US Presidential Election 2024

[Knuttell]

They've elected a lot of uninspiring 'Kings' over the years.
Were people all that inspired by Biden?
Or either Bush?
Nixon?

Its more a matter of substance, with kamala, you get the sense there is just nothing there, a potemkin village sitting in an arctic wasteland.

They finally got round to policy and have in last 48 hours cobbled together a policy document just in time for the debate.

She's only had years to formulate these and yet tumbleweed when questioned on them recently. She should have been biting at the bit to showcase and discuss them.

Harris campaign lists policies on eve of debate after criticism of vagueness

Campaign posts positions on economy, ‘fundamental freedoms’, safety and crime, and national security

www.theguardian.com

 

[odyssey06]

...

Its more a matter of substance, with kamala, you get the sense there is just nothing there, a potemkin village sitting in an arctic wasteland.

They finally got round to policy and have in last 48 hours cobbled together a policy document just in time for the debate.

She's only had years to formulate these and yet tumbleweed when questioned on them recently. She should have been biting at the bit to showcase and discuss them.

Harris campaign lists policies on eve of debate after criticism of vagueness

Campaign posts positions on economy, ‘fundamental freedoms’, safety and crime, and national security

www.theguardian.com

Really? So do you think Hilary Clinton should have won in 2016 because she had an extremely detailed policy plan worked out well in advance, and would have made a better President than Harris or Biden?

Does a VP spend their time formulating policy in case they have to step into the breach?
She's not a dictator, unlike how Trump seems to want to conduct himself, she is the head of the Democratic party which already has many policy positions.

Harris already announced her big ticket tax plans last month.
This puts clear blue water between her and Trump.
What policy areas are you concerned about that she hasn't covered, and that are within the scope of a US President given how dependent they are on getting things passed by Congress?

In my recollection, Presidents are usually defined \ judge on how they respond to unfolding events, rather than a detailed policy manifesto.
When elected, they have the political capital to push a champion a few major initiatives through Congress, and then they are up against the usual political dynamics, mid-terms etc.

 

[Knuttell]

Does a VP spend their time formulating policy in case they have to step into the breach?

It was clear for some time Biden was not a well man and was getting progressively worse with dementia.

Reckon it be good thing to have a few policies or positions ready to trot for when the inevitable happened.

I know if it were me I'd definitely have had something I could talk to when pressed on the matter, beats running your mouth on the old word salad setting

 

[Sophrosyne]

I agree that Kamala Harris is not the best at putting her case and is currently not the most charismatic, though she might grow into the role.

Donald Trump and his running mate are actively alienating many voter groups.

But in the end, it will come down to trust and which candidate is considered the more responsible.

The Harris campaign still maintains that she is the underdog – a strategy to motivate Democratic voters.

According to US media, it all depends on who wins Pennsylvania, though it is possible for either to win without that State.

A conservative estimate from CNN gives Harris 175 electoral college votes + 50 from States leaning towards the Democrats, which means she needs 45 more to reach 270.

It gives Trump 188 electoral college votes and 31 leans, leaving 51 more to reach 270.

There are 94 EC votes up for grabs in the battleground States.

Pennsylvania 19

Georgia 16

North Carolina 16

Michigan 15

Arizona 11

Wisconsin 10

Nevada 6

Nebraska 1

At the moment, it is all in the lap of the gods.

 

[Ceist Beag]

He actually went with "they're eating your pets"! Worse than deranged.

 

[Sophrosyne]

Despite certain fudges, Harris performed better than expected.

It all went wrong for Trump, who was doing reasonably well until she commented about his rally crowds. After that blow to his ego, he reverted to his usual gibberish.

She knew what she was doing.

 

[Leo]

She knew what she was doing.

And he should have known it was coming, coverage in advance of the debate from her camp said that's exactly what they were going to do.

 

[Sophrosyne]

And he should have known it was coming, coverage in advance of the debate from her camp said that's exactly what they were going to do.

Doubtless!

I'm sure his team briefed him and advised him to stay on track.

But he cannot help himself. He is a narcissist.

Any hint of criticism releases the extraordinary vitriol we witnessed last night.

 

[odyssey06]

Even the Fox News panel thought Harris won it by 2:1

But then I've seen other polls, and it helped 4% of people for decide who to vote for.
Even after watching that debate.

4% might be all that Harris needs to get over the line.

But it really it desperate that there's about 40% - 45% that seemingly will vote for Trump no matter what.

I am optimistic that current polling aren't picking up new voters, the sort influenced by Taylor Swift and anti Trump 'soft power' like The Daily Show, who will skew overwhelmingly Democrat.

Fox News Voter Panel Overwhelmingly Call Debate for Kamala Harris: ‘Trump Was So Bad’

A Fox News voter panel called Tuesday’s presidential election debate for Harris, blasting Trump for his apparent lack of strategy.

www.mediaite.com

 

[Sophrosyne]

But it really it desperate that there's about 40% - 45% that seemingly will vote for Trump no matter what.

"You can fool some of the people all of the time".

 

[odyssey06]

"You can fool some of the people all of the time".

True, I just wasn't expecting the 'some' of the people to be 40% or so.

 

[Purple]

Its more a matter of substance, with kamala, you get the sense there is just nothing there, a potemkin village sitting in an arctic wasteland.

That's quite as apt comparison since the Potemkin Village stories were a myth made up to discredit Potemkin and Catherine the Great. While her trip to Crimea (part of what was the new Governate of Novorossiya) was lavish and Potemkin spent vast amounts of money in fireworks, shows and painting towns and villages along the route the stories of fake villages are just that, stories.
In Kamila Harris's case the policies were there but they certainly needed to be polished up and presented better so, a very suitable comparison indeed.

 

[Purple]

True, I just wasn't expecting the 'some' of the people to be 40% or so.

The level of waste, corruption, bureaucracy and red tape in the US is staggering. It is that, to a great extent, that many Trump voters are voting against.

 

[odyssey06]

The level of waste, corruption, bureaucracy and red tape in the US is staggering. It is that, to a great extent, that many Trump voters are voting against.

They are deluded then. The only place Trump wants to 'drain the swamp' is into his own bank accounts.
He has nothing against corruption and waste and grifting as long as he gets a piece of the action.
His family are involved in some very suspect financial dealings with Middle East and Russia.
He was charging the government accomodation at luxury hotel rates for his Secret Service protection staff.

 

[Purple]

They are deluded then. The only place Trump wants to 'drain the swamp' is into his own bank accounts.
He has nothing against corruption and waste and grifting as long as he gets a piece of the action.
His family are involved in some very suspect financial dealings with Middle East and Russia.
He was charging the government accomodation at luxury hotel rates for his Secret Service protection staff.

I agree. The Manhattan Real Estate sector is probably as corrupt and skewed and political as anything in America. Trump is a poster child for corruption, he's the personification of the so-called swamp.

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

The debate didn't shift the betting needle very much though it has switched to Kamala being marginal favourite.

I really enjoyed the debate especially the very biased anti Trump (pro truth) interventions of the ABC presenters.

 

[thedaddyman]

The debate didn't shift the betting needle very much though it has switched to Kamala being marginal favourite.
View attachment 9320
I really enjoyed the debate especially the very biased anti Trump (pro truth) interventions of the ABC presenters.

Interesting reading the Fox news coverage afterwards. Admitting Harris won but claiming the presenters ganged up on Trump and it doesn't really matter anyway. All of which may be true but Trump is on the defensive at the minute

 

[odyssey06]

Harris is ahead on points but no knockout blow yet - incredibly, Trump is like Teflon for stuff that would kill any other candidate's campaign.
As things stand I think she will win but there's still time for surprises and events in the remaining weeks of the campaign.

 

[Purple]

Harris is ahead on points but no knockout blow yet - incredibly, Trump is like Teflon for stuff that would kill any other candidate's campaign.
As things stand I think she will win but there's still time for surprises and events in the remaining weeks of the campaign.

Trump is like a religion and, like a religion, those who believe will continue to do so no matter how many of its "facts" are shown to be false, no matter how much of its rhetoric is shown to be self serving hypocrisy and no matter what horrendous behaviour about it is unearthed.

Supporters will say that it is the message that they subscribe to and the message is what matters, no matter how contemptable the messenger may be.

 

[TRS30]

IMO it's not even a proper functioning democracy. Between gerrymandering and use of the electoral college system, the candidate with the least votes can win!
While I don't believe either SPTP or PR is perfect, their system is neither and leads to nothing of significance getting done if one party is determine to stop anything being achieved as it is a perceived 'win' for the other side.