Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

Posted
29 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

oh my sweet summer child

To be fair, I said should be enough. Im fully aware that we are treading water in a sea of retarded anti-intellectuals and broken, cheugy interior decorators. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
16 minutes ago, troph said:


 

But the whole shark and batteries in a boat thing was just another stand up routine attempt, the problem is he’s losing his mind too so he’s not nearly as good at it as he was.

Maybe I’m not understanding your point here. My way of thinking is standup comedy requires lots of observation skills. If you interviewed 90% of those at his speeches they wouldn’t remember 10% of what he said. It’s like his fans are those kids in junior high that didn’t connect with jocks or nerds and now they have a friend. No matter how stupid friend is he is the best. 
 

However all your points are spot on. 

Posted
1 hour ago, troph said:

Of course there’s the propaganda, classic blame an exterior threat, the guy isn’t one dimensional but his ability to make his people laugh was a huge component that was never really noticed by MSM for sure but I’m not sure really anyone dove into it.

I don't know when I read it, but I clearly remember that someone wrote an article in the The Atlantic (I can't recall how old it was and I'm too lazy to go back and find it) that described the experience of being at a Trump rally as jovial, raucous, celebratory and welcoming.  And that the the enthusiasm was infectious and swept away so many in the movement that just wanted to be a part of a community.  The author said it was hard to understand this through the venom and hate espoused by Trump unless you actually attended one.

That magic formula is clearly gone now.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
3 hours ago, Biff Tannen said:

Uh, I do.  Maybe more.  We HAVE to get people out to vote.  No mercy.

I don't.  I doubt there is anybody who didn't vote for him in 2020, who is now thinking "you know what?  That's my guy!"  I also think the Trump of 2020 would be doing a lot more over the span of two weeks than a Mar-a-Lago presser, a Bedminster presser, and a "rally" at a 2,700 seat theater, especially as his competition is lapping him.

Partly because:

1 hour ago, troph said:

I did my own post mortem on why Trump was appealing after the 2020 election, he lost but he still made it way too close given his presidency. There’s all sorts of political reasons, but putting the gravity of the situation aside, his stump speeches were more of a standup routine than anything else. Now I didn’t find it funny but his crowds laughed more than they cheered. Of course there’s the propaganda, classic blame an exterior threat, the guy isn’t one dimensional but his ability to make his people laugh was a huge component that was never really noticed by MSM for sure but I’m not sure really anyone dove into it. 

now he’s older, he’s flustered, he’s not a novel candidate, more are done with him and he’s lost it. But the whole shark and batteries in a boat thing was just another stand up routine attempt, the problem is he’s losing his mind too so he’s not nearly as good at it as he was.

All great points, and it feeds into him just rambling on without a point.  I feel like in the run-up to 2016 and 2020, yeah, he would get off topic and babble/ramble a bit but he seemed to be working the crowd more, and he always seemed to have that reality TV star knack of having a point or two or three that he was trying to make.  He may take a while to get to the point, but he eventually came back to it, and got the applause and the laughs at the right moments.

I sometimes think the people who believe he's thrown in the towel and is just grifting are right.  He is not acting like somebody who wants to actually win.  He can talk a lot, but I can talk about how I'm going to win the lottery or go out with Sela Ward on a date, but if I don't actually go out and buy a ticket or figure out how to get the restraining order dropped, it's not going to happen.

Now he's the political equivalent of an elderly person driving around, blowing through stop signs and traffic lights, oblivious to what's going on around him.

  • Haha 2
Posted
where's [mention=593]Brisketexan[/mention] with a hot dish recipe? 


You rang?

6f7c4e7e13ac73429d9286fb62dc19fa.jpg

Spammity spam!

Had this show up on my Twitter, so now I'm going to force all of you to look at this face, too:
image.thumb.png.f360ef1c7d22426669479dd25ddb8d39.png


So…the problem is that none of these people have EVER been laid, right?
  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Haha 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
8 hours ago, aggie08 said:

I hope they like human excrement on their well-manicured lawn.

Hey, say what you will, but those folks are brave AF. They’re not only putting a massive target on their back, they’re giving their neighbors permission to think about changing their thoughts. That’s a big signal. 
 

but yeah they’re probably fucked. 

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
10 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Well, I believe that you maintain that there were pricing errors that should correct themselves and should not require goverment intervention.

I didn't do a deep dive and there's probably nothing to dive on, but the policy sure seems like it could be problematic, e.g. price controls.

As to the concentration in those industries, that doesn't necessarily implicate monopolization and certainly not collusion (I'm fairly certain the government watches that and would jump on it).  There's probably some pretty good arguments that those industries are monopolistic by nature.

 Well ok, but nobody proposed price controls.


For the record, I don’t love the proposal because the juice (hand waving about price gouging to mollify progressives) isn’t worth the squeeze (people who know better calling it price controls, and people who don’t believing them).

That said, words have meaning and  I’m not going to play along with that framing. I see this as a VERY modest step towards reasserting a modicum of oversight of monopolistic behaviors and cartels. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Posted
4 hours ago, Old Freak Nasty said:

I don't know when I read it, but I clearly remember that someone wrote an article in the The Atlantic (I can't recall how old it was and I'm too lazy to go back and find it) that described the experience of being at a Trump rally as jovial, raucous, celebratory and welcoming.  And that the the enthusiasm was infectious and swept away so many in the movement that just wanted to be a part of a community.  The author said it was hard to understand this through the venom and hate espoused by Trump unless you actually attended one.

That magic formula is clearly gone now.

There was a similar article in the NYT about 6 or 8 months ago.  I think it was "The Joy of Attending a Trump Rally" and yes, it's like a college football tailgate.  

Posted

We’ve seen then try to make scandals out of nearly everything with nothing sticking and coming close to being a scandal, but trying to make the Walz/pepper story be some proof that he’s purposely trying to say Whites have no culture has to be a.) the worst thing I’ve ever seen and b.) shows they know they are losing and have nothing. 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Posted
10 hours ago, Pancho said:

 

We eat a shit ton of tacos in my family and we call those Gringo Tacos. Definitely have more spice than Tim's. They aren't my favorite that we make but there is something nostalgic about it for me.  

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, Post Oak said:

We eat a shit ton of tacos in my family and we call those Gringo Tacos. Definitely have more spice than Tim's. They aren't my favorite that we make but there is something nostalgic about it for me.  

 

  • Haha 5
Posted
6 hours ago, troph said:

I did my own post mortem on why Trump was appealing after the 2020 election, he lost but he still made it way too close given his presidency. There’s all sorts of political reasons, but putting the gravity of the situation aside, his stump speeches were more of a standup routine than anything else. Now I didn’t find it funny but his crowds laughed more than they cheered. Of course there’s the propaganda, classic blame an exterior threat, the guy isn’t one dimensional but his ability to make his people laugh was a huge component that was never really noticed by MSM for sure but I’m not sure really anyone dove into it. 
 

now he’s older, he’s flustered, he’s not a novel candidate, more are done with him and he’s lost it. But the whole shark and batteries in a boat thing was just another stand up routine attempt, the problem is he’s losing his mind too so he’s not nearly as good at it as he was.

I wonder if it’s simply a matter of contrast. 

Just a few weeks ago it was Trump compared with Biden, and the latter was looking every bit of his 81 years, with his speech and mannerisms diminished far beyond 2020 when he was more in the spotlight of a national election. Next to that, Trump almost seemed spry, and the national focus and rhetoric was more on the aging Biden.

Now we have Harris and Walz, who are running all over the country with an image of youth, vibrancy, and joy, coming at Trump and Vance with all the wit and bravado. Now, by comparison Trump looks like the feeble geriatric who everybody at the dinner table wishes would stop with the senseless jabbering.

I know there’s more to it than that, but I really think the change is not so much Trump himself and his antics, but his opponent who with contrast is pointing out how incompetent and deficient as a person Trump is. If it was still Biden as the nominee, Trump could still be lisping the same fucked up rants, but everybody would still be talking about how Biden’s age has made him unfit for office.

  • Hook 'Em 8
  • Like 1
Posted
We’ve seen then try to make scandals out of nearly everything with nothing sticking and coming close to being a scandal, but trying to make the Walz/pepper story be some proof that he’s purposely trying to say Whites have no culture has to be a.) the worst thing I’ve ever seen and b.) shows they know they are losing and have nothing. 

It’s a mix of “scandal fatigue” and the boy who cried wolf. Literally EVERYTHING is a scandal to them (the ultimate snowflakes). Which makes nothing they call a scandal a scandal. “Walz used toilet paper! He hates trees! And he once crossed the street when the ‘don’t walk’ sign was on!” Layer on the fact that their allegations are more often than not pure lies (“he abandoned his unit to avoid deployment to Iraq!”), and it just doesn’t get traction outside the cult.
The idea is running out of gas. They have nothing new, and no new customers who will buy it.
  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
8 hours ago, Da Fino said:

He’s trying to lose. There’s no other explanation. That should be enough for him to lose texags 

TexAgs is too busy telling each other what Trump really meant by those words.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Posted
18 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Can’t stop laughing at these losers.

 

IMG_5303.jpeg

Everyone: Please just stop being weird.

Ben Shapiro: THE SPICES ARE NOT TO BE MOCKED!

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 4
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
4 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

 


You rang?

6f7c4e7e13ac73429d9286fb62dc19fa.jpg

Spammity spam!



So…the problem is that none of these people have EVER been laid, right?

 

I’d eat that, but onion and bell pepper? Are you sure that’s the right book?

Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

 Well ok, but nobody proposed price controls.


For the record, I don’t love the proposal because the juice (hand waving about price gouging to mollify progressives) isn’t worth the squeeze (people who know better calling it price controls, and people who don’t believing them).

That said, words have meaning and  I’m not going to play along with that framing. I see this as a VERY modest step towards reasserting a modicum of oversight of monopolistic behaviors and cartels. 

I disagree with your premise. They're putting meat on the bones of her campaign (edit - for the media, for content at rallies) and appealing to younger votes, not mollifying progressives. Candidates need a simple plan to rally an audience on the stump, and to sound like a reasonable step to the media. Detailed plans and discussing policy doesn't work. The media pays no attention. See Hillary Clinton's campaign, for example. The next 10 weeks aren't about legislation; they're about winning an election so you can pass legislation. Bare bones ideas are what matters in a campaign. The legislative process is where you worry about the details, but they have to get there first. 

 

2 hours ago, Hank Kingsley said:

These freaks are so lost and have veered way off course, you fucking love to see it. 

 

Jeez, the extreme-whites are really kicking up a fuss about spicy tacos. Fortunately, they're on the receiving end of a snide of mockery.

image.png.4ffb3dcd9eb2269d682fc8144c6db084.png

Edited by Chopper
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 8
Posted
10 minutes ago, Chopper said:

I disagree with your premise. They're putting meat on the bones of her campaign (edit - for the media, for content at rallies) and appealing to younger votes, not mollifying progressives. Candidates need a simple plan to rally an audience on the stump, and to sound like a reasonable step to the media. Detailed plans and discussing policy doesn't work. The media pays no attention. See Hillary Clinton's campaign, for example. The next 10 weeks aren't about legislation; they're about winning an election so you can pass legislation. Bare bones ideas are what matters in a campaign. The legislative process is where you worry about the details, but they have to get there first. 

Bingo. You have to work towards taking back house and senate especially if you want to pass any policy. It’s sad that’s the way it is now but gotta make changes. The days of running on strictly policy are dead. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
11 minutes ago, Chopper said:

I disagree with your premise. They're putting meat on the bones of her campaign (edit - for the media, for content at rallies) and appealing to younger votes, not mollifying progressives. Candidates need a simple plan to rally an audience on the stump, and to sound like a reasonable step to the media. Detailed plans and discussing policy doesn't work. The media pays no attention. See Hillary Clinton's campaign, for example. The next 10 weeks aren't about legislation; they're about winning an election so you can pass legislation. Bare bones ideas are what matters in a campaign. The legislative process is where you worry about the details, but they have to get there first. 

 

 

Jeez, the extreme-whites are really kicking up a fuss about spicy tacos. Fortunately, they're on the receiving end of a snide of mockery.

image.png.4ffb3dcd9eb2269d682fc8144c6db084.png

Oh those poor, oppressed, and now MOCKED white people!

maxresdefault.jpg

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
3 hours ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

 Well ok, but nobody proposed price controls.


For the record, I don’t love the proposal because the juice (hand waving about price gouging to mollify progressives) isn’t worth the squeeze (people who know better calling it price controls, and people who don’t believing them).

What daylight do you see between what she's talking about and price controls?  It's not like we're the only ones that say it looks like that.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/08/15/kamala-harris-price-gouging-groceries/

 

https://time.com/7011214/kamala-harris-campaign-federal-ban-price-gouging-food-groceries-inflation/

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

The Trump campaign has spent 4x as much money in Georgia once Harris became the nominee compared to pre-Harris in 2024. Of the $37m in ad buys for next week, $24m is in Georgia

They are scared.  They know they have no path to winning without Georgia.  And it is a tied race - not to mention AZ slipping into lean Harris and NC also a tied race.

Also means their "fix" with the Election Board not certifying isn't as foolproof as people on here act like it is. 

  • Hook 'Em 5
Posted
5 minutes ago, BehoId, The Underminer! said:

What daylight do you see between what she's talking about and price controls?  It's not like we're the only ones that say it looks like that.

Most state price gouging statutes contain these three elements:

  1. Emergency or Crisis Situation – applies to abrupt price increases during a time of disaster or other emergency
  2. Essential Items or Services – applies exclusively to items or services that are essential to survival
  3. Price Limit – sets a limit on the price that can be charged for essential goods or services

I could see a Price Gouging statute that had a relatively high standard of proof that required a showing of monopoly or a certain jump in profit margin unrelated to product improvement, etc. 

I see something like that as distinct from simple price controls.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, NorthLoop said:

You joke, but phdhorn is a super climate change denier. It's pretty much the reason he doesn't post here anymore. 

Damn, missed that and that’s unfortunate. Loved his storm tracker threads (that was him right?)

 

edit: never mind, asked and answered. I should have kept reading the thread before posting.  

Edited by achooloco
Posted
Why am I not at all surprised people would take offense to Walz joking about white people not liking spice? Snowflakes indeed.

Greatest scandal in modern history.

“But your nominee has said we should get rid of the constitution and that he wants to be a dictator.”
“Whatever. The real scandal is what Walz said about food.”
  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 2
  • Rage+1 2
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

 Well ok, but nobody proposed price controls.


For the record, I don’t love the proposal because the juice (hand waving about price gouging to mollify progressives) isn’t worth the squeeze (people who know better calling it price controls, and people who don’t believing them).

That said, words have meaning and  I’m not going to play along with that framing. I see this as a VERY modest step towards reasserting a modicum of oversight of monopolistic behaviors and cartels. 

Do we even know what the proposal is?

This whole subject intrigues me because I am firmly convinced that capitalism/business is run amok, but the only candidate/policy person with sensible reforms I can think of is Liz Warren.

ETA:  Scraping around, this seems to be pretty much pandering and some mush-mouthed stuff about using the antitrust laws against alleged gougers.  Nothing like an actual "federal ban on 'corporate price-gouging."

Edited by TwiceHorn
  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
38 minutes ago, Chopper said:

I disagree with your premise. They're putting meat on the bones of her campaign (edit - for the media, for content at rallies) and appealing to younger votes, not mollifying progressives. Candidates need a simple plan to rally an audience on the stump, and to sound like a reasonable step to the media. Detailed plans and discussing policy doesn't work. The media pays no attention. See Hillary Clinton's campaign, for example. The next 10 weeks aren't about legislation; they're about winning an election so you can pass legislation. Bare bones ideas are what matters in a campaign. The legislative process is where you worry about the details, but they have to get there first. 

 

 

Jeez, the extreme-whites are really kicking up a fuss about spicy tacos. Fortunately, they're on the receiving end of a snide of mockery.

image.png.4ffb3dcd9eb2269d682fc8144c6db084.png

Black pepper being too spicy is a long held Minnesota stereotype. Getting triggered about joking around with that is just out of touch and, well, I'm not trying to pedal a talking point but it's fucking weird and maladjusted.

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Haha 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Do we even know what the proposal is?

This whole subject intrigues me because I am firmly convinced that capitalism/business is run amok, but the only candidate/policy person with sensible reforms I can think of is Liz Warren.

Maybe we should wait until she makes her policy speech today. For all we know, maybe she worked with Liz on it 



×
×
  • Create New...