• 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.

Merged 2024 Election Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
I remember Bush making lots of gaffes, too. No one accused him of being demented.
If anyone wants a trip down memory lane, here's some memorable ones. I especially love the one where he boasts that 'we' never stop thinking of new ways to harm our country and its people.

Oh, and who can forget when he in 2022, following russia's invasion of Ukraine, condemned the invasion of... Iraq.

But I already see news sites making the putin/Zelensky name gaffe their top story, because of course they are. I get it's summertime and Komkommertijd, but come on, you have a responsibility to your viewers. It's as if they want Dump to win.

They don't have any responsibility to anyone. All they care about is eyes and clicks. That's money. Responsibility went out the window ages ago.
 
Of course, the media will focus on the minor gaffes.

**** the media - if anyone wasn't moved by his statement about kids being killed by guns, they have no soul. (or are Republicans, which is the same thing)
 
**** the media - if anyone wasn't moved by his statement about kids being killed by guns, they have no soul. (or are Republicans, which is the same thing)

The media are irresponsible. They will say whatever they think will generate views and clicks, which are money. They suck. The only sources I follow are the BBC and U.S. National Public Radio. And even they can't always be trusted.
 
Someone should have given him the quip: "Find me a parent who hasn't called one of their kids by the wrong name."

I dunno. If Biden had fathered Putin and Zelensky or Kamala Harris and Donald Trump then that might wash, but still looks bad.

And yeah, people will say, "He did okay. He did really well! Didn't he do well everyone!" but he basically did boilerplate stuff.

Remember how we laughed when George W Bush didn't know the name of the president of Pakistan or how Donald Trump invented the word covfeve?

He's just about hanging on, really.
 
And, as I predicted, the CNN pundits are already jumping on him.

Putting on my tinfoil hat here. What if the failed debate performance and all of the subsequent dems calling for Biden to step down were are part of the Biden campaign for 2024? If he deliberately flubbed the first debate to over inflate Trumps sense of "I got this in the bag, why worry" there by wasting most of the summer on trying to convince any undecided voters? Then come the Sept 10th debate, Biden hammers Trump over and over. Come October, no one will remember the first debate, but if Trump is blasted in the September one, followed by an all out media blitz, so that Trump floundering it is fresh come November 5th.

Yeah I know, too much Sister Sage Machiavellian scheming there. See you in the Trump FEMA interment camps come 2025.
 
Last edited:
Putting on my tinfoil hat here. What if the failed debate performance and all of the subsequent dems calling for Biden to step down were are part of the Biden campaign for 2024? If he deliberately flubbed the first debate to over inflate Trumps sense of "I got this in the bag, why worry" there by wasting most of the summer on trying to convince any undecided voters?

Are you suggesting that Biden is playing four dementianal chess?
 
This made me curious because it flatly contradicts absolutely all other known data from all other known sources, which show a shift against Biden of several percentage points nationally, putting the gap between them about twice the size of the margin of error, and bigger shifts than that in swing states and some formerly blue states that have now become swing states. (Even New York is one of them now.) So this nefarious anti-Biden plot (including sources that have been on his side until now) needs to include not just suppression of this one single report, but outright fabrication of the rest. So what makes the difference between this one and the rest? If the rest are correct, what threw this one off, and, if this one is correct, what threw the others off?

For anybody else who wants to look at what they did for this report, a copy of the original work is here. (It's one of the links inside the page Shemp linked to.) They explained that most other surveys take a new sample each time but this one returned to the same group of individuals, making it possible to track changes in each individual's responses over time.

In their intro, they appear to believe that that makes their report more fundamentally reliable than other surveys, but I don't see any support for that belief. In fact, in their "Limitations" section near the end, they even give what I see as the reason why it's less reliable than others. Signing up for this kind of repeating process selects a sample with a built-in bias from the start, and then, when some drop out at a later time anyway, what's left is a biased subsample of the original biased sample (and a smaller sample size).
 
I don't get what point anybody thinks there was in that press conference. No matter how well his symptoms are managed this time, it can't make previous things, which we all saw happen, unhappen.
 
I don't get what point anybody thinks there was in that press conference. No matter how well his symptoms are managed this time, it can't make previous things, which we all saw happen, unhappen.

I think they're going off the "he had a bad night, had a cold, or had jet lag" theory or some combination thereof.

He was better tonight, but the bar was set pretty low, he wasn't really challenged with anything unexpected, and still didn't really inspire confidence in his mental acuity. And the gaffes were pretty significant.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom