. Therefore if all she can muster is plus 2 in the national popular vote, chances are she will get swept in all the rust belt states and Trump will win the EC by 70-100.
Depends on where she gets turnout. Could be a very different landscape to Biden. More like Clinton.
Biden won by over 70 EVs, Harris can afford to lose 2 big states or 3 smaller ones to still make 270 compared to the map in 2020.
He barely squeaked by in about 4 states. Trump could’ve just as easily won despite Biden winning the popular by 4.
Vance is an all around disaster VP pick.
Very possible. Her winning the popular by a couple and losing the EC should be a lesson learned for Dems who think winning the popular by 1 or 2 would be sufficient for an EC win.
What lesson is there to learn, that the US has an election system that rewards some rural losers over where people actually live? I think that has been clear for a long time.
Not much dems can do about it, the system is what it is, and is almost impossible to update.
Not enough couch discourse imo. The AP actually fact-checking it is amazing. 
I believe a lead of 4 or 5 points or more would be safe for her, at this point or so. However, the outcome will depend on the turnout in a few swing states. It's hard to see how a lead of around 2 points would make those swing states viable for her, especially considering that states like Michigan and Pennsylvania seem to have shifted since 2020. In particular, Michigan has seen changes among Arab and Muslim voters.
People who complain about the Electoral College being unfair should just give up at this point. It can seem unfair, especially from a Democratic or progressive perspective because they want to win all the time but the system also aims to represent the other side. Overall, it's not performing too poorly for either side in general. I would think most essential governance happens at the state level, while the issues at the federal level often get more attention and mostly are just for show.
Last edited:
Not enough couch discourse imo. The AP actually fact-checking it is amazing.
Best thing is they've now taken it down
It's quite baffling that people can understand the minutia and strategy of political actions and write long and rich worded paragraphs about it with such confidence, but at the same time don't understand that desperate and ignored people might resort to destroying property when they see a community they identify with literally being blown to pieces.
Politicians must be understood because their hands are tied by the political game, they need to support genocide to win elections.
Protestors against genocide must be criticized because their methods might be counterproductive.
It's the complete moral bankruptcy of the country's political elite.
Politicians must be understood because their hands are tied by the political game, they need to support genocide to win elections.
Protestors against genocide must be criticized because their methods might be counterproductive.
It's the complete moral bankruptcy of the country's political elite.
I mean…. Yes? Seriously, what fantasy land do you live in where doing shit that pisses off the very people who hold the fate of something important to you is a good strategy.
Mate, you need to get this into your head. Nothing is going to change the current genocide. There is literally nothing anyone can do to change it. Gandhi, Mandela and MLK could come back from the dead and beg harris to stop the genocide and she would still keep sending bombs to kill children.
So honestly, feck strategy, these people are angry, hopeless and powerless. Asking them to be rational is honestly insulting at this point.
And I'm glad I don't live in the same land as you, where making excuses for genocidal maniacs is seen as a necessity.
With that attitude you’re right, nothing changes. Gaza is fecked, might as well quit and burn some shit.
And yes, you’re right, you may not live on my shitty country, but you live in a country that perpetrated untold horrors on a global scale for multiple centuries. Basically, countries suck and do shitty, self interest crap and it takes work, real and slow work to make changes.
I guess you need the coping mechanism. The blame lies on angry people, not those supporting these shit criminal politicians.
By the way, do you know that those arrested at the protest are all family members of hamas' victims? Would you tell them to their face what you're saying here? That the president has no choice but to commit genocide and they should just rethink their methods?
And the desperation is pretty obvious when you need to go back centuries to have a go at my country. Which to be honest I don't care, I'm not a patriot. For me the life of a portuguese, an american, an israeli or a gazan child all have the same value. It's sad that this is not true for most americans.
Rural loser? That's harsh mate.
Just because you live in the city doesnt make your vote means more.
This reasoning is equally valid for literally any protest targeting politicians, ever, and that should be reason enough to discard it.
On the contrary, it’s worth far less.
Quite right too, there's absolutely no way they can confidently be stating it didn't happen and it was greatly unprofessional of them to have tried to do so.Best thing is they've now taken it down
This is true in my experience. Some states will protect you from Trumpism much better than others. Choose your abode carefully.
It’s not a fecking coping mechanism, it’s reality. You want the US government to stop enabling genocide? Stop giving their leaders excuses to avoid doing so, it’s not that difficult a concept.
As to you second paragraph? Absolutely I would say to their face that peaceful actions were the only path forward, except they were already peacefully protesting in the rotunda, a fact that was barely covered because some dumbfecks were doing stupid shit. And where do you get off saying that I have intimated that the president “had no choice but to commit genocide”? He had every choice and made the worst possible choice.
And finally, no desperation on my part, just pointing out how no country, especially the former colonial ones, are innocent. Where do you think America learned its genocidal lessons from?
Well, the reason I'm skeptical of that JVP protest making any impact at all is because the exact same protest has been happening at Grand Central in New York, practically every weekend. And has made no impact. At all.
> As to you second paragraph? Absolutely I would say to their face that peaceful actions were the only path forward, except they were already peacefully protesting in the rotunda, a fact that was barely covered because some dumbfecks were doing stupid shit
The media and political leadership do have agency. They can choose to report the kafkaesque spectavle of the 5 people arrested from within Bibi's hall all being family members of the hostages. They could focus on the images from outside the hall within the capitol of JVP arrested for sitting down. The framing and priority given to the story inside and outside is in their hands.
You have seen in the university protests how the media and politicians covered for the fact that, for example, pro-Israel outsiders repeatedly assaulted UCLA student protestors, that Columbia protestors were hit by an Israeli student with chemicals that didn't leave their skin and clothes for months, that there were snipers on the roof of Indiana University, that almost all violence-related charges against the protestors have been quietly dropped months after their reputation, career, and life was destroyed. They didn't cover any of that. You're living in some fantasy where a polite protest makes politicians happy and the media sympathetic. No. There are actual ideological and material factors here.
The US is an active party to genocide. A child bled to death over hours, on the phone with her mother and doctors, while the bullets I paid for shot up the ambulances approaching her. I'm glad the people in DC had the guts and heart to demonstrate what the US is. Balls which I lack.
I - and you - belong in jail, at best in a re-education camp.
Last edited:
Absolutely they do, and they are all failing us. I'm not out here defending the media or the politicians, in fact I will unequivocally say, again, that they are almost, to a person, failing us. Whether it be for votes or ratings, their goal is not to better the world, or even the US, but instead to enhance themselves. These are people that need little excuse to avoid doing what is right in the service of doing what is advantageous to them and those they are beholden to. My only comment was that those in search of change can not merely be on the side of what is right and just, but that they must also be as close to perfect in their actions as possible. What the family members did was noble and what needs to be done. What the college protesters did was by and large brave and just. But in both cases, instead of those people leading the news they were relegated, at best, to the end of the show as those who purported to be acting in their name gave the media and politicians the red meat they desired.
You talk about polite and peaceful protest not making change possible.. I would ask you to point me towards meaningful change that happened in this country in the last 100 years where the driving force was violence or rage. That is simply not how change happens.
The US government is indeed an active participant in genocide, and if you want to go to jail for that then go for it. If you truly feel that way then I would expect you are on your way to turn yourself into the ICC, right?
As I said, I don't have the guts to do what the people in DC did. I'm selfish, and care about my job, my future, my visa, etc. I'm not standing on some moral high ground here. Recognising that, I'm absolutely not going to - ever - question the actions of braver, better people. I'm going to question those who have authority instead.
A jail sentence for me would absolutely be deserved.
Forget jail, by Israeli standards, which I obviously don't agree with, I would also be a legitimate military target as a financial sponsor.
Attacking police officers is not brave. Setting fire to a flag is not brave. Defacing monuments is not brave. What those family members did is brave. What the protesters, especially hostage family members, do in Israel is brave. Peacefully standing up to authority is brave. Wearing a mask and smashing a cop from behind is not brave, and if you think that is bravery and a valid tactic to protest Gaza then we are on vastly different sides of the equation.
Within the context of the election, which this thread is about, I’m still waiting to hear how a candidate can campaign to win the presidency while also supporting flag burning, vandalism, and attacking police.
I think there are better times to deploy this spiel about political realities than now, a few days after liberals/Democrats had to switch their presidential candidate after being the last people on earth to realize that you cannot campaign to win the presidency with an 80-year-old who the overwhelming majority of voters find too old. No shame in getting things wrong, but it is annoying when it is paired with repeated lessons about how everyone else is 'being unrealistic' or whatever.
So no strategy recommendations?
Oh, and I would be super interested if you could point me to where on this Caf this group Dem and Lib exists that was all on the Biden train. Pretty sure most, if not all, of us, were most assuredly not. Rolling with the only candidate you have after the primaries is not the same as being the "last people on earth.....".
I guess that I am sorry that my question doesn’t align with your scheduling.
100%.
You are a perfect example of what I'm talking about:
Here you are confidently lecturing people about the reality of the situation and yet your assessment of reality was completely wrong. Biden did not die and isn't the nominee.
By ignoring it?
Many things happened that day, including a speech which was the cause of those "vandals" being in town. She could have made a statement on the speech, like Pelosi or Bernie did. Or on the protests inside. Or on the arrested family members inside.
She chose to make her statement about the "vandals" outside. It's probably fine for her election. As I said before, most voters are passively pro-genocide, few people have red lines. Having Biden policies come from someone who can pretend to give a damn will win a lot of young voters who follow primarily the aesthetics of the situation.
I'm not sure if staying silent would have lost her any support, but I guess she wanted to show she was on the right side of history
Is this where it's worth pointing out that her party invited that man to give the speech?
I’m sorry, but you’re the 2nd person to suggest that today and I can’t bring myself to believe that yall are being serious.
I thought it was a facile question. Boiling down the issue to 'flag burning and vandalism' leads the answer in one direction.
A recent Harvard CAPS/Harris poll found that 25% of Democratic and 20% of Independent respondents favor Hamas over Israel. One might also wonder how a campaign can win by treating this 20-25% as "abhorrent".