[Merged] 2024 Election Thread

[Skeptic Ginger]

Now I'm just stuck in linguist-mode trying to figure out how anybody could have ever associated zips or ziplessness with that concept.

Perhaps you don't understand what a zipless **** means. You'd probably need to read the book.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Why would Trump need a plan on day 1 to invoke the Insurrection Act?

Because he expects massive protests in the streets if he wins.

And why would that be?

Because the GOP and Trump do not expect to win by majority rule.

It all fits into place.

 

[Darat]

In 2020 when the dynamics were such due to Covid that he could run a campaign from his basement. Next year he won't have that liberty, although he could try the Rose Garden strategy (which didn't work for Jimmy Carter).



Nate Silver is out with an article essentially arguing that the only thing crazier than trying to oust Biden is letting him run if he can't handle the rigors of the campaign.



He references (but does not link) this article by Jonathan Martin at Politico:

Sounds like when the Dems ran with the terminally ill Clinton.

 

[The Atheist]

Oh for pity's sake, get your minds out of the gutter. He didn't grab them by their pussies.

Nobody said he did.

He did, however, grab them by the chest exactly where they've grown breasts in the meantime.

They got nothing and this is also nothing. Do you know any grandparents that do innocent but embarrassing things?

I'll use that as a defence when I go and feel up some pre-pubescent girls in the street. If I get out alive, I'll let you know how it turns out.

He also stopped doing it when it was pointed out to him it might look bad.

So, it's a big nothing, but he stopped doing it because...?

Yeah, that makes perfect sense.

Maybe because it wasn't more of an issue than grandpa is embarrassing.

None of the children were his grandchildren.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Nobody said he did.

He did, however, grab them by the chest exactly where they've grown breasts in the meantime.

Got a link for that?

So, it's a big nothing, but he stopped doing it because...?.

He's 80 years old and has been in the public eye his whole adult life. How is it no one noticed he was a pedophile until now?

 

[The Don]

Trump confuses Obama and Biden in speech, warns Biden will lead U.S. into 'World War II'

Youtube link.

As I hear it he says:

"Take a look at Obama and some of the things that he's done.... this is the same thing, the country is very divided...and we did it with Obama....We won an election that everyone said couldn't be run"

IMO the reason why he says this is that he thinks that Obama was responsible for the whole Russian interference probe and so he's saying that he won the 2016 election despite the efforts of the Obama administration to (unfairly in his view) investigate Russia's impact on the election.

I admit that trying to divine meaning from President Tump's usual stream of (un)consciousness at rallies is akin to reading the future in tea leaves but IMV he doesn't necessarily believe that Obama was the Democratic candidate in the 2016 election, merely that he was a major part of the forces against him.

IMO the WWI/WWIII gaffe is simply down to the fact that President Trump is as blind as a bat, refuses to wear reading glasses when using a teleprompter (and I'm sure he'd lie and say he never uses one anyway) and never listens to himself speak.

 

[Resume]

Speaking of rallies and speeches, can any Trump fan's left here explain to me why so many of his cultists are enraptured with his non-sequitur ramblings?

 

[The Great Zaganza]

Speaking of rallies and speeches, can any Trump fan's left here explain to me why so many of his cultists are enraptured with his non-sequitur ramblings?

he tells you how the World really is: very, very confusing.

 

[Delvo]

Speaking of rallies and speeches, can any Trump fan's left here explain to me why so many of his cultists are enraptured with his non-sequitur ramblings?

I'm not one of those, but I did grow up with a lot of exposure to the type that would later (after I left) end up as them. The big motivating factor in their view of politics is negativity about government & politicians. I almost wrote "hatred & fear" there, and that's what it is for some of them, but, for most it's more of a disapproval of alleged incompetence and/or laziness. Either way, it runs so deep that it's what they use to measure how good or bad anything else is. Their whole model of good & bad consists entirely of government & politicians as the standard for badness and everybody/everything else as the standard for goodness.

Everything wrong that they see happening in the world and in their own lives can be traced back to government/politicians somehow. If/when they see something bad being done by a private organization, company, or person who isn't a politician or other government employee, if they haven't found a way to trace it back there yet, so they're stuck only being able to describe how bad it is, the worst terms in which to do so are comparisons with government/politicians; they say the company/organization in question was acting like a government agency or the person might as well be a government employee. The problems with our private health care "system", for example, are examples of government interference & regulation every step of the way. A long line to wait in at a business means that business is being run like a government agency, and getting things done quickly & efficiently at a government office means that office is being run like a business (plus it's also the first time in their lives it's ever gone like that, every single time it happens). If they make a mistake themselves while doing something like filling in a form, at a government office, the problem is the agency and/or its employees picking a fight with them over the process and having a process that's just designed to create problems; if they make the same kind of mistake at a private organization/company, they apologize for their own mistake and ask how to correct it. I've sat in little corner restaurants/diners overhearing the guys at the next table over talking about work & time off, throwing in extra side comments like "...except for government employees; they're so lazy they take a bunch of extra days off even though they never do anything while they are there!". I've ended minor disagreements with my father by juxtaposing government/politician laziness & inefficiency with the harm they're always doing, as in "if they were really doing X, they wouldn't have enough time to screw everything else up as much as they do", because that's the kind of logic that works in their minds: government/politician badness is not a conclusion but a premise, an axiom, something so obvious & fundamental that it's not subject to proof or disproof, but something you can use to prove/disprove other things.

Trump talks like them; and he rants about how bad politicians and most of the government are, and he does it in normal words, not pretentious politician-speech-language. He also did actually do several things while in office that could be categorized as reducing the amount of stuff certain agencies do or the ability to do stuff.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Speaking of rallies and speeches, can any Trump fan's left here explain to me why so many of his cultists are enraptured with his non-sequitur ramblings?

Sure as we soon as we get any of them to ADMIT they are Trumpers and stop hiding behind "I'm not a Trumper, don't dare call me a Trumper, I am personally offended you called me a Trumper now if you don't mind I have to spend the next rest of my life defending Trump, attacking anyone who criticizes Trump, and acting exactly like someone who loves Trump all while using Trump's exact arguments and language and nothing else."

Again as I said Trump has two bases. Out in the real world where they breath air and touch grass you do find actual Trump supporters, but online the vast majority are the "I don't like Trump exactly, but I love how angry he makes liberals/how he's causing drama because I'm a nihilistic child" types.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

As I hear it he says:

"Take a look at Obama and some of the things that he's done.... this is the same thing, the country is very divided...and we did it with Obama....We won an election that everyone said couldn't be run"

IMO the reason why he says this is that he thinks that Obama was responsible for the whole Russian interference probe and so he's saying that he won the 2016 election despite the efforts of the Obama administration to (unfairly in his view) investigate Russia's impact on the election.

I admit that trying to divine meaning from President Tump's usual stream of (un)consciousness at rallies is akin to reading the future in tea leaves but IMV he doesn't necessarily believe that Obama was the Democratic candidate in the 2016 election, merely that he was a major part of the forces against him.

IMO the WWI/WWIII gaffe is simply down to the fact that President Trump is as blind as a bat, refuses to wear reading glasses when using a teleprompter (and I'm sure he'd lie and say he never uses one anyway) and never listens to himself speak.

And that's his excuse for not knowing WW2 was 80 years ago?

As for Obama, more than once Trump claims he won Obama in an election no one thought could be done. You can chalk up all Trump's Obama ramblings to anything you want. But IMO, the reason is he's mixing fantasies with reality. He wishes he won an election against Obama and sometimes that wish is conflated with his reality.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

I don't particularly like this woman's podcast (Jojo from Jer z) but sometimes these short clips are worth hearing and sharing. It didn't dawn on me that one of the revenge monsters that seethes in Trump's brain could have come from things that happened in military school. In particular they exercised control over Trump, something he hates with a passion.

It's only ~5 minutes long and has an extensive list of all the military bashing Trump has done. The review is worth hearing:

 

[Stacyhs]

I had a thread on Creepy Joe when he was running for 2020 and I stand by the point I made at the time:

If any other adult male touched little girls the way Joe Biden touches little girls, he would either cop a fist in the face or a visit from the police.

What utter rubbish.

From Politifact:

Fact-checking the pedophilia attacks against Joe Biden

There is no credible evidence that supports this claim. In Joe Biden’s more than 40 years of public life, we could find no news reports, formal accusations, complaints, arrests or investigations that implicate him in any sort of sex crimes involving kids.

I was amazed the Republicans didn't make more of it at the time, but maybe the Republicans were scared that an attack on Biden as a sexual predator might backfire on the fact that their bloke was a sexual predator as well.

Are you kidding? Most of that crap was being spewed in 2019, well before the 2020 election. And it still is.

Less than two months before Election Day, President Donald Trump took his campaign tactics against Joe Biden to a new low, retweeting an image on Tuesday that baselessly accused the former vice president of being a pedophile.

Save the Children? Extremist conspiracy movement QAnon fabricates pedophile claims against Joe Biden as election looms

Sept 28, 2020

VIDEO: Students appalled by footage of 'creepy' Joe Biden touching women

April 25, 2019,

"DeSantis War Room, the official rapid response Twitter account for Florida’s Republican Gov. and 2024 presidential candidate Ron DeSantis, shared a video yesterday that implied President Joe Biden is a pedophile.

The clip contains selectively edited footage from swearing-in ceremonies for senators and their families, events over which Biden presided as Vice President during the Obama administration, having previously served in the chamber from 1973 to 2009."

Fox News Says White House Flew ‘Pedophile,’ ‘Groomer’ Pride Flag

The Dems don't care, so it's a lost cause. It's just a nice old man who likes to touch pre-pubescent girls' chests and kiss and sniff their hair.

No; the Dems recognize right-wing propaganda intended to smear Biden. Obviously, it's not just right-wingers who have fallen for it.

THE FACTS: A video segment circulating widely online this week has been edited to remove all context to make it appear the president inappropriately kissed a young woman in public and touched her breast.

CLAIM: A photo shows President Joe Biden touching a child inappropriately below the waist.

AP’S ASSESSMENT: Altered photo. The photo was digitally altered to make it appear as if Biden’s hands were under the child’s shirt. The original photo, which was taken by an Associated Press photographer in 2021, shows the child stretching their shirt to show the president, who is pointing at the shirt in return.

"Gropin’ Joe Biden with a woman not his wife," reads the text of a 2017 Facebook post sharing an image that appears to show Biden grabbing a woman’s chest as they pose for a photo.

This post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed.

False claim: Photo shows Joe Biden inappropriately holding boy’s face

Fact Check-Video of Biden loudly ‘sniffing’ a baby is digitally edited

Don't let facts get in the way of confirming a bias.

 

[Stacyhs]

Got a link for that?

He's 80 years old and has been in the public eye his whole adult life. How is it no one noticed he was a pedophile until now?

No, he doesn't. Well, maybe one that's been doctored to make it look like he grabs girls' chests.

Not one supported with evidence case of pedophilia has ever been produced. But if you're looking for edited photos and video created by the right-wing, you're in luck. See my post above.

 

[The Atheist]

He's 80 years old and has been in the public eye his whole adult life. How is it no one noticed he was a pedophile until now?

Interesting who's mentioning the word pedophile.

What utter rubbish...

Don't let facts get in the way of confirming a bias.

Yeah, look at the right-wing rags running stories on it.

Vox

After several women said earlier this year that Biden had touched them in ways that made them uncomfortable, the former vice president and 2020 Democratic candidate promised to be “much more mindful” of people’s personal space.

But recent incidents tell a different story.

Last month, he called a 10-year-old girl “good-looking” at a campaign event. Then, this week, he told the brothers of a 13-year-old Iowa girl to “keep the guys away from your sister.”

Time, The Atlantic, Guardian... take your pick.

I never realised how many outlets Murdoch controlled.

 

[Brainster]

Sounds like when the Dems ran with the terminally ill Clinton.

Who overcame her terminal disease to... lose to Trump? I'm not sure that's the template either of us is rooting for.

 

[Stacyhs]

Interesting who's mentioning the word pedophile.

Ummmmm...I wouldn't use that line if I were you:

"If any other adult male touched little girls the way Joe Biden touches little girls, he would either cop a fist in the face or a visit from the police.

Just because you didn't use the word 'pedophile' that's exactly what you described. Or do you deny that's what your were implying? Don't bother. It's like Trump denying he wasn't inciting the crowd on J6.

Yeah, look at the right-wing rags running stories on it.

Vox

"Last month, he called a 10-year-old girl “good-looking” at a campaign event. Then, this week, he told the brothers of a 13-year-old Iowa girl to “keep the guys away from your sister.” And in an exchange that went viral on Twitter, he wagged his finger at an activist, K.C. Cayo, who asked him about abortion rights."

Oh, no! Evidence that Biden is a pedophile! LOL!!!!

Time,

I suggest you read this one again. It isn't what you think it is.

The Atlantic,

“It wasn’t sexual,” Lappos said, “but he did grab me by the head. He put his hand around my neck and pulled me in to rub noses with me."

Oh, NO! Evidence that he's a sexual predator! Rubbing a nose that "wasn't sexual" is being a sexual predator!

Guardian... take your pick.

"“He then put his hand on the back of my head and pressed his forehead to my forehead while he talked to me. I was so shocked that it was hard to focus on what he was saying. I remember he told me I was a ‘pretty girl’,” Kohnert-Yount told the Post in a statement.

The former intern said she was uncomfortable and embarrassed by Biden’s comments about her appearance, “even though it was intended as a compliment” and she believed his intentions were good."

"Sofie Karasek said she met Biden after the Oscars in 2016, where she had been part of a group of sexual assault survivors who appeared on stage. Biden clasped her hands and placed his forehead against hers"

"The third woman, Ally Coll, said she met Biden when she was a Democratic staffer during the 2008 presidential campaign. He squeezed her shoulders and complimented her smile, and Coll said he held her “for a beat too long”."

Damn sexual predator!
Not one of the articles you quoted implied Biden is a sexual predator or pedophile.

I never realised how many outlets Murdoch controlled.

Who's putting out the doctored photos and videos? The Dems? The Left-wing media?

Can you produce one UNDOCTORED photo or HONESTLY EDITED video
showing Biden touching a child in an inappropriate manner?

ETA: Skeptic Ginger asked you already for a link to your claim that "He did, however, grab them by the chest exactly where they've grown breasts in the meantime."

There's a reason for the saying, "Put up or shut up".

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Interesting who's mentioning the word pedophile.

Touching prepubescent girls chests is an accusation of pedophilia. Now you deny it? Color me not surprised.

Yeah, look at the right-wing rags running stories on it.

Vox
Time, The Atlantic, Guardian... take your pick.

I never realised how many outlets Murdoch controlled.

That's your ******* evidence?


Those accusations of Biden grabbing women in the halls was debunked. They were outright lying or all it was was Biden's habit of closing in on people's personal space..

Telling boys to protect their sister and telling a little girl she was pretty isn't abnormal in the least. Do you live under a rock?

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/biden-accuser-photo/

an accusation made by Tara Reade against presumptive Democratic presidential Joe Biden. Reade, who worked as a junior staffer in Biden's office in 1993 (while Biden was a senator representing Delaware in the U.S. Congress), claimed in 2019 that back in 1993 Biden had touched her shoulders and neck in a way that made her feel uncomfortable, and then in 2020 claimed that Biden in fact had sexually assaulted her. Biden has unequivocally maintained that the alleged incident "never happened."

Such posts were wrong on two fronts. First, Biden has not maintained that he "never met" Reade, who worked as a staff assistant in his Senate office from December 1992 to August 1993 (and it's unclear whether he has even averred that he "doesn't remember" Reade). Second, and more important, although this photograph dates from the correct time period (i.e., January 1993) to potentially be a picture of Biden with Tara Reade, it is actually a photograph of Biden posing with Zoë Baird, who had then just been nominated for the position of U.S. Attorney General by President Bill Clinton.

Stacy has more than addressed your ********.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

This reply is to a post in the Biden thread:

On a recent trip, the TV in our motel was on Fox News when my wife turned it on.

Laura Ingraham’s show was on. She had a Chinese lady on who was opining what happens when the left came after religion in her country with Ingraham saying the same was happening in the US. Followed by a story on the ineffectiveness of our attempts to control the southern border and the dire consequences of an “open border”. Followed by a third story where I don’t remember the topic*, only that it was another outrage of some sort with another outrage queued for after the commercial break. What an “outrage machine” is what I thought.

Maybe I’m a bit blind to it if Rachel Maddow or others on MSNBC and the left in general may be doing the same thing. Their outrage seems more justified by facts and a study of history. But it was glaringly obvious what Fox doing over just a 20 minute slice.

A lot of MSNBC has been covering Trump's "vermin" comments because Hitler used the same language.

CNN had a story on Anderson Cooper about the Trump machine getting thousands of Trump loyalists vetted and lined up for the purge Trump will do when elected. Trump did poorly in terms of his fascism his first 3 years as POTUS because the system blocked him. It is expected that a second term would be like the end of his first term, replacing all those road blockers with loyalists. The key people behind it are Steven Miller, the Heritage Foundation and the like. Trump is too self-absorbed to run the show.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

The political satire is thick in here, like smoke in a pool room. I suppose Trump leading Biden by 1 point in the 2024 election polls has much to do with it.

https://pro.morningconsult.com/trackers/2024-presidential-election-polling

 

[PitPat]

This reply is to a post in the Biden thread:

A lot of MSNBC has been covering Trump's "vermin" comments because Hitler used the same language.

CNN had a story on Anderson Cooper about the Trump machine getting thousands of Trump loyalists vetted and lined up for the purge Trump will do when elected. Trump did poorly in terms of his fascism his first 3 years as POTUS because the system blocked him. It is expected that a second term would be like the end of his first term, replacing all those road blockers with loyalists. The key people behind it are Steven Miller, the Heritage Foundation and the like. Trump is too self-absorbed to run the show.

I'm sort of surprised that Stephen Miller has escaped any indictments. Could be one of the numbers of unindicted co-conspirators in a few.

But he seems like a slippery fellow. Maybe he's cooperating at some level, on some trial.

 

[Stacyhs]

The political satire is thick in here, like smoke in a pool room. I suppose Trump leading Biden by 1 point in the 2024 election polls has much to do with it.

https://pro.morningconsult.com/trackers/2024-presidential-election-polling

You might want to look up the definition of "political satire".

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

You might want to look up the definition of "political satire".

Yea, you might wanna expand your thinking beyond cartoons, I know what I said.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

This is disturbing. Trump hates brown people especially Hispanics yet Univision, the leading Spanish language broadcast corporation in the US, has come calling with what I suppose is like Fox News selling blatant alt-right political messaging presumably because of profits (or some payoff?).

 

[Stacyhs]

Yea, you might wanna expand your thinking beyond cartoons, I know what I said.

What an odd statement considering I haven't posted or referred to any cartoons. And you still don't know what political satire is.

 

[The Atheist]

Ummmmm...I wouldn't use that line if I were you:

Touching prepubescent girls chests is an accusation of pedophilia. Now you deny it? Color me not surprised.

I'm intrigued at the pair of you constantly using that word. The definition of paedophilia is:

a psychiatric disorder in which an adult has sexual fantasies about or engages in sexual acts with a prepubescent child

I don't think he's committed a sexual act, although some of his touching rises to the potential of being classed as a sexual assault in law.

The ladies doth protest too much, methinks.

The bizarre thing about your defence is that Biden himself admitted overstepping the mark. If he's done nothing wrong, why did he apologise say he'd change? (and then fail to)

Feel free to keep defending him, but I sure as hell wouldn't be letting him near my daughter,

 

[Silly Green Monkey]

If he's not a sexual threat to your child, why would you keep him away? That's not very consistent, either he's a threat or he's not.

 

[The Atheist]

If he's not a sexual threat to your child, why would you keep him away? That's not very consistent, either he's a threat or he's not.

He's a disgusting old man who gets way too touchy with kids. Why would I want them near him?

 

[The Atheist]

The really hilarious part about the whole saga is that it ought to be a damning indictment on American politics.

A political organisation with 47,000,000 members, 51 US senators, a couple of dozen governors, and thousands of representatives at state and federal level can't find a better candidate than an octogenarian whose only distinguishing trait is that he's not Trump.

I wonder why people like AOC bother.

 

[Silly Green Monkey]

Other candidates and the lack thereof are an entirely separate issue to whether or not he is a pedophile and a threat to your children, or not a pedophile and therefore not a threat to your children.

 

[Delvo]

A political organisation with 47,000,000 members, 51 US senators, a couple of dozen governors, and thousands of representatives at state and federal level can't find a better candidate than an octogenarian whose only distinguishing trait is that he's not Trump.

It's worse than that. It could do so but refuses to.

 

[Tero]

Supposing the things go badly for Trump and Nikki Haley ends up the candidate.

How many of Trump's base will write in his name anyway.

 

[The Atheist]

It's worse than that. It could do so but refuses to.

Yes, my bad.

I should have "won't find a better candidate". With the numbers they have, I don't believe they couldn't if there were any will to try something new.

Pretty much every other country seeks change when a sitting leader is unpopular. Aussie, UK, NZ... all changed leaders several times in recent history as popularity waned. The Dems should be kissing Trump arse for holding sway over the Republicans, because if the R team came up with a half-decent candidate, Biden would get Jimmy Cartered off the map.

 

[Stacyhs]

I'm intrigued at the pair of you constantly using that word. The definition of paedophilia is:

a psychiatric disorder in which an adult has sexual fantasies about or engages in sexual acts with a prepubescent child
I don't think he's committed a sexual act, although some of his touching rises to the potential of being classed as a sexual assault in law.

The ladies doth protest too much, methinks.

I'm intrigued by the sheer disingenousness of your post. You're trying to have it both ways. First you claim that Biden "did, however, grab them [prepubescent girls] by the chest exactly where they've grown breasts in the meantime," and that "If any other adult male touched little girls the way Joe Biden touches little girls, he would either cop a fist in the face or a visit from the police," but then claim that you "don't think he's committed a sexual act."
Sexual assault on a child IS a sexual act on child which is accusing him of being a pedophile. You doth contradict yourself, methinks.

The bizarre thing about your defence is that Biden himself admitted overstepping the mark. If he's done nothing wrong, why did he apologise say he'd change? (and then fail to)

More disingenuous nonsense. Biden apologized for getting in women's personal space and unintentionally making them uncomfortable.

In a video and statement released to his Twitter feed, Biden said that he had always seen politics as about “personal connection” and defended his habit of hugging and touching people he met. But he also added that he would change his habits in the future.

“Social norms are changing. I understand that, and I’ve heard what these women are saying. Politics to me has always been about making connections, but I will be more mindful of personal space in the future. That’s my responsibility and I will meet it,” Biden said.

What YOU are accusing him of is touching little girls in inappropriate places while failing to produce a single supporting photo or video that has not been doctored by the right-wing.

Feel free to keep defending him, but I sure as hell wouldn't be letting him near my daughter,

I'm not defending him: I'm exposing your claims as unsupported, misrepresented and/or fake right-wing propaganda because it fits your anti-Biden bias.

 

[Mike!]

Supposing the things go badly for Trump and Nikki Haley ends up the candidate.

How many of Trump's base will write in his name anyway.

All of them.

 

[thaiboxerken]

Now Jill Stein is running.

I didn't think she was still on Putin's payroll.

 

[Trebuchet]

Supposing the things go badly for Trump and Nikki Haley ends up the candidate.

How many of Trump's base will write in his name anyway.

In the unlikely event another R is nominated, Trump is certain to declare fraud and keep on running and can probably get his name on the ballot in many states. They won't even have to write him in.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

In the unlikely event another R is nominated, Trump is certain to declare fraud and keep on running and can probably get his name on the ballot in many states. They won't even have to write him in.

That would be a good thing, split the GOP vote.

 

[Tero]

Somebody linked a Twitter post by Larry Elder and I read a few lines of his political pitch.

That got me thinking that yes, Trump has a big problem. Some 30% of registered voters are republicans. 70% are not. How can such a hated character win in that situation? It happened just the one time and with a small number of votes in 3 states. Now we actually know him. Many did not back in 2016.

 

[jt512]

That got me thinking that yes, Trump has a big problem. Some 30% of registered voters are republicans. 70% are not. How can such a hated character win in that situation? It happened just the one time and with a small number of votes in 3 states. Now we actually know him. Many did not back in 2016.

First of all, you don't have to be registered to be a Republican. Secondly, who says Trump is hated by Republicans?