US Presidential Election 2024 - Trump vs Harris - Vote Hard with a Vengence

[Remius]

Toronto Star predicts a Trump win for three reasons...


Reason one: neck-and-neck national polling means advantage Trump.

Reason two: Pennsylvania.

Third, the Trump formula has worked.

Jaime Watt: Donald Trump is going to win the 2024 U.S. presidential election. Here are three reasons why

Commentators who have assumed that the stain and chaos of Trump’s first term would disqualify him from the Oval Office a second time are fundamentally mistaken. The damage he has

www.thestar.com

Those are all strong reasons to make that prediction.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Reason one: neck-and-neck national polling means advantage Trump.

Some optimists posit that pollsters have corrected for bias. They would almost all have to have figured out how to do this - at approximately the same time - since 2022, despite a problem (D+ polling bias) that predates 2016, in order to produce the aggregate results reported by analysts.

Third, the Trump formula has worked.

Surveys have repeatedly stressed the same set of top-of-mind issues. All Trump did was take respondents at their word rather than try to elevate issues lower on the lists. The "formula" is the same one our own politicians routinely follow; it's not his.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Trump has already been found liable in civil court for rape;

Missed that earlier. Is that the Carroll case? In that one, the jury said "no" to rape, and "yes" to sexual abuse. Doesn't make it a lot better, but to many people that's a substantial difference.

 

[dimsum]

Missed that earlier. Is that the Carroll case? In that one, the jury said "no" to rape, and "yes" to sexual abuse. Doesn't make it a lot better, but to many people that's a substantial difference.

I mean, “sexual abuse” scandal would also have sunk a POTUS candidate until 2016…


Also, the Trump team has started the lawsuits already. I suspect they will be as successful as the last time.

Trump Files First Election Lawsuit in Chilling Sign of What’s to Come

The election fraud lawsuits have started again.

newrepublic.com

 

[brihard]

Missed that earlier. Is that the Carroll case? In that one, the jury said "no" to rape, and "yes" to sexual abuse. Doesn't make it a lot better, but to many people that's a substantial difference.

I’m using the Judge’s description, just to clarify that.

Donald Trump raped E. Jean Carroll even though he was found liable only for 'sexual abuse,' judge rules

The jury didn't find Trump "raped" Carroll only because of a quirk in New York state law, according to the judge who oversaw the trial.

www.businessinsider.com

 

[dimsum]

Trump talks about reporters being shot and says he shouldn't have left White House after 2020 loss

Donald Trump is asking voters in Pennsylvania again to make him leader of a “failed nation." Kamala Harris countered from a Michigan church pulpit that God offers America a “divine plan strong enough to heal division."

apnews.com

“I have this piece of glass here,” he said. “But all we have really over here is the fake news. And to get me, somebody would have to shoot through the fake news. And I don’t mind that so much.”

Facing criticism for suggesting violence against the media, Trump’s campaign later played down his comments.

“The President’s statement about protective glass placement has nothing to do with the Media being harmed, or anything else,” Trump campaign spokesperson Steven Cheung said in a statement. Instead he claimed that Trump was suggesting that reporters were in “great danger themselves, and should have had a glass protective shield, also. There can be no other interpretation of what was said. He was actually looking out for their welfare, far more than his own!”

Somehow Trump’s quote and the spokesperson’s “what he really meant…” quote doesn’t line up…

 

[Brad Sallows]

I mean, “sexual abuse” scandal would also have sunk a POTUS candidate until 2016…

Anything we think ought to sink a candidate has to measured against the alternative. What happens when both candidates are sunk by some combination of personal flaws and/or politically intolerable positions?

 

[Brad Sallows]

Also, the Trump team has started the lawsuits already. I suspect they will be as successful as the last time.

Lawsuits and other legal manoeuvers that essentially amount to means of "elevating our votes and/or deprecating theirs" have already been flying from both sides.

For example, overseas military ballots too often are a point of contention, and they might be again. I doubt Democrats have ceased to be willing to play hardball with military ballots that don't make timelines, regardless of the reasons that lead to delays. Republicans probably feel the same way about non-military out-of-country absentee ballots.

 

[Lumber]

Lawsuits and other legal manoeuvers that essentially amount to means of "elevating our votes and/or deprecating theirs" have already been flying from both sides.

For example, overseas military ballots too often are a point of contention, and they might be again. I doubt Democrats have ceased to be willing to play hardball with military ballots that don't make timelines, regardless of the reasons that lead to delays. Republicans probably feel the same way about non-military out-of-country absentee ballots.

Apple to... Toasters.

The extremely important distinction here is the lawsuits from one side are attempts in various ways of discounting votes, and the lawsuits from the other side are about protecting votes. Also, one sides list of law suits are far FAR more numerous than the other.

It is patently NOT about "elevating our votes and/or deprecating theirs", it's about elevating votes PERIOD.

Even if the votes being "saved" do favor one side , and even if that side is doing it for entirely selfish political reasons, it wouldn't matter, because "saving" people's votes is the democratically correct thing to do, regardless if your motivations are altruistic and democratic at all.

 

[dimsum]

Anything we think ought to sink a candidate has to measured against the alternative.

Absolutely.

What happens when both candidates are sunk by some combination of personal flaws and/or politically intolerable positions?

Then the electorate does the standard “pro / con” and vote for the one who has the least “con”.

…and this is when I default to “one of the two has multiple court cases against them, to the point that ‘I’m voting for the felon’ was a call (facetious or not) for their supporters.” Strange how that dropped off pretty quickly after a few weeks…

 

[The Bread Guy]

Bit of crossover here, so decided to share it here ...

Awaiting the next President: Canadians prefer Trudeau to deal with Harris, Poilievre to work with Trump -

Significant regional variation over which leader is best suited to handle the next American president November 4, 2024 – Canadians will join their American neighbours in watching results pour in tomorrow night for the U.S. election. Will Donald Trump become only the second president elected for...

angusreid.org

 

[QV]

Bit of crossover here, so decided to share it here ...

Awaiting the next President: Canadians prefer Trudeau to deal with Harris, Poilievre to work with Trump -

Significant regional variation over which leader is best suited to handle the next American president November 4, 2024 – Canadians will join their American neighbours in watching results pour in tomorrow night for the U.S. election. Will Donald Trump become only the second president elected for...

angusreid.org

View attachment 88849

That is an amusing poll and it says a lot more than the title suggests.

 

[Lumber]

That is an amusing poll and it says a lot more than the title suggests.

What does it say? Seems pretty straight forward to me, and it makes sense to me, in that I agree PP would do a better job of working with Trump, and JT with Harris. What are you seeing?

 

[Brad Sallows]

Apple to... Toasters.

The extremely important distinction here is the lawsuits from one side are attempts in various ways of discounting votes, and the lawsuits from the other side are about protecting votes. Also, one sides list of law suits are far FAR more numerous than the other.

I understand how you see it, but I see looser voting controls unambiguously increasing opportunities for fraud, and fraudulent votes negate - not protect - legitimate votes. With respect to military ballots, Democratic legal activity has pretty much never been about protecting them.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

I mean, “sexual abuse” scandal would also have sunk a POTUS candidate until 2016…


Also, the Trump team has started the lawsuits already. I suspect they will be as successful as the last time.

Trump Files First Election Lawsuit in Chilling Sign of What’s to Come

The election fraud lawsuits have started again.

newrepublic.com

Slick Willie comes to mind.

 

[Lumber]

Slick Willie comes to mind.

He wasn't a POTUS candidate at the time he earned that moniker, he was already into his 2nd term.

 

[Brad Sallows]

He wasn't a POTUS candidate at the time he earned that moniker, he was already into his 2nd term.

It's true he wasn't a POTUS candidate at the time, but that's because the nickname predates his first run. And as some women admitted in later years, they voted for him despite knowing about his treatment of women.