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

[George Wallace]

Snowbirds are already headed down South.

 

[lenaitch]

So Country over Party, and over self (if that makes sense

This concept of party loyalty, often blind party loyalty, is something that I will never understand. We have it here as well but it is nowhere near as strong or as pervasive.

I heard a radio interview the other day with someone who had family in the US. The family was 'long time diehard' Republicans, didn't like Trump and didn't agree with anything he proposed, but would vote for him anyway because . . . Republican (or never Democrat, I'm never sure). It almost seems that the US could save a lot of money by just counting registered party members and having the roughly remaining one-third schlepp out to vote every four years.

 

[Remius]

So here are some final guesses. We can see who will get it right lol

https://twitter.com/x/status/1853674650619744504

 

[GR66]

The biggest question to me is how strong is the Never Trump movement.

Are most of those voters going to be willing to chance a USSC change from 4 years of Harris ? I know several who are still considering voting for Trump simply due to that fact alone.

For Republicans: Thomas is 76, and Alito is 74, Chief Justice Roberts is 69.
For Democrat: Sotomayor is 70, and Kagan is 64

Other Republicans: Kavanaugh is 59, Gorsuch is 57, Barret is 52, and the last Democrat Brown is 54.


So Thomas would be 80 and Alito 78, the loss of those 2 would bring the court to 4-5 R/D.

Many never Trumpers are asking themselves can at least Alito make it (most NT’s want Thomas gone simple as he’s been so visibly influenced by his wife and big money favors) - but ideally not gone under a Harris Presidency.

For me, who’s livelihood can go away with a change in gun laws, it’s a tough decision to make, and it isn’t with a clear conscience that I am going to vote for Harris - but it is will a much clearer conscience that if I was going to vote to DJT. So Country over Party, and over self (if that makes sense).

Interesting take on the USSC appointments. I wonder how many Republicans in the general voting public are taking that into consideration in their vote choice. Not something that is normally a big factor north of the 49th.

 

[Brad Sallows]

(most NT’s want Thomas gone simple as he’s been so visibly influenced by his wife and big money favors)

That isn't proven; it isn't provable. It's a story NT's tell themselves as part of rationalizing their noble self-image standing against the rest of the Republican party.

 

[KevinB]

Interesting take on the USSC appointments. I wonder how many Republicans in the general voting public are taking that into consideration in their vote choice. Not something that is normally a big factor north of the 49th.

For gun owners at least it’s always on the forefront.

 

[suffolkowner]

For gun owners at least it’s always on the forefront.

do you really think thats on the table? Seems like a big swing

 

[OldSolduer]

This concept of party loyalty, often blind party loyalty, is something that I will never understand. We have it here as well but it is nowhere near as strong or as pervasive.

JT's Liberal Party enters the chat as does most of Toronto...

 

[suffolkowner]

JT's Liberal Party enters the chat as does most of Toronto...

does it? There doesnt seem to be much support there right now. Didnt they lose the last two byelections in Toronto and Montreal?

 

[KevinB]

That isn't proven; it isn't provable. It's a story NT's tell themselves as part of rationalizing their noble self-image standing against the rest of the Republican party.

Honestly even amongst a lot of die hard Trump folks he’s a bit of a liability. It’s one of the only common beliefs— albeit no one wants him gone for a Democratic appointee.

 

[MrWhyt]

That isn't proven; it isn't provable.

whether or not he has been influenced doesn't need to be proven. The fact that he's received multiple high value gifts and only reported them after they were found out should be enough to make him (or any other judge in a similar situation) resign. The judges of the highest court in the land shouldn't have questionable integrity.

 

[Brad Sallows]

whether or not he has been influenced doesn't need to be proven. The fact that he's received multiple high value gifts and only reported them after they were found out should be enough to make him (or any other judge in a similar situation) resign. The judges of the highest court in the land shouldn't have questionable integrity.

His integrity isn't in question, except by the people who have targeted him as the oldest Republican-appointed member of the bench, and therefore the one most likely to be next to resign. If he refuses to recuse when one of his friends brings a matter before the court, that's questionable. And his wife's activities are her own. Women's agency and independence of men is a bedrock principle of pretty much everyone opposed to him. The same principle applies to men with respect to their wives.

Thomas has been following the same lines of legal thought since before he was appointed to the USSC. There's nothing there to be "bought". If anyone wanted to buy one justice, he'd be the least likely candidate since he's most likely to be an outlier, often writing his own opinions even in concurrence. And it would probably be necessary to "buy" at least 3 justices to even have a hope of swaying a decision.

None of the criticisms pass a common sense test. People who think they can see hidden motives are not immune from the counter-charge that they can have hidden motives, foremost among which is ejecting Republican-appointed justices by any means available. Their honesty is indeterminate.

 

[MrWhyt]

His integrity isn't in question

If you think a judge taking gifts and not reporting them is totally ethical then I don't think there is much else to say.

If he refuses to recuse when one of his friends brings a matter before the court, that's questionable.

so these may not be bribes, but merely a retainer fee for a future bribe.

 

[Blackadder1916]

What are some of the disruptions today?

FBI Statement on Bomb Threats to Polling Locations | Federal Bureau of Investigation

The FBI is aware of bomb threats to polling locations in several states, many of which appear to originate from Russian email domains. None of the threats have been determined to be credible thus far.

www.fbi.gov

FBI Statement on Inauthentic Use of Bureau Name, Insignia in Promoting False Election-Related Narratives | Federal Bureau of Investigation

The FBI was made aware of two instances of its name and insignia being misused in promoting false narratives surrounding the election.

www.fbi.gov

 

[Bluebulldog]

I think, under some analysis, that a lot of people won't talk about a very large elephant in the room.

Institutional racism, and sexism is still a thing South of the border. While the vast majority of polled voters might indicate one thing....it's what happens when they're in that voting booth that matters.

The Dems put Hilary forth against Trump in 2017. Running essentially on a "Stay the course" platform. Except many folks in places like Ohio and other rust belt areas, who saw their lives downgraded with the economic downturn in 2008, and didn't really recover, didn't want that message.

Trump's platform spoke directly to them, business and American jobs 1st.....

Hillary also had problematic messaging around her involvement in things like Benghazi. She was seen to be an elitist, and dishonest.

The Dems have essentially done the same with Harris following on behind Biden. Harris refusing to debate or speak to some of the more contentious pieces of legislation she's been associated with can be seen in much the same light as Hillary.

While much of the US being polled, might tick the boxes on being woke, or DEI centric, the recent climate around those same issues, would indicate that it may not be a selling point for much of the US electorate.

Much like 2017, this is a hold-your-nose election.

 

[KevinB]

I think, under some analysis, that a lot of people won't talk about a very large elephant in the room.

Institutional racism, and sexism is still a thing South of the border. While the vast majority of polled voters might indicate one thing....it's what happens when they're in that voting booth that matters.

The Dems put Hilary forth against Trump in 2017. Running essentially on a "Stay the course" platform. Except many folks in places like Ohio and other rust belt areas, who saw their lives downgraded with the economic downturn in 2008, and didn't really recover, didn't want that message.

Trump's platform spoke directly to them, business and American jobs 1st.....

Hillary also had problematic messaging around her involvement in things like Benghazi. She was seen to be an elitist, and dishonest.

The Dems have essentially done the same with Harris following on behind Biden. Harris refusing to debate or speak to some of the more contentious pieces of legislation she's been associated with can be seen in much the same light as Hillary.

While much of the US being polled, might tick the boxes on being woke, or DEI centric, the recent climate around those same issues, would indicate that it may not be a selling point for much of the US electorate.

Much like 2017, this is a hold-your-nose election.

I think you are missing a lot of the key aspect that DJT suffers from a lot of the same issues that HRC did, probably more as he’s a convicted felon on top of that.

Trump didn’t do much in his first term, and raised the debt more than any other President had before — now the fact that there was COVID gives him a bit of a pass, but he failed to ‘drain the swamp’ and instead did exactly the opposite.

Trump has a lot of negative baggage, and while Harris hasn’t done a great job is distancing herself from some of President Biden’s less popular policies, you cannot ignore the fact that never before have you seen so many Republicans come out against a Republican candidate.


Edit: Trumps media/strategy team did perhaps pull off a solid home run with the Joe Rogan Podcast. I think that Harris’s team fumbled that one in basically demanding he come to them and refusing to go to him.

 

[Bluebulldog]

I think you are missing a lot of the key aspect that DJT suffers from a lot of the same issues that HRC did, probably more as he’s a convicted felon on top of that.

Trump didn’t do much in his first term, and raised the debt more than any other President had before — now the fact that there was COVID gives him a bit of a pass, but he failed to ‘drain the swamp’ and instead did exactly the opposite.

Trump has a lot of negative baggage, and while Harris hasn’t done a great job is distancing herself from some of President Biden’s less popular policies, you cannot ignore the fact that never before have you seen so many Republicans come out against a Republican candidate.

Kevin.

I think in a very indirect sense you actually just helped argue my point.

I'm not arguing that DJT has his detractors. But the simple fact is, is that a lot of your friends and neighbors, are going to vote for DJT, because he's not a woman, and he's not a racial minority.

But I guess we'll see tomorrow morning once most of the counting is done...

 

[KevinB]

Either way I’m still going to be disappointed with the result either way - unless Chris Christie wins on a write in

 

[Blackadder1916]

Either way I’m still going to be disappointed with the result either way - unless Chris Christie wins on a write in

You never know, there could be a last middle run waddle to the polls by a constituency of overweight white men.

 

[dapaterson]

Someone has written an internet enabled Atari 2600 real time election tracker.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1853869787006279817