Jump to content

2024 Presidential Election thread


pfife

Recommended Posts

21 minutes ago, 1984Echoes said:

Do whatever King Trump dictates or face the consequences.

so if the NYT article has any truth to it, one of Trump's complaints about Rona is that she isn't making a big enough effort (as in spend more money) on election security issues. So if he puts someone in charge that will waste more resources on that wild goose chase, that's less resource for their candidates. Sounds good to me. 

Edited by gehringer_2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, oblong said:

To follow up on that… if Romney had won in 2012 Trump would have run in 2016 as a D.  Unless Romney didn’t run again. 

I don't think Trump would have run as a Democrat.  I think he knows that his tough guy schtick wouldn't work with them.  I don't think he even wanted to be President.  Several different accounts said that he wanted to make a bigger name for himself so he could be the next big conservative TV host. That actually would have been an appropriate role for him.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, gehringer_2 said:

so if the NYT article has any truth to it, one of Trump's complaints about Rona is that she isn't making a big enough effort (as in spend more money) on election security issues. So if he puts someone in charge that will waste more resources on that wild goose chase, that's less resource for their candidates. Sounds good to me. 

That's the good part. Also good, IMO, is that her fund-raising has been drastically subpar. (But I think that's a reflection of Trump Toxicity).

The bad part was that... he was pissed at her for staging the Republican Primaries. He didn't want anyone else showcased because he wanted to just waltz right in and take the nomination at 100%, with no opposition. And he told her not to dfo the primaries. Ronna didn't follow his orders... subsequently... 49% of Republicans (and Indies where eligible) are NOT voting for him, which makes him look bad. Worse... Nikki now looks good, and a viable alternative. At least to the Never-Trump crowd on the right.

So of course he wants another lackey there who does nothing but follow his orders.

And despite you thinking that there may be more wasted resources... you're forgetting who Trump is. He wants all of the funding that goes to the RNC to go directly into his own pocket. So he can decide what he wants to spend that money on.

Probably another portrait of him & Melania & Barron.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trump generally has the ability to just flip on whatever he wants and the MAGA crowd just goes with it.  I really think he messed up politically here on immigration.  

1) This immigration bill isn't even that great, it's not like it was a compromise, senate republicans got almost everything they asked for.  

2) High profile house republicans are pissed.  Immigration was in their minds a big factor for their re-election bids, either as an achievement or as a issue that they can claim they'd deal with.  Now at best for them, hopefully it's an issue that folks ignore, the same folks they've been riling up to care about it so much.  

3) Biden appears to be looking to take advantage of it and not just let it sit as an unforced error.  Regardless if the House GOP ignores it or buckles and passes it, Biden (if ignored) could actually have it as part of his platform, taking it away from republicans to campaign on, or Biden (if passed) touts it as bi-partisan work that he got to the finish line.  I'm not sure which one would help him more with voters, but I feel like Trump (once again) put the GOP in a no win situation.  I don't think he's realized yet he put himself in that position too.

Edited by ewsieg
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

Trump generally has the ability to just flip on whatever he wants and the MAGA crowd just goes with it.  I really think he messed up politically here on immigration.  

1) This immigration bill isn't even that great, it's not like it was a compromise, senate republicans got almost everything they asked for.  

2) High profile house republicans are pissed.  Immigration was in their minds a big factor for their re-election bids, either as an achievement or as a issue that they can claim they'd deal with.  Now at best for them, hopefully it's an issue that folks ignore, the same folks they've been riling up to care about it so much.  

3) Biden appears to be looking to take advantage of it and not just let it sit as an unforced error.  Regardless if the House GOP ignores it or buckles and passes it, Biden (if ignored) could actually have it as part of his platform, taking it away from republicans to campaign on, or Biden (if passed) touts it as bi-partisan work that he got to the finish line.  I'm not sure which one would help him more with voters, but I feel like Trump (once again) put the GOP in a no win situation.  I don't think he's realized yet he put himself in that position too.

I don't think Trump cares whether high profile Republicans lose their re-election bids.  He just wants to win personally.  It would obviously be to his benefit to have a Republican congress but he just wants to win.  If he doesn't get his way as president he'll just whine like a baby about how everybody is against him and half of America will believe everything he says.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing that is so weird to me is that back in pre-crazy times - I'm talking probably pre Gingrich, if a party had double crossed one of it's members as badly as the GOP has screwed Lankford, that would likely have driven a party switch. And that is the mechanism that did a lot to keep party radicals, which have always been around at the edges, from ever having much leverage - the fact that they could drive members to the other side. But we have this weird 'two completely different worlds' thing going now, where a GOP Senator cannot even construct a conceptual idea of himself in the other party, despite probably being in every other way from an identical culture in terms of wealth, education, lifestyle. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Motown Bombers said:

Mayor of Dearborn is encouraging people to vote uncommitted on Biden in the primary. Does this guy do anything else besides attack Biden over Palestine? It's like Palestine is more important than his city. 

If he's a single issue voter, what will he do with the Muslim ban?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WSJ-

WASHINGTON—President Biden is dispatching a group of foreign policy and political advisers to Michigan on Thursday in an attempt to quell growing outrage over deaths in Gaza.

The move comes ahead of Michigan’s Feb. 27 presidential primary and has taken on a new urgency after Biden’s previous attempts to assuage Muslim and Arab-American supporters have proven insufficient.

The delegation, led by deputy national security adviser Jon Finer and U.S. Agency for International Development Administrator Samantha Power, follows a January visit by campaign manager Julie Chávez Rodríguez, who was publicly rebuffed by the mayor of Dearborn, Mich., and other local Arab-American elected officials. 

The Thursday trip to Michigan is infused with presidential politics. Polls show Biden trailing former President Donald Trump in Michigan, one of the so-called “Blue Wall” states along the Great Lakes that Biden flipped in his 2020 campaign triumph. Dearborn is home to the largest Muslim population in the U.S. and is roughly 54% Arab-American, according to census figures. Biden won Michigan in the 2020 election by about 150,000 votes, or nearly 3%.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, romad1 said:

If he's a single issue voter, what will he do with the Muslim ban?

actually, kinda reminds me of George Orwell being so frustrated with misguided peaceniks who didn't understand that the old-left pacifism was suicide in the face of Hitler and Stalin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, GoBlue23 said:

The way this report is written, it's as if it was done intentionally.   Don't reports like this usually use statements like "could not recall" or "did not remember"?   

 

8 minutes ago, Motown Bombers said:

I'm curious why Beau was even brought up? I'm also curious the context of these answer. His first term as vice president did end in 2013? 

All valid questions, and to be honest, there's context here (such as the interview being immediately after the October 7 attacks) that may be factor as well.

None of that really solves the political problem, IMO. His age was always a liability, and it's one thing that can never be solved... literally no one gets younger. The same can be said of Trump as well, given he's pretty damn old and under indictment

Edited by mtutiger
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's amazing to me is Biden has been the most progressive president since at least Johnson but young progressives won't vote for him because he's old. They would vote for Whitmer who's identical politically but much less accomplished. It's all about vibes. When historians look back and see how close this election was, they will be shaking their heads. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...