2024 POTUS ELECTON

[hector]

Trump declared himself the leader in fertilization.....THE LEADER!!!!

I didn’t watch the debates, but this sounds amazing.

I want to laugh and cry and not give a fuck all at once.

[Philbert]

I am ok with that, this is what leaving the door wide open has led us all to.

It would have been really great if Trump didn't kill the bipartisan legislation that would have given the President broad authority to 'close' the border and deport illegal immigrants. Even asylum seekers.

Voters voting concerned about the border are a joke.

FTFY. The choices are A: party which cynically treats border security as purely an issue with which to win elections, and B: party which treats border security as a non-issue, except when losing an election, at which point they convert to A. Entirely missing from this is C: anyone actually trying to solve border security issues.

[aurelius]

I am ok with that, this is what leaving the door wide open has led us all to.

It would have been really great if Trump didn't kill the bipartisan legislation that would have given the President broad authority to 'close' the border and deport illegal immigrants. Even asylum seekers.

Voters voting concerned about the border are a joke.

FTFY. The choices are A: party which cynically treats border security as purely an issue with which to win elections, and B: party which treats border security as a non-issue, except when losing an election, at which point they convert to A. Entirely missing from this is C: anyone actually trying to solve border security issues.

Except that the political stars aligned to make a workable deal that would have done some good. And one party killed it at the request of their Presidential candidate.

People need to stop making false equivalence arguments.

[Hardartery]

I'm waiting for the Grandpa Simpson/Trump memes. That could be epic. Just here for the comedy.

[Philbert]

I am ok with that, this is what leaving the door wide open has led us all to.

It would have been really great if Trump didn't kill the bipartisan legislation that would have given the President broad authority to 'close' the border and deport illegal immigrants. Even asylum seekers.

Voters voting concerned about the border are a joke.

FTFY. The choices are A: party which cynically treats border security as purely an issue with which to win elections, and B: party which treats border security as a non-issue, except when losing an election, at which point they convert to A. Entirely missing from this is C: anyone actually trying to solve border security issues.

Except that the political stars aligned to make a workable deal that would have done some good. And one party killed it at the request of their Presidential candidate.

People need to stop making false equivalence arguments.

You're right. 3.5 years of actively fouling up the border while pretending to be helpless about it is worse than killing one bill. They are not equivalent, but they are both so hopelessly evil (each in their own special ways) wrt this issue that it is effectively a non-issue for this election, even though many people think it is.

[aurelius]

I am ok with that, this is what leaving the door wide open has led us all to.

It would have been really great if Trump didn't kill the bipartisan legislation that would have given the President broad authority to 'close' the border and deport illegal immigrants. Even asylum seekers.

Voters voting concerned about the border are a joke.

FTFY. The choices are A: party which cynically treats border security as purely an issue with which to win elections, and B: party which treats border security as a non-issue, except when losing an election, at which point they convert to A. Entirely missing from this is C: anyone actually trying to solve border security issues.

Except that the political stars aligned to make a workable deal that would have done some good. And one party killed it at the request of their Presidential candidate.

People need to stop making false equivalence arguments.

You're right. 3.5 years of actively fouling up the border while pretending to be helpless about it is worse than killing one bill. They are not equivalent, but they are both so hopelessly evil (each in their own special ways) wrt this issue that it is effectively a non-issue for this election, even though many people think it is.

This is ignorant. Biden continued Trump's border policies for about a year until SCOTUS ruled Biden did not have the authority per the law as the epidemic ended (immigrant right groups sued the admin). SCOTUS stated without emergency powers the law does not give the President the authority to close the border or limit immigration. Senate Republicans and Democrats spent about a year hammering out a new immigration law to give the President that authority. Trump told the Republicans to kill it so idiots would vote for him in 2024.

If elected, Trump will be unable to do anything about the border either as the effective law doesn't give the President authority to do so.

This both sides stuff is old and flat out wrong. There is one group wantonly spreading lies, intentionally creating division, killing legislation that will help, and feeding people's hate. That is Republicans.

[Philbert]

I am ok with that, this is what leaving the door wide open has led us all to.

It would have been really great if Trump didn't kill the bipartisan legislation that would have given the President broad authority to 'close' the border and deport illegal immigrants. Even asylum seekers.

Voters voting concerned about the border are a joke.

FTFY. The choices are A: party which cynically treats border security as purely an issue with which to win elections, and B: party which treats border security as a non-issue, except when losing an election, at which point they convert to A. Entirely missing from this is C: anyone actually trying to solve border security issues.

Except that the political stars aligned to make a workable deal that would have done some good. And one party killed it at the request of their Presidential candidate.

People need to stop making false equivalence arguments.

You're right. 3.5 years of actively fouling up the border while pretending to be helpless about it is worse than killing one bill. They are not equivalent, but they are both so hopelessly evil (each in their own special ways) wrt this issue that it is effectively a non-issue for this election, even though many people think it is.

This is ignorant. Biden continued Trump's border policies for about a year until SCOTUS ruled Biden did not have the authority per the law as the epidemic ended (immigrant right groups sued the admin). SCOTUS stated without emergency powers the law does not give the President the authority to close the border or limit immigration. Senate Republicans and Democrats spent about a year hammering out a new immigration law to give the President that authority. Trump told the Republicans to kill it so idiots would vote for him in 2024.

If elected, Trump will be unable to do anything about the border either as the effective law doesn't give the President authority to do so.

This both sides stuff is old and flat out wrong. There is one group wantonly spreading lies, intentionally creating division, killing legislation that will help, and feeding people's hate. That is Republicans.

I was ready to apologize for posting ignorance, but I did a 15 second review of page one Google results on Bidens executive orders on the border first.
https://cmsny.org/biden-harris-immigrat ... e-actions/
These are not dated a year after taking office

and the order he had no authority to give
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white- ... rcna155426

Not saying republicans as a party aren't vile (promoting unverified pet eating stories is a prime example) but to rephrase: If a voter is single issue (leaving aside how silly that would be in itself) for border security, they have no one to vote for in this election.

[aurelius]

Not saying republicans as a party aren't vile (promoting unverified pet eating stories is a prime example) but to rephrase: If a voter is single issue (leaving aside how silly that would be in itself) for border security, they have no one to vote for in this election.

thanks for posting that. I was referring to title 42 but your post paints a more complete picture that Biden has relaxed border standards. Which I do find puzzling. Only the far left would support that action. I guess both parties are hostage to their extremes. How does the majority in the middle regain control of the US political system?

[SaviorSelf]

How does the majority in the middle regain control of the US political system?

Ranked choice voting instead of single choice voting, apparantly. People much smarter than I say that the current situation is a mathematical side effect of how our current voting system is. (Current situation being a two party system where each party isn't very representative of anyone)

[mikeylikey]

How does the majority in the middle regain control of the US political system?

Ranked choice voting instead of single choice voting, apparantly. People much smarter than I say that the current situation is a mathematical side effect of how our current voting system is. (Current situation being a two party system where each party isn't very representative of anyone)

tl/dr: Ranked choice voting solves some of the problems of first-past-the-post, but introduces others. The proposed solution is a weighted choice system, where voters give each candidate a score from 1 to 10, the scores area averaged and the winner is the candidate with the highest score.


First-past-the-post voting has one major strength to it that would seem especially relevant in our current times: it is easy to publish and audit the results. 1 man 1 vote. You add up the votes for each candidate, you should have the total votes. And you can do this for each precinct, county, district, and state, and publish everything online, so that concerned citizens and journalists can subject the results to everything from simple smell test to complicated statistical analysis to look for anomalies.

Ranked choice voting is more mathematically satisfying, but with n candidates there are n factorial ballot permutations, which means publishing the results of the election in a way that is easily digestible and verifiable by the average concerned citizen is all but impossible. That seems like an issue we are not going to handle well at the current time.

[mikeylikey]

https://www.mediaite.com/politics/trump ... e-shot-at/

“He believed the rhetoric of Biden and Harris, and he acted on it,” Trump said, claiming, “Their rhetoric is causing me to be shot at, when I am the one who is going to save the country, and they are the ones that are destroying the country — both from the inside and out.”

“It is called the enemy from within. They are the real threat,” Trump added, appearing to use the exact same kind of language he claims the Democrats are using that inspired the shootings.

This whole election is just bizarre.

[aurelius]

This whole election is just bizarre.

Which ignores that Trump and conservatives have been using violent and apocalyptic rhetoric since the Obama administration. The only thing I have enjoyed about this election is Harris making an effort to dial down the rhetoric.

Responding to the message of Musk's tweet: there was an assassination attempt against Biden in 2023. There were two documented attempts on Trump's life while he was President. Every President going back to Kennedy has had a documented assassination attempt (or assassination in the case of Kennedy).

As a private citizen, Trump engages in riskier public outings like open air rallies and unplanned public appearances. In this case it appears someone tried to snipe Trump at his golf course (was spotted before the attempt was made). Apparently, golf courses are a nightmare for SS to provide security. As a sitting President his security is essentially ironclad and Biden has less control over his movements (no unplanned public appearances).

[mbasic]

I think Trump's toxic personality and ego is going to attract more of the mentally-ill-assassin-types ....or more assassins in general thinking killing him is doing an act of the Greater Good or whatever? I know it seems all these assassins (lone actors) are a bit crazy.

Like you might disagree with Kamala, Biden, Obama on things like gun control or abortion rights ....I can see a crazy person trying to kill on of those mentioned in that same For the Greater Good mentality. But goddamned Trump is such as asshole about the policies/issues he advocates for. Its like he invites these weirdos .... as he takes on this super-villian** persona of sorts (that the crazy person actually wants to see, to justify their actions).

**(Some of left get a little this way about 2a and abortion during their democratic primaries: almost wide eyed crazy sayin' "we gonna take all your guns" ....but then tone it down later)

------------------------

Every (sitting) President going back to Kennedy has had a documented assassination attempt (or assassination in the case of Kennedy).

But has only a candidate has been targetted this much? I know Trump is in a weird situation being an EXpresident and one of candidates for the upcoming election at the same time?

[weisgarber]

But has only a candidate has been targetted this much? I know Trump is in a weird situation being an EXpresident and one of candidates for the upcoming election at the same time?

He's more than just a candidate. He's an ex-president, he has multiple convictions, and he's in the news daily. He's a bigger deal than most presidents. Which is more exciting, going after a boring politician that most people don't really like, or a huuuge celebrity who's everywhere that many people, for reasons I've still been unable to figure out, worship like some kind of messiah?

And he's convenient. Most high-level politicians do whatever interaction with the public that they need to get elected or remain in power, and that's about it. They don't really want to interact with the plebes any more than they have to, and more importantly, they want to remain safe. Trump craves the attention and cannot survive without it. He's constantly putting himself in dangerous situations that make him an easier target.

When news of the last attempt surfaced, one conspiracy that appeared almost immediately was "How did the gunman know he'd be going golfing? Who is the mole?" Then we learned the gunman was waiting at least 12 hours. He didn't have inside knowledge; he just figured if he waited a while Trump would probably just show up.

[mbasic]

On one hand, if Trump does happen to get into office, there will be even more desire to off him.
On the other hand, security would even be more ramped up then (one would think, but in practice is hard to do).
Then again, maybe as we get closer to voting-day, the desire by the crazies to off him exponentially increases due to the
fact once he IS in office, its going to be hard to do it then....so better opportunities now?

If trump get assassinated, I will be very indifferent about it TBQH about his actual death.
More worried about the far right will go ape-shit, which is a sad thing to be worried about.

It would be ironic if in the aftermath of all that^ ....is 'that' what successfully spawns a bunch of anti-2a/gun control/assault-weapons bans/etc.

fucken country sux dix

[mikeylikey]

Which ignores that Trump and conservatives have been using violent and apocalyptic rhetoric since the Obama administration. The only thing I have enjoyed about this election is Harris making an effort to dial down the rhetoric.

That analogy doesn't really hold.

There was plenty of "Obama is going to End America" rhetoric but it wasn't coming from the mainstream party leadership, it was coming from pundits and bloggers. McCain, Romney, Boener, Ryan and the GOP aparatus in general maintained a posture that Obama was legitimate and simply wrong on policy. I won't say the GOP didn't cynically triangulate to try and benefit from the birthers and cooks while keepint their hands ostensibly clean, but they didn't directly promote that rhetoric during Obama's tenure.

Contrast that with now, when you have the apocalypicic rhetoric coming from people at the very top of the DNC (Biden, Harris, et al). Not just tacit encouragement, it's now the direct and unambiguous party line. This is qualitatively different than what Obama dealt with.

I'm not contesting here whether or not Trump is in fact Uniquely Evil, just pointing out that I think we are in uncharted territory wrt the rhetoric and comparing it to what Rush Limbaugh said about Obama misses that.

He's more than just a candidate. He's an ex-president, he has multiple convictions, and he's in the news daily. He's a bigger deal than most presidents. Which is more exciting, going after a boring politician that most people don't really like, or a huuuge celebrity who's everywhere that many people, for reasons I've still been unable to figure out, worship like some kind of messiah?

For what its worth, based on what we know at this point the two attempts on Trump don't seem to be proximately related to the "Trump Uniquely Evil" rhetoric so much as just a couple of nuts who wanted to feel like God by killing and important guy.

[aurelius]

There was plenty of "Obama is going to End America" rhetoric but it wasn't coming from the mainstream party leadership, it was coming from pundits and bloggers. McCain, Romney, Boener, Ryan and the GOP aparatus in general maintained a posture that Obama was legitimate and simply wrong on policy. I won't say the GOP didn't cynically triangulate to try and benefit from the birthers and cooks while keepint their hands ostensibly clean, but they didn't directly promote that rhetoric during Obama's tenure.

Contrast that with now, when you have the apocalypicic rhetoric coming from people at the very top of the DNC (Biden, Harris, et al). Not just tacit encouragement, it's now the direct and unambiguous party line. This is qualitatively different than what Obama dealt with.

I'm not contesting here whether or not Trump is in fact Uniquely Evil, just pointing out that I think we are in uncharted territory wrt the rhetoric and comparing it to what Rush Limbaugh said about Obama misses that.

I agree the rhetoric has gotten progressively worse. The turning point for me that started the current era of politics in the US was when Obama was elected. Continuing that decline: any decorum in politics essentially ending with Trump's campaign in 2016. The Clinton campaign largely just painted him as a joke. I don't hear out of the Harris campaign the apocalyptic language as much or at least a real attempt to dial it down. I do hear it out of the Trump campaign as essentially his only message to his base. Trump messages the 'end of the country' and 'WW3' if Harris is elected. This is not new language for MAGA but essentially its only coherent principal: we have to be in charge or we will burn it all down around us.

The rhetoric surrounding Trump as the end of US democracy started occurring toward the end of his Presidency. Seeing his role in attempting the stop the peaceful transfer of power after losing the 2020 election and the Project 2025, I don't think the rhetoric is that far off base. Trump does aspire to be an autocrat. If Trump wins in 2024, what does the 2028 election look like? Is there even a free election? Republican controlled states are already suppressing the vote. Including using policing power to intimidate groups that do not vote the way Republicans want (look at what Florida and Texas are doing). I believe what happens if Trump is reelected to US democracy is a legitimate question to ask.

[JonA]

The rhetoric surrounding Trump as the end of US democracy started occurring toward the end of his Presidency. Seeing his role in attempting the stop the peaceful transfer of power after losing the 2020 election and the Project 2025, I don't think the rhetoric is that far off base. Trump does aspire to be an autocrat. If Trump wins in 2024, what does the 2028 election look like? Is there even a free election? Republican controlled states are already suppressing the vote. Including using policing power to intimidate groups that do not vote the way Republicans want (look at what Florida and Texas are doing). I believe what happens if Trump is reelected to US democracy is a legitimate question to ask.

Coming from this viewpoint, I can see why you think Harris's rhetoric is "dialing it down"

[BostonRugger]

I don't think Routh tried to shoot Trump because of Democrat rhetoric. I think he did it because he's fanatical about Ukraine and a bit touched, whether from mental illness, long-term drug abuse, or a combination of the two.

Source: I saw some pictures of him on the internet

[aurelius]

Source: I saw some pictures of him on the internet

He did not do his Fives.