2024 US Presidential Election

[Lisnaholic]

Plenty said so during the previous government.

May
Johnson (the cunt)
Truss
Sunak

All got to be PM without winning an election.

Three of them went on to win one as PMs but it's not the same.

^ Yep, I remember the unpopularity of this roster of Tory PM's, and the brief, misguided hope that each replacement would be an improvement

I don't think I said it should be downplayed - what I did say is that if the Democrats continue to signal boost the message, it won't ultimately help them - and in fact it might damage them (just my opinion). There's been several recent articles/opinion pieces that argue much in the same vein - which admittedly, doesn't mean I'm right - just saying my opinion is by no means unique. If you think the Democrats should continue to make that the focal point of their messaging with less than 2 weeks to the election, and that somehow, this strategy of theirs that they've employed since the 2016 election cycle will somehow make the difference between their defeat and their victory, that not enough voters have heard messaging comparing Trump to Hitler and/or fascists, then we simply disagree, and that's fine.

Reductio ad Hitlerum: 60 years of Democrats falsely calling the Republican nominee a fascist

^ I looked at the first article on the basis of its neat title, but after your calm and measured comments, it read like blatant propaganda to me:-

Democrats first warned Trump was a fascist in 2015 and 2016. They repeated the attacks throughout his presidency and reelection campaign in 2020 and are resurrecting it today. It's indicative of how vile and divisive the Democrats are, all the while claiming and portraying themselves as civil and respectful. It's nonsense.

It is pure, unadulterated, radical, extremist, left-wing propaganda. The only people who believe these Nazi and fascist comparisons are the massively brainwashed and indoctrinated Democrat voters and left-wing sycophants.

I take your point that the Dems have too often cried wolf, but what if this time there really is a wolf!? I can't do the historical comparison thing with Goldwater, etc, but I think Trump is in a different category compared to previous Republican candidates. Has anyone before Trump gone to such lengths to try to overturn legit election results? Has anyone else talked so consistently about weaponising the tools of government (incl. the military) for revenge against "the enemies of the people"?

If there is a fair amount of lazy name-calling ("fascist" from the Dems) there's an equal amount from the Republicans too ("communist","Marxist"), but as usual with the Trump era GOP, their name calling is not backed up with any facts. I have seen no evidence of Marxist or communist policies in the Dems agenda, past or present. On the other hand, we have all seen the quotes, the prior behaviour, the Project 25 to validate the accusations that Trump is a fascist wannabe authoritarian.

[DJChameleon]

The funniest claims about Kamala being a communist crack me up because I'm always screaming I wish. She is so damn moderate that it hurts. She's basically a corporate Democrat on steroids and today I'm reluctantly voting for her.

[DJChameleon]

So Trump did his interview with Joe Rogan for anyone interested in listening with a few hours on their hand...I'm sure the clips will circulate shortly if they haven't already.

This interview is so annoying 😑. I'm sure I will torture myself listening to it but just listening to his constant lies and half truths is annoying.

[SGR]

[SGR]

^ Yep, I remember the unpopularity of this roster of Tory PM's, and the brief, misguided hope that each replacement would be an improvement

^ I looked at the first article on the basis of its neat title, but after your calm and measured comments, it read like blatant propaganda to me:-

I take your point that the Dems have too often cried wolf, but what if this time there really is a wolf!? I can't do the historical comparison thing with Goldwater, etc, but I think Trump is in a different category compared to previous Republican candidates. Has anyone before Trump gone to such lengths to try to overturn legit election results? Has anyone else talked so consistently about weaponising the tools of government (incl. the military) for revenge against "the enemies of the people"?

If there is a fair amount of lazy name-calling ("fascist" from the Dems) there's an equal amount from the Republicans too ("communist","Marxist"), but as usual with the Trump era GOP, their name calling is not backed up with any facts. I have seen no evidence of Marxist or communist policies in the Dems agenda, past or present. On the other hand, we have all seen the quotes, the prior behaviour, the Project 25 to validate the accusations that Trump is a fascist wannabe authoritarian.

Republicans definitely do call Democrats communists and marxists - one of Trump's favorites over either of those though seems to be 'the radical left'. As DJ said though, where Kamala used to openly talk about her support for many progressive policies and positions, she's almost entirely shifted to the center in her transformation into a generic corporate Democrat. Of course, shifting to the center is nothing new for the general election (relative to the primary). It could be that the Democrats are trying to make gains among the old stodgy GOP guard that the likes of Liz/Dick Cheney and Mitt Romney represent, as well as possibly once excited Nikki Haley supporters who are just looking for permission (in a sense) to vote for Harris (which might include their choice to recently refocus on messaging about Trump and fascism/authoritarianism). It's seemingly a risky gamble, as we know that Trump has been making in-roads with working-class voters who used to be reliable Dem voters. NBC had an article recently that noted this:

A new report commissioned by a labor-backed group is examining a problem many Democrats might rather ignore: the exodus of working-class voters from the party they used to call home.

Republicans under former President Donald Trump have been making inroads in the working class, including among Black and Hispanic voters, while Democrats have been gaining suburban moderates and highly educated professionals that used to vote Republican.

"Increasingly, Republicans are the party of working class people," Ohio Sen. JD Vance, Donald Trump's running mate, said during a recent podcast interview, while noting that CEOs and other wealthy professionals have shifted toward Democrats.

Some voices on the left have downplayed the significance or even denied the loss of working class voters, but the data is increasingly clear and signs of realignment are everywhere.

"I've watched as MAGA flags have encroached into my community, which used to be a solid deep-blue working-class suburb of New York made of ethnic whites and people of color," said Maurice Mitchell, the national director of the Working Families Party, a labor-backed group that aims to organize a multiracial working-class coalition. "Republicans are making inroads into the working class, and it's not just white working class people."

If pursuing the support/votes of the GOP of old is the planned late-stage pitch for the Democrats, I would think it's at least a risky gamble - it reminds me of comments made by Chuck Schumer in the runup to the 2016 election, where they employed a similar strategy (remember Hillary not campaigning in certain blue wall states?):

In the run-up to the 2016 election, Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) dismissed the possibility that Donald Trump's popularity with rural and working-class voters spelled trouble for the Democratic ticket. "For every blue-collar Democrat we lose in western Pennsylvania, we will pick up two moderate Republicans in the suburbs in Philadelphia," he proclaimed, reflecting the prevailing attitude within the party establishment. "And you can repeat that in Ohio and Illinois and Wisconsin."

One year after the election, it's not clear that Democrats have learned their lesson. Many have deluded themselves into believing that Russian interference, and not the party's abysmal failure to win over the working class, was the primary culprit in Hillary Clinton's crushing defeat. Clinton herself has pointed fingers at Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and former FBI director James B. Comey, while mocking former vice president Joe Biden's suggestion that her campaign did not offer a vision for the middle class. But even as Democratic leaders have cleared the wreckage and begun to rebuild, there has not been a full and honest reckoning with what actually happened in 2016...

You also mentioned some controversial or outrageous things Trump has said/did - and I think that points to a wider problem with the 'He's a fascist/authoritarian' messaging (beyond the fact that this message itself is a hand that has been played over and over since 2015) - and that is that the market is completely saturated with wild/outrageous/controversial Trump stories and newspieces, and has been since he's been running for president. Take for example - just the other day, a model accused Trump of groping her 31 years ago while Epstein watched. Regardless of whether or not the story is true, for most presidential candidates, this would have been an October surprise. But for Trump, it's seemed to have been more akin to a fart in the wind - and I think a large reason for that is that the market for wild, outrageous, and negative Trump stories is completely saturated, which diminishes the impact of any individual story/newspiece further and futher. You'd need something really novel and shockingly negative about Trump to move the needle in that respect.

[SGR]

This interview is so annoying 😑. I'm sure I will torture myself listening to it but just listening to his constant lies and half truths is annoying.

Joe failed me - all I wanted was for him to ask Trump his thoughts about Bigfoot...and then how he plans to finally find him 

The whole thing was pretty softball-ish and not as interesting as many might have thought it could be. Really didn't care to hear the 20 or so minutes of Trump and Joe babbling about UFC and Dana White.

[SGR]

I don't know if any of y'all like Epic Rap Battles of History, but if so, I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts on this. I thought the beat was weak on this one and it was probably the worst of three political rap battles they've done for Trump. It seemed like it was done a little hastily. Maybe it will grow on me with time.

[Guybrush]

I'll admit the US Presidential Election is a topic I've noticed bums me out. For example, the planet is going to shit and here we have a climate denier in the running for his second term. And like so many of the world's big problems, there's very little a single person like myself can do about it.

So although I absolutely care about it, I tend to try to ignore it for my own peace of mind.

[Psy-Fi]

Chris Matthews GUSHES Over Liz Cheney For Campaigning With Kamala

[SGR]

https://x.com/ForecasterEnten/status/1849806868266287350

[Guybrush]

Why oh why?

[Psy-Fi]

Robinhood launches contracts to wager on presidential election

[SGR]

Pro-Harris Super PAC Raises Concerns About Focusing on Trump and Fascism - NYT

The leading super PAC supporting Vice President Kamala Harris is raising concerns that focusing too narrowly on Donald J. Trump's character and warnings that he is a fascist is a mistake in the closing stretch of the campaign.
...
In an email circulated to Democrats about what messages have been most effective in its internal testing, Future Forward, the leading pro-Harris super PAC, said focusing on Mr. Trump's character and the fascist label were less persuasive than other messages.

"Attacking Trump's Fascism Is Not That Persuasive," read one line in bold type in the email, which is known as Doppler and sent on a regular basis. "'Trump Is Exhausted' Isn't Working," read another.

The Doppler emails have been sent weekly for months — and more frequently of late — offering Democrats guidance on messaging and on the results of Future Forward's extensive tests of clips and social media posts. The Doppler message on Friday urged Democrats to highlight Ms. Harris's plans, especially economic proposals and her vows to focus on reproductive rights, portraying a contrast with Mr. Trump on those topics.

"Purely negative attacks on Trump's character are less effective than contrast messages that include positive details about Kamala Harris's plans to address the needs of everyday Americans," the email read.

These kinds of accusations, being old-hat as they are, aren't going to persuade anyone who's undecided at this point, regardless of how much truth there is to them. For Democrats, winning this election is not going to come down to signal-boosting just one more former government official's opinions about Trump being a fascist. The people who would be persuaded by that are already voting for Kamala. As a result, I think, if the Democrats want to win, they should stop talking about Trump so much, and talk more about how they're going to improve the lives of average Americans - and better communicate their vision for the future.

[Psy-Fi]

Why Muslims Should Vote For The Green Party with Dr. Jill Stein

[Marie Monday]

Lol @ a white boomer lady telling Muslims who to vote for

Plus the implication that your religion should dictate your politics, what a great idea that definitely has never led to problems