Jump to content

2024 Presidential Election Thread - Let's keep the party going.


Recommended Posts

Posted
8 hours ago, Hank_Hill said:

Lol just heard my MAGA landlord (I know I know but I’d pay rent to Hitler for $1900/mo dog allowed in Maui post fire) getting out of the car bitching to his wife about Kamala claiming Indian on her college scholarship applications. like that makes any fucking sense. They scared. 

That’s so dumb. Her father was a professor at Stanford. She likely could have gotten admittance (and reduced tuition!) to one of the best universities based on that alone, but chose to go to an HBCU! 

Posted
Just now, South Austin said:

She better love it, because an illegal from Guatemala is about to take it.

Holding auditions on top of the border wall. Need to leave some poles on the southern side to let our new 2028 pole vaulters get some practice 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
10 hours ago, Ted Lange said:

 

Hell, Trump pressured the Afghan government to release 5,000 Taliban prisoners as an incentive to get the Taliban to the negotiating table. (Negotiations to which the Afghan government itself wasn’t invited.) Trump will claim he didn’t release the prisoners, the Taliban did. But that’s a distinction with no difference. He made them do it. And a bunch of jihadists returned to the battlefield.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Rage+1 2
Posted
56 minutes ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

Meanwhile.

 

 

 

 

Translation: he reached out to the Trump campaign to get paid in some capacity or otherwise get in on the grift, and they told him to go get his shine box. 

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 3
Posted
2 minutes ago, HenryJames said:

Rittenhouse has a chance to do the funniest thing possible.

Something tells me the rittenhouse fanclub would be less enthusiastic about shooting THAT pedophile 

Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, TexArcher said:

His wives The "help" is the only reason his kids even survived.

FFT

Edited by dcbc
  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Posted
2 hours ago, cactusflinthead said:

Trump doesn't like dogs. One of his go to curses for people he doesn't like is to call them a dog.

This author says he hates them.

Trump observed that Republican senator Marco Rubio was “sweating like a dog” at a 2016 debate. He compared former White House aide Omarosa Manigault Newman to a dog when she published her book Unhinged: An Insider’s Account Of The Trump White House. Trump noted that Republican nominee Mitt Romney “choked like a dog” against Obama in the 2012 election. At various times, NBC’s David Gregory, Fox News’ Glenn Beck and Ted Cruz’s communications directors were all, Trump leered, “fired like a dog”.

https://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/politics/article/donald-trump-dogs#:~:text=“Donald was not a dog,understood Trump's hostility to dogs.

 

Of course he had something to say about Noem shooting her dog.

“Couple of rough stories, there’s no question about it,” the former president said. “Until this week, she was doing incredibly well. And she got hit hard and sometimes you do books and you have some guy writing a book and you maybe don’t read it as carefully, you know. You have ghost writers do it, they help you, and they, in this case, didn’t help too much.”

https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/14/politics/kristi-noem-trump-dog-killing/index.html

 

 

This should tell people all they need to know.

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, Planet Houston said:

Trump has to be fucking livid right now. I imagine him trying to frantically reach Putin to whine about giving Joe and Kamala a resounding victory, while Putin ignores the call and laughs as he rips a line with his hitman he just got back. 

Yeah, yeah your family is around here somewhere.  We just need this photo op 1st.

Edited by WBT
  • Fuck You 7
Posted

https://www.axios.com/2024/08/02/trump-nabj-fact-checking-black-journalists

 

Quote

Moments before former President Trump took the stage at the National Association of Black Journalists annual convention in Chicago on Wednesday, the organization's president was called back to address an issue.

Why it matters: Trump did not want to be fact-checked live and was refusing to go on stage, NABJ president Ken Lemon told Axios.

"[Trump's team] said, 'Well, can you not fact check? He's not going to take the stage if you fact-check,'" Lemon said.

 

Quote

The intrigue: The Q&A with the GOP presidential nominee was delayed more than an hour before he eventually joined a panel of Black journalists, including ABC News correspondent Rachel Scott, Fox News anchor Harris Faulkner and Semafor reporter Kadia Goba.

At the time, President Trump blamed the delay on audio problems.
Lemon told Axios, "There were audio problems, but they were resolved very quickly."
"The bigger problem was his threat not to take the stage when he had agreed to go on. He did not want to be fact-checked, but we could not let him on the stage without fact-checking," Lemon said.

 

Quote

The stalemate was so prolonged that NABJ leaders were prepared to explain to the audience of nearly 2,000 people why Trump would not appear.

"I was prepared to go on stage to craft a statement, saying he decided not to go on stage because of fact-checking... we couldn't compromise on that.
As Lemon was preparing that statement, Trump walked onto the stage.
The other side: The Trump campaign disputes NABJ's account. Trump spokesperson Steven Cheung told Axios on Friday that they waited "for close to 40 minutes while audio/technical issues were fixed by NABJ."

 

Spoiler

Zoom in: Lemon says Trump's team eventually asked NABJ not to post the fact-checking on its social media platforms or allow the moderator to disclose that there would be fact-checking.

ABC's Rachel Scott discussed the fact-checking on stage, and NABJ publicized ahead of the event that there would be fact-checking."
Catch up quick: Earlier this week, NABJ announced that Trump would be in Chicago to conduct the in-person interview, creating a divide among members who didn't think the organization should provide him with the platform.

Lemon and other leaders have noted that NABJ has traditionally invited both candidates to the convention every election cycle. He said he understands the disappointment.
Zoom out: Members began lining up three hours ahead of the event to get a seat in the more than 2,000-seat auditorium, making their way through a line that snaked through the hallway.

Once everyone was seated, they waited patiently for the interview to begin, having been told the program would begin "momentarily."
Ultimately, the program that was supposed to begin at noon central time did not begin until more than an hour later.
Between the lines: In the aftermath, members remain divided on whether it was right for NABJ to extend the invitation and give a platform to Trump. Some said it was embarrassing; others praised the interviewers for their tough questioning.

Brittany Cummings, a communications professional, was among the members who didn't think the organization should have extended the invitation to Trump.
"I'm not sure that any group of journalists has the 'secret sauce' to make him tell the truth and speak as a normal candidate would," she said. "He's not a normal candidate, so we can't treat him as such."
"During the actual discussion, he was disrespectful, and I don't think there was anything new to learn."
The bottom line: Lemon said it is important for people to know that NABJ did not let anything slide. They said "no" several times to ensure the event was put together correctly and to protect the women conducting the interviews.

"Our whole team stood our ground."

 

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted
Quote

In a YouGov poll conducted between July 25-29, 59 percent of Republicans surveyed said they would prefer a president under the age of 75. Trump celebrated his 78th birthday in June. Forty percent said they had no preference, and just two percent said they would prefer a president over the age of 75.

Well have I got news for them!

Excuse Me What GIF by Biden Inauguration Committee

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
1 minute ago, Js1 said:

Trump +2 a week ago. Trump +5 two weeks ago (against Biden)

It's gonna be a blowout if Trump can't find a foothold. Their campaign is in freefall and their voter enthusiasm is waning while voter enthusiasm for Kamala is surging and not losing momentum. 

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted

Hate to even think about it for fear of the jinx, but man I’m still amazed at the sudden burst of enthusiasm to squash the whole right wing conservative movement right now.  I’ve been burned before (electing Biden over Trump II, Jan 6, felony convictions, etc)…but this feels different because of the sheer diversity across the US public that are talking about it / donating / Zoom calls.  

I feared we were going to sleepwalk into Project 2025, Michigan vs App State-style.  Really hope that it’s “Ball State leading Alabama 7-0 start of the second quarter” instead.  

  • Hook 'Em 8
Posted
Just now, mdmost said:

I think his only remaining play is to bribe RFK Jr to drop out and endorse him. 

I was just about to ask, what is the consensus here? It feels like the majority of RFJ Jr.'s support would go to Dotard, because loonies. But who knows.

Posted

He'd lose the diehards who only wanted to vote 3rd party. He'd get the nutbars who are anti-vax since Trump now plays to those people. Hopefully, they would just stay home out of disgust of being sold out. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 minute ago, mdmost said:

He'd lose the diehards who only wanted to vote 3rd party. He'd get the nutbars who are anti-vax since Trump now plays to those people. Hopefully, they would just stay home out of disgust of being sold out. 

A lot of the early RFK support were also protest votes by younger left voters. They are obviously coming home 

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted
1 minute ago, Red Five said:

I was just about to ask, what is the consensus here? It feels like the majority of RFJ Jr.'s support would go to Dotard, because loonies. But who knows.

That’s what they say, and I believe it. It feels like there would be more people that are absolutely no on Democrats but don’t love voting for Trump so they go to RFK. That probably happens more than people that are absolutely no on a black woman so they go to RFK.  Both real, but former seems bigger. 

Posted

Also don’t forget RFK has successfully gotten on the ballot in plenty of places. At some point it will be too late for him to remove his name, even if he endorsed Trump

Posted (edited)
30 minutes ago, Chad Fuck said:


My guess is dogs don’t like him because they can sniff out dickheads. And because they don’t like him, he don’t like them.

I stared at the comment last night. I could either go on a longcat rant about how this is one of the worst signs of his overall sorriness or nothing at all. Just report it with some detachment. Because if I said anything it would be a screed.

Edited by cactusflinthead
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
24 minutes ago, Js1 said:

A lot of the early RFK support were also protest votes by younger left voters. They are obviously coming home 

 

22 minutes ago, 'stache said:

Aren’t they mostly anti vaxxers?

Yes, and yes. A law school friend and anti-science (or as she puts it "pro-nature") crusader was all in on RFK, Jr. But she's also pro-women, and is now firmly in the Harris camp. She's a nut job, but she votes.

Edited by Cap33
  • Hook 'Em 6
Posted
43 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

The thing that pisses me off, possibly the worst save the whole fuck democracy thing, is that while old, it's obvious Biden fucking loves America. And he loves America in a way that is dwindling to the point of not existing anymore. He does hard shit as president, he does shit he doesn't like, but he does it. But in moments like this, you can see his pure, unadulterated joy in bringing Americans home. This is the shit he fucking lives for as President. It's just genuine happiness to be able to bring folks home. This right here is the guy who was best friends with John McCain, right here.

Meanwhile, the other fuck has never fucking laughed in his life and never enjoyed anything about being president other than worship and personal immunity. 

I love Biden. He's a better POTUS today than Kamala or Trump could ever hope to be. He'll be a better POTUS than those two tomorrow, next week, next month and probably until the day age no longer allows it. But the simple fact of the matter is he could no longer win this race -- and he did an amazing thing by stepping aside when he did and how he did it. It's absolutely amazing. My entire outlook on this country turned on an absolute dime on 7/21.

 

27 minutes ago, immamac said:

It's gonna be a blowout if Trump can't find a foothold. Their campaign is in freefall and their voter enthusiasm is waning while voter enthusiasm for Kamala is surging and not losing momentum. 

I agree. It will take something along the lines of Biden's debate performance to stop her. Trump and his merry band of miscreants will do a lot of illegal shit trying to steal her rightful win, though.

  • Hook 'Em 6
Posted
3 minutes ago, Cap33 said:

 

Yes, and yes. A law school friend and anti-science (or as she puts it "pro-nature") crusader was all in on RFK, Jr. But she's also pro-women, and is now firmly in the Harris camp. She's a nut job, but she votes.

_F5X1X.gif

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Haha 4
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
32 minutes ago, immamac said:

It's gonna be a blowout if Trump can't find a foothold. Their campaign is in freefall and their voter enthusiasm is waning while voter enthusiasm for Kamala is surging and not losing momentum. 

Yep.  This was always going to happen for whichever side pulled their head out of their ass first and offered a non-octogenarian

  • Hook 'Em 7
Posted
1 minute ago, Cap33 said:

 

Yes, and yes. A law school friend and anti-science (or as she puts it "pro-nature") crusader was all in on RFK, Jr. But she's also pro-women, and is now firmly in the Harris camp. She's a nut job, but she votes.

I work with someone who is all in on RFK, Jr. She thinks he's only against dangerous untested vaccines.  It's taking all of my self control not to forward her the latest Behind the Bastards episodes on him.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted

Not sure how poor old Peggy was able to finish this column. So much resigned defeat. Maybe octogenarians should no longer be WSJ columnists either.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-fight-of-trumps-political-life-strengths-of-kamala-harris-have-become-clearer-cd8622cc

Quote

Those who think about politics and history as a profession can’t resist comparing presidential years. “This is 1968 all over again.” “We’re back to the dynamics of ’72.” We do this because we know political history and love it, and because there are always parallels and lessons to be learned.

But it should be said as a reminder: This year isn’t like any previous time.

This is the year of the sudden, historically disastrous debate, the near-assassination of one of the nominees, the sudden removal of the president from his ticket, the sudden elevation of a vice president her own party had judged a liability, and her suddenly pulling even in a suddenly truncated campaign.

We have never had this year. And it continues to astound.

Kamala Harris just got two excellent weeks in the clear. Donald Trump’s campaign had to take her down early or at least hit her hard—and didn’t. She has the wind at her back; he’s scattered and stuck on the back of his heels. This week she had a good rally in Atlanta; he went before a hostile National Association of Black Journalists, was taken aback by his first questioner’s accusatory tone, matched her energy, and revealed, if you didn’t know, how cutting and personal the coming months will be.

What is remarkable is how surprised the Trump campaign seems to have been by Ms. Harris. Why? Smart people understood Joe Biden would eventually have to step aside, and she was his most likely replacement. Why have they responded as if shocked? We have a trough of videos of her talking, it’s devastating. Where is it? Is that all you’ll need to make a coherent case? When are you going to locate the meaning of this thing?

“San Francisco liberal,” “way too radical.” All that feels tired, the reflex of an aged muscle. It sounds like the 1990s. This isn’t the ’90s. New ages need new arguments, or at least arguments freshly cast.

Can Mr. Trump shift gears? He grew up, as I did, watching “The Ed Sullivan Show.” I’m sure it was on every Sunday night at 8 at the Trump house in Queens. On that show you saw every week the great Borscht Belt comics of 1950-70. Their timing—“Take my wife—please!”—is ingrained in him. What he does now is shtick, because he likes to entertain and is a performer. The boat’s sinking, the battery’s spitting, the shark’s coming! As Hannibal Lecter said, “I’d love to have you for dinner!”

This works so perfectly for those who support him. For everyone else it’s just more evidence of psychopathology. He has to freshen up his act. Can he?

Ms. Harris will dominate the coming week with the unveiling of her vice-presidential choice. Then there will be the convention, in which they’ll pull out all stops. And then August will be over. Meaning a third of the 100-day campaign will be over. Does Mr. Trump know that he’s fighting for his life?

I want to take a quick look at some factors that are major pluses for Ms. Harris.

• She is new. She seems a turning of the page away from Old Old Biden and Old Old Trump. She looks new, like a new era. She displays vigor and the joy of the battle. The mainstream media is on her side. Coverage hasn’t been tough or demanding.

• On policy she is bold to the point of shameless. This week she essentially said: You know those policies I stood for that you don’t like? I changed my mind! Her campaign began blithely disavowing previous stands, with no explanation. From the New York Times’s Reid Epstein: “The Harris campaign announced on Friday that the vice president no longer wanted to ban fracking, a significant shift from where she stood four years ago.” Campaign officials said she also now supports “increased funding for border enforcement; no longer supported a single-payer health insurance program; and echoed Mr. Biden’s call for banning assault weapons but not a requirement to sell them to the federal government.” It’s remarkable, she’s getting away with it, and it’s no doubt just the beginning. It will make it harder for the Trump campaign with its devastating videos.

Will the left of her party let her tack toward moderation? Yes. She’s what they’ve got, and in any case people on the wings of both parties have a way of recognizing their own. Progressives aren’t protesting her new stands: That’s the dog that didn’t bark.

• She too is a born performer. She knows what she’s doing when she’s campaigning. She is less sure of what she’s doing when she’s governing. But she gets a race. Running for the 2020 Democratic nomination, she wasn’t good at strategy or policy, but the part involving performing and being a public person and speaking with merry conviction—she gets that and is good at it.

• She is beautiful. You can’t take a bad picture of her. Her beauty, plus the social warmth that all who have known her over the years speak of, combines to produce: radiance. It is foolish to make believe this doesn’t matter. Politicians themselves are certain it matters, which is why so many in that male-dominated profession have taken to Botox, fillers, dermabrasion, face lifts, all the cosmetic things. Because they’re in a cosmetic profession.

• She has a wave of pent-up support behind her. By November we’ll know if something big happened. Barack Obama deliberately, painstakingly put new constituencies together. He created a movement. It had fervor and energy. What we may see this year is something different—that a movement created Kamala Harris. That is, the old constituencies held, maintained fervor and rose again when Mr. Biden stepped aside and Ms. Harris was put on top. I’m not sure we’ve seen that before.

She has many particular challenges. One is this: When you see Mr. Trump, that’s Trump. He is what you think he is. He doesn’t hide much. You look at him and think (pro or con), OK, I get it, I know who that guy is. When you see Ms. Harris, is that Harris? Is what she is showing you her? You wonder, “Is this real and genuine?” I wonder how she’ll address that or answer it.

Another: She stumbles in interviews. Will she try to get away with not doing any?

Another: People will continue to wonder how liberal she is, and how strong she is, but I think an equally or more important question will be how serious she is. Does she think seriously, deeply, soberly? I haven’t seen her betray this tendency. Mr. Obama was a serious man, Hillary Clinton was fully understood as a serious woman. (That’s why her campaign could produce and she could capitalize on the famous “3 a.m. phone call” ad.) Is Ms. Harris? Is she a credible commander of the U.S. nuclear arsenal?

Some will respond, “But Donald Trump isn’t serious!” My answer would be: That’s why he lost the popular vote twice. If Democrats lose the popular vote, they almost certainly lose the election.

Mr. Trump himself would reply: I controlled the nuclear arsenal for four years. Nothing blew up.

 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
5 minutes ago, Cap33 said:

 

Yes, and yes. A law school friend and anti-science (or as she puts it "pro-nature") crusader was all in on RFK, Jr. But she's also pro-women, and is now firmly in the Harris camp. 

Ultimately we are all going to have to make the tough decision that you either believe in HARD science (which biology is) or you are not allowed to vote. Either we keep being held hostage by lunatics who on top of that spread easily vaccinated diseases (which admitedly COVID is not easily vaccinated, they were right in a way today it is just like the flu), or we go hard on doing what is right and correct.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

I work with someone who is all in on RFK, Jr. She thinks he's only against dangerous untested vaccines.  It's taking all of my self control not to forward her the latest Behind the Bastards episodes on him.

If you post an email address one of us can forward it. Ha.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
6 minutes ago, linux said:

Ultimately we are all going to have to make the tough decision that you either believe in HARD science (which biology is) or you are not allowed to vote.

Like a literacy test

  • Haha 3


×
×
  • Create New...