Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

Posted
32 minutes ago, TexasHooch said:

Honest question: What's the value of national polls at this point?  Nationwide popular vote doesn't matter.  Only 7 states do.

True and infuriating.  The forefather/1800 dumbasses couldn’t even use popular vote for a tie breaker and instead had to come uo with some dumb convoluted “each state gets one vote” scheme that is still clear as mud (who decides how to vote if a state delegate group is evenly split) and will cause complete chaos if actually needed.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
7 hours ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

I worry about my supervisor learning my job could be done by any regular surly dumbass.  I hate my job and my company, but I'm less than five years from retirement and get paid mid six figures for about 15 hours per week of legitimate value-added work. 

Still isn't going to stop me from leveraging my recent successes to convince my dumb ass supervisor I better get a bomb ass raise this year or I'm declaring free agency.

Side Eye GIFs | Tenor
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 3
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 2
Posted
22 minutes ago, Horn Dog said:

True and infuriating.  The forefather/1800 dumbasses couldn’t even use popular vote for a tie breaker and instead had to come uo with some dumb convoluted “each state gets one vote” scheme that is still clear as mud (who decides how to vote if a state delegate group is evenly split) and will cause complete chaos if actually needed.

Well then didn’t foresee:

Partisan gerrymandering

The U.S. adding a bunch of western states with about 5k people in them who all get an equal vote (ND, SD, WY, MT, ID basically give the GOP 5 free votes in an EC tie and 10 senators)

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Rage+1 2
Posted
7 hours ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

I worry about my supervisor learning my job could be done by any regular surly dumbass.  I hate my job and my company, but I'm less than five years from retirement and get paid mid six figures for about 15 hours per week of legitimate value-added work. 

IMG_3393.thumb.jpeg.df7d210dcf08c814692083e1ea9373f8.jpeg

  • Haha 5
Posted

CBS does battleground “estimates” based on their national poll

Nevada - Harris +3

Wisconsin - Harris +3

Michigan - Harris +2

Arizona - Harris +1

NC - Harris +1

PA - tie

GA - Trump +1

NE-02 - Harris +4

That would be 284 for Harris with the potential to hit 303 (trading GA for NC)

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
33 minutes ago, Horn Dog said:

True and infuriating.  The forefather/1800 dumbasses couldn’t even use popular vote for a tie breaker and instead had to come uo with some dumb convoluted “each state gets one vote” scheme that is still clear as mud (who decides how to vote if a state delegate group is evenly split) and will cause complete chaos if actually needed.

The hard truth about the founding fathers and the Constitution

Spoiler

It was written by people who are not much smarter than the average American, at a time when "founding documents" were basically a dime a dozen. Most of these fizzled out in ten or fewer years and fade entirely into historical obscurity, like the State of Muskogee, the Republic of Vermont, and the Republic of the Rio Grande.

Remember that secessionist idiot guy from Better Call Saul who wanted to pay Jimmy with fake money from his "sovereign" nation? There's not much difference between him and the founding fathers when it comes to the energy and intellect that went into formation logistics of their respective republics, probably because deep-down they believed whatever the arrangement was would probably be temporary.

I don't have any doubt that the founding fathers were definitely the best and brightest that could be mustered among the rich, white, land owning people who had emancipated from the British Empire. However, it's pretty obvious that they were not thinking very hard about the future and whenever they did think about the future it's clear they weren't thinking things through very clearly.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
1 hour ago, Snake Diggity said:

Funny you mention 9/11, because I have thought since it happened that if we were anything other than fucked that Jan 6 would have been a 9/11 style moment in terms of galvanization of the country, and everybody but the absolute nuttiest of the nutty would have been like “ok, that’s enough, fuck Trump and his followers”.

Just imagine if the demographic composition of the rioters were different. I'd guess the average insurgent was a white male around 50 years old. Now, picture how America would react if the typical person in that crowd were non-white and in his/her 20s or, gawd forbid, wearing a turban.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Posted
5 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

The hard truth about the founding fathers and the Constitution

  Hide contents

It was written by people who are not much smarter than the average American, at a time when "founding documents" were basically a dime a dozen. Most of these fizzled out in ten or fewer years and fade entirely into historical obscurity, like the State of Muskogee, the Republic of Vermont, and the Republic of the Rio Grande.

Remember that secessionist idiot guy from Better Call Saul who wanted to pay Jimmy with fake money from his "sovereign" nation? There's not much difference between him and the founding fathers when it comes to the energy and intellect that went into formation logistics of their respective republics, probably because deep-down they believed whatever the arrangement was would probably be temporary.

I don't have any doubt that the founding fathers were definitely the best and brightest that could be mustered among the rich, white, land owning people who had emancipated from the British Empire. However, it's pretty obvious that they were not thinking very hard about the future and whenever they did think about the future it's clear they weren't thinking things through very clearly.

IMG_3074.gif.7d30015e5b31e67ae9c104943a9dec3d.gif

Well, they seem to be arguing about the future in the federalist and anti-federalist papers.   And it is abundantly clear that they thought (or hoped) that their efforts would not be temporary.  The fact that the Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union did not allow for a state to withdraw from the compact is a pretty good sign of that.  And that title of the document thing. 

  • Hook 'Em 5
Posted
Just now, Gatorubet said:

IMG_3074.gif.7d30015e5b31e67ae9c104943a9dec3d.gif

Well, they seem to be arguing about the future in the federalist and anti-federalist papers.   And it is abundantly clear that they thought (or hoped) that their efforts would not be temporary.  The fact that the Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union did not allow for a state to withdraw from the compact is a pretty good sign of that.  And that title of the document thing. 

I mean a guy can hope his marriage will last a long time, but deep down he knows he can't keep her on the farm once she's met Karl Hungus

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 3
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
10 minutes ago, bolverk said:

Just imagine if the demographic composition of the rioters were different. I'd guess the average insurgent was a white male around 50 years old. Now, picture how America would react if the typical person in that crowd were non-white and in his/her 20s or, gawd forbid, wearing a turban.

Taking down the American flag flying out front, smearing shit all over the walls inside the Capitol, etc.

You know, "patriots". 

Posted
8 hours ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

I worry about my supervisor learning my job could be done by any regular surly dumbass.  I hate my job and my company, but I'm less than five years from retirement and get paid mid six figures for about 15 hours per week of legitimate value-added work. 

Still isn't going to stop me from leveraging my recent successes to convince my dumb ass supervisor I better get a bomb ass raise this year or I'm declaring free agency.

Fuck picket fences, this is the actual American dream. Of course it's not really attainable for like 99% of people.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
18 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

The hard truth about the founding fathers and the Constitution

  Hide contents

It was written by people who are not much smarter than the average American, at a time when "founding documents" were basically a dime a dozen. Most of these fizzled out in ten or fewer years and fade entirely into historical obscurity, like the State of Muskogee, the Republic of Vermont, and the Republic of the Rio Grande.

Remember that secessionist idiot guy from Better Call Saul who wanted to pay Jimmy with fake money from his "sovereign" nation? There's not much difference between him and the founding fathers when it comes to the energy and intellect that went into formation logistics of their respective republics, probably because deep-down they believed whatever the arrangement was would probably be temporary.

I don't have any doubt that the founding fathers were definitely the best and brightest that could be mustered among the rich, white, land owning people who had emancipated from the British Empire. However, it's pretty obvious that they were not thinking very hard about the future and whenever they did think about the future it's clear they weren't thinking things through very clearly.

Well, I think I disagree.  While their shortsightedness is evident in hindsight, they crafted a revolutionary form of government when their peers, notably France, failed miserably in a relatively short period of time, while ours has endured to the present.  And, while racially and ethno-religiousy pretty homogeneous, they put together quite an array of factions and interests to do it.

  • Hook 'Em 8
Posted
9 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Well, I think I disagree.  While their shortsightedness is evident in hindsight, they crafted a revolutionary form of government when their peers, notably France, failed miserably in a relatively short period of time, while ours has endured to the present.  And, while racially and ethno-religiousy pretty homogeneous, they put together quite an array of factions and interests to do it.

Can we really attribute its success to anything besides good fortune, military superiority, and a willingness to commit genocide?

And we had to fight a civil war for it to "endure" past like 70 years. I don't think any historian could look at the trajectory of this country and say "damn, I guess they're lucky they had the Electoral College and giving four senators to the Dakotas otherwise they'd have been screwed"

  • Drool 2
Posted
2 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

Can we really attribute its success to anything besides good fortune, military superiority, and a willingness to commit genocide?

And we had to fight a civil war for it to "endure" past like 70 years. I don't think any historian could look at the trajectory of this country and say "damn, I guess they're lucky they had the Electoral College and giving four senators to the Dakotas otherwise they'd have been screwed"

Good geography helped too. Flanked on either side by oceans and our northern neighbor was a still colony for almost the first 100 years of our existence and our southern neighbor was also a colony for the first 30 years of our existence and then we beat them in a war 25 years later. No serious threats to our sovereignty besides ourselves for a long ass time 

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted

One thing they never envisioned was that the populous would become so stupid and gullible making it impossible to ever exercise the amendment process ever again for anything meaningful.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
29 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

they seem to be arguing about the future in the federalist and anti-federalist papers.

This was a point I wanted to make before, but I'd forgotten about, supporting the idea that the founding fathers were the intellectual equivalent of today's mediocre white male demographic among which Trump overperforms.

The point is that these guys were basically spending way too much time on the forums and podcasts of their time. Guys who loved the sound of their own voices and spent way too much time convincing themselves that their own (sometimes good, sometimes bad) ideas were deserving of becoming the law.

Posted
2 hours ago, TexasHooch said:

Honest question: What's the value of national polls at this point?  Nationwide popular vote doesn't matter.  Only 7 states do.

Someone posted this the other day for NC which I thought was insightful.   You can get a lot of insight from how an individual state will do if you know the overall national baseline to start from. 
 

image.jpeg.58b85f90252f504d36a6614b5b846d46.jpeg

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted

That’s a good succinct graph - the better the margin for Harris, the more likely the swing states go in the same direction, like 2020. The smaller the margin, the more one or two things could fall in Trump’s favor, like 2016

Posted

I decided to do a compare/contrast of the 2020 NBC September poll, 2020 exits and 2024 NBC September poll

Biden 51-43 (+8) / actual was 51-47 (+4)
Black voters: Biden +85 / actual was +84
18-34: Biden +29 / actual was +24 (for 18-29, no 18-34 breakdown)
Women: Biden +20 / actual was +11
Whites with college degrees: Biden +10 / actual was +15
Independents: Biden +6 / actual was +9
Seniors: Biden +4 / actual was -4
White voters: Trump +9 / actual was +12
Men: Trump +5 / actual was +2
Whites without college degrees: Trump +23 / actual was +32

NBC's 2020 poll mostly missed the mark on women, whites without college degrees and seniors (in Trump's favor) and whites with college degrees (in Biden's favor)

2024 NBC poll: Harris 49-44 (+5)
Black voters: Harris +78
18-34: Harris +23
Women: Harris +21
Whites with college degrees: +21
Independents: Harris +8
Men: Trump +12
White voters: Trump +9
Whites without college degrees: +28

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Posted
31 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

This was a point I wanted to make before, but I'd forgotten about, supporting the idea that the founding fathers were the intellectual equivalent of today's mediocre white male demographic among which Trump overperforms.

The point is that these guys were basically spending way too much time on the forums and podcasts of their time. Guys who loved the sound of their own voices and spent way too much time convincing themselves that their own (sometimes good, sometimes bad) ideas were deserving of becoming the law.

Arrested Development No GIF

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
44 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

Can we really attribute its success to anything besides good fortune, military superiority, and a willingness to commit genocide?

And we had to fight a civil war for it to "endure" past like 70 years. I don't think any historian could look at the trajectory of this country and say "damn, I guess they're lucky they had the Electoral College and giving four senators to the Dakotas otherwise they'd have been screwed"

Wait, what?

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted
17 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

 

IMG_3394.gif.50f0756dd4e63d8979eb39f17d7678d9.gif

I think that is a spectacularly bad take.  But I guess it’s conceivably possible that all the respected historians are wrong and you are correct.  

 

 

1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

Arrested Development No GIF

They weren't dumb, they weren't smart. They were average. Sorry if that offends you, but it's pretty clear.

Posted
6 minutes ago, Js1 said:

I decided to do a compare/contrast of the 2020 NBC September poll, 2020 exits and 2024 NBC September poll

Biden 51-43 (+8) / actual was 51-47 (+4)
Black voters: Biden +85 / actual was +84
18-34: Biden +29 / actual was +24 (for 18-29, no 18-34 breakdown)
Women: Biden +20 / actual was +11
Whites with college degrees: Biden +10 / actual was +15
Independents: Biden +6 / actual was +9
Seniors: Biden +4 / actual was -4
White voters: Trump +9 / actual was +12
Men: Trump +5 / actual was +2
Whites without college degrees: Trump +23 / actual was +32

NBC's 2020 poll mostly missed the mark on women, whites without college degrees and seniors (in Trump's favor) and whites with college degrees (in Biden's favor)

2024 NBC poll: Harris 49-44 (+5)
Black voters: Harris +78
18-34: Harris +23
Women: Harris +21
Whites with college degrees: +21
Independents: Harris +8
Men: Trump +12
White voters: Trump +9
Whites without college degrees: +28

The 2020 men thing is surprising

Posted
1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, James Madison, and Alexander Hamilton were all wicked smart.

George Washington, while not an intellectual giant, had an inordinate amount of common sense and wisdom.

As I said, it's a hard truth.

They were wicked smart for their time, but would be pretty average today.

Posted
39 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

This was a point I wanted to make before, but I'd forgotten about, supporting the idea that the founding fathers were the intellectual equivalent of today's mediocre white male demographic among which Trump overperforms.

The point is that these guys were basically spending way too much time on the forums and podcasts of their time. Guys who loved the sound of their own voices and spent way too much time convincing themselves that their own (sometimes good, sometimes bad) ideas were deserving of becoming the law.

Laugh Lol GIF

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Haha 3
Posted
2 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

The 2020 men thing is surprising

I used the Pew report, but there's no "definitive" numbers.

CBS had men Trump +8, women +15 Biden, black voters +75 Biden, 18-29 +36 Biden, independents +13 Biden, white college grads +3 Biden, white no college +35 Trump, seniors +5 Trump

So moral of the story - fuck if I know, but the NBC poll does not look far off 2020 in its sub-sample breakdowns, with Harris doing way better with women and college grads (uh duh, the 2 groups that have fled the GOP the fastest since Dobbs)

Posted
Just now, David Dennison said:

No, they'd be wicked smart today, too.

I doubt that, and the shitshow they've left us with is pretty strong evidence of their mediocrity.

Posted
Just now, Js1 said:

I used the Pew report, but there's no "definitive" numbers.

CBS had men Trump +8, women +15 Biden, black voters +75 Biden, 18-29 +36 Biden, independents +13 Biden, white college grads +3 Biden, white no college +35 Trump, seniors +5 Trump

So moral of the story - fuck if I know, but the NBC poll does not look far off 2020 in its sub-sample breakdowns, with Harris doing way better with women and college grads (uh duh, the 2 groups that have fled the GOP the fastest since Dobbs)

It's easy to forget how popular a full-strength Biden could be especially when there's a mismanaged global pandemic. Men really did love the guy, compared to the generic D. But that love collapsed as he appeared more and more frail through his term.

Posted
2 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

It's easy to forget how popular a full-strength Biden could be especially when there's a mismanaged global pandemic. Men really did love the guy, compared to the generic D. But that love collapsed as he appeared more and more frail through his term.

It collapsed as prices went up. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

They also provided a straightforward way to change it. If we can't, that's on us.

It was so straightforward half the states opted to secede a few decades later.

In retrospect, the compromises made to appease slavers have had terrible consequences on a multigenerational scale. Even things that, on their face, have nothing to do with white supremacy and enjoy overwhelming popular support are politically impossible due to the filibuster.

  • Like 2
Posted
1 minute ago, chainsaw said:

It was so straightforward half the states opted to secede a few decades later.

In retrospect, the compromises made to appease slavers have had terrible consequences on a multigenerational scale. Even things that, on their face, have nothing to do with white supremacy and enjoy overwhelming popular support are politically impossible due to the filibuster.

It was a third of the states, but that's beside the point. They wouldn't have been states and there wouldn't have been a union without the compromises made in Philadelphia.

The filibuster is a Senate rule that can be changed by a simple majority vote. 

  • Hook 'Em 5
Posted
1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

It was a third of the states, but that's beside the point. They wouldn't have been states and there wouldn't have been a union without the compromises made in Philadelphia.

The filibuster is a Senate rule that can be changed by a simple majority vote. 

The Senate owes its existence to the appeasement of slavers.

Posted
13 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

It was so straightforward half the states opted to secede a few decades later.

In retrospect, the compromises made to appease slavers have had terrible consequences on a multigenerational scale. Even things that, on their face, have nothing to do with white supremacy and enjoy overwhelming popular support are politically impossible due to the filibuster.

You realize the filibuster in its current form is literally a modern adaptation, right? And it could be changed with any majority vote. But that’s the founding father’s problem? 
 

Stop. Get Help.gif

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, chainsaw said:

What do you mean by this, exactly?

Are you going to attempt to argue that all of the modern democracies of the world haven’t attempted to emulate the framework that was created in the United States? 
 

Fuck this, I am not going to waste my fucking Sunday arguing with your ass. Just scream Genocide a few more times and then argue how the democratic party is fucking itself by not catering only to the hyper left progressive wing of the party that most people loathe and let’s just declare the Chainsaw hat trick, ok?

Edited by SydneyCarton
  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Haha 2
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

You realize the filibuster in its current form is literally a modern adaptation, right? And it could be changed with any majority vote. But that’s the founding father’s problem? 
 

Stop. Get Help.gif

I mean, it did exist in some form from the beginning and was used frequently after 1850 once it got a name . It wasn’t a formal rule until 1917 and adapted in 1975 to three-fifths instead of two-thirds 

Posted
Just now, SydneyCarton said:

Are you going to attempt to argue that all of the modern democracies of the world haven’t attempted to emulate the framework that was created in the United States? 
 

Fuck this, I am not going to waste my fucking Sunday arguing with your ass. Just scream Genocide a few more times and then argue how the democratic party isn’t fucking itself by catering only to the hyper left progressive wing of the party that most people loathe and let’s just declare the Chainsaw hat trick, ok?

I'm trying to understand the point you wanted to make. I'm not sure I can agree that the framework has been emulated, but even if it has been emulated, is that proof that the framework is good? It all depends what you meant by "framework."

To bring this back to the topic of the thread, we are here stressing about an Electoral College tie due to the shortcomings of the founding fathers. I'm grateful that the polls are trending in a good direction, but also pissed this is even a realistic possibility.



×
×
  • Create New...