Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

Posted

 

1 hour ago, wood said:

Exactly. Absence of proof is not proof of absence, and McDonald's acknowledged they don't keep records that far back. Sometimes, especially back then, if you made less than x amount, you didn't even have to file a tax return. I worked numerous jobs while at UT from 1983-89. Having to prove now that I worked at any one of them would be pretty difficult.

But Trump said it, like he says so many things, so voila ... another 'gotcha' moment for the rubes out there.

Mickey D’s are all franchise-owned anyway. Do all employment records for all Mickey D’s worldwide wind up in the corporate office? There’s a better-than-zero chance the owner/franchisee of the McDonald’s Kamala worked at back in 1983 is fucking dead and gone by now. But seriously, why are we devoting even an ounce of debate to this matter?

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 2
Posted
2 minutes ago, C-Man said:

 

Mickey D’s are all franchise-owned anyway. Do all employment records for all Mickey D’s worldwide wind up in the corporate office? There’s a better-than-zero chance the owner/franchisee of the McDonald’s Kamala worked at back in 1983 is fucking dead and gone by now. But seriously, why are we devoting even an ounce of debate to this matter?

Couldn't she FOIA her own W-2 from the IRS

Posted

Trump has said repeatedly that McDonalds “confirmed” she never worked there. Just fucking made up out of whole cloth. And so the story is “did she work there?” and not “Holy shit look at how crazy Trump is now”.

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Rage+1 2
Posted
11 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

Couldn't she FOIA her own W-2 from the IRS

Why the fuck should she even entertain this shit? Trump won't release any documents about himself.

  • Hook 'Em 7
  • Like 2
Posted
Just now, safe sex said:

Why the fuck should she even entertain this shit? Trump won't release any documents about himself.

This. Fuck that 

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted
2 minutes ago, safe sex said:

Why the fuck should she even entertain this shit? Trump won't release any documents about himself.

I agree. I'm just explaining how she could get them if she ever needed them.

Posted
 
soldier referenced in this story was Vanessa Guillén. I voted in her home district yesterday, the neighborhood has many murals in her honor
image.jpeg.95ae0485d3d87ebefd23850e068bc349.jpeg
image.jpeg.69c6e0307819cf62256fce2f24b7070f.jpeg
image.jpeg.848bf7edc6504a44113ffdaa586f76ba.jpeg
 
 
his comments will score big with his base 
 

They’ll never hear them, nothing matters anymore with this fuckin guy.
  • Hook 'Em 5
Posted
1 hour ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Couple things:

Thing one: Stein is almost certain to overperform Harris. That said, I expect the spread to be tighter, and I think it’s very possible both Harris and Robinson could overperform their Election Day polling average in North Carolina for different reasons.
 

Thing two: Over the last four elections,  national polling averages have been off ~3 points (which isn’t much) and swing state polls have missed by 3-4.  In 2008 and 2012, Obama overperformed. In 2016 and 2020, Trump overperformed.

in BOTH cases the miss largely comes down to assumptions about the makeup of the electorate. 
So the assessment at this stage boils down to:

1) are the polls exactly right?

2) if not, who is being under/over weighted in the models, and 

3) who do they vote for?

TLDR;  1) polling is shit, so 2) nobody knows what the fuck is going to happen, but 3) if you've been paying attention to this timeline, expect the fucking worst.

There, that covers it.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
Just now, Brisketexan said:

TLDR;  1) polling is shit, so 2) nobody knows what the fuck is going to happen, but 3) if you've been paying attention to this timeline, expect the fucking worst.

There, that covers it.

 

the russians are muddying the polling waters, then radio heads are running with those numbers predicting a huge trump V

if it doesn't happen, they'll all be screaming it was a fraud election 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

He has no paths if he loses NC, right?

He could win without NC if he picks up NV, AZ, GA, PA and MI.  He could even lose WI in that scenario and be fine.

 

Technically possible, but unlikely.

 

Edited by SimonBolivar
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 minute ago, SimonBolivar said:

He could win without NC if he picks up NV, AZ, GA, PA and MI. 

 

 

 

east coast could decide this election very early into the evening 

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Huckleberry said:

Nobody wished harm on them that I recall. They said they wouldn't feel bad when it happened. That's a significant difference. 

@Brisketexan concluded that, by voting their conscience, Muslim Americans were throwing a tantrum and seeking to harm anyone who disagreed with them. That is a ludicrous take.

Meanwhile, @Js1 and others expressed rather startling schadenfreude, indicating no sympathy for the eventual suffering of Muslims who voted against the candidate of their choosing. His position was that if Muslim Americans don’t vote the way Js1 demands they vote, then he won’t do shit about it and won’t feel any sympathy if Muslims end up persecuted by Trump. Which is orders of magnitude closer to what Brisket accuses the Muslims of doing, as compared to what the Muslims are actually doing.

Some of y'all are exceptionally smart but have a massive blind spot when it comes to partisan politics. I’m as liberal as it gets and a loyal Democratic voter. But on this issue, it’s understandable why Muslims could not bring themselves to support a Democrat or might come to a different conclusion on the risk calculus compared to the rest of us. I don’t agree with it. I think it reflects a massive underestimation of what a second term Trump would be capable of. But it’s based on legitimate concerns and the actual track record of the current Democratic administration, and being wrong or misjudging the likelihood of future events is not the same as being unreasonable.

It’s too bad the DNC didn’t let a Palestinian speak at the convention, because I think that could have helped. As it is, the party basically signaled that four more years of Democratic rule would be more of the same and Palestinians could fuck off. So now many Muslim Americans are left with two shitty options, from their perspective. 

Edited by BrickHorn
  • Like 1
Posted (edited)

In regard to the Muslims, the decisions are vote to wait and see and the other orange one is get fucked immediately. 

Edited by Mdhorn
  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, BrickHorn said:

@Brisketexan concluded that, by voting their conscience, Muslim Americans were throwing a tantrum and seeking to harm anyone who disagreed with them. That is a ludicrous take.

Meanwhile, @Js1 and others expressed rather startling schadenfreude, indicating no sympathy for the eventual suffering of Muslims who voted against the candidate of their choosing. Which is orders of magnitude closer to what Brisket accuses the Muslims of doing, as compared to what the Muslims are actually doing.

Some of y'all are exceptionally smart but have a massive blind spot when it comes to partisan politics. I’m as liberal as it gets and a loyal Democratic voter. But on this issue, it’s understandable why Muslims could not bring themselves to support a Democrat or might come to a different conclusion on the risk calculus compared to the rest of us. I don’t agree with it. I think it reflects a massive underestimation of what a second term Trump would be capable of. But it’s based on legitimate concerns and the actual track record of the current Democratic administration, and being wrong or misjudging the likelihood of future events is not the same as being unreasonable.

It’s too bad the DNC didn’t let a Palestinian speak at the convention, because I think that could have helped. As it is, the party basically signaled that four more years of Democratic rule would be more of the same and Palestinians could fuck off. So now many Muslim Americans are left with two shitty options, from their perspective. 

Or you give them a platform that completely pisses off all the Jewish voters. Look dude, this is a no win situation and the Muslim voters have to understand that. Bibi (and putin) is doing everything he can to get trump elected. It is known. There is absolutely nothing Biden can do to make both sides happy and we are here. Trump is banking on the absolute blind Muslim vote for him as an alternate to what he and his buddy setup. They will get fucked like all his rally goers when he can't pay for the busses. That is why people are without sympathy. How fucking stupid do you have to be to believe in anything trump would possibly do would help you?

Edited by HOOKEM4
ousux
  • Hook 'Em 7
  • Like 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, tx 3 putt said:

 

maga 

triggered GIF

Goddammit. Now my mom who hates trump might vote for him because she hates gates more. Antivaxxers will be the end of our civilization. Dammit.

  • Rage+1 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
9 minutes ago, BrickHorn said:

@Brisketexan concluded that, by voting their conscience, Muslim Americans were throwing a tantrum and seeking to harm anyone who disagreed with them. That is a ludicrous take.

Meanwhile, @Js1 and others expressed rather startling schadenfreude, indicating no sympathy for the eventual suffering of Muslims who voted against the candidate of their choosing. His position was that if Muslim Americans don’t vote the way Js1 demands they vote, then he won’t do shit about it and won’t feel any sympathy if Muslims end up persecuted by Trump. Which is orders of magnitude closer to what Brisket accuses the Muslims of doing, as compared to what the Muslims are actually doing.

Some of y'all are exceptionally smart but have a massive blind spot when it comes to partisan politics. I’m as liberal as it gets and a loyal Democratic voter. But on this issue, it’s understandable why Muslims could not bring themselves to support a Democrat or might come to a different conclusion on the risk calculus compared to the rest of us. I don’t agree with it. I think it reflects a massive underestimation of what a second term Trump would be capable of. But it’s based on legitimate concerns and the actual track record of the current Democratic administration, and being wrong or misjudging the likelihood of future events is not the same as being unreasonable.

It’s too bad the DNC didn’t let a Palestinian speak at the convention, because I think that could have helped. As it is, the party basically signaled that four more years of Democratic rule would be more of the same and Palestinians could fuck off. So now many Muslim Americans are left with two shitty options, from their perspective. 

It is absolutely unreasonable. Any reasoned analysis would conclude that the current US approach to the Israel/Palestine conflict (which sucks, to be clear) is essentially SOP for this nation and that installing a pro-authoritarianism and anti-brown people head of state can only possibly make things worse.

The blind spot isn't on the side you think it is in this situation. I don't agree with what some others have posted in that I'll still be saddened if Trump wins and he inevitably encourages Netanyahu to be even more ruthless. But if I were a Palestinian-American who voted for it to happen watching as it did, I think Rust Cohle's advice would probably go through my mind. And that would be more reasonable than having voted for it.

  • Hook 'Em 7
Posted
16 minutes ago, BrickHorn said:

@Brisketexan concluded that, by voting their conscience, Muslim Americans were throwing a tantrum and seeking to harm anyone who disagreed with them. That is a ludicrous take.

Meanwhile, @Js1 and others expressed rather startling schadenfreude, indicating no sympathy for the eventual suffering of Muslims who voted against the candidate of their choosing. His position was that if Muslim Americans don’t vote the way Js1 demands they vote, then he won’t do shit about it and won’t feel any sympathy if Muslims end up persecuted by Trump. Which is orders of magnitude closer to what Brisket accuses the Muslims of doing, as compared to what the Muslims are actually doing.

Some of y'all are exceptionally smart but have a massive blind spot when it comes to partisan politics. I’m as liberal as it gets and a loyal Democratic voter. But on this issue, it’s understandable why Muslims could not bring themselves to support a Democrat or might come to a different conclusion on the risk calculus compared to the rest of us. I don’t agree with it. I think it reflects a massive underestimation of what a second term Trump would be capable of. But it’s based on legitimate concerns and the actual track record of the current Democratic administration, and being wrong or misjudging the likelihood of future events is not the same as being unreasonable.

It’s too bad the DNC didn’t let a Palestinian speak at the convention, because I think that could have helped. As it is, the party basically signaled that four more years of Democratic rule would be more of the same and Palestinians could fuck off. So now many Muslim Americans are left with two shitty options, from their perspective. 

2 points on this:

1.  If they are dumb enough to vote for Trump and he wins, they deserve what they get, and it's gonna be ugly on several fronts.

2.  We are in America.  Foreign policy is never going to be issue #1 for any candidate.  I'm not sure what more they want from Harris.  She's called for a cease fire and that is much more than Trump will do.  Trump will tell Bibi to go nuts and he'll back him all the way because he loves dictators.

  • Hook 'Em 8
Posted

That anti-Alred commercial with the vet in the wheel chair just said they are doing transgender surgeries on people in the military - even children. Transgender kids are in the military now. Who knew.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 5
  • Rage+1 1
  • Drool 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, Goofyboy said:

That anti-Alred commercial with the vet in the wheel chair just said they are doing transgender surgeries on people in the military - even children. Transgender kids are in the military now. Who knew.

If there's one thing I learned watching the UT-Georgia game, it's that Republicans in Texas are really, really, really scared shitless of trans people and are willing to make up any story to justify that hate and fear.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 2
Posted
3 minutes ago, Goofyboy said:

That anti-Alred commercial with the vet in the wheel chair just said they are doing transgender surgeries on people in the military - even children. Transgender kids are in the military now. Who knew.

Private Mason at drop off, Lt Col. Maiseigh (she/her) at pickup.

  • Haha 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
6 minutes ago, HOOKEM4 said:

Goddammit. Now my mom who hates trump might vote for him because she hates gates more. Antivaxxers will be the end of our civilization. Dammit.

No offense to your mom, but that tiny cross-section is too dumb to try to save.

Okay, maybe some offense.

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted
1 hour ago, Royalfan5 said:

As a rural Nebraskan who played 8-man football, there is nothing more than football coaches with a rural Nebraska background love more than an opportunity to call someone a dipshit. 

As a baseball coach of 12-18 YOs for many years, I heartily approve this statement.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted

I think there were rumblings about Harris going on the Joe Rogan Podcast. With Trump doing it this Friday I wonder if they would circle back and get her on a day or two later to get in the last word where she can point to all the crazy bullshit he will likely spout on Friday.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, HOOKEM4 said:

Well to be clear, my 9 year old is in the national guard and he came home today asking how he is supposed to pee now that she is a girl. I am letting my wife deal with it. Hoping I am not on the hook for the bill. I am waiting to vote because I need trump to commit to reversals. We will see. /independent

Hello sir, would you like to be on The Lead with Jake Tapper? we are hoping you can join our panel of undecided voters who will watch a super cut of Kamala Harris bloopers mixed with fart noises and then tell us if you’ve made up your mind yet.  /CNN, probably 

Edited by Bozo_Casanova
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
2 hours ago, Js1 said:

You hearing things in DC? 

Where's @quigley and @Ghost of LL with that good $9.95 insider shit? 

The person I know (actually a UT law grad) is a professional friend. Our relationship isn't based in politics so I ask him about that on the side. It causes him a lot of anxiety. I don't anticipate seeing him until Christmas party season so after the election.

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

As a baseball coach of 12-18 YOs for many years, I heartily approve this statement.

Followed closely by a compulsion to order them to "stop playing grabass!"

I don't know what "grabass" is, exactly, but based on the voice-raised input I heard from many coaches over the years, it is apparently the most popular game in the world for males between the ages of 8 and 18, cuz they're playing it all the damned time.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Haha 7
Posted (edited)

I’m not not going to name the poster to which I’m referring, but I’ve posted with him, one way or another, for nearly two decades, and in general, he is a solid dude whom I respect and whose opinions I seek out and value. 
 

Having said that:

 

STOP FEEDING THE TROLL.

Edited by Bateshorn
Posted
1 hour ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Dipshit is a top 5 epithet, no doubt about it. I use it constantly. 

 

Yep. I pretty much alternate between 'dipshit' and ...

tumblr_o3oipnqiZR1qzpn6vo2_540.gifv

Posted
1 minute ago, TexEx15 said:

I think there were rumblings about Harris going on the Joe Rogan Podcast. With Trump doing it this Friday I wonder if they would circle back and get her on a day or two later to get in the last word where she can point to all the crazy bullshit he will likely spout on Friday.

I would have been cool if she did it a week ago (I still maintain he wouldn't be willing to have her on), but I don't want to live in a world where both Presidential candidates appear on Joe Rogan as their last chance to reach a national audience on a "major outlet."

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

2) And yes, shadenfreude is real and is merited.  "Don't vote for the leopard, he said he will eat all our faces, and that especially includes your face."  "Fuck you, I'm voting for the leopard."  [Leopard wins, promptly eats voter's face]  "Oh no, my face!  This is terrible!  Don't you feel bad for me?"  "Ummmm.....no.  We fucking warned you that this was exactly what was going to happen, you told us to fuck off and voted for him anyway.  You asked for it, you got it." 

You’re on a dumb analogy roll today. The leopards eating faces metaphor applies when a minority knowingly aligns with a bigot and against an open-minded candidate for selfish or opportunistic reasons. 

That only seems to fit if you focus exclusively on the Trump side of the decision, and completely ignore  the Biden administration’s (and Harris campaign’s) record on this issue. This is not a case where Muslim voters would knowingly chose evil over good because they calculate that they could be on the inside track with evil. It’s a case where they judge, based on an actual track record, that one side is more evil than the other. You just can’t see why they would ever consider the administration that has funded the Gaza assault as evil. 

Like I said, total blind spot. Y'all are seemingly incapable of seeing this objectively. It’s weird, but I guess that’s the shitty part of partisan politics. 



×
×
  • Create New...