U.S. Federal Elections 2024, Presidential, Senate and U.S. House of Representatives

[glenn239]

8 hours ago, DKTanker said:

Did Trump not understand that would be the case?  I've been led to believe he did little to no prepping for the debate and we know he didn't participate in any of the GOP debates over the last year.  Perhaps if he had...but as he said, debates can only hurt him.

Trump was all over the map.  He has no one to blame but himself for allowing ABC to do the debate - if the Dems refused to go on FOX, then no debate.   Harris did better than expected.    I think the Dems wanted the 10th so that they could bury the debate in 9/11 ceremonies if Harris shit the bed.  Swift's endorsement also seemed coordinated to the post-debate strategy.

[Murph]

You just can’t hate the media enough.  

[futon]

8 hours ago, DKTanker said:

Did Trump not understand that would be the case?  I've been led to believe he did little to no prepping for the debate and we know he didn't participate in any of the GOP debates over the last year.  Perhaps if he had...but as he said, debates can only hurt him.

The performance at a debate is determined not only by the contender but also by the viewers that make the call as whether or not it did well. If the viewers don't know the topic, then what's good can look bad and what's bad can look good. 

For foreign policy.. he did fairly well. 

Harris had some good counter points. Some were just based off of artificially made ones. One of the good ones though was the Taliban invited to Camp David, was particularly a solid hit I thought.  But Trump's counter to that measured up and returned the focus to the actual poor Afghanistan withdrawl. 

[Mikel2]

8 hours ago, DKTanker said:

Did Trump not understand that would be the case?  I've been led to believe he did little to no prepping for the debate and we know he didn't participate in any of the GOP debates over the last year.  Perhaps if he had...but as he said, debates can only hurt him.

 

Rule #1 should have been not to take the bait and to stick to message.

Crowd size?   "Let me tell you about the inflation of the last 3.5 years"

January 6?   "Let me tell you how much better things were on 1/6/21 compared to today"

[sunday]

26 minutes ago, glenn239 said:

(...). Swift's endorsement also seemed coordinated to the post-debate strategy.

Ah, yes, that endorsement

Not a bad coordination.

Edited September 11 by sunday

[Stuart Galbraith]

Apparently he did so well, he sees no need for a further debate. Its a shame, I was hoping he would expand on his views on post birth abortion, and entre he considers best with roast dog.

[rmgill]

2 hours ago, glenn239 said:

My favorite part was when Trump said states would abort babies in the 7th, 8th, 9th month and even just after birth.  The fact checkers on ABC hotly disputed this, saying that abortion after birth was illegal.  But, apparently, the 9th month was ok, because they had nothing to say about that.

They completely ignore Northam's proposal. Even CNN covered it. So, someone needs to fact check the fact checkers at ABC. 
https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/31/politics/ralph-northam-third-trimester-abortion/index.html

For those saying this was never proposed or on the table...

From the above cited CNN article. Note the quotes. Is CNN quoting Northam out of context? 
 

“[Third trimester abortions are] done in cases where there may be severe deformities. There may be a fetus that’s nonviable. So in this particular example, if a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen,” Northam, a pediatric neurosurgeon, told Washington radio station WTOP. “The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired. And then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.” 

The bill – which among other things would end a state rule that requires at least three physicians confirm “that a third trimester abortion is necessary to prevent the woman’s death or impairment of her mental or physical health” and ends “the need to find that any such impairment to the woman’s health would be substantial and irremediable” – is currently tabled in Virginia’s legislature. 

 

 

 

Northam said he supports the bill’s measures, telling WTOP that “we want the government not to be involved in these types of decisions. We want the decision to be made by the mothers and their providers.

Edited September 11 by rmgill

[rmgill]

2 hours ago, glenn239 said:

Trump was all over the map.  He has no one to blame but himself for allowing ABC to do the debate - if the Dems refused to go on FOX, then no debate.   Harris did better than expected.    I think the Dems wanted the 10th so that they could bury the debate in 9/11 ceremonies if Harris shit the bed.  Swift's endorsement also seemed coordinated to the post-debate strategy.

The media well and truly ignores that Harris has avoided all but the most milquetoast of media interviews. 

How many interviews and pressers has she done since announcing her campaign? 

[sunday]

1 hour ago, rmgill said:

They completely ignore Northam's proposal. Even CNN covered it. So, someone needs to fact check the fact checkers at ABC. 
https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/31/politics/ralph-northam-third-trimester-abortion/index.html

For those saying this was never proposed or on the table...

From the above cited CNN article. Note the quotes. Is CNN quoting Northam out of context? 
 

“[Third trimester abortions are] done in cases where there may be severe deformities. There may be a fetus that’s nonviable. So in this particular example, if a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen,” Northam, a pediatric neurosurgeon, told Washington radio station WTOP. “The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired. And then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.” 

The bill – which among other things would end a state rule that requires at least three physicians confirm “that a third trimester abortion is necessary to prevent the woman’s death or impairment of her mental or physical health” and ends “the need to find that any such impairment to the woman’s health would be substantial and irremediable” – is currently tabled in Virginia’s legislature. 

 

 

 

Northam said he supports the bill’s measures, telling WTOP that “we want the government not to be involved in these types of decisions. We want the decision to be made by the mothers and their providers.

Were abortion so much good and holy, then abortion apologists should be proud of it been done. However, it seems there are enough people around in Samland that do not think of the fact of killing babies as a virtuous thing.

https://www.wnd.com/2024/09/linsey-davis-is-a-liar-social-media-deliver-abortion-truth-bomb-to-presidential-debate-moderator/

 

Quote

"As Democrats and media outlets accuse former President Donald Trump of dramatizing the Democratic abortion agenda, data from the Minnesota Department of Health shows that at least eight babies who survived abortions in the state were left to die.

"Under a 2015 Minnesota law, the state formerly was required to report whether abortions resulted in the live birth of a baby, what actions were taken to preserve the life of that baby, and whether the baby survived.

"Those reporting requirements exposed that between Jan. 1, 2021, and Dec. 31, 2021, physicians performed five abortions that resulted in a baby's live birth.

"No measures were taken to help the first baby, who reportedly had 'fetal anomalies' that resulted 'in death shortly after delivery.' Two of the babies were given 'comfort care measures' as they died. No measures were taken to "preserve life" of the last two babies, who were previable.

"Previous data from the Minnesota Department of Health reveals that physicians have been leaving babies to die after failed abortions for years. In 2020, no babies were reported born alive through botched abortions, according to the Minnesota Department of Health.

"But between Jan. 1, 2019, and Dec. 31, 2019, three abortions resulted in born-alive babies who were then allowed to die. The first baby reportedly had 'fetal anomalies' but also had 'residual cardiac activity' for two minutes, yet no efforts were taken to preserve that baby's life, and "the infant did not survive.

"The second baby died while 'comfort care measures' were provided. The third baby was previable and did not receive any attempts to preserve his or her life. It does not appear that any of the babies born alive in botched abortions survived.

"Due to efforts by the state's Democratic governor, who served from 2019 until the present, Minnesota will no longer even keep track of born-alive babies."

 

[Josh]

Has Fox News reacted to Swifts endorsement yet? They were frantic about her not getting political around the superbowl. Saving her endorsement for the last two months seems oddly strategic for a celeb.

[sunday]

3 hours ago, sunday said:

Ah, yes, that endorsement

Not a bad coordination.

Elon Musk, the knight in shining armor to the rescue!

 

[Josh]

I do not think that will go over well…

[Stuart Galbraith]

He must really want to be roasted on one of her Albums so bad.

[sunday]

Cat lives matter.

All the nine of each.

Edited to add

Looks like USian democrats are for innovative foodstuff.

First sundry, insectlike bugs.

Now, fluffy pets. And ducks.

Those mean Canadian geese had it coming, but domestic duckies?

Furthermore, considering the large number of cat ladies voting Democrat, this could be quite the offence to some hard core vote block.

Edited September 11 by sunday

[Josh]

16 hours ago, Skywalkre said:

Fifteen minutes into this debate and it's a complete waste of time.  My prediction is this does nothing to change the race...

Actually I am going to revise my estimate after watching some actual clips of the debate and reading a number of Fox News assessments of it: Trump definitely “lost”, to the extent such things can be won or lost. But what was probably far more damaging then winning or losing is that his rambling senility was on full display for the vast majority of the population who has never watched one his rallies. I think that could motivate the small number of undecided or indecisive voters. A lot of independents not paying much attention to the election yet leaning towards Trump who do not live in the conservative media sphere got their first taste of him unedited, and it’s not a good look. It probably is not a huge number, but since everything this year seems to rest on a knife edge, it could well prove to be decisive.

[Skywalkre]

8 hours ago, glenn239 said:

My favorite part was when Trump said states would abort babies in the 7th, 8th, 9th month and even just after birth.  The fact checkers on ABC hotly disputed this, saying that abortion after birth was illegal.  But, apparently, the 9th month was ok, because they had nothing to say about that.

Pre-Dobbs data on abortions showed 96% occurred up to 15 weeks, 3% up to 20 weeks, and 1% after that.  Post-birth abortions are a myth and illegal (so I commend the moderator for calling Trump out on that) and from what I've found abortions right before birth are also illegal.  Harris was asked about abortions in months 7-9 and dodged it.

I'd argue both failed in their response on the issue but while Harris won't suffer, Trump dug a hole for himself.  Trump's answers on the subject were painful to listen to (him still clinging to this notion that all legal experts wanted this outcome has always been absurd coupled to the post-birth nonsense mentioned above to name a few).  Those very late term abortions are incredibly rare and the reasons for them seem to be ones that women are sensitive to (maternal endangerment, fetal inviability, restrictions on getting the abortion earlier).

Edited September 11 by Skywalkre

[Skywalkre]

10 hours ago, Rick said:

Did not watch, but this synopsis sounded good
...
Overall I can call it a tie.

There's no way that debate was a tie.  Even diehard Trump supporters were struggling to find good things to say afterwards in post-debate discussion coverage (at best they could temper Harris' performance).

I highly recommend everyone watch the debates.  They're 90m of your time each.  I particularly say this to Trump supporters because most of the ones I've met have heard nothing outside of the sound bites on social media.

[sunday]

This is a classic

[Skywalkre]

8 hours ago, futon said:

For foreign policy.. he did fairly well.

Did he?  His inability to say he wants Ukraine to win was painful to watch.  You would think as a populist he would shift his tone since Americans have generally been supportive of Ukraine since the war started.

One pundit wondered if, come Nov, a single quote from that exchange could be the reason Harris wins.  Harris was attacking Trump on his stance on support of Ukraine and said this if Trump had been in the WH when the war started:

Quote

Putin would be sitting in Kyiv with his eyes on the rest of Europe. Starting with Poland. And why don't you tell the 800,000 Polish Americans right here in Pennsylvania how quickly you would give up for the sake of favor and what you think is a friendship with what is known to be a dictator who would eat you for lunch.

That pundit pointed out, with how close this race appears to be, that if that line gets just 10k of those folks to vote for Harris when they weren't going to before, she's won the state and likely the EC victory.

[Skywalkre]

3 hours ago, Josh said:

Actually I am going to revise my estimate after watching some actual clips of the debate and reading a number of Fox News assessments of it: Trump definitely “lost”, to the extent such things can be won or lost. But what was probably far more damaging then winning or losing is that his rambling senility was on full display for the vast majority of the population who has never watched one his rallies. I think that could motivate the small number of undecided or indecisive voters. A lot of independents not paying much attention to the election yet leaning towards Trump who do not live in the conservative media sphere got their first taste of him unedited, and it’s not a good look. It probably is not a huge number, but since everything this year seems to rest on a knife edge, it could well prove to be decisive.

I'm still skeptical.  One of the Trump pundits in a post-debate discussion I was wastching highlighted that while he lost he didn't have any meme-able, blatantly painful moments like Biden's incoherent rambling in the first debate.  As much as many of Trump's comments were painful to listen to... he's always been painful to listen to yet he's still neck-and-neck with Harris in all the latest polling.

What I'm more curious about is the effect this performance had on various groups that supported Biden back in '20 but haven't lined up behind Harris yet.  I was always under the impression both candidates had ceilings they had already reached but apparently polling is showing that Harris could actually go higher and is just not clicking with groups that historically have gone the Ds way in the past - Blacks, Latinos, and Genz/Millennial suburbanites.

For Black voters this seems to mostly be male Black voters and the pieces I've seen on this is just disillusionment from a very small subset of the country that has historically voted D and noticed nothing ever changes.  Latinos is more complicated... and frankly given how large that group has become now it's understandable they can't be viewed as a single voting bloc anymore.  The Genz/Millennial cohort dissatisfaction I can imagine is solely from economic troubles from recent inflation.

Did Harris do enough to win over those groups in that debate last night?  I don't think so (maybe her response on her racial background might win over the male Black voters... but that's it).

[17thfabn]

3 hours ago, Josh said:

Actually I am going to revise my estimate after watching some actual clips of the debate and reading a number of Fox News assessments of it: Trump definitely “lost”, to the extent such things can be won or lost. But what was probably far more damaging then winning or losing is that his rambling senility was on full display for the vast majority of the population who has never watched one his rallies.

I watched 90% of the debate.

I'll give you Trump was goofy at times. It didn't look like dementia to me. I have plenty of experience dealing with dementia, both professionally and with family. It looked like "Typical goofy Trump" behavior. He wasn't full blown "goofy Trump", he toned it down some. 

[rmgill]

5 hours ago, Josh said:

I do not think that will go over well…

Why? The FBI isn't making it for AP, CNN, MSNBC approval and consumption? 

[rmgill]

1 hour ago, Skywalkre said:

There's no way that debate was a tie.  Even diehard Trump supporters were struggling to find good things to say afterwards in post-debate discussion coverage (at best they could temper Harris' performance).

Is that why Harris wants another one now? 

 

[rmgill]

7 minutes ago, 17thfabn said:

I watched 90% of the debate.

I'll give you Trump was goofy at times. It didn't look like dementia to me. I have plenty of experience dealing with dementia, both professionally and with family. It looked like "Typical goofy Trump" behavior. He wasn't full blown "goofy Trump", he toned it down some. 

He's gonna beat that drum now that Biden is off the table. He was defending Biden as being competent and reasonable off and on for the past year, I found the posts, but now it's all memory-holed as far as he's concerned. Never mind that Biden is STILL president. 

[DKTanker]

1 hour ago, Skywalkre said:

Did he?  His inability to say he wants Ukraine to win was painful to watch. 

In the context of this particular war, define what is a win for Ukraine.  Trick question, it is purposely undefinable.  And it is from that perspective Trump should have answered the question.  The objective is not to win, as Zelinski so adroitly pointed out, it is for everyone to make money.  Alas, while Trump was on the right path about this being a war of needless death, he just isn't smart enough to connect all the Military Industrial Complex dots.