• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Cont: The Trump Presidency: Part 27

Status
Not open for further replies.
dirtywick said:
I don't think there's any way Trump could win in 2024. It's pretty obvious his whole campaign and platform is just going to be bitter bitching about the 2020 election loss and I don't think that's a winning message.
Click to expand...

More than 40% of this country worships the ground he walks on. He can win.
 
trustbutverify said:
I don't think there's any way Trump could win in 2024. It's pretty obvious his whole campaign and platform is just going to be bitter bitching about the 2020 election loss and I don't think that's a winning message.
Click to expand...
More than 40% of this country worships the ground he walks on. He can win.
Click to expand...
Yes, there are some hardcore MAGAchuds (as well as republicans who may not personally like him but still will vote against the democrats regardless of the candidate).

But, you need more than just the hardcore base to win. Trump would need to appeal to moderates, which is becoming less and less likely the more he complains about 'stolen elections'. (He was able to win in 2016 in part by actually appearing more moderate than Clinton, but I think that particular appeal is gone, even without the insurrection.)

The one advantage he might have is a spat of voter suppression bills which could cause some problems for the Democrats. But, many of those laws are being passed in states that were either republican to begin with (like Texas), or weren't necessary to the Democrat's victory (such as Georgia).
 
The Don said:
Well education would be a start, but when the predominant religion in a country states that eating from the tree of knowledge is a sin which results in being banished from paradise, education (as opposed to indoctrination) faces a major uphill battle. :(
Click to expand...


Don't forget things like the official platform of the Texas Republican Party opposing the teaching of critical thinking in schools because it has "the purpose of challenging the student’s fixed beliefs and undermining parental authority."
 
The Don said:
Well education would be a start, but when the predominant religion in a country states that eating from the tree of knowledge is a sin which results in being banished from paradise, education (as opposed to indoctrination) faces a major uphill battle. :(
Click to expand...


Yeah, this goes back to my comment.

Education isn't going to help when the party is in a different reality, in which that supposed "education" is just wrong.

Consider, for examples, flat earthers. You can show them all the pictures of the earth from outer space that you want, but if they don't accept the existence of satellites and space travel, and therefore insist that it is all a conspiracy, no amount of pictures of the global earth matters. It's a completely different reality with no shared foundation.
 
Yes.

We are in a post-facts world and none of our tactics work.

This is a bad thing.

*Makes the hurry up and get there gesture with my hands*
 
JoeMorgue said:
The subtext doesn't get anymore text than that.
Click to expand...


A webcomic I read features a young woman who was religiously homeschooled her entire life, until she starts attending a secular college in another town. At one point, she mentions that she and her friends were never allowed to watch "Frozen" because it contains the unacceptable message that parents can be wrong about what's best for their children.
 
Armitage72 said:
A webcomic I read features a young woman who was religiously homeschooled her entire life, until she starts attending a secular college in another town. At one point, she mentions that she and her friends were never allowed to watch "Frozen" because it contains the unacceptable message that parents can be wrong about what's best for their children.
Click to expand...

I guess Little Mermaid is out, then, too.

And pretty much every other Disney princess movie.
 
Segnosaur said:
Yes, there are some hardcore MAGAchuds (as well as republicans who may not personally like him but still will vote against the democrats regardless of the candidate).

But, you need more than just the hardcore base to win. Trump would need to appeal to moderates, which is becoming less and less likely the more he complains about 'stolen elections'. (He was able to win in 2016 in part by actually appearing more moderate than Clinton, but I think that particular appeal is gone, even without the insurrection.)

The one advantage he might have is a spat of voter suppression bills which could cause some problems for the Democrats. But, many of those laws are being passed in states that were either republican to begin with (like Texas), or weren't necessary to the Democrat's victory (such as Georgia).
Click to expand...

He starts out with a fairly large, passionate base guaranteed to vote for him no matter what he says or does because they are in love. There's no potential opponent who can say the same. It doesn't mean he will win, but it certainly means he can.
 
Yes. There is no way Trump can win in 2024 because... all the exact same reasons he couldn't have won in 2016.
 
JoeMorgue said:
Yes. There is no way Trump can win in 2024 because... all the exact same reasons he couldn't have won in 2016.
Click to expand...

I think that the situation is different though. Leaving aside that it's said he _won't_ win, not that he _can't_, the country is galvanized against him now. No one except the cultists want to see him in power anymore, and even his base has eroded. I think his chances of winning now are lower than they were in 2016, but of course a lot can happen until 2024.
 
Trump would win if enough people hated his opponent more than they hate him.
 
Segnosaur said:
I think the problem is.... the way you stated your arguments made it seem like you were suggesting Trump never used the N-word, based on the logic that:
- Cohen never heard him use it
- Cohen was a 'confidant', and if he didn't use it around a confidant, he is unlikely to have used it elsewhere

That may not have been your intention, but I think a few of us assumed that that was what you were arguing.
Click to expand...

It would be ridiculous for me, or anyone, to claim that Trump as never used the N word in his entire life. It would be an impossible claim to prove. What I can say is that he is certainly not known for using it and it has not been something that he's been reported as saying by those writing tell all books about him.
From what I understand, this is what the Apprentice tape claim it's all about. From Holly Robinson Peete:

“Shortly after the finale, rumors started going around that he had tossed out an N-word in referring to me. And I was like, ‘Huh?’ And then when the producer told me when it happened during the finale. I remember the moment,” Peete said of when she thinks Trump used the slur.

“I wasn’t in earshot, but I could see them deciding between me and Bret Michaels,” she continued. “There was a moment where [Trump] was talking with producers and they’re really animated and that was when I heard that he said, ‘They want the N-word to win.’ Because I guess the network wanted me to win or me to be chosen, and Trump wanted Bret. And the quote was, ‘They want the N-word to win.’”
Click to expand...

So what we've got is rumors that Trump used the word once back in 2010. And Mary Trump saying she heard it among family members years ago. That's it. What we haven't got is people who worked closely with him and later turned on him who have come forward and said they have heard him using that word although still saying he is a racist pig.
 
JoeMorgue said:
Yes. There is no way Trump can win in 2024 because... all the exact same reasons he couldn't have won in 2016.
Click to expand...
Not saying that it is impossible for Trump to win, but suggesting that 2016 is indicative of his chances in 2024 may be problematic for a few reasons:

- His opponent (Clinton) was someone who had been subject to character assassination for over a decade. (I know republicans will try to paint all Democrats as "commie-socialists", but I think the attacks on Clinton were much more significant than against most potential Democratic candidates)

- His lack of political history in 2016 allowed people to make favorable assumptions about how he would govern. (He was actually seen as more of a moderate than Clinton was in the 2016 election, and many of his promises were vague enough that people could read in almost anything into them.) After 4 years though, we know exactly what he is like.... he didn't become "more presidential" after the election, and he was more interested in tax cuts than improving health care. And lets face it, he left office when the economy was struggling.

- Democrats/the media/etc. are more aware of the risks of having him back in power. (In 2016, left-wing voters might have decided to sit things out or vote 3rd party, thinking "Clinton has this in the bag/what harm could Trump do". Now, they will be more likely to rally around the Democratic candidate as the best way to keep Trump out of office. And in 2016, the media was treating him with kid gloves, which will be less likely to happen now.)
 
Segnosaur said:
Not saying that it is impossible for Trump to win, but suggesting that 2016 is indicative of his chances in 2024 may be problematic for a few reasons:

- His opponent (Clinton) was someone who had been subject to character assassination for over a decade. (I know republicans will try to paint all Democrats as "commie-socialists", but I think the attacks on Clinton were much more significant than against most potential Democratic candidates)

- His lack of political history in 2016 allowed people to make favorable assumptions about how he would govern. (He was actually seen as more of a moderate than Clinton was in the 2016 election, and many of his promises were vague enough that people could read in almost anything into them.) After 4 years though, we know exactly what he is like.... he didn't become "more presidential" after the election, and he was more interested in tax cuts than improving health care. And lets face it, he left office when the economy was struggling.

- Democrats/the media/etc. are more aware of the risks of having him back in power. (In 2016, left-wing voters might have decided to sit things out or vote 3rd party, thinking "Clinton has this in the bag/what harm could Trump do". Now, they will be more likely to rally around the Democratic candidate as the best way to keep Trump out of office. And in 2016, the media was treating him with kid gloves, which will be less likely to happen now.)
Click to expand...

Agreed. He got the benefit of the doubt in 2016. He is no longer given that benefit; he is a known entity now. He may have received more votes than he did in 2016, but he also lost by more votes, too. Millions more.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom