Jump to content

U.S. Presidential Primaries 2024!


Skywalkre

Recommended Posts

I read an interesting comment on a blog post. Prediction was that Biden resigns next May, Harris pardons the whole Biden family then passes on competing in the primary due to her inherent toxicity and radioactivity from providing said pardons. 

I am going to assume that Harris will be given a rather massive golden parachute for going along with such a plan. Question is, who will the DNC favor in the primary? If they had any brains it would be someone like Williamson, but It seems to be Newsom (Michelle as VP?).

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 952
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

7 minutes ago, Ivanhoe said:

 am going to assume that Harris will be given a rather massive golden parachute for going along with such a plan. Question is, who will the DNC favor in the primary? If they had any brains it would be someone like Williamson, but It seems to be Newsom (Michelle as VP?).

The standard Democrat golden parachute seems to be for a big book deal for a book practically no one will read. 

Are you talking about Marianne Williamson? I always expect her to break out into a rendition of "Age of Aquarius". 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Ivanhoe said:

I read an interesting comment on a blog post. Prediction was that Biden resigns next May, Harris pardons the whole Biden family then passes on competing in the primary due to her inherent toxicity and radioactivity from providing said pardons. 

I am going to assume that Harris will be given a rather massive golden parachute for going along with such a plan. Question is, who will the DNC favor in the primary? If they had any brains it would be someone like Williamson, but It seems to be Newsom (Michelle as VP?).

 

As far as I know only Hunter was charged with anything and that has been resolved, so I’m not sure what this crazy theory is based on. In any case, DOJ has a policy of not charging sitting presidents and Biden could pardon anyone he wants right now were he to feel it necessary. Trump is clearly delaying his own trial to use the office to end the federal charges against him and I don’t see why Biden couldn’t easily do the same even if we assume he’s guilty of something.

 

Biden is running unless he suffers a medical emergency. Democratic voters by and large aren’t enthusiastic about it, but Trump has proven to be as much of a motivator for democratic voters as republican ones.

Edited by Josh
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/16/2023 at 11:22 AM, Detonable said:

  It’s unlikely that the cadaver received more votes than Obama. So widespread fraud almost certainly occurred. 

That's just brilliant deducti... sorry, was going for a joke there and couldn't even finish it. 🙄

This 'theory' has come up multiple times before and it's still as bad as it always was.  Literally a few minutes of google will show you why this isn't a red flag in the slightest.

First... there's this simple thing called population growth.  There were more voters in '20 than in '08 (Obama's biggest win as measured in total votes cast).  The US population went up ~8.5% in that 12 year period.  Obama got ~69.5 million votes in '08 and Biden got ~81.3 million.  If you multiply  Obama's total by the population increase you get 75.4 million.

Some of you may be going "HA, Skywalkre, your math shows it's still an issue!"  Except, again, it's not.  Population difference accounts for half of the difference.  The rest can be attributed to turnout.

Many of you may remember how Obama's win in '08 was spun as this massive win for democracy with incredible turnout, blah blah blah.  Guess what the actual turnout amongst eligible voters was in '08?  It came out to... wait for it... a whopping 61.6% of eligible voters.  Some of our foreign posters here on TN may chuckle at that number because it's bloody pathetic.  It was the highest turnout for a POTUS election in a long time... but compared to many other Western democracies it's downright embarrassing.  Turnout in '20 was actually higher, believe it or not, with the final % coming to... wait for it... 66.6%.  Biden had more people voting (because more people lived here) and more people, though still a pathetically small number of those eligible, cast votes as a % of eligible voters compared to '08.

Lastly, some of you still fail to grasp how so many Americans really don't care for Trump.  Plenty of folks showed up in '20 to vote against Trump.  The same thing happened in '22 (though there it was to vote against his candidates).

You throw the absolute vitriol many Americans hold towards the guy, which led to higher (though still pathetically small) turnout, with a large population voting... and you have a very understandable and reasonable result in '20.  Still... the real sad thing is... many of you will cling to this notion that the results were 'fishy'. 

/sigh

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/16/2023 at 4:12 PM, 17thfabn said:

I don't think there is any way Trump can stay away from a chance to get attention. Not going to the debates may be the smart move, but  it is not in Trump's nature to avoid the limelight. 

Here's the thing - he'll get attention even if stays away.  Here we are 5 weeks away from the debate and pundits are already talking about "Trump may not show up!?  <insert more free advertising for Trump>". 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, rmgill said:

Didn’t really campaign and won more votes. 

There was this little thing called COVID going on during the '20 campaign season.  Besides, modern campaigning is really measured by money spent (with a big part going towards ads via internet, TV, radio, etc).  When you compare those figures Biden and supportive Super Pacs spent 60% more than Trump*.  When you compare the money spent between '08 and '20, adjusted for inflation, Biden as a campaign spent about the same but pretty sure supportive Super Pacs spent far more.  Overall spending on the Presidential campaign, adjusted for inflation, was ~43% more in '20 compared to '08.

*Trump supporters seem unwilling to take a serious look at how poorly Trump ran his campaigns.  There were plenty of stories back in the day about Trump shunning R support and advice on building 'ground game' efforts in key states.  The Ds spent more money and also still did the old fashioned work of going door-to-door.  Meanwhile Trump leaned heavily on in-person events and free advertising via media coverage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Skywalkre said:

There was this little thing called COVID going on during the '20 campaign season.

So, what about now? Is he going to keep on putting a lid on being president in NATO meetings or current campaigning?

 

1 hour ago, Skywalkre said:

Besides, modern campaigning is really measured by money spent (with a big part going towards ads via internet, TV, radio, etc). 

There were reasons. -> But they don't really apply because it doesn't matter. ->

1 hour ago, Skywalkre said:

*Trump supporters seem unwilling to take a serious look at how poorly Trump ran his campaigns.
 

But it was really Trump's fault. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, rmgill said:

So

Umm... you stated he didn't "really campaign" yet he actually did (per the money spent on every other avenue).  His campaign felt large, in-person events weren't a great idea in the middle of a pandemic (and since we know some Trump rallies were superspreader events in hindsight that wasn't such a bad decision on their part).  Your statement was unequivocally false.

45 minutes ago, rmgill said:

There were reasons. -> But they don't really apply because it doesn't matter. ->

No idea what you're trying to get across here (but that's not really new).

46 minutes ago, rmgill said:

But it was really Trump's fault.

I mean... it was.

I just heard a great quote from a pundit discussion DeSantis' campaign woes.  It went along the lines of "when you hear of candidates shuffling their staff and firing people... it's never actually about the folks they let go... it's about the candidate."

I know it pains some Trump supporters to even consider he may have done something, like running his campaign, poorly... but just like believing in the 'stolen election' BS it doesn't change the reality no matter how much you want to believe otherwise.  There were plenty of stories at the time of Trump balking at rather basic campaign strategies (like setting up local campaign offices) and going his own way.  Contrast this with the Ds who, even if you hate their politics you have to admire their logistical efforts in '20, put in the work to learn the lessons from '16 and adjust in '20.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, 17thfabn said:

Wow! The Jews even control the Chi Comms! You have to be impressed.

The conservative commentators mostly like RFK JR because he makes Biden uncomfortable. But most acknowledge that he is not a conservative and  is crazy.

Yeah, the death toll from Covid in NYC (chock full o' them Ashkenazi Jooz!) and China would make his theory seem somehow implausible. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Josh said:

As far as I know only Hunter was charged with anything and that has been resolved, so I’m not sure what this crazy theory is based on.

The "Joe will resign the day after half-time so Kamala can serve ten years" theory was overtaken by events, so we need a new one?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm reminded of all the crazy theories that filled the Biden thread for several months after he was elected.  I was thinking the other day of going back and collecting the best to repost them.  Just... outlandish doesn't even do credit to some of them.  Considering how far off they all were you'd think folks would take a step back and go "maybe I'm not looking at this the right way..."

Nah... 🤣

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is sad that voters are as -- fill in the blank -- as they are. Realistically uneducated and lacking knowledge would be my choice. Take the Senate races for Pennsylvania.  The moral and intelligent Rick Santorum lost about 20 years ago and now we had a race between the lesser of two idiots in John Fetterman and Dr. Oz and still the voters of that state couldn't pick the lesser of two evils. 

Pence is in the same category now as Santorum was back then. And back then, the only National level Democrat worth a damn was Dick Gephardt. Now Gephardt would be regarded as a right-wing, pick-your-phrase de-jour of the left. 

Trying to decide, much less know, who will be the Presidential candidates next year is like picking which sports team this year will when their championship next year. This country fornicated up greatly when Trump was not reelected. The lies of the entrenched government folks, one cannot accurately use the noun "official," along with their morally syphilitic whores in the media, are the second reason why the U.S. is on its way down. The first is the uneducated and knowledgeable voter. 

Thank God there is the Bible, as we will win the final war for eternal victory!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The media clearly has a huge influence in candidate quality, if not by selecting individual favorites then by selecting the tone of an election. Ironically I think the right suffers from this far more than the left, because statistically they get their news from a smaller number of news sources which have had a lot more legal challenges to their truthfulness than the left. One can spin that as a left wing conspiracy of course, but the more simple answer probable would involve the demographics of conservative media.

 

In any case, I think their are only a couple of people on the board that approve of either party’s heir apparent this election, and none of them are pro Biden. But as I’ve mentioned, Trump turns out the voters on both sides. Also if 2022 is any measure, the Dobbs decision is going to cause some additional turnout and swing votes for democrats down the ballot.

Edited by Josh
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/17/2023 at 11:37 PM, Skywalkre said:

Umm... you stated he didn't "really campaign" yet he actually did (per the money spent on every other avenue).  His campaign felt large, in-person events weren't a great idea in the middle of a pandemic (and since we know some Trump rallies were superspreader events
 

Oh bloody well stop it with the super spreader events bullcrap. The left was bloody fine with mass protests with every bloody leftist under the sun being fine with being in the mass crowds let aline rioting. It didn't ring true now, it's utterly fatuous now. 

On 7/17/2023 at 11:37 PM, Skywalkre said:

 

 

in hindsight that wasn't such a bad decision on their part).  Your statement was unequivocally false.

They were announcing LIDS or the campaign at 10am in the morning. He was campaigning from his basement. 

Unequivocally, not false. 

 

On 7/17/2023 at 11:37 PM, Skywalkre said:

No idea what you're trying to get across here (but that's not really new).

You're still stuck on page 1 I think. 

On 7/17/2023 at 11:37 PM, Skywalkre said:

I just heard a great quote from a pundit discussion DeSantis' campaign woes.  It went along the lines of "when you hear of candidates shuffling their staff and firing people... it's never actually about the folks they let go... it's about the candidate."

 

Maybe he should just do it from his basement. 

On 7/17/2023 at 11:37 PM, Skywalkre said:

I know it pains some Trump supporters to even consider he may have done something, like running his campaign, poorly... but just like believing in the 'stolen election' BS it doesn't change the reality no matter how much you want to believe otherwise. 

You're still rambling on about super spreader events at right leaning political rallies. 

On 7/17/2023 at 11:37 PM, Skywalkre said:

There were plenty of stories at the time of Trump balking at rather basic campaign strategies (like setting up local campaign offices) and going his own way.  Contrast this with the Ds who, even if you hate their politics you have to admire their logistical efforts in '20, put in the work to learn the lessons from '16 and adjust in '20.

I have lots of problems with Trump. But I have more problems with the left. 

Yes. Logistical efforts at changing the voting rules mid-stream. But the election wasn't stolen, that was all above board. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/18/2023 at 5:09 AM, Skywalkre said:

I'm reminded of all the crazy theories that filled the Biden thread for several months after he was elected.  I was thinking the other day of going back and collecting the best to repost them.  Just... outlandish doesn't even do credit to some of them.  Considering how far off they all were you'd think folks would take a step back and go "maybe I'm not looking at this the right way..."

Nah... 🤣

Far off? You mean like his corruption and the stories about his son? You know, the ones suppressed by big tech and the Federal Government? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/18/2023 at 3:40 AM, Rick said:

It is sad that voters are as -- fill in the blank -- as they are. Realistically uneducated and lacking knowledge would be my choice.

I'm in full agreement, in particular when looking at Rs.  There have been plenty of Conservative choices in recent years yet estimates put it as 60% of Rs are solidly hooked to and behind Trump.  It's not like he's been the only option.  Rs are just shooting themselves in the foot by making him their ride or die.

On 7/18/2023 at 3:40 AM, Rick said:

Pence is in the same category now as Santorum was back then. And back then, the only National level Democrat worth a damn was Dick Gephardt. Now Gephardt would be regarded as a right-wing, pick-your-phrase de-jour of the left.

Speaking of Gephardt... he's currently leading an effort to make sure Trump doesn't get reelected again.

Quote

Gephardt: No Labels effort ‘would probably elect Donald Trump’ in race against Biden

Former House Democratic leader Dick Gephardt argued that a third-party candidacy backed by the centrist political group No Labels “would probably elect” former President Trump back into the White House.

Gephardt said in an interview with PBS NewsHour on Monday that the effort from No Labels to run a bipartisan ticket of one Democrat and one Republican in the 2024 presidential election would not be an issue in “normal times,” as third parties have consistently run throughout U.S. history. 

But he said the country avoided the 2020 election being “broken” by a “whisker” because then-Vice President Mike Pence and GOP officials in a few key states did not give in to pressure from Trump to overturn the election. He said Trump can never be near the presidency again after he tried to “overthrow our government and overthrow our electoral process.” 

“The No Labels effort, we believe, if you look at all the polling data, all the data you can look at, would probably elect Donald Trump, if the two candidates are Trump and [President] Biden,” Gephardt said.

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4103217-gephardt-no-labels-effort-would-probably-elect-donald-trump-in-race-against-biden/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, rmgill said:

Oh bloody well stop it with the super spreader events bullcrap. The left was bloody fine with mass protests with every bloody leftist under the sun being fine with being in the mass crowds let aline rioting. It didn't ring true now, it's utterly fatuous now.

Multiple things can be true.  Trump's events could be superspreader events, the Left could have been hypocritical about protests and their impact (every Liberal/D person I know was always torn about this... it was never some clear "this is ok and that's not"), and even the WH under Biden can end up having superspreader events after he takes office.  Doesn't change the fact they chose to avoid said events for health concerns for their supporters as well as their candidate.  Despite the fact you're unaware of them there are a lot of ways to campaign.

8 hours ago, rmgill said:

Unequivocally, not false.

If you're going to state that campaigning only happens when your candidate has big rallies... that's fine, you should just state such a bizarre definition at the start.  I speak English so I know what it means in modern context.  By that same definition the only candidates of political office that truly campaign are basically Senators, Governors, and POTUS candidates because most politicians below that level would have trouble getting people to show up to a rally... so they do all the other things - campaign offices that call voters and go door-to-door, internet/TV/radio ads, reaching out via mail/email, etc. (all the things Biden and the Ds did in '20 that Trump either didn't have the money to do as much or stuck up his nose at the thought of).

8 hours ago, rmgill said:

Yes. Logistical efforts at changing the voting rules mid-stream. But the election wasn't stolen, that was all above board. 

I mean... it was.  Again, there was this little thing called COVID going on so changes were made fairly late in some places.  There were challenges to many of these in the courts and the courts decided in many cases some changes were acceptable.  That's... how our system works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/18/2023 at 1:05 PM, Josh said:

The media clearly has a huge influence in candidate quality, if not by selecting individual favorites then by selecting the tone of an election. Ironically I think the right suffers from this far more than the left, because statistically they get their news from a smaller number of news sources which have had a lot more legal challenges to their truthfulness than the left. One can spin that as a left wing conspiracy of course, but the more simple answer probable would involve the demographics of conservative media.

 

Let us say the media has become a more customer orientated. In the days of analogue media, many outlets strived to deliver a somewhat balanced reporting on events and to present different opinions about problems.

This all went down hill with the start of social media and it is not the media that is to blame for that, as suddenly new competition emerged. Competition that was not having striving for standards, but mostly aiming at getting clicks for revenue and the best way for that is emotion.

Everybody loves to be right and one sees this in the difference on how people talk about the media. 1980ies/1990ies people would say this newspaper is more left leaning and that is more conservative.

Today people say this site, blog, channel is right, the rest is lying. So in the end it is the people who caused this.

And people like to believe that humans are in control of events. So it is easy to sell something like:

"COVID was designed by the Chinese to avoid the re-election of Trump."

Edited by seahawk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I think this is a glorious idea and they should go for it. Maybe they can hire the "Aliens!" meme guy as White House spokesperson, too. :D

Quote

Steve Bannon Pushes Trump/Kennedy Ticket for 2024

By Naveen Athrappully

8/2/2023 Updated: 8/2/2023

Steve Bannon has reiterated his preference for a Trump/Kennedy ticket for the 2024 presidential run, suggesting that the combination would produce a “massive landslide” win, even as the possibility remains almost nil.

The former White House chief strategist expects a “firestorm of the lawfare will start next spring” for the former president, Mr. Bannon said during a Sunday episode of the podcast “Bannon’s War Room,” referring to the mounting legal issues which Mr. Trump faces at the moment.

If Trump can “walk through that fire,” he can get “55 percent or more of the country.” And then, “if somehow it worked out [that] you could get Kennedy as a running mate—and I don’t know, that is far from even technically can happen because of the structure of the Democratic and Republican parties and ballot access and all that—you could get 60 percent or higher in the country and win a massive landslide.”

Mr. Bannon had earlier suggested a Trump/Kennedy ticket in April. During one of the podcasts, Mr. Bannon said that former Arizona gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake was his top choice for Mr. Trump’s vice president. However, if she were not available, “Kennedy would be an excellent choice.”

[...]

In addition to Mr. Bannon, many other conservatives are open to the idea of a Trump/Kennedy challenge for the 2024 election.

In an April 29 social media post, former national security advisor Michael Flynn said that he was “really starting to like this presidential candidate’s attitude,” referring to Kennedy.

Conservative talk show host Steve Deace said in an April 6 post to social media that “as long as he doesn’t go trans, a man with high character and courage like RFK Jr. will be tempting.” GOP operative Roger Stone has also extended support for a Trump/Kennedy challenge.

Despite the support, Mr. Kennedy has dismissed the possibility of teaming up with Mr. Trump.

“Just to quell any speculation, UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES will I join Donald Trump on an electoral ticket. Our positions on certain fundamental issues, our approaches to governance, and our philosophies of leadership could not be further apart,” Mr. Kennedy said in a May 10 post on social media.

[...]

Both Mr. Trump and Mr. Kennedy have expressed high regard for each other. In an interview with Newsmax in June, Mr. Trump said he was impressed with how Mr. Kennedy has boosted his popularity in polls.

“I respect him—a lot of people respect him. He’s got some very important points to be made,” the former president said, referring to Mr. Kennedy.

During a town hall hosted by News Nations in late June, Mr. Kennedy said he was “proud that President Trump likes me, even though I don't agree with him on most of his issues.”

https://www.theepochtimes.com/us/steve-bannon-pushes-trump-kennedy-ticket-for-2024-post-5439315?utm_source=partner&utm_campaign=ZeroHedge

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Evidently Gavin Newsom, Governor of California and presidential wannabe in waiting, has challenged Ron DeSantis, Governor of Florida and contender for the GOP presidential nomination, to a debate and Ron DeSantis has accepted the challenge.

This won't sit well with the White House but will set well with much of the Democratic Party faithful as they privately were hoping Old Joe would just slip away.

Nor will this sit well with Team Orange because, because it isn't about Trump.

Update:  Newsom has offered dates of November 8 or 10.  To be a 90 minute live televised debate with no audience in attendance.

Update:  On social media Team Orange faithful are indeed in meltdown mode. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I will enjoy the also rans having a debate with each other. Newsome is setting himself up as the replacement next cycle or if anything goes sideways this time around; Desantis is effectively now doing the same since he's already lost the nomination without an act of god.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Josh said:

I think I will enjoy the also rans having a debate with each other. Newsome is setting himself up as the replacement next cycle or if anything goes sideways this time around; Desantis is effectively now doing the same since he's already lost the nomination without an act of god.

I don't know enough about Newsom to as of yet judge, but my gut hunch with DeSantis is that he won't ever be president. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, glenn239 said:

I don't know enough about Newsom to as of yet judge, but my gut hunch with DeSantis is that he won't ever be president. 

Newsom would be a very polarizing candidate. He'd be a lot better than Biden this time around (really who wouldn't be outside of say, Bernie?) but IMO he's a poor choice in a general election - super blue governor from the state that creates the definitions of liberal. IMO a couple of the Dem mid western governors would be much better candidates for 2028, at least in terms of pure electability. But if Joe drops out for some reason this season I think Newsom might primary Kamala.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, this one should not be impeached

https://newrepublic.com/post/172402/vivek-ramaswamy-paid-someone-scrub-wikipedia-page

Quote

Vivek Ramaswamy Paid Wikipedia Editors to Erase His Soros Fellowship and Covid Work
He announced his 2024 bid after making sure his Wikipedia page was edited.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...