2024 U.S. Elections | Trump wins

If Michelle Obama ran, I think she'd almost certainly beat Trump. She's very intelligent, articulate, likeable. I'm not sure Harris ticks those boxes to the same degree, which is why I think Trump still has the edge. It's gonna be very close, the debate in September is massive. Obviously Biden was gonna lose. While I'm hopeful Harris will win, you can't underestimate the number of people who love Orange face.
 
RedDevil@84 said:
Obama's speech reminds me why Trump coming right after him was one of the most shocking things of that year. It was unbelievable that US would go from a guy who walks and talks like that to Trump.
Click to expand...
I reckon having a black man in the white house did a lot to further radicalise the right. They couldn't stomach it. At all.

In 2008, the Republican party still nominated John McCain. And even followed with Mitt Romney four years later. That seems a lifetime ago for where the party is today.
 
Last edited:
Charlie Foley said:
How are they both this good at public speaking? I swear I hear someone speak and I think “they spoke very well” and then an Obama speaks and I wonder are there good speakers or are there just Obamas and everyone else. Is there a lectern in every room in their house or something?
Click to expand...

I can't really comment on Michelle, but Barrack is the best political speaker I've ever heard in my life, and it's not even by a close margin
 
B20 said:
I reckon having a black man in the white house did a lot to further radicalise the right. They couldn't stomach it. At all.

In 2008, the Republican party still nominated John McCain. And even followed with Mitt Romney four years later. That seems a lifetime ago for where the party is today.
Click to expand...

A lot of the right wing type talk about how Obama was this huge divider and was the reason for all of this division in society, but I've never actually been able to see what he did to cause this division besides being black
 
Cloud7 said:
A lot of the right wing type talk about how Obama was this huge divider and was the reason for all of this division in society, but I've never actually been able to see what he did to cause this division besides being black
Click to expand...
They would say he put more focus on race relations (I mean besides the obvious focus generated by him being elected), which doesn't seem to be particularly true - at least not in his first term. His two terms also coincided with the inception of the Black Lives Matter movement following the shootings of Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown in particular, so I imagine many right-wing types draw a connection between Obama and that movement, which is a real boogeyman for them.
 
Mitch McConnell as senate leader in those years probably also did it's part. There are few politicians who have done more to undermine American democracy than McConnell in modern history. Probably only Trump.
 
B20 said:
Mitch McConnell as senate leader in those years probably also did it's part. There are few politicians who have done more to undermine American democracy than McConnell in modern history. Probably only Trump.
Click to expand...
He'll go down as one of if not the most influential US political figure in the modern era (Turtle). It's a great example of knowing what you want, analysing the system, identifying weaknesses and then getting it. I don't agree with Mitch's view of the world, but I respect his single-mindedness and devotion to shaping the world to it.

He fundamentally believes (quite a lot like this iteration of Vance) that the US would best prosper under a traditional family structure, largely driven by white Christian ideals and beliefs. And that the US would do better under that than under democracy. Once you realise that, it's a lot easier to process the actions of these people. Both Vance and McConnell would probably upright say that democracy is holding back American success, and that it would be better under 'their' view of the world.

Once Mitch saw he couldn't win by appealing to voters, he charted a course that didn't need them, and it's nothing if not impressive.

The fact that those on the other side (pro democracy) have been unable to muster the drive and discipline to fight him is an indictment of us, not him.
 
WI_Red said:
1. She’s a woman
2. She’s a Clinton
3. James Comey

Edit: 4. Horrific campaign, especially in WI
Click to expand...
No 3 is the top reason, without Comey she would have almost certainly won
 
berbatrick said:


For the first time I believe she can be president
Click to expand...


Depends greatly on what happens in November, if Harris doesn't win, it means the US still isn't ready for a woman to be president anytime soon.

Well, the stupid electoral college that is, the actual people don't mind.
 
Morty_ said:
Depends greatly on what happens in November, if Harris doesn't win, it means the US still isn't ready for a woman to be president anytime soon.

Well, the stupid electoral college that is, the actual people don't mind.
Click to expand...
The earliest she can run in 2032 anyway, provided Schumer retires and she wins the Senate seat in 28. 0 chance of her running for prez in 28 given that all her experience by then will just be being a safe blue seat Congresdwoman for a decade.
 
InfiniteBoredom said:
The earliest she can run in 2032 anyway, provided Schumer retires and she wins the Senate seat in 28. 0 chance of her running for prez in 28 given that all her experience by then will just be being a safe blue seat Congresdwoman for a decade.
Click to expand...

She has the identity credentials for the primary, she has the base libs who she didn't have earlier, she is building coalitions within the party. This wouldn't be a hostile takeover like Bernie, but a gentle change, centre-right VP and all. Definitely a smaller climb to the nomination.
And if Kamala can turn around her national numbers, AOC probably can too.
 
berbatrick said:


For the first time I believe she can be president
Click to expand...


As pointed out in the comments, even Ilhan Omar met with hostage families. It would be incredibly odd if a US politician declined to do so given that there are 8 American citizens still being held hostage.

The tweeter simply seems to be making provocative statements for attention.
 
Raoul said:
As pointed out in the comments, even Ilhan Omar met with hostage families. It would be incredibly odd if a US politician declined to do so given that there are 8 American citizens still being held hostage.

The tweeter simply seems to be making provocative statements for attention.
Click to expand...

This wasn't just any hostage, he was IDF. She has also shown maturity with her rhetoric, didn't say needlessly inflammatory words like "genocide", and said Harris is already working hard for a ceasefire (which she didn't define as permanent or as needing Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, both of which are off the cards for the Biden-Bibi side), and didn't make any further demands.

It's not just the one tweet, there's an article and a post too:



Raoul said:
Yeah I noticed that. I think much of the progressive movement has been subsumed into the party at this point. A lot of what Sanders was selling has been picked up by the likes of Harris and others and AOC is drifting towards the center.
Click to expand...
 
berbatrick said:
This wasn't just any hostage, he was IDF. She has also shown maturity with her rhetoric, didn't say needlessly inflammatory words like "genocide", and said Harris is already working hard for a ceasefire (which she didn't define as permanent or as needing Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, both of which are off the cards for the Biden-Bibi side), and didn't make any further demands.

It's not just the one tweet, there's an article and a post too:

Click to expand...


This doesn't account for anything the tweeter is saying about the squad being in decline. For starters, the squad isn't an actual thing, but rather a branding that was given to four new members in 2020. Each of them are still largely progressives by policy, even though AOC is attempting to cast herself as not being a member of the fringe. The likes of Omar, Talib, and Pressley are still pretty much the same, which is in contravention to what the tweeter is saying.
 
Raoul said:
This doesn't account for anything the tweeter is saying about the squad being in decline. For starters, the squad isn't an actual thing, but rather a branding that was given to four new members in 2020. Each of them are still largely progressives by policy, even though AOC is attempting to cast herself as not being a member of the fringe. The likes of Omar, Talib, and Pressley are still pretty much the same, which is in contravention to what the tweeter is saying.
Click to expand...

It has reduced in size this year, with 2 defeats. Omar is always vulnerable to a similar campaign too.
Anyway, my main point was about AOC getting ready for prime time, which you seem to agree with.
 
WI_Red said:
1. She’s a woman
2. She’s a Clinton
3. James Comey

Edit: 4. Horrific campaign, especially in WI
Click to expand...

I don't think the first had anything to do with it.

She was just unlikeable and unable to connect to common man, esp.in key states like Pennsylvania, Michigan etc. Plus the Dems kinda overestimated her appeal and underestimated Trump's.
 
berbatrick said:
It has reduced in size this year, with 2 defeats. Omar is always vulnerable to a similar campaign too.
Anyway, my main point was about AOC getting ready for prime time, which you seem to agree with.
Click to expand...

Bowman and Bush weren't original "members". Both of them lost for reasons out of their own control due to the influence of AIPAC money. Therefore the tweeter, who looks like a pro-Israeli influencer, seems to be taking a victory lap that AIPAC has help to ruin the squad, when the original members are all still in congress.
 
Edgar Allan Pillow said:
I don't think the first had anything to do with it.

She was just unlikeable and unable to connect to common man, esp.in key states like Pennsylvania, Michigan etc. Plus the Dems kinda overestimated her appeal and underestimated Trump's.
Click to expand...

It definitely didn't help. She was unlikable for sure, but part of what made her unlikable to many was definitely that she was an assertive woman.
 
nimic said:
It definitely didn't help. She was unlikable for sure, but part of what made her unlikable to many was definitely that she was an assertive woman.
Click to expand...
I'd say the issue was she is a Clinton with all the baggage that came with
 
Edgar Allan Pillow said:
I don't think the first had anything to do with it.

She was just unlikeable and unable to connect to common man, esp.in key states like Pennsylvania, Michigan etc. Plus the Dems kinda overestimated her appeal and underestimated Trump's.
Click to expand...

It was probably an improbable confluence of all factors.
 
The Firestarter said:
I'd say the issue was she is a Clinton with all the baggage that came with
Click to expand...

Hilary was a pantomime villain for right wingers ever since the 90s when she made the "stay home and bake cookies" comment, which was then followed up by Bill putting her in charge of universal healthcare. So you had two scenarios that pissed off the right from the beginning - a direct challenge of traditional values by an assertive woman who rejected the idea of being a housewife in lieu of a professional career, and second, a Hilary led attempt to reduce corporate influence and power in healthcare.

This level of resentment was maintained throughout her Senate and SecState careers and into her Presidential campaigns, and was the foundation of everything from the Benghazi investigations to her email server during the 16 campaign. Hillary of course didn't help her own cause by not covering her basis to thwart such attacks.
 
Raoul said:
Hilary was a pantomime villain for right wingers ever since the 90s when she made the "stay home and bake cookies" comment, which was then followed up by Bill putting her in charge of universal healthcare. So you had two scenarios that pissed off the right from the beginning - a direct challenge of traditional values by an assertive woman who rejected the idea of being a housewife in lieu of a professional career, and second, a Hilary led attempt to reduce corporate influence and power in healthcare.

This level of resentment was maintained throughout her Senate and SecState careers and into her Presidential campaigns, and was the foundation of everything from the Benghazi investigations to her email server during the 16 campaign. Hillary of course didn't help her own cause by not covering her basis to thwart such attacks.
Click to expand...
Be that as it may, w.r.t to "the right", my point was actually about independents and also mostly usual dem voters but not the core electorate that will always go and vote. She just couldn't bring people to vote and yeah it's due to multiple of issue which were not exactly unknown either. However it was "her turn" in '16.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.