Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

Posted
20 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

6 years of education implies a master's degree.  Is there any state in which one must even have a bachelor's degree to work in daycare?

I doubt it.  I think he is conflating daycare with preschool, and state certifications with educational paths that makes it easier to get hired as a director of a preschool.

If you go to most Montessori-type preschools, the director likely has a bachelor or possibly a masters.  That director is also likely the licensee, which requires ongoing certification.  But not everyone who works there (even a Montessori-type preschool) needs to be a licensee.    

Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

So they're both shitheads.

I still think my favorite Nate shithead moment was when he was asked why he was so bullish on a red wave in 2022 when most of the polling was just right wing spam and he said "well the left-wing pollsters could just do the same" 

Edited by Js1
  • Haha 1
Posted (edited)

GOP pollster has Trump up 53-43 in Alaska.

So.... the same margin as 2020 - Trump won 52.83 to 42.77. 

Peltola is up 46-45, but obviously with RCV, that's about where she wants to be.  This was an NRCC/Begich internal (big caveat), and conveniently did not test second-choice options in a race that is not FTTP. 

Edited by Js1
Posted
1 hour ago, Goofyboy said:


Bluesky. It’s slowly picking up users and is basically Twitter.

This. There's no default algorithm and your feed only shows you posts from people that you actually follow, and in the order that they are posted. It's a bit of a curve to find/follow the people you liked from Twitter, but it's all I use at this point. Fuck Elron.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 2
Posted
4 minutes ago, The Royal We said:

your feed only shows you posts from people that you actually follow, and in the order that they are posted.

What a concept!!

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 1
  • Drool 1
Posted
6 minutes ago, The Royal We said:

This. There's no default algorithm and your feed only shows you posts from people that you actually follow, and in the order that they are posted. It's a bit of a curve to find/follow the people you liked from Twitter, but it's all I use at this point. Fuck Elron.

But, I mean....Threads has already figured out that it should show me the "do you guys like hot middle aged mom bods?" posters along with the people and topics I follow.  And I appreciate that.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Haha 3
  • Drool 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Brisketexan said:

But, I mean....Threads has already figured out that it should show me the "do you guys like hot middle aged mom bods?" posters along with the people and topics I follow.  And I appreciate that.

I'm disappointed in Threads. Please let me know what accounts are posting that so I know which ones to block.

  • Haha 1
  • Drool 1
Posted
10 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Season 5 Wow GIF by The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/kamala-harris-raised-300-million-august-extending-cash-windfall-rcna169759

Vice President Kamala Harris' political operation raised more than $300 million in the month of August — more than twice as much as former President Donald Trump's operation gathered in the same period — two sources familiar with the Harris fundraising numbers told NBC News. 

I’m responsible for $5 of that.  You are all welcome. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
21 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

I'm disappointed in Threads. Please let me know what accounts are posting that so I know which ones to block.

I wonder if the problem is it feels too much like Instagram? Facebook and Instagram still feel like different products, probably because they started separately, but Threads was literally spun off of Instagram and I just haven't been able to care enough to click over from one to the other. I got a Bluesky login from surly but I don't see anything all that interesting or breaking news from my feed. If only there was a way to get elmo out of the way so it could go back to twitter as it used to be. I never was active but the links to breaking news and jokes was always interesting to me.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
I doubt it.  I think he is conflating daycare with preschool, and state certifications with educational paths that makes it easier to get hired as a director of a preschool.
If you go to most Montessori-type preschools, the director likely has a bachelor or possibly a masters.  That director is also likely the licensee, which requires ongoing certification.  But not everyone who works there (even a Montessori-type preschool) needs to be a licensee.    

WGAF? You’ve given that question more thought than JD. He’s completely out of touch with reality on a great many things, including this one.
Posted
4 hours ago, Snake Diggity said:

The “right” Republican answer to that question is so obvious: “2 things Charlie: first, we’ve got to cut taxes so that dads keep more of their money and can afford for mom to stay home.  Second, we’ve got to cut taxes so that families with 2 working parents keep more of their money and can afford daycare.”

Are you saying the "right" Republican answer is correct, though? Because day care averages 18k to 30k, or so I'm told. The marginal difference from a tax cut to a middle, or lower, income family wouldn't make a dent in the cost. A tax cut wouldn't address what's already a shortage in child care facilities.

Posted (edited)
17 minutes ago, Chopper said:

Are you saying the "right" Republican answer is correct, though? Because day care averages 18k to 30k, or so I'm told. The marginal difference from a tax cut to a middle, or lower, income family wouldn't make a dent in the cost. A tax cut wouldn't address what's already a shortage in child care facilities.

I assume he's saying its the "right" answer for the right-wing audience that just loves being lied to about basic economics. These are the same people that think school vouchers will allow more middle class families to send their kids to private school when every example of the program in every location is that private schools just jack their rates up equal to the voucher and nobody gets ahead except the private school industry, which of course is the point because most of those schools are Christian schools, because if there's one thing the Vatican needs, its more money.

Edited by 'stache
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
18 minutes ago, Chopper said:

Are you saying the "right" Republican answer is correct, though? Because day care averages 18k to 30k, or so I'm told. The marginal difference from a tax cut to a middle, or lower, income family wouldn't make a dent in the cost. A tax cut wouldn't address what's already a shortage in child care facilities.

Fuck no it’s not actually right.  But at least he could say the “normal” bullshit that Republican politicians can say that people can understand (if disagree with).  What he said should throw off even the most red voter.  NO ONE who heard that was like “yep, that’s what we need to do to address childcare costs”.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, Js1 said:

He sounds worse than Joe did at the debate. He’s going to be on every upper known to man on Tuesday night 

Good, it will make him say more insane shit than normal and be less inhibited about cropping an n-bomb.

Edited by kevwun
Posted

Trump is promising gas below $2/gallon. Might have to go ask the O&G thread how they feel about that outcome.

But seriously this is just Trump running for 5th grade class president by promising no homework. I fully expect that before Election Day he will promise to eliminate all income tax on day 1.

  • Hook 'Em 7
  • Like 1
Posted
3 hours ago, GopherRock said:

It's hard to call Minnesota a battleground or purple state when Republicans haven't won shit here since 2010.

I don't hear it much anymore, but there was a long time after CO turned blue that you'd hear people refer to us as a battleground state.  Republican hasn't won statewide office since Cory Gardner got a Senate seat in 2014.  And before that it was probably Bill Owens being re-elected to be Governor in 2004.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

yeah, calling MN or CO a battle ground state would be the same if Dems called Iowa or Missouri battleground states. Maybe they used to be, and it's not a 100% impossibility but it would take extraordinary circumstances for any of these states to flip.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
Just now, Nice Guy Eddie said:

yeah, calling MN or CO a battle ground state would be the same if Dems called Iowa or Missouri battleground states. Maybe they used to be, and it's not a 100% impossibility but it would take extraordinary circumstances for any of these states to flip.

You need a very high favorability brand name to even consider it, and incredibly moderate bona fides, like Phil Scott of Vermont or Larry Hogan of Maryland (and even then you can lose).

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
6 minutes ago, 'stache said:

My favorite is when O&G people I know discuss the benefits to their industry when oil prices go up, then go on facebook and complain about the president and high gas prices. It makes me ragey to no end.

I have one friend who can't not complain about gas prices if you spend more than 1 hour with him. He also works from home, and probably fills up his truck once per month.

He also earns big dollars from a software company that sells to O&G majors. He has disagreed that any higher energy prices have put a $1 in his pocket. Come on man. 

Posted
17 hours ago, Post Oak said:

If you start the email with "team" you're automatically a fucking knob and I have lost what little respect I had for you.

I start my emails to my team with “Folks” a la Uncle Joe

 

 

 

No Way Wtf GIF by Harlem

 

 

My fav gif comes to the rescue yet again

  • Like 1
  • Haha 4
  • Rage+1 2
Posted
28 minutes ago, 'stache said:

My favorite is when O&G people I know discuss the benefits to their industry when oil prices go up, then go on facebook and complain about the president and high gas prices. It makes me ragey to no end.

I think you and I are about the same age, which means we grew up in OK in the 80's and 90's.  Sure, we had $1 gas but the economy there was a flaming barrel of shit.

Posted
5 minutes ago, Pancho said:

 

Nate - Oh Harris up 1 in PA? That’s basically down 3 after I adjust them 

Also Trump - 46, 45, 44, 43

There’s that ceiling again 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
3 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

If we could just freeze time somewhere between 1994-1998, I think that’s where AI should construct “The Matrix.”

Fine with me, but you need to glitch in the 2005 college football season somehow.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
17 minutes ago, Dnaguy said:

This.

Childcare has to be one of the biggest drags to the US economy out there.

It incentivizes people to pay under the table, it keeps people out of the work force, and the front line workers don’t make close to a living wage.

There needs to be public childcare starting at 3. Super head start or whatever. I’d even try and make it 2.

I shouldn’t have to pay more for day care than I would for private college. 

Yeah, we had to put the kid in daycare a year early just to be eligible for the preK. When I stopped paying that bill I felt like I got a raise.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
12 minutes ago, Dnaguy said:

Childcare has to be one of the biggest drags to the US economy out there.

It was probably my secret crush Annie Lowery in The Atlantic that I saw this, but a conservative, in good-faith policy towards child care costs might be something like paying mothers a UBI or a child stipend.  Her point (if I’m attributing it correctly) was that household labor and child-rearing is just something our economic measures fail to capture; it clearly offers huge value because we can gauge it off what third party providers charge.  
 

This would, of course, be very in keeping with a conservative, family values first campaign that no one will really run on because the GOP donor class care only about tax cuts and fucking over brown people.  

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
1 minute ago, Horn Under a Bad Sign said:



His mind is mush, of course, but I don't like the fact that Kamala HQ edited what he said to make it appear more mush-filled. 

They would've needed two pages to get everything and it still wouldn't have made any more sense than what they typed.

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Posted

Surrender in Virginia (and NH and MN)

image.png.5853099e0c2bb6a2cf7c408d26fe5bf9.png

Spoiler

Trump campaign pulls away from three target states after Harris surge

Ex-president diverts resources from states he boasted about winning while Biden was Democratic candidate

Robert Tait
Thu 5 Sep 2024 12.49 EDT
Last modified on Thu 5 Sep 2024 15.29 EDT

Donald Trump has quietly wound down his presidential campaign in states he was targeting just six weeks ago amid polling evidence showing that Kamala Harris’s entry into the presidential race has put them out of reach and narrowed his path to the White House.

The Republican presidential nominee’s campaign has diverted resources away from Minnesota, Virginia and New Hampshire – states Trump was boasting he could win while Joe Biden was the Democratic candidate – to focus instead on a small number of battleground states.

Special attention is being paid to Pennsylvania, which has 19 electoral college votes, and where a new CNN poll shows Trump and Harris tied at 47% each.

Resources have also been transferred to southern and south-western Sun belt states – namely North Carolina, Georgia Nevada and Arizona – where Trump previously had healthy leads over Biden that have been whittled away since Harris replaced the US president at the top of the Democratic ticket.

Maga Inc, a Trump-supporting Super Pac, has recently spent $16m in adverts in North Carolina as polls have shown Harris close to drawing even in a state the Democrats carried just once in presidential elections since 1980.

The tactical shift is a graphic sign of how the dynamics of the electoral contest have shifted since the Republican national convention in July, when euphoric Trump campaigners talked confidently of winning Minnesota, Virginia and New Hampshire.

Democrats have carried all three in recent presidential polls but Biden’s support showed signs of serious erosion following June’s calamitous debate performance in Atlanta – prompting bullish Republican forecasts that they would be “in play” in November.

An internal Trump campaign memo even before the debate posited ways that the former president could carry Minnesota and Virginia – partly helped by the presence of the independent candidate Robert F Kennedy Jr, whose campaign was initially thought to pose a greater threat to Biden before contrary polling evidence changed Trump’s calculus.

As optimism surged, Trump and his running mate, JD Vance, held a rally in Minnesota shortly after the Republican convention, while the campaign said it planned to open eight offices in the state and build up staff.

Since then, Harris replaced Biden and chose the Minnesota governor, Tim Walz, as her running mate – helping her to shore up local support – while Kennedy has suspended his campaign and endorsed Trump.

Harris’s ascent has also infused the Democrats’ supporters with fresh enthusiasm, leading to a surge in popularity that has propelled her into a small but consistent national poll lead and a fundraising bonanza that saw her campaign raise $540m in August alone.

The predicted rash of new Trump offices and hires in Minnesota appears not to have happened, Axios reported.
skip past newsletter promotion

In Virginia – the site of Vance’s first solo rally after being appointed to the ticket – Trump has not staged a rally for six weeks and the campaign has stopped citing memos claiming it can flip the state. Its apparent slide down the priority list is a far cry from 28 June, when the former president staged a rally in Chesapeake a day after his ultimately race-changing debate with Biden.

The clearest evidence of the switch in campaign’s thinking has come in New Hampshire, which a former Trump field worker said this week that it was no longer trying to win.

Trump has not appeared there since winning the Republican primary in January and has not sent a major surrogate since the spring, despite New Hampshire being identified by Michael Whatley, chair of the Republican National Committee, after the June debate as one of the states the Trump campaign was targeting to expand its electoral wining map.

Recent polls have shown Harris leading outside the margin of error.

“This election is going to be won in those seven swing states,” Lou Gargiulo, the co-chair of Trump’s campaign in New Hampshire, told Politico. “That’s where the effort’s got to be put.”

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
42 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Nate - Oh Harris up 1 in PA? That’s basically down 3 after I adjust them 

Also Trump - 46, 45, 44, 43

There’s that ceiling again 

I get what you're saying, but the consistent fucking stubborness of PA to be basically a dead heat is both astounding me, pissing me off, and the major nagging issue I have with this race at the moment. 

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

I get what you're saying, but the consistent fucking stubborness of PA to be basically a dead heat is both astounding me, pissing me off, and the major nagging issue I have with this race at the moment. 

If she wins NV, AZ, NC, MI, and WI, then she doesn't need PA.  (She'll win PA.  Philly and the burbs will turn out heavy.)

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 1


×
×
  • Create New...