Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

Posted
1 hour ago, Ravishing Rick said:

and Wall St / European stock markets all appear to be pricing in a Trump victory

What makes you think this is occurring 

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

When Harris wins this thing, there better be a goddamn reckoning in the mainstream media. You venture outside of this thread and the national narrative is Trump is on the verge of pulling away with this thing and Democrats are sad sack crying everywhere.

 

Haha, they don’t care.  They’ll do a couple of weeks of talking about themselves (it’s their favorite subject anyway).  Whatever drives eyeballs.  

 

1 hour ago, TheStoicPaisano said:

 

I’m sure Lee Greenwood is very familiar with who pays the bills after managing to be a one hit wonder who still makes a leaving at it forty years later, but I bet he never imagined sharing the marquee with the founder of Death Row Records.  

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Rage+1 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted (edited)

Here's the text of that article:  

Quote

“The investor community, they’ve been very, very, favoring Trump based on my conversations and based on just a general ambiance,” Interactive Brokers senior economist Jose Torres told Fortune. 

The market has already started pricing in a Donald Trump victory. A series of recent analyst notes detail how the former president’s protectionist economic policies would translate into market outcomes. Investors expect a second Trump term would mean tariffs on importers hoping to enter the U.S. market and higher levels of inflation. Trump’s signature economic proposal of implementing blanket tariffs isn’t the platonic ideal of a free-market policy one might have associated with past conservative leaders. Yet the market is very much preparing for the tectonic shifts that a closed-off U.S. market could pose to the global economy. 

In Europe, stocks are already lagging the broader market. In the U.S., inflation forecasts have started to trend up just as Trump pulled ahead in the betting markets. Analysts have even started to bandy about predictions of stagflation. The polls show Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris in a dead heat heading into the final week of their respective campaigns. However, prediction markets are tilting in favor of Trump, which has colored much of the market forecasts. 

“Trump win increasingly priced in, but polls still tight,” Barclays European equities strategist Emmanuel Cau wrote in an analyst note published Wednesday.

European stocks are already underperforming the market due to investors’ fears they’ll be hit hard by Trump’s proposed tariffs, according to Barclays. For investors, European companies struggling with Trump’s tariffs could lead to major earnings hits. In a worst-case scenario of a full-blown trade war between Europe and the U.S., companies in Italy and Germany could see high-single-digit drag on EPS growth, according to Barclays. Entire sectors, such as tech and the European auto market, could suffer the same fate, per the bank’s forecast. 

European stocks, “keep lagging, suggesting they may be perceived as the losers from a second Trump presidency,” Cau wrote. 

Another feature of Trump’s tariffs is that they’re widely expected to be inflationary. “Expected tariffs (per Trump’s stated proposals) support potential upside risk to market pricing of inflation if Trump wins the U.S. election,” Bank of America rates strategist Meghan Swiber wrote in a note on Wednesday. 

And because Wall Street expects Trump to win the election, projections for the future rate of inflation have ticked up. For example, inflation compensation, which is the premium investors are willing to pay to protect the real value of their returns from inflation, rose since September, according to Bank of America. Part of the increase was due to positive economic data. Another part had to do with Trump’s political fortunes. 

“We note it also coincided with higher market-implied probability of Former President Trump winning the U.S. election,” Swiber wrote. 

Trump’s tariffs would lead to 70 to 80 basis points of inflation, according to Bank of America’s estimates.

I think it's disingenuous though to state or imply that the market expects Trump to win.  The truth is that the implications of him winning are so severe that foreign markets have no choice but to hedge now in the event it actually happens.  It's what they do.

Edited by TexasHooch
  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Posted
2 hours ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

 

 

Polls have sample sizes of hundreds or a couple of thousand. Early voting has sample size of millions. It’s not theoretical or speculative. All polling is based on modeling from past elections. There has never been a gender gap like this in turnout. If Harris wins by a surprising number, this will be why pollsters didn’t see it coming.

2020 gender gaps (all leads for women):

GA - 12

NC - 12

MI - 8

PA - 7

AZ - 4

NV - 4

WI - 0

 

 

 

  • Hook 'Em 7
Posted
2 minutes ago, LCHorn said:

Haha, they don’t care.  They’ll do a couple of weeks of talking about themselves (it’s their favorite subject anyway).  Whatever drives eyeballs.  

I know. It's why I haven't watched a lick of television coverage during this election.

Posted
3 hours ago, Pancho said:


Boy, stop. R

Harris going on Rogan isn’t officially dead, Jesus Christ. 

It's almost like motherfuckers don't understand when you go to overtime and win the toss, you play defense first.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
1 hour ago, Ravishing Rick said:

This is my first time to venture into the cloak room, so have patience with me, please.  What I'm trying to understand is all the positivity for Harris and her chances in this thread, yet the sportsbooks/betting markets, and Wall St / European stock markets all appear to be pricing in a Trump victory.  Seems like that shouldn't be ignored?

It is a valid point.  If Trump wins, people will point to the betting markets (along with all the MSM) to say “it was in plain sight the whole time”.  So all of that is evidence to think this thing is gonna be a nail biter and that Trump is likely to win.  But there’s also plenty of valid evidence that those narratives have been manipulated and that the data heavily favors Harris.  In the end people making predictions are probably gonna lean on their own anecdotal experience.  For my part there is clearly more enthusiasm for Harris than there was for Biden or Hillary and there seems to be less enthusiasm from Trump’s supporters than there was in 2016 or 2020.

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

This is my first time to venture into the cloak room, so have patience with me, please.  What I'm trying to understand is all the positivity for Harris and her chances in this thread, yet the sportsbooks/betting markets, and Wall St / European stock markets all appear to be pricing in a Trump victory.  Seems like that shouldn't be ignored?

This is a Trumper. He’s “trying to understand it.”.  He posted the betting bullshit that Maga is trying to sell the Bros to convince them he’s gonna win.

If he can’t understand it, that means he’s a fan of the orange turd doing some gentle trolling.  if you truly has not watched any TV or news or social media since Biden dropped out, then he just needs to shut the fuck up and watch what happens because he wasn’t interested until today.

Mostly, by showing up with a stupid question that will illicit responses that aren’t positive (for no other reason, implying we haven’t discussed something we’ve discussed to death), he can run back to DT and say how mean and brainwashed the bubble is in the cloak room.  

But I’m not gonna neg him, it’s fine letting it play out.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Gatorubet said:

This is a Trumper. He’s “trying to understand it.”.  He posted the betting bullshit that Maga is trying to sell the Bros to convince them he’s gonna win.

If he can’t understand it, that means he’s a fan of the orange turd doing some gentle trolling.  if you truly has not watched any TV or news or social media since Biden dropped out, then he just needs to shut the fuck up and watch what happens because he wasn’t interested until today.

Mostly, by showing up with a stupid question that will illicit responses that aren’t positive (for no other reason, implying we haven’t discussed something we’ve discussed to death), he can run back to DT and say how mean and brainwashed the bubble is in the cloak room.  

But I’m not gonna neg him, it’s fine letting it play out.

In fairness, the national narrative outside of the surly safe space is that Harris is blowing it.

That doesn't mean she is, but that's the narrative.

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

This is a Trumper. He’s “trying to understand it.”.  He posted the betting bullshit that Maga is trying to sell the Bros to convince them he’s gonna win.

If he can’t understand it, that means he’s a fan of the orange turd doing some gentle trolling.  if you truly has not watched any TV or news or social media since Biden dropped out, then he just needs to shut the fuck up and watch what happens because he wasn’t interested until today.

Mostly, by showing up with a stupid question that will illicit responses that aren’t positive (for no other reason, implying we haven’t discussed something we’ve discussed to death), he can run back to DT and say how mean and brainwashed the bubble is in the cloak room.  

But I’m not gonna neg him, it’s fine letting it play out.

I dunno dude. I wandered in here for the first time in 2018 asking questions about Michael Bloomberg. I knew I hated trump and he was a clown but I didn’t know much else. Before that I was as violent of a “take your bullshit politics to the cesspool that is the cloak room” as anyone having never even been here. It happens. 

Edited by SydneyCarton
  • Hook 'Em 5
Posted
14 minutes ago, heso said:
2 hours ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

Polls have sample sizes of hundreds or a couple of thousand. Early voting has sample size of millions. It’s not theoretical or speculative. All polling is based on modeling from past elections. There has never been a gender gap like this in turnout. If Harris wins by a surprising number, this will be why pollsters didn’t see it coming.

The other reason is new voters who will be mostly women. 

Posted
1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

In fairness, the national narrative outside of the surly safe space is that Harris is blowing it.

That doesn't mean she is, but that's the narrative.

you could absolutely be correct. I guess it depends on how you take the statement.” I’m trying to understand the enthusiasm for Kamala. “

I took at that as questioning why anyone would, not that people are reporting Trump will win.   As you correctly point out, he could be saying ‘why is everyone saying Trump will win when they were all these enthusiastic supporting Kamala.’

If that’s what he meant then I’ll apologize to him right now.  But also saying “venture in CR” has a negative undertone/implication, which is also shared by everyone Maga who does not post anymore. 

 

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
5 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

I dunno dude. I wandered in here for the first time in 2018 asking questions about Michael Bloomberg. I knew I hated trump and he was a clown but I didn’t know much else. Before that I was as violent of a “take your bullshit politics to the cesspool that is the cloak room” as anyone having never even been here. It happens. 

well, I assume anyone reading my posts knows me after all these years and gives it the tenuous worth it deserves.  You are absolutely right that my gut reaction after reading that post is insufficient evidence of anything.  

Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Liberal media.

 

This is stupid for several reasons,  but the number one reason is it’s based on a premise that if Cheney is working on republicans, somehow it means Harris can’t be doing other things at the same time, like you can only do one. 
 

ARE MY EFFORTS TO READ ON MY PHONE WHIKE I TAKE A SHIT A BOLD GAMBIT, OR HAIL MARY!?!?

Edited by SydneyCarton
  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Haha 1
Posted
7 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

In fairness, the national narrative outside of the surly safe space is that Harris is blowing it.

That doesn't mean she is, but that's the narrative.

I'm outside a surly safe space. I just don't watch cable news. It's not a narrative I'm frequently seeing and when I do, it's easily dismissed as trying to drive clicks and viewers and readers. The news needs a story, especially when corporate profits are involved. 

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

I'm outside a surly safe space. I just don't watch cable news. It's not a narrative I'm frequently seeing and when I do, it's easily dismissed as trying to drive clicks and viewers and readers. The news needs a story, especially when corporate profits are involved. 

You’re not outside a surly safe space. 

Posted
7 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

This is stupid for several reasons,  but the number one reason is it’s based on a premise that if Cheney is working on republicans, somehow it means Harris can’t be doing other things at the same time, like you can only do one. 
 

ARE MY EFFORTS TO READ ON MY PHONE WHIKE I TAKE A SHIT A BOLD GAMBIT, OR HAIL MARY!?!?

You see the problem. It's everywhere and it pisses me off to no end.

Posted

If Trump wins he's found a new way to do it by somehow getting the least enthusiastic base I can ever remember in any election in my adult life to get out there and carry him to a win.  

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted
If Trump wins he's found a new way to do it by somehow getting the least enthusiastic base I can ever remember in any election in my adult life to get out there and carry him to a win.  

….while going to various swing states and shit talking their largest cities.
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

In my lifetime, I’ve never seen a campaign where a significant number of politicians publicly endorse the candidate for president from the other party.   And I’m supposed to see that and think it’s Harris who is in trouble?

This as well.  Open revolt from fairly prominent members of a candidate's party isn't something we have ever seen at these levels.  

Edited by Surly Bevo
  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 1
Posted
24 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

In fairness, the national narrative outside of the surly safe space is that Harris is blowing it.

That doesn't mean she is, but that's the narrative.

Just another data point showing how worthless mainstream news media has become. They don’t call the ridiculous, are always surprised by everything and have no clue how to analyze anything other than the smell of their own farts.

But I guess they make money, and that’s all that matters now. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, Surly Bevo said:

If Trump wins he's found a new way to do it by somehow getting the least enthusiastic base I can ever remember in any election in my adult life to get out there and carry him to a win.  

I don't think that's it, at least not entirely.  What you have is the Maga people that are big, loud and stupid, and they've gotten the media's attention.  As a result, and because of 2016 and polling misses, these folks are grossly skewing the narrative.  

Basically, what everyone, and I mean everyone seems to have forgotten is that the silent majority is what really carries the day, not the loud and brash.  That is what is under-represented in everyone's modeling.  It's fairly ironic as well, for most of my life, every time I'v heard someone mention the silent majority in the past when discussing politics its been someone making a Republican point; that isn't the reality this time around.  

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
6 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

In my lifetime, I’ve never seen a campaign where a significant number of politicians publicly endorse the candidate for president from the other party.   And I’m supposed to see that and think it’s Harris who is in trouble?

Apparently. 

 

  • Haha 2
Posted
3 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Apparently. 

 

LOL at the notion that the fucking New Republic's opinion at this point means a goddamn thing.  This is just tried and true end of the race liberal bed wetting/hand wringing.  

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
13 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

In my lifetime, I’ve never seen a campaign where a significant number of politicians publicly endorse the candidate for president from the other party.   And I’m supposed to see that and think it’s Harris who is in trouble?

But Tulsi Gabbard.

Posted
2 minutes ago, Surly Bevo said:

LOL at the notion that the fucking New Republic's opinion at this point means a goddamn thing.  This is just tried and true end of the race liberal bed wetting/hand wringing.  

Ryan Reynolds Reaction GIF

Posted
2 hours ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Tbh she should go on Mr Beast and do a challenge 

She and Trump need to keep one hand on the Constitution. First one who drops out loses. Trump has an advantage though because he wears diapers and is used to shitting and peeing himself.

Posted (edited)
21 minutes ago, Surly Bevo said:

This as well.  Open revolt from fairly prominent members of a candidate's party isn't something we have ever seen at these levels.  

I think it’s important in that, while that will never sway the true cultists, the former normal Republicans seeing these Republican officials support Harris will give them cover - support for their internal justification to make the same decision.  The polls don’t address this, but we do have anecdotal evidence in numerous cases.  Even a 1 or 2% flip from registered likely voter Republicans would be great. 

And if the race winds up being closer than we suspect, that could mean everything. 

Edit: and as many of the independents seem to be former Republicans, this may have a greater effect on them than the registered Republicans.

Edited by Gatorubet
  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
10 minutes ago, Surly Bevo said:

LOL at the notion that the fucking New Republic's opinion at this point means a goddamn thing.  This is just tried and true end of the race liberal bed wetting/hand wringing.  

So I just read the report from the Center for Working Class Politics that this "article" references.  What it all boils down to is that "the working class" favors lies over the truth on the campaign trail.

image.png.82eee136331cca2816f73fecabc5e4f9.png

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
42 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

You’re not outside a surly safe space. 

Untrue. Long ago I learned how to analyze media and apply critical thinking skills. 

Posted
2 minutes ago, Chopper said:

Untrue. Long ago I learned how to analyze media and apply critical thinking skills. 

Yes. But you’re still here. You post and read here. And you’re influenced by what you see here. We all do/are. 



×
×
  • Create New...