2024 U.S. Elections | Trump wins

It varies by state but in Maryland, you have to register for a party to vote in their primaries (you can only vote in your party's primaries in Maryland).
But primaries are done right? So now it's just for shits and giggles?
 
I give a shit about a womans right to chose along with a hundred other things that you yourself enjoy in your country. If american politics doesn't agree with you then don't comment, simple.
Is that an order, sir?
 
If it wasn't Gaza it would be something else. They weren't too bothered about an apartheid state before the violence escalated to this extreme.
Don't project, mate. I went to a march supporting palestine when I was 16. I'm 39 now.
 
So

Where has that stick been to beat on Republicans?
Republicans are scum, no one expects anything from them. Democrats are supposed to be the good guys, no? Yet, they support genocide all the way.
 
You're in the election thread. These issues are being discussed in the context of the election.

Of course what the US is doing is shameful and there should be a reckoning. It should not, however, be timed so as to hand the country back over to Trump. Do it on November 6th.

Jill Stein trying to siphon off votes in Michigan is beyond stupid. If Trump gets re-elected it will harm Palestinians more in the long run.



Disgraceful.

Yes the issues are. Nobody is advocating voting for Trump though?

What bothers me in this particular instance ( I can't speak for others) is what prompted me to reply to Raoul this time.

I'm not even one of the posters on this thread constantly going on about the conflict. But it bothers me when some posters bring it down to Meh, Biden and the dems literally have no choice.

That is what I'm challenging. The gaslighting that this is literally the only possible response from American politics, even when people give actual historical occasions of when that wasn't the case.

Say that the American politics is, for various reasons, generally pro Israel.
Say that the USA were always going to support Israel, especially in the initial aftermath of Hamas' attack.
Say that the majority of Americans, regardless of the number of deaths, will always prioritise domestic issues over foreign policy ones. Even if that is a potential American supported genocide.
Say that some Americans see this as a genuine existential fight for democracy.
Say that almost anyone would get a vote over Trump.

All are true to some extent and even fair.

But please don't say that this response, even now, is the only way. It just objectively isn't and American history points to that fact.
 
Exactly right. It's easy to sit, safely (for the time being, who knows if Trump backs out of NATO for example), in Europe and criticize.
I can say the same. It's easy to sit saely in your home in america while your government supports the murder of tens of thousands of children.
 


Biden dropped out July 24th.

Looked like we were on course for a Trump 350+ EV win.


Looks to be part of a long(ish) term trend:



Republicans: +393,365
Democrats: -3,584,321
Independent: +1,802,932

Think some of this might be due to Republicans being the only party with competitive primaries this time round. Obviously this doesn't explain July.
 
Most people only register to vote when they get or update their driver's license. I registered to vote when I moved to Maryland 23 years ago and registered as democrat so I can vote in the primaries. It's not something you have to do every election cycle.
It's always a bit strange seeing the US democratic process from a country where all citizens aged 18 and above simply get a ballot send to their home address close to election time and where the parties have decided on a leader themselves.
 
The idea that people on the left were not upset about Israel until 2023 is not even worth commenting on.

It's such a crazy notion. When I was younger I was heavily involved in activism and it was really difficult to have different left wing groups agree on something, everyone had their stupid little ideological quirks. But there were two things that united everyone: israel should end the occupation, indonesia should end the occupation of timor. It's been something all the left is in agreement for decades.
 
Looks to be part of a long(ish) term trend:



Republicans: +393,365
Democrats: -3,584,321
Independent: +1,802,932

Think some of this might be due to Republicans being the only party with competitive primaries this time round. Obviously this doesn't explain July.


What the feck? The dems have lost 3.5 million registered voters?
 
What the feck? The dems have lost 3.5 million registered voters?
My guess is that a majority of them switched to "non affiliated". There was also some that flipped to republican to mess with primaries in 22, so maybe that?? Also, the NY line is odd (to me who knows nothing about how this is tabulated). Would that be based on people moving away?
 
My guess is that a majority of them switched to "non affiliated". There was also some that flipped to republican to mess with primaries in 22, so maybe that?? Also, the NY line is odd (to me who knows nothing about how this is tabulated). Would that be based on people moving away?

Is there anything stopping someone from registering for both parties to vote in the primaries? Legally I mean.
 


This is going to get played over and over, in certain states.
 
Is there anything stopping someone from registering for both parties to vote in the primaries? Legally I mean.
I believe you can only be registered for one party (or unaffiliated) at a time, so since the primaries are on the same day this would not be possible.

edit: also, not all states restrict primary voting to the party you are registered for. I cannot remember which state it was, but at one point in my life I had to say Dem or Rep when I showed up to vote and then they gave me the corresponding ballot.
 


I mean yes? The two party system is extremely fecking stupid and should be done away with - but I fail to see why considering the broader context of the election in the election thread is a problem?
Yes the issues are. Nobody is advocating voting for Trump though?

What bothers me in this particular instance ( I can't speak for others) is what prompted me to reply to Raoul this time.

I'm not even one of the posters on this thread constantly going on about the conflict. But it bothers me when some posters bring it down to Meh, Biden and the dems literally have no choice.

That is what I'm challenging. The gaslighting that this is literally the only possible response from American politics, even when people give actual historical occasions of when that wasn't the case.

Say that the American politics is, for various reasons, generally pro Israel.
Say that the USA were always going to support Israel, especially in the initial aftermath of Hamas' attack.
Say that the majority of Americans, regardless of the number of deaths, will always prioritise domestic issues over foreign policy ones. Even if that is a potential American supported genocide.
Say that some Americans see this as a genuine existential fight for democracy.
Say that almost anyone would get a vote over Trump.

All are true to some extent and even fair.

But please don't say that this response, even now, is the only way. It just objectively isn't and American history points to that fact.
I don't disagree with any of that. Biden has done a pathetic job holding the Israelis accountable and it's a stain on his legacy. That said, I think some people at times put too much of the blame on him solely - ignoring the billions of dollars spent over decades by lobbyists who have their tentacles in everything now.

My point is that the election is a zero sum game. Criticizing the US and its pro-Apartheid foreign policy is a good thing and should be celebrated - but I don't think this is a reasonable critique to throw at Kamala specifically, especially given the alternative.
 
What the feck? The dems have lost 3.5 million registered voters?

Barring large errors with the figures it would seem so, maybe more. That spreadsheet just covers the states where info is easily retrievable. It would be interesting to see a breakdown based on age to see where this decline is coming from.

My intuition tells me that at least some of this is Democrats not having a competitive primary added to voter apathy due to being the party in power. There's also been a fair bit of a "purging" of the voter rolls in certain states. It would be hard to argue that it doesn't reflect some change in voter sentiment though.

I do worry how this affects poll sampling. Independents would be more likely to vote Democrat than usual, but there ought to be a reduction in the sampling of people identifying as Democrat.
 
So it is looking increasingly likely that the Democrats will win the election. A couple of weeks ago, there were reports about Biden planning a supreme court reform and getting rid of the presidential immunity to an extent. I asked the same question four years ago but are there any hopes that all the rather undemocratic and outdated constitutional stuff like electoral college, gerrymandering, two party system, etc. are being tackled by the Democrats if Harris becomes president?

It would make it much, much harder for Republicans to be elected, especially lunatics like Trump, in the future. d
 
I mean yes? The two party system is extremely fecking stupid and should be done away with - but I fail to see why considering the broader context of the election in the election thread is a problem?

I don't disagree with any of that. Biden has done a pathetic job holding the Israelis accountable and it's a stain on his legacy. That said, I think some people at times put too much of the blame on him solely - ignoring the billions of dollars spent over decades by lobbyists who have their tentacles in everything now.

My point is that the election is a zero sum game. Criticizing the US and its pro-Apartheid foreign policy is a good thing and should be celebrated - but I don't think this is a reasonable critique to throw at Kamala specifically, especially given the alternative.
I disagree to some extent. I think it is valid criticism to levy, at Biden, and by association, Harris. The only way to push the party to change is to keep up pressure via criticism, protesting, "undecided" votes, etc.

That being said though, once the general election rolls around it becomes a which is the least bad situation.
 
So it is looking increasingly likely that the Democrats will win the election. A couple of weeks ago, there were reports about Biden planning a supreme court reform and getting rid of the presidential immunity to an extent. I asked the same question four years ago but are there any hopes that all the rather undemocratic and outdated constitutional stuff like electoral college, gerrymandering, two party system, etc. are being tackled by the Democrats if Harris becomes president?

It would make it much, much harder for Republicans to be elected, especially lunatics like Trump, in the future. d

The EC, if i believe correctly, requires a constitutional amendment to be taken care of, 2/3 of congress, so its not happening.

There is nothing much, i think, that prevents dems from adding more states though, if dems have a trifecta again they need to prioritize self-preservation, abolish the filibuster and add Puerto Rico and DC, for extra EC votes, and to level the playing field in the senate.
 
So it is looking increasingly likely that the Democrats will win the election. A couple of weeks ago, there were reports about Biden planning a supreme court reform and getting rid of the presidential immunity to an extent. I asked the same question four years ago but are there any hopes that all the rather undemocratic and outdated constitutional stuff like electoral college, gerrymandering, two party system, etc. are being tackled by the Democrats if Harris becomes president?

It would make it much, much harder for Republicans to be elected, especially lunatics like Trump, in the future. d
3 months is an eternity in politics. Let’s not count our chicken yet.

But to answer your questions, no, those are beyond the power of any modern era president. There must be a groundswell of public support, an organized effort, and generations of elected officials beholden to those organized effort to make those come true. It took the likes of Heritage Foundation 50 years to overturn Roe, or the NRA to turn the assault weapon ban into Heller vs DC.

There needs to be at least, at LEAST, 6 consecutive Democratic administrations to get a majority on the court that will be solid for campaign financing, VRA, gerrymandering, abortion, etc
 


If +5 in Florida is true then it’s very likely + 1-3 Harris everywhere else. Trump won by 3.5 in 2020 and it has gone even redder since.
 
You can keep on repeating this.

Then people will reply, generally agreeing but pointing out that other presidents have gone nowhere near as far as Biden, with some withholding arms when they want to pressurise Israel. They may also point out the polling that in terms of the Democrat base is nowhere near as pro-Israel as the Republican base. Which we've seen in the past 2 elections, regardless of what Trump does, will eventually fall in line and back him.

Then the gaslighting will continue, ignoring the above and continuing to repeat the mantra that this is basically the only way.

Then someone will say Trump and the conversation lies there.

Rinse and repeat.

I think for many of these people, a better reply is that both candidates being pro-Israel is simply a reflection of US public opinion which is deeply racist, imperialist, and pro -genocide; in need of widespread re-education at best :)
 
I think for many of these people, a better reply is that both candidates being pro-Israel is simply a reflection of US public opinion which is deeply racist, imperialist, and pro -genocide; in need of widespread re-education at best :)

You would be correct in the first part. The US public are generally pro-Israel with the exception of the youth, who are notorious for protesting and complaining on social media, but not actually to turning up to vote.
 
The EC, if i believe correctly, requires a constitutional amendment to be taken care of, 2/3 of congress, so its not happening.

There is nothing much, i think, that prevents dems from adding more states though, if dems have a trifecta again they need to prioritize self-preservation, abolish the filibuster and add Puerto Rico and DC, for extra EC votes, and to level the playing field in the senate.
Any constitutional amendment also requires 3/4 of states as well as 2/3 of Congress, that's even less likely.

Re; Filibuster, abolishing it has consequences, this was done for the nomination of SCOTUS judges and look where that ended up, the filibuster needs to change, probably by reducing the numbers required, it serves a purpose as it means there needs to be some bi-partisan ship
 
The EC, if i believe correctly, requires a constitutional amendment to be taken care of, 2/3 of congress, so its not happening.

There is nothing much, i think, that prevents dems from adding more states though, if dems have a trifecta again they need to prioritize self-preservation, abolish the filibuster and add Puerto Rico and DC, for extra EC votes, and to level the playing field in the senate.

3 months is an eternity in politics. Let’s not count our chicken yet.

But to answer your questions, no, those are beyond the power of any modern era president. There must be a groundswell of public support, an organized effort, and generations of elected officials beholden to those organized effort to make those come true. It took the likes of Heritage Foundation 50 years to overturn Roe, or the NRA to turn the assault weapon ban into Heller vs DC.

There needs to be at least, at LEAST, 6 consecutive Democratic administrations to get a majority on the court that will be solid for campaign financing, VRA, gerrymandering, abortion, etc

Doesn't sound as if there will be any significant changes to those things anytime soon. A bit disappointing but I guess it is what it is
 
You would be correct in the first part. The US public are generally pro-Israel with the exception of the youth, who are notorious for protesting and complaining on social media, but not actually to turning up to vote.

The second part follows from the first, unless you think it's good to be racist, pro-imperialism or genocide (and as part the Iraq occupation, that may be an open question?). After all, the US is a Liberal Democracy with a Free Press, it's not like any information about the history or current reality is being censored from them!
 
The EC, if i believe correctly, requires a constitutional amendment to be taken care of, 2/3 of congress, so its not happening.

There is nothing much, i think, that prevents dems from adding more states though, if dems have a trifecta again they need to prioritize self-preservation, abolish the filibuster and add Puerto Rico and DC, for extra EC votes, and to level the playing field in the senate.

In theory there's also the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, but at best that would just circumvent the system.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Interstate_Compact
 
The second part follows from the first, unless you think it's good to be racist, pro-imperialism or genocide (and as part the Iraq occupation, that may be an open question?). After all, the US is a Liberal Democracy with a Free Press, it's not like any information about the history or current reality is being censored from them!

It would make sense if it were true. The reality is the US public aren't galvanized culturally, socially, or ideationally, which makes for a lot of conflicting opinions about various subjects. The Israel issue is the only one with cultural cross-over appeal because of evangelicals on the right, and a lot of casual Christians and Jews in the middle and on the slight center left.
 
Its a false choice since US voters don't have the ability to start or stop anything in the Middle East since both options are to varying degrees always going to be pro-Israel.
I don't disagree, but the agenda from a certain poster is that by voting for one side means you are enabling/supporting genocide, so you must support another side
 
Any constitutional amendment also requires 3/4 of states as well as 2/3 of Congress, that's even less likely.

Re; Filibuster, abolishing it has consequences, this was done for the nomination of SCOTUS judges and look where that ended up, the filibuster needs to change, probably by reducing the numbers required, it serves a purpose as it means there needs to be some bi-partisan ship

Requires the states that benefits most from the system to go against it, yeah, not happening.

I see your point that abolishing the filibuster can backfire, but the way i see it, the filibuster is a relic that needs to be abolished anyway, to get things done, the days of 60 senators for either party are long gone.

Maybe reduce it, like you say, is also an option, say 55?