Funny, I thought this thread was about the election, not the spewing of tiresome, disingenuous bullshit from Trump cultists— or sifting through it to see if there’s any point or coherence (spoiler: there isn’t).

Trump’s back in Butler, Pennsylvania today, the same spot where a smooth-brained anti-Trumpist found his balls and did what all anti-Trumpists wanted to do if they only had the stones, which is to assassinate their folk devil.

Apparently even Elon Musk is going to be there. So if they wanted to destroy two folk devils in one they might just try to do so.

https://amp.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2024/oct/05/us-politics-donald-trump-kamala-harris-joe-biden

Hmm...

I was supposed to feel outraged when Trump said “grab them by the pussy” decades ago. — NOS4A2

Gotta' wonder what happened in the 12 years after. Anything serious? — Oct 2, 2024

In this article you can read the reason why I decided to not vote this year:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/oct/06/palestinian-us-friends-job-opportunities-humanity-gaza

The double standard involved with discussing cruelty is there. As a matter of public discourse, the language of complete vindication is different than what the U.S. should do as a polity.

Your choice to not choose between possible administrations ignores the extreme rhetoric from the Trump side that has been going on for years. As citizens, these differences appear in outcomes in our communities. Don't gnash your teeth in self-imposed silence.

Just being supportive to Palestinian-Americans (and human dignity in general) who aren't going to vote for Democrats this year.

I would love to vote the Green Party, but in NYS we have only two parties in the ballot and makes me wonder: why should it be this way?

Anyway, I do recognize that Trump may make things worse and he already contributed to this mess when he moved the USA embassy to Jerusalem (among many other things he did, with help from Nikki Haley in the UN General Assembly).

God, help us with these politicians! (Praying, I guess, is the only thing I can do now :confused: )

(Praying, I guess, is the only thing I can do now :confused: ) — Eros1982

No. You can vote. And it is both stupid and ignorant not to. Is that you? Are you both stupid and ignorant?

If you think you're making any kind of statement by choosing not to vote, the only one you're actually making is the one in the paragraph just above. If any other statement, there are far better ways to do it.

Your choice to not choose between possible administrations ignores the extreme rhetoric from the Trump side that has been going on for years. As citizens, these differences appear in outcomes in our communities. — Paine

Yes.

If I had to go before a tribunal and defend my choice of voting for Harris, it would give me pause. But it isn’t that serious. People want to believe it’s their only political power— to fill in an oval every 4 years — and thus all the hand-wringing.

It’s overthinking it. Vote against Trump and keep at the local work — organizing, striking, protesting, lawsuits, unionizing, boycotting, etc. That’s it. Will a Trump or Harris administration make achieving goals easier or harder? I think the answer is clear.

The one area I understand feeling bad about: support for Israel’s genocide. Seems like Harris is all-in for Israel, just as Biden has been. True enough. It’s also true, however, that Trump is an even bigger supporter. So not only do we make it worse with him in office, we get all the other terrifying, horrible, shitty things along with it.

A vote against the worst candidate when there’s really just two options isn’t an endorsement of the less bad candidate, nor the two-party system. Sitting out or voting third party, particularly in a swing state, is helping to elect the worst candidate. This is true if you believe Harris is the worse candidate too.



Cool— so you’re irrelevant.

so you’re irrelevant. — Mikie

I'm irrelevant too because I don't get to vote. But I notice that Dump has become of late a magnet for flies - so he seems to report and comment on in his campaign speeches of late. I immediately thought of "The Lord of the Flies', or ...

Beelzebub is the Greek version of the name Baal-zebub, a pagan deity worshipped in the ancient Philistine city of Ekron during Old Testament times. The name means “the lord of flies” (2 Kings 1:2), which is significant as golden fly images have been discovered during excavations at ancient Philistine sites. After the Philistines, the Jews changed the name to “Beelzeboul,” as used in the Greek New Testament, which means “lord of dung” and refers to the fly god that was worshipped for protection from fly bites. According to certain biblical scholars, Beelzebub was also known as the “god of filth,” which later became a term of contempt in the mouth of the Pharisees. As a result, Beelzebub was a particularly despised deity, and the Jews used his name as another name for Satan.

Tell all your fundamentalist Christian friends not to vote for this antichrist. Signs and wonders, people!

Anyway, I do recognize that Trump may make things worse and he already contributed to this mess when he moved the USA embassy to Jerusalem (among many other things he did, with help from Nikki Haley in the UN General Assembly). — Eros1982

Not to judge your voting intentions since I can sympathize with your frustration but it's not really a question whether Trump will be worse (he will), so you might as well be honest and own the decision.

↪Eros1982

Cool— so you’re irrelevant. — Mikie

:up:

I'm irrelevant too because I don't get to vote. — unenlightened

You’re always relevant in this thread, at least.

I’ve seen enough. Ready to make my official prediction:

Trump wins.

Which is unbelievable and sad, but so it goes. Looks like men aren’t ready for a woman president, yet again. But it’s more than that — it’s that she has no message.

She could have run with a strong and consistent message of taxing the rich to pay for popular programs. Instead she’s raced to the “middle,” on the advice of the most pathetic intellectual weaklings known to man, and desperately tried to appeal to conservative voters. She’s done so with climate change and fracking, on guns, and on war. She doesn’t answer questions directly. She regurgitates the same lines like “hopes, ambitions, and desires.” There’s barely been any policy proposals, and the ones that have been proposed are “eh.” They’ve once again left Bernie and progressives in the cold— and they’ll pay for it, especially among the Gaza crowds.

The DNC strategy at this point is to lay low, appeal to the middle, say as little as possible (see any of the uninspiring, friendly interviews she’s done), and bring it back to how bad Trump is and was. It’s a terrible strategy and a terrible candidate. They even defanged Tim Walz, who is now left with endlessly talking up school lunches — which is all the party allows him.

So the democrats put up another loser in the 4th quarter and will blow it try again against the worst candidate and former president in history. 4 more years of Trump’s climate denial and federal judges (given that republicans are going to win the senate), which will do generational damage, and the further destruction of institutions that do any good for regular people.

It feels like 2016 again: no real enthusiasm for the Democrat. There was none in 2020 either, but it was a pandemic and we were sick of Trump. That was motivation enough — plus Biden, a man, also hadn’t fully degenerated into the shell he is today, and still had a little Obama fairy dust on him from his years as VP. The electorate’s memory is also poor and rose-colored, and usually rebel against whoever is in office.

So despite what the polls, or Allan Lichtman, or Bill Maher, or Nate Silver or anyone else says, I think Trump will win at least one of the blue wall states — Michigan? — and that will be all he needs, as he will carry Georgia and North Carolina and Arizona.

Maybe some good comes out of it. Who knows. I hope I’m wrong — but I won’t be.

Ps. Sorry @180 Proof. I’ll put money on it.

That would be my analysis too. Very close but Kamala seems to be blowing it.

The DNC strategy at this point is to lay low, appeal to the middle, say as little as possible (see any of the uninspiring, friendly interviews she’s done), and bring it back to how bad Trump is and was. — Mikie

I think it was a mistake for Harris to keep the Biden people on her campaign team for this reason. These are the same idiots who thought it was a good idea to hide a candidate with a 35% approval rating and hope for the best when people vote. They're still acting like they're running with a guy who must be covered in bubble wrap until election day. Either because these people are that incompetent or they think that changing strategies with a new candidate is an implicit acknowledgement of their own failures is unclear but they're not changing their strategy and taking advantage of a more energetic candidate like they should be. Of course, the Republicans haven't really adapted to running against someone who isn't Biden either. They still believe for whatever reason that Harris cannot finish a sentence and that she needs notes or a teleprompter to say anything.

That being said this strategy isn't that really much different from Trump's to be honest (apart from arguably the laying low part). He's not doing as many events as he did in 2016 (though he is making up for it in other ways), he's trying to appeal to the middle with regards to abortion, his statements always lack any substance, he's doing uninspiring friendly interviews with right wing podcasters and Fox, and every time he speaks he has to talk about how bad the Democrats are.

12Oct24

Sorry 180 Proof. I’ll put money on it. — Mikie

:ok: You stick with those MAGA-GOP talking points and I'll stick with my 22Sept24 prediction¹ that Harris-Walz will win the upcoming Roevember 5th presidential election. :victory: :party:

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/934008 [1]

Harris will beat Trump, says election prediction legend Allan Lichtman² :victory: :cool: — 180 Proof

https://www.cnbc.com/2024/09/05/harris-trump-lichtman-election-prediction.html [2]

(2022)
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/781991

(2023)

Also, when you say it won’t be Joe Biden as the nominee — care to bet on that too?
— Mikie
Like taking candy from a baby. :yum: — 180 Proof

I (technically) have won this bet but lost the other one that Diaper Don wouldn't be the GOP nominee. The latter, however, no doubt contributed to the former. :up:

===========

NB: Fwiw, since Labor Day I think it's reasonable to have read "mainstream" news media polls as follows –

Given that Diaper Don The Fascist Clown & his MAGA-GOP Circus Cult have pissed-off the majority of (likely) women voters so much since 2018 (then doubled down on the blatant misogyny in 2022 and again this year), I guesstimate (not counting Dems campaigns' huge money & get-out-the-vote ground game advantages) woman voters' preference for Harris-Walz & Dems is undercounted by 2% and The Clown is thereby generally overcounted by 5% in "national polls" and overcounted by 2% in swing state polls, and so I read them accordingly [adjusted]; for example:

swing states [T -2%]

Forbes 11Oct24 (latest, best #s for T)

AZ - T 51% [49] v H 46%
GA - T 49% [47] v H 48%
MI - T 45% [43] v H 47%
NC - T 46% [44] v H 45%
NV - T 47% [46] v H 48%
PA - T 46% [44] v H 45%
WI - T 48% [46] v H 46%

Electors - T216 + 21 (max) v H229 + 72 (min) :cool:

&

national [T -5%, H +2%]

FiveThirtyEight 12Oct24 national polls (avg.)

T 46% [41] v H 48.5% [50.5]

NYTimes 12Oct24 national polls (avg.)

T 46% [41] v H 49% [51]

The Economist 12Oct24 national polls (avg.)

T 46.4% [41.4] v H 50.2% [52.2]

Fox Noise 12Oct24 national polls (?)

T 48% [43] v H 50% [52]

===========

To date all (quality) polling trends favor Harris-Walz +270 Electoral College victory. Hyping election anxiety is great for motivating Democratic, Independent & GOP/suburban white women voter turnout / particpation. :strong: :mask:

>>> Roevember 24

Given that Diaper Don The Fascist Clown & his MAGA-GOP Circus Cult have pissed-off the majority of (likely) women voters so much since 2018 (then doubled down on the blatant misogyny in 2022 and again this year), I guesstimate (not counting Dems campaigns' huge money & get-out-the-vote ground game advantages) woman voters' preference for Harris-Walz & Dems is undercounted by 2% and The Clown is thereby generally overcounted by 5% in "national polls" and overcounted by 2% in swing state polls, and so I read them accordingly [adjusted]; for example: — 180 Proof

That is called wishful thinking, not analysis. If you bet money on it, you'll lose big. But let's take a different tack. If 538 overestimates Trump by 5% (or more) and underestimates Harris by 2% (or more) in their last national poll before the election, I will post a picture of myself here on this thread naked apart from a diaper with a crybaby face and sucking on a pacifier. Why? Because I believe in science and not making stuff up to make myself feel better. So, what are you going to do if/when you turn out to be wrong and the national polls turn out, let's say, to be within 1% either way of being right? Show me you actually believe what you're saying...

I don't understand your post ... but I'm now looking forward to you posting that pic. :sweat:

I'm just sayin' I'll do that if you're right about the national polls; what'll you do if I'm right that you're completely wrong?

I'm just sayin' I'll do that if you're right about the national polls; what'll you do if I'm right that you're completely wrong? — Baden

I'll live in the US struggling against a neofascist regime while you and the rest of the world will be wagging your fingers and saying "I told you so." :mask:

In 2020 Biden-Harris won the national / popular vote by 51.3% (or margin of +4.5%) against an incumbent POTUS who actively compromised the election system. 306 electors vs 232 electors (by flipping two Republican states and winning the very same three states lost by a combined 0.7% due to HRC's arrogant neglect in 2016)! My ELECTORAL COLLEGE prediction (and reasoning for it) does not deviate significantly from the 2016, 2018, 2020, 2022 trend. If I was merely "wishful thinking", mate, I wouldn't rely on center-right to right wing news media polling (and the best stats for T therein).

But hey you go right on bloviating from the cheap seats, my friend; I'm looking forward to that photo (the more lurid the better). :smirk:

I'm not doing anything other than calling you out for making a ridiculous unsupported prediction. And putting my pacifier where my mouth is. :wink:

... a ridiculous unsupported prediction. — Baden

We shall see soon enough.

Because I believe in science ... — Baden

There are too many variables for there to be a scientific determination based on the polls of the outcome of the election.

Rather than bet, I'll hold on to my money. I might need it.

I don't know who'll win. The polls could change. Trump might do or say something disastrous. But the chances of 538 being off by that margin by polling day are small enough to stick to my commitment.

The polls could change. Thump might do or say something disastrous. — Baden

It does not seem as though there is anything he might say or do that would significantly change the polls. It is not as if, even with the evidence, Trump supporters, backed by his propaganda machine, will believe it or not discount it because they think other things are more important.

According to FiveThirtyEight

“Polls’ true utility isn’t in telling us who will win, but rather in roughly how close a race is — and, therefore, how confident we should be in the outcome.” Historically, candidates leading polls by at least 20 points have won 99 percent of the time. But candidates leading polls by less than 3 points have won just 55 percent of the time. In other words, races within 3 points in the polls are little better than toss-ups — something we’ve been shouting from the rooftops for years.

That being said this strategy isn't that really much different from Trump's to be honest — Mr Bee

You’re right. It isn’t fair, really, but because he’s been a lying degenerate clown for so long, any bullshit he spews is shrugged off.

You stick with those MAGA-GOP talking points — 180 Proof

Well there’s no need to get nasty. :gasp:

Also, when you say it won’t be Joe Biden as the nominee — care to bet on that too?
— Mikie
Like taking candy from a baby. :yum:
— 180 Proof
I (technically) have won this bet but lost the other one that Diaper Don wouldn't be the GOP nominee. — 180 Proof

Yeah, you did. I was as shocked as anyone. What did we end up betting? $10 to charity of choice? Let me know and I’ll pay up. I’d forgotten about that.

Needless to say, I hope you’re right here too.

Anyway — he’s within the margin of error in swing states and is down with black men by a lot compared to 2020. Women could save the day if they come out strong — but will they? Will it be enough? I have doubts.

Don't know if it means much ...

National Security Leaders for America Endorses Kamala Harris for President of the United States (Sep 22, 2024)

Kamala introduces racist policies, forgivable loans so long as you have a certain skin-color. Media silent.

Uh oh, here's another one:

As others might fathom, this is going to be an Obama 2.0 president.