Election 2024- Page 31

[Jay Lerner-Z]

Posted: 11/1/24 at 11:52am

“Sleepy Joe" "Crooked Hillary" “Pocahontas”

Did Kamala not get a trademark nickname? No fair. I guess Don is running out of steam.

[binau]

Posted: 11/2/24 at 5:49am

Media who suggest Kamala is well ahead in early voting would be best to caveat and strongly encourage people to vote because otherwise some people might not think there is any need to go out and vote if they believe the Democrats are already going to win....

[ACL2006]

Posted: 11/2/24 at 8:18am

Jay Lerner-Z said: "“Sleepy Joe" "Crooked Hillary" “Pocahontas”

Did Kamala not get a trademark nickname? No fair. I guess Don is running out of steam."

I've heard her called Crooked Kamala.

[Bwaygurl2]

Posted: 11/2/24 at 10:44am

binau said: "I don’t think it’s even worth arguing whether trump is a Nazi or not - the point is about 50% of the US are about to vote for him. The strategy of calling him a Nazi doesn’t work. If Trump is everything then he is nothing. Another misstep on the democratic party and supporters to not be more careful to use extreme language when it’s most needed and most effective. Similarly all the legal cases - the focus should have been on the things that really matter, such as any crimes around election interference.


Someone somewhere decided it was a good idea to do trump in for cooking the books and paying off a stripper. Well now it looks like the legal system has been weaponised and I assume many people no longer believe in what has been waged against trump, even if there is some importance to some of it. It’s lost in the noise.

This is akin to arguing that the legal system was weaponized against Al Capone because they got him on tax evasion rather than murder or any of the other illegal activity he was involved with. Trump committed crimes and if you commit crimes I don't care what the motivation of the prosecution is; you should face consequences. 

Combine this with Trump policies that actually resonate with voters right now and the democrats may not have a winning hand - you know I never thought in my life I’d see Kamala Harris on CNN actually showing support for ‘the wall’ and challenging only because Trump didn’t build enough of it or get Mexico to pay - and even say when Anderson Cooper asked if she supports the wall that she is open to good ideas wherever and she wants to protect the border.

Kamala is wisely trying to appeal to voters who have concerns about illegal immigration. She isn't a Left Wing ideologue with no flexibility to move Right if she feels it's important.

The Democrats need to do better on policy, their leader and their strategy to defeat the competition if they want to succeed. For a person that is as bad as Trump is it shouldn’t be this hard for them to succeed. They have failed and failed big time, and they have let you down. Don’t get angry at Trump or Trump supporters because of the failings of your own party. The democrats need to do better. They have to learn and evolve."

It seems like you think only Democrats have any agency. It isn't Democrats who are pushing wildly unpopular things like tax cuts for millionaires and outlawing abortion. Democrats already pay close attention to issue polling and try to offer popular policies to win elections. Saying"for a person as bad as Trump it shouldn't be this hard to succeed " ignores the fact that we have a deeply divided electorate nearly half of which would never consider voting Democrat for any reason; in previous eras America had a majority of voters that were willing to vote either party; that era is long gone. 

Where Democrats have failed is in understanding the modern information environment; we live in a post truth era where what someone believes is far more important than reality. It isn't enough to pass good legislation and hope folks notice; they won't. 

[binau]

Posted: 11/3/24 at 3:22am

Yes, Kamala Harris can now claim she supports "the wall" but my point is that I think in the eyes of voters (I mean I am listening to what they say) it's perceived as too little, too late. Because they can choose between someone that essentially caused the problem and now says they'll fix it, with someone who has been trying to prevent it from the very beginning. This is an example of a strong policy failure that I think could have been avoided if the Democrats made different decisions under the Biden/Harris administration, and may have cost them the election. 

I also think your last comment reflects a strong naivety that I have realised after researching extensively both the Democrats and Republicans, which is that it is both the Democrats and Republicans, as well as left and right-wing activists that actually create false narratives. There are several things that both Donald Trump and Kamala Harris said on their debate that was completely wrong, for example and if you don't already know this without researching I would claim it reflects the ideological nature of your views. Sometimes minor things, somethings things that matter. So I wouldn't suggest that the Democrats simply are victims of only knowing how to tell the truth, they are playing the game too. 

After having a shocking realisation that misinformation comes from both sides, I realise that people need to think critically with all information they receive and not be ideological. It's also why I think any party who attempts to limit freedom of speech or control information should not be in power because the consequences and slippery slopes are too dangerous. 

My fear for the Democrats and America is that unless they start listening more to voters, improving their arguments and policy decisions that they're going to lose not just 2024 but also 2028 because the Republican Party is changing and there is a strong line of succession now that I can't see quite on the Democrats. Maybe I'm wrong, we'll see in a few days. But I am completely sincere if the Democrats lose they do take time to reflect and improve their party. Simply dismissing it as being a victim of 'misinformation' and moving on is a very dangerous and self-inflecting thing to do. It's the definition of not listening. 

Finally, regarding your stance on Trump being done for cooking the books - I don’t disagree with you but that’s a separate point. Regardless of the moral principles you want to uphold the action might have been counter productive and made things worse. Would you rather Trump get away with cooking the books to hide the money he paid a prostitute or would you rather he win the election? 

Updated On: 11/3/24 at 03:22 AM

[Bwaygurl2]

Posted: 11/3/24 at 7:57am

It seems you are getting into Both-sidesism with your contention that both Democrats and Republicans traffic in misinformation. There is simply no equivalent to the misinformation that the Right produces. Unfortunately, stating that makes a person look partisan.

I get the impression after reading posts of yours for years at this point that you see yourself as an "above the fray, non partisan critical thinker" and in my experience this attitude leads people into false Both-sidesism narratives. The two sides are not symmetrical. 

And the Democrats have failed to build echo chambers of their own to fight the Right's billon dollar echo chambers. That's why I say they have failed to fight misinformation. I'm not saying Democrats never lie but they don't have the giant megaphone that the Right does to influence public opinion. But if you think I'm just a naive partisan I guess there is no reason to keep talking about it. 

Biden/Harris did not create a problem at the border. The problem is neither party has the guts to tell the American people the truth: the US economy runs on illegal immigration, but voters don't want to hear that. The notion that we have "open borders" under Biden/Harris is misinformation that the Right has done and excellent job getting the public to believe.

I'd rather Trump lose the election than be prosecuted, sure, but America has so much elite impunity that it's nice on the rare occasions that an elite person is held accountable. I never expected Trump to even be put on trial.

[Jay Lerner-Z]

Posted: 11/3/24 at 10:57am

Kamala did not cause the border problem!

That’s a ridiculous perception, detached from reality. The numbers that Trump spouts at his rallies go back several years, including under his own term. 

Whatever the result of this election, it would be easier to accept if it was based on informed fact. Alas.
 

 

[binau]

Posted: 11/3/24 at 12:20pm

According to BBC verify illegal crossings reached record numbers under the Biden administration and if I recall when confronted on this fact Kamala doesn’t challenge it - instead she points to the bill that they tried to improve the situation but due to Trump’s political games they weren’t able to pass it. If it’s not a problem why doesn’t Kamala deny it’s a problem? My understanding is it is uncontroversial, what am I missing? Obviously the number Trump quotes might be misinformation, but he has a tendency to lie and exaggerate. 

[Bwaygurl2]

Posted: 11/3/24 at 1:18pm

binau said: "According to BBC verify illegal crossings reached record numbers under the Biden administration

Assuming this is true, we can't say it is Biden's fault unless we know WHY border crossings were up under him. It may be tied to factors in Latin America rather than Biden border policy. I need to look into this. 

and if I recall when confronted on this fact Kamala doesn’t challenge it - instead she points to the bill that they tried to improve the situation but due to Trump’s political games they weren’t able to pass it.

The bill was Democrats attempt to address polls showing that Americans were concerned about the border and add more funding, but Trump ended that. So it's not as if Democrats aren't listening to public opinion. 

If it’s not a problem why doesn’t Kamala deny it’s a problem? My understanding is it is uncontroversial, what am I missing?

Neither party can say "don't worry about illegal immigration because our economy depends on it" because that would be politically toxic. 

Obviously the number Trump quotes might be misinformation, but he has a tendency to lie and exaggerate."

 

[Bwaygurl2]

Posted: 11/3/24 at 1:29pm

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/u-s-mexico-border-migrant-crossings-reach-new-biden-era-low/

This doesn't give a theory for why border crossings went up to record highs last December. It did say that in August of this year crossings were equal to 2020 when Trump was in office. It says they went down due to Biden dramatically reducing eligibility for asylum. 

So the Democrats have tried to address this issue in different ways and have had success. This flies in the face of the narrative that they are refusing to do anything about it. 

[binau]

Posted: 11/3/24 at 4:49pm

Thanks for posting the link. I agree it shows that they are capable of dealing with this issue. However, my overall point is that I think the Democrats have given easy ammunition to Trump because as you can see from the data it's not a right-wing conspiracy theory that the numbers have gone up to record levels under the Biden-Harris administration - of course you can argue about the cause in a scientific sense (i.e. what were the push and pull factors) - but what I think is inarguable is that the Biden-Harris administration were governing while this happened and as we can see from the link you posted they did and do have appropriate levers to take action that they did not use until recently. I think it's also inarguable that we are witnessing a stark 180 in Democratic policies that now look more like Trump policies, you can see an NPR article on the below that also discusses this. 

https://www.npr.org/2024/10/29/nx-s1-5171441/democrats-shift-immigration

"In the last six months, Biden issued a number of executive actions that mimic those from the Trump administration, including limiting most asylum petitions at the U.S. southern border."

So either we're in a situation where the Democratic Party is so desperate to hold onto power that they will completely undermine their own values and policies to stay in power, or perhaps some of the stronger Trump immigration policies were more appropriate to solve some of these issues at this moment in history. Either way, it's not the best look for the Democratic Party right now in my opinion and it feels self-inflicted that could have been avoided had sooner action been taken. 

Also, bwaygurl2 RE: 'both sideisms' I do kind of agree with you. At least in a social media context the worst misinformation I've seen is right-wing misinformation. For example, I have seen doctored Guardian articles with completely false articles claiming that people said things they never said. I also imagine in another reality if Biden/Harris were able to keep a little more control over the border than they did Trump would still claim they are doing a horrible job. 

I haven't often seen this kind of blatant false 'fake news' in left-wing social media posts. I think what I often see in left-wing circles is a mischaracterisation or spin on certain issues that feels intellectually dishonest - and this seems to happen all the way to the top leaders of left-wing parties including Kama Harris herself. It's usually easy to tolerate because at least the intentions feel like they have a just cause, but it can be frustrating to see because I think left wing people believe that truthfulness is one of their core values.  

I think you're right that it's not symmetrical - but it is significant enough in my opinion that people should still be critical about what they read and watch (I think the best way is to watch as many long-form videos as possible from people with all different perspectives and make up your own mind based on their own words, not short edits or written commentary takes on these same videos). It's by doing this that I have started to realise that in my opinion the Democrats have lost their way and are putting themselves and therefore potentially the country too at risk.

Similarly, it's by doing this that I realise the Republican Party is changing and a lot of people standing alongside Trump are much more reasonable, intelligent, more likely to appeal to swing voters and therefore a greater threat to Democrats than I remember Trump or the Republican Party having in the past (e.g. JD Vance, Tulsi Gabbard, Elon Musk, Vivek Ramaswamy) - I know many of you will still have a visceral reaction to these names but as I have said before I think what we need to do is really pay close attention to the competition and respond in a strategic way or the risk is we become uncompetitive. 

 

 

 

[ACL2006]

Posted: 11/3/24 at 8:24pm

The Ann Selzer poll. Ann Selzer is an actual pollster who predicted the last 3 presidential races. Harris winning Iowa would be huge. Harris just may take Iowa, Pennsylvania, Michigan & Missouri.

[Jay Lerner-Z]

Posted: 11/3/24 at 8:53pm

This is pyschological torture!

Let it be over.

Let him be over.

[South Florida]

Posted: 11/3/24 at 9:43pm

One of you Dumbplicans wrote a bold type statement and refuted a bunch of issues, sadly. However when I challenged the Dumbplicans to answer my questions they claimed "I answered the questions and he makes up new ones." Well, I never discussed one of those things you bold face typed. I asked you Dumbplicans two things.

1  How do you feel about Dumps cozy relationship with Putin and other dictators?

2  Is global warming a threat to my grandchildrens future?

Updated On: 11/3/24 at 09:43 PM

[binau]

Posted: 11/4/24 at 2:51am

I’m not sure if you count me since I’m not a trump supporter as such and I probably won’t give you the disagreement you’re, looking for but I’ll bite 

1. For diplomacy reasons it’s important that country leaders have an open dialogue with all other countries. Especially threats. This allows us to advocate for our interests and reduce conflict. Tulsi Gabbard speaks about this very issue, and this is part of her non-interventionist stance on war as one of her main goals is reducing US involvement in wars (which by the way is when the democrats started hating her because she disagreed with Obama’s stance on the Syria situation). 
 

This is an example of Trump having more capable hands than in the past. The Democrats lost a good one.

2. yes 

[South Florida]

Posted: 11/4/24 at 8:42am

Binau, I'm not sure what you're saying. Is it that we should become less involved in foreign affairs and military involvements? Should we stop being a part of NATO? Should we refrain from any military actions that dosen't directly affect us? Should we not supply Ukraine with weapons? The question was about cozying up to dictators. Is it the former president's strategy to keep your friends close and your enemies closer? What is the reason he loves Putin, why does he send him Covid vaccines? How is he going to end the Russian war? What are we doing cozying up to dictators? It dosen't seem like a strategy for anything positive.

[binau]

Posted: 11/4/24 at 9:26am

I think if you go and watch Tulsi Gabbard speak you can understand further what she means (who might end up being Secretary of State so important to pay attention) - it's nothing to do with NATO, it's simply making sure the US avoids war unless absolutely necessary such as wanting to avoid the Iraq or Syria interventions, or causing escalations that could result in nuclear war. The general sentiment is less intervention than currently being taken, and I think Tulsi has suggested the plan for Russia is to negotiate an end to the war that will involve a compromise for both Russia and Ukraine. I think it's quite a surprising departure from both typical Republican and Democratic perspectives and sounds more like Bernie Sanders (Tulsi Gabbard and Bernie Sanders were aligned on the general sentiment of reducing war). Tulsi also appears reasonably well qualified to handle these issues given her service in Iraq. Overall, I am much more confident that Trump's foreign policy decisions will be better with Tulsi than without. 

 

[Jay Lerner-Z]

Posted: 11/4/24 at 10:17am

Why are you so sure that Trump will win, binau?

You talk as if it's already happened.

[binau]

Posted: 11/4/24 at 10:41am

I think he will from what I can see of the battle ground states but I absolutely fully acknowledge I may be wrong and it’s not a done deal. I can see a lot of early voting is going Kamala’s way and a lot of contradicting polls too. So not certain of anything. 

[kdogg36]

Posted: 11/4/24 at 11:37am

binau, I took your side above when someone called you a Trumper, but I'm getting the distinct impression from a few of your posts that you think the world would be better off if Trump won than if Harris won. I'm hoping you'll deny that vociferously so I don't feel like a fool.

[ACL2006]

Posted: 11/4/24 at 12:05pm

Today's Marist Poll has Harris at +4. Just 3 days ago, it had Dumpster slightly ahead.

https://x.com/pslst15/status/1853482762960879810?t=Mo2mCeB0pgQS-9bVydszYA&s=19

[binau]

Posted: 11/4/24 at 12:47pm

kdogg36 said: "binau, I took your side above when someone called you a Trumper, but I'm getting the distinct impression from a few of your posts that you think the world would be better off if Trump won than if Harris won. I'm hoping you'll deny that vociferously so I don't feel like a fool."

The only thing I think I would definitely prefer about a Trump administration than a Harris administration is Tulsi Gabbard in a prominent leadership position, who is a former Democrat but I understand she is dead to you now. Otherwise, all the other posts are meant to articulate the failings of the Democratic Party and why they need to do better. 

[Jay Lerner-Z]

Posted: 11/4/24 at 1:22pm

What would you expect Tulsi to do about Gaza?

If she and Trump are so intent on keeping America out of international conflict, wouldn’t they stop supplying Netanyahu with weapons? I can’t see that happening.

[binau]

Posted: 11/4/24 at 2:02pm

Well Tulsi’s views appear to be more nuanced, you can read them here. Based on this I agree with you she is unlikely to stop supplying weapons unless doing so goes against America’s interests  

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Tulsi_Gabbard

[Zeppie2022]

Posted: 11/4/24 at 7:44pm

"One of you Dumbplicans wrote a bold type statement and refuted a bunch of issues, sadly. However when I challenged the Dumbplicans to answer my questions they claimed "I answered the questions and he makes up new ones." Well, I never discussed one of those things you bold face typed. I asked you Dumbplicans two things. 1 How do you feel about Dumps cozy relationship with Putin and other dictators? 2 Is global warming a threat to my grandchildrens future?"

For the record, you asked question about Jan 6th and me and others answered it. Correct me if I am wrong but you never responded to my answer or others on our Jan 6th answer. You just pivoted to global warming question for us to answer while you never respond to a question myself or others ask you. You hate Trump but you act just like him using juvenile nickname (Dumplicans) for people who disagree with you. I have had a nice dinner with glass of wine so I will try and be nice to you and for the last time answer a couple of your questions.

1. Trump was POTUS for 4 years, did he get US into any wars? Trump tried to have dialog with Kim Young Un (North Korea) which I believe was two summits to try and work a arms deal. It did not work out, but you think it was bad thing, ok. I doubt their relationship was "cozy". Putin is a world leader, so it is better to have some type of relationship with him than none at all. We all have no idea how good or bad their relationship is and if you think you know you are a fool. You make way too much out of sending Putin some COVID vaccines. You could say it was an example of giving foreign aid to another country.

2. There is global warming on earth. I am not a scientist so I am not going to act like I know the total effect of global warming will have in the future or when it may happen. People like Al Gore look like fools now when they predicted the earth as we know it would be destroyed by global warming by now. 

Have a good evening.

Updated On: 11/4/24 at 07:44 PM