Elections What's your final prediction in who wins in the US 2024 election?

[fedorthegoat777]

There have been Republicans ruined by scandal too. Its not new.

All your points are basically reducing everything to "My side good guys..other side bad guys". Your side watches better news. They're less biased, etc. Its all bullshit that you don't notice because you're so deep in the tank.

The fact that you're arguing the access hollywood tape would have killed a Democrat is laughable. Even 30 years ago Bill Clinton was shoving cigars up a young white house aids vag, and he cruised to easy re-election. That was literally in office, not decades earlier.

Actually I think he was shoving the cigars in her stink hole.

 

[Bob Gray]

Actually I think he was shoving the cigars in her stink hole.

 

[MLarson]

I think it's insane as you wrote it, but maybe you think like lowering the income threshold for Medicaid counts as destroying America or something so I'd like to see something more concrete.

Come on now she won't get anything substantial done in office. I get people don't want Trump back in but they could have gotten some better then her.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Come on now she won't get anything substantial done in office. I get people don't want Trump back in but they could have gotten some better then her.

You said our country is done if she wins! That's very different from saying we won't see big changes. The former sounds really bad (but too vague to grasp); the latter sounds OK.

Trump only got one major piece of legislation done last time (huge, deficit-financed tax cut for rich people and corporations), and he put a bunch of theocrats in the courts. I think there’s more danger in a second term, especially given how he left last time. Plus, deficits were too low in 2016, as we were demand-constrained. We're supply-constrained now so the policies he's talking about or even an extension of his cuts would be far more damaging. Just by not exploding the debt, Harris would be doing a lot better. Her housing plan would also address the biggest problem facing a lot of the country. If you're not a mega rich individual or a theocrat (or someone who wants to scrap the Constitution and democratic gov't), what's the case for Trump?

 

[Bob Gray]

OK, but that's still very unusual. I don't think there's any evidence to support your assertion that Democrats would be equally dismissive of similar transgressions against taste, decency, and law, and there is a lot of evidence against it. If you think it's just human nature, you should reconsider.

Come on.

I'll give you a an example. You and lots of other left leaning base voters hang your hat on Trumps civil trial against E. Jean Carrol. A 30 year old accusation with no evidence to support it from someone who's dependability is sketchy at best.

Biden also had a decades old accusation with no evidence to support it from some whos dependability is sketchy at best. Nevertheless, you'll hang your hat on "what a jury said" while ignoring the fact that the evidence supporting the accusation is non-existent, and you'll defend Biden from the same accusation by bringing up the fact that the accusation is not supported by evidence.

Two very similar accusations, but you treat one as probable, if not outright accepting it, while dismissing the other.

I don't know what "come on" means. Have you ever voted not democrat?

 

[Jack V Savage]

I'll give you a an example. You and lots of other left leaning base voters hang your hat on Trumps civil trial against E. Jean Carrol. A 30 year old accusation with no evidence to support it from someone who's dependability is sketchy at best.

Biden also had a decades old accusation with no evidence to support it from some whos dependability is sketchy at best. Nevertheless, you'll hang your hat on "what a jury said" while ignoring the fact that the evidence supporting the accusation is non-existent, and you'll defend Biden from the same accusation by bringing up the fact that the accusation is not supported by evidence.

What post are you referring to? I would encourage you to try to understand that not all people who you identify as being on the left agree about every issue.

I don't really care to litigate Trump's case. I assume the process works pretty well, and the conclusion that people who looked much more closely at the evidence than I did was that it was more likely than not that he did what he was accused of. I think Trump's moral unfitness was established long before that case, and I haven't even referred to it in this discussion (and rarely in any discussion).

Two very similar accusations, but you treat one as probable, if not outright accepting it, while dismissing the other.

One was found to have been more likely than not to be true in court, and the other fell apart completely. I don't think any honest person would judge them equally likely.

I don't know what "come on" means. Have you ever voted not democrat?

Yes. "Come on" means knock it off. There's no point in playing games. You were in another thread advancing the "biased moderator" thing, which to me is beyond just "has conservative ideological or policy preferences" and into "partisan freak" territory.

 

[Bob Gray]

What post are you referring to? I would encourage you to try to understand that not all people who you identify as being on the left agree about every issue.

I don't really care to litigate Trump's case. I assume the process works pretty well, and the conclusion that people who looked much more closely at the evidence than I did was that it was more likely than not that he did what he was accused of. I think Trump's moral unfitness was established long before that case, and I haven't even referred to it in this discussion (and rarely in any discussion).

One was found to have been more likely than not to be true in court, and the other fell apart completely. I don't think any honest person would judge them equally likely.

Yes. "Come on" means knock it off. There's no point in playing games. You were in another thread advancing the "biased moderator" thing, which to me is beyond just "has conservative ideological or policy preferences" and into "partisan freak" territory.

Your posts that said he probably did it.

Heres the thing. If there were an overwhelming amount of evidence that supported the accusation, yet the jury found him not liable, then you'd have an issue with the verdict, as you should. But, on the inverse, if there is not enough evidence and a jury finds him liable, you should also have a problem with that. And you don't. Thats part of my point. You're completely fine with just saying "Well, the system works. The jury said it" only because it falls in line with your political motivation, rather than because the verdict itself was a good one. This isn't a situation where you'll actually argue the merits of the case, because it has none. But it's politically convenient to accept it despite the fact that neither you nor anyone else can actually bring up a coherent narrative as to why the jury should have found him liable.

Like I said, if there were overwhelming evidence supporting the accusation and yet he was not found liable, you'd have a big problem with the verdict, so appealing to the verdict itself is meaningless. But I think I'd be consistent and say "Man, that's fucked up".

What "biased moderator" thing are you talking about?

I noticed you didn't the answer the question. I'd say it's very likely you've never voted anything other than democrat. And you're gonna vote democrat in 2028, 2032 and 2036, and likely a long time after. But you're sure that it's other people that are the "biased".

 

[Jack V Savage]

Your posts that said he probably did it.

That's "hanging my hat on it"?

Heres the thing. If there were an overwhelming amount of evidence that supported the accusation, yet the jury found him not liable, then you'd have an issue with the verdict, as you should.

This is a circular argument. Your evidence that your baseless allegations are true is your belief that if they were tested, they'd prove to be true.

What "biased moderator" thing are you talking about?

That the ABC moderators were biased against Trump because they corrected egregiously false factual claims and didn't try to argue with Harris about less clear matters.

I noticed you didn't the answer the question.

It was a yes/no question, and I said yes. What more do you want? Your claim that I'm just your mirror image in terms of partisanship suggests an unfamiliarity with me as an individual and a belief that all people who don't blindly agree with Republican talking points are the same.

 

[I Am Legion]

As much as I think Harris has this, each interview she does off the cuff shows what a zero she is. Word salad every day. They are better with the game plan of keeping her mouth shut unless rehearsed. Rehearsed she has a shot. Unrehearsed with no notes or teleprompter she is a Deer in headlights.

Someone just pulls her string and she shits out of her mouth.

 

[Streeter]

Kamala s shine is already fading and fading faster by day.. her only shot is due to Trump factor- any other csnidate (excluding Vivek) this wouldn't even be a race. Everyone voting for Kamala is just voting agsinst Trump. Folks voting for Trump at least are for most part voting for his policies.

 

[Takes Two To Tango]

This is close af. lol

 

[Takes Two To Tango]

Kamala s shine is already fading and fading faster by day.. her only shot is due to Trump factor- any other csnidate (excluding Vivek) this wouldn't even be a race. Everyone voting for Kamala is just voting agsinst Trump. Folks voting for Trump at least are for most part voting for his policies.

You think it's over for her?

 

[Gotosleepho]

I'm rooting for the underdog in this election Donald Trump.

 

[JudoThrowFiasco]

Leaning Trump. Not sure if we have enough data for a trend line but we know he over performs in a GE compared to polling and modeling and it looks like Harris won't have a big enough lead using those metrics.

 

[Streeter]

You think it's over for her?

Over ? It's never over with Trump as Trump when he senses any of his own forward momentum always shoots himself in the foot. My oointvia Ksmalas no longer a shiny new toy and as that fades folks are realizing she's totally out of her depth. Like posted on here earlier she's a "Post Turtle " the truea definition of one.

Anyone voting Kamala is just voting againat Trump and not for anything. I believe that's starting to resonate. Only way Trump loses is if he goes into his triggered mode n goes off rails over so thing dumb ...... which could happen n Kamala might swing it. As stands Kanala is going to lose. Wisconsin an Nevada seem to be trending blue e ery other swing red.

The woman has no policy or plan , her only answer to tough questions is a robotic " i was raised in a middle class family " . Which really isn't even true both her parents were professors lol. She's a total mess. Give her more than 20 min in an interview and she's a disaster. She gets elected she's 100% puppet even more than Biden.

If I could get equal odds I would bet a good amount on Trump an juat hope he shuts up.

 

[Takes Two To Tango]

Over ? It's never over with Trump as Trump when he senses any of his own forward momentum always shoots himself in the foot. My oointvia Ksmalas no longer a shiny new toy and as that fades folks are realizing she's totally out of her depth. Like posted on here earlier she's a "Post Turtle " the truea definition of one.

Anyone voting Kamala is just voting againat Trump and not for anything. I believe that's starting to resonate. Only way Trump loses is if he goes into his triggered mode n goes off rails over so thing dumb ...... which could happen n Kamala might swing it. As stands Kanala is going to lose. Wisconsin an Nevada seem to be trending blue e ery other swing red.

The woman has no policy or plan , her only answer to tough questions is a robotic " i was raised in a middle class family " . Which really isn't even true both her parents were professors lol. She's a total mess. Give her more than 20 min in an interview and she's a disaster. She gets elected she's 100% puppet even more than Biden.

If I could get equal odds I would bet a good amount on Trump an juat hope he shuts up.

Very well said, thanks.

 

[Helden]

Over ? It's never over with Trump as Trump when he senses any of his own forward momentum always shoots himself in the foot. My oointvia Ksmalas no longer a shiny new toy and as that fades folks are realizing she's totally out of her depth. Like posted on here earlier she's a "Post Turtle " the truea definition of one.

Anyone voting Kamala is just voting againat Trump and not for anything. I believe that's starting to resonate. Only way Trump loses is if he goes into his triggered mode n goes off rails over so thing dumb ...... which could happen n Kamala might swing it. As stands Kanala is going to lose. Wisconsin an Nevada seem to be trending blue e ery other swing red.

The woman has no policy or plan , her only answer to tough questions is a robotic " i was raised in a middle class family " . Which really isn't even true both her parents were professors lol. She's a total mess. Give her more than 20 min in an interview and she's a disaster. She gets elected she's 100% puppet even more than Biden.

If I could get equal odds I would bet a good amount on Trump an juat hope he shuts up.

Lol, I love the "she has no policy" line coming from the "we are gonna have numbers, look, the numbers we are talking about, nobody has heard of numbers like that" - concept of a policy clown

 

[cheesus]

Kamala wins. Trump can't help but continually put his foot in his mouth. Would be hilarious to see Trump win though, endless entertainment for another term.

 

[Lycandroid]

Harris wins, Democrats got this in the bag no matter how many people vote the other way, fixing democracy by scrapping it entirely.

 

[Fedor>Cain]

Yeah, bases are always rock solid. Thats why theyre called bases. Harris can answer every single question with "Well....my mother was a working class woman and we both believed in values and equality..." and her base still pulls the lever for her. What's your point?

I swear, people act like it's only the "other side" with voters that are voting for them no matter what.

People aren't acting like that. You just refuse to look at anything objectively or with nuance.

While there is some truth to what you are saying, you can just look at D's vs R's with Biden and Trump.

Biden looked senile on national TV in his debate and he got booted off the ticket. Trump sounded senile and said all sorts of crazy shit in the Kamala debate and it barely moved the needle.

You're really telling me that there is no difference between D's and R's with unwaivering support from their bases?

...and that's just one concrete example