|
Post by TKennedy on Aug 16, 2024 14:22:33 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by majorminor on Aug 16, 2024 14:26:26 GMT -5
Oh I dunno. I think Kamala's meteoric rise and rapid polling reversal is proof that Don's schtick is wearing a little thin even among those in the middle and sorta right that otherwise broadly support his policies.
|
|
|
Post by Rob Hanesworth on Aug 16, 2024 14:48:50 GMT -5
Oh I dunno. I think Kamala's meteoric rise and rapid polling reversal is proof that Don's schtick is wearing a little thin even among those in the middle and sorta right that otherwise broadly support his policies. We so rarely get a glimpse of an actual Trump policy. It's usually promised to arrive "very soon and be the greatest policy ever."
|
|
|
Post by Russell Letson on Aug 16, 2024 14:49:04 GMT -5
Not to take anything away from Harris, but I suspect that at least some of that "meteoric rise" is the result of relief on the part of the non-MAGA portions of the citizenry: relief that Biden stepped aside (however reluctantly); relief that there was a candidate ready to step in; relief that Harris is not some back-of-the-pack errand-girl-VP but a vigorous, focused, and clearly competent public campaigner. The Trump team is already at work on undermining her every way they can, starting with the usual playground tactics that their base seems to enjoy, but there are enough items in her resume to provide ammo for traditional oppo work. So it's going to get uglier, and one should never underestimate the power of ugly in politics. Though I hope and expect that when Harris and Trump and then Walz and Vance confront each other face to face, people will see the differences and vote accordingly. (But never count out ugly or resentful or angry or tribal sentiments. As my mother used to remind me, "Their vote counts as much as yours.")
|
|
|
The Latest
Aug 16, 2024 15:04:21 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Marshall on Aug 16, 2024 15:04:21 GMT -5
Oh I dunno. I think Kamala's meteoric rise and rapid polling reversal is proof that Don's schtick is wearing a little thin even among those in the middle and sorta right that otherwise broadly support his policies. Interesting comment, Steve. We shall see. If Trump could learn to control his meandering mouth, he’d stand in much better stead.
|
|
|
The Latest
Aug 16, 2024 15:27:40 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by millring on Aug 16, 2024 15:27:40 GMT -5
Though I don't even understand the comment in question ( the best I can decipher from it is that maybe he's saying something like "I'd rather be a recipient of this award than that award because to receive that award I'd have to have nearly died. With this award, on the other hand, all I would have to have done is give bunches of money.")
Whatever the heck he meant, he does know he's already lost. This is what giving up looks like.
|
|
|
The Latest
Aug 16, 2024 16:08:55 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by TKennedy on Aug 16, 2024 16:08:55 GMT -5
I am not so sure John, Kamala has yet to actually show her chops unscripted and live under hostile fire. Trump is really good at getting under people’s skin with his insults and putting them off balance. I think we have a tight horse race right now that may well hinge on the debates. She would be smart to stand for a hostile interview or debate with Fox to demonstrate her moxie. That could really be decisive.
|
|
|
Post by millring on Aug 16, 2024 16:29:46 GMT -5
I am not so John, Kamala has yet to actually show her chops unscripted and live under hostile fire. Where is that ever going to come from? ...and when? It's clearly not going to come from Trump in a debate. His level of debating skills isn't even junior high level. If calling her "bugger brains" would win a debate, I'd give him a chance. Honestly, I'm not trying to be snarky. It's obvious that this "accidental" candidacy is the most winning strategy since the Bulls drafted Michael Jordan. She can skate into a landslide right now if she just doesn't say anything. And nobody is going to make her say anything. If they haven't by now, they aren't going to. There is nobody who is going to ask her any question that will be hard to answer. For one thing, nobody even knows what that tough question would be. But even if they asked her about her complicity in covering up Biden's condition?......so what? None of you would blink. Who cares? I'm reminded of Harry Reid when he was confronted about spreading the false accusation that Mitt Romney didn't pay taxes. His response was "Well, it worked, didn't it?" Even if they asked her "You were raised by a Marxist Socialist. Can you enumerate any problems with implementing socialism in the United States? She wouldn't answer and nobody who is interested in her would care. Even if someone in a position to be heard (like a moderator or a journalist) asked her, "I own an AR15 "assault style" rifle. Should I be allowed to keep it? Should it be confiscated, or would you prefer something akin to a "buy-back" program? Who would care? Even if someone asked "By a very large margin, most Americans still favor limits on abortion. You don't. Would you still work towards abortion-on-demand? Isn't that counter to the majority view?" Who would care? There isn't a tough question to ask her because she clearly holds the majority views.
|
|
|
Post by Cornflake on Aug 16, 2024 16:40:01 GMT -5
It's easy to be misled by the poll numbers. Yes, Harris is doing very well with regard to the popular vote. The electoral college is still very much up for grabs. There was a piece about the electoral-college picture today. Here's a free link. www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/08/16/opinion/harris-trump-electoral-college-map.html?unlocked_article_code=1.DU4.H-0h.8f621_upjHBF&smid=url-shareThe author of the piece commented, "Mr. Trump has increasingly looked like a washed-up rock star who can play only his greatest hits for his dwindling group of fans." That didn't strike me as mean, just accurate, particularly in the context of the larger piece. Trump keeps addressing his loyal core instead of talking to the swing voters who will decide this thing.
|
|
|
Post by TKennedy on Aug 16, 2024 16:43:17 GMT -5
Well we will have to revisit this discussion after the election John . You could be right.
|
|
|
Post by millring on Aug 16, 2024 16:43:33 GMT -5
...instead of talking to the swing voters who will decide this thing. I've noticed that talking is not his strong suit.
|
|
|
Post by dradtke on Aug 16, 2024 17:03:11 GMT -5
If Trump could learn to control his meandering mouth, he’d stand in much better stead. If Trump could learn to control his meandering mouth, he wouldn't be Trump.
|
|
|
The Latest
Aug 16, 2024 17:17:53 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by TKennedy on Aug 16, 2024 17:17:53 GMT -5
According to Vance that’s what makes him so enticing.
|
|
|
Post by epaul on Aug 16, 2024 17:47:21 GMT -5
I'd love to comment right now, but I'm involved in a heated debate over on the Cichlid Forum on how soon you should begin feeding newly-hatched brine shrimp to Cichlasoma portalegrensis fry.
|
|
|
Post by Russell Letson on Aug 16, 2024 18:24:38 GMT -5
John, I find it hard to figure where a "landslide" for Harris would come from. Unless, of course, "landslide" has come to mean "more than a 3% margin in the popular vote." As Cornflake has already noted, the election is to be won in the Electoral College--which is where Trump won in 2016. Hillary beat him by 2.1% in the popular vote but lost in the electoral 304-227. When it comes to numbers, it's all about the leverage provided by the way the electoral college is structured. And Trump's non-stupid staffers know that.
Trump's base is amazingly solid, and what I hear the undecided and "centrist" voters interviewed on CNN, MSNBC, and NPR is not exactly sharp-eyed when it comes to what seem to me to be Trump's manifest shortcomings as a human being and politician. I see a consistent failure to pay attention to what his administration actually accomplished, who benefitted from his policies, and what the Biden administration has managed to get done.
Trump seems to own the emotional territory defined by hurt feelings, resentment of "elites" (which for some reason seems to include people like me and most Soundholers), and fears of people-not-like-us. Not that ordinary working people aren't still facing hard times, but Trump is good at directing their resentment not at, say, venture-capital firms that buy up distressed real estate (and mess with the housing markets), corporations that pursue quarterly ROIs and distributing managerial rewards, or transnational oil companies that have more influence on energy prices than any government. And then, of course, there's the torrent of lies that muddy the waters even for those with the energy and willingness to do basic fact-checking.
|
|
|
Post by millring on Aug 16, 2024 18:34:45 GMT -5
John, I find it hard to figure where a "landslide" for Harris would come from. Unless, of course, "landslide" has come to mean "more than a 3% margin in the popular vote." As Cornflake has already noted, the election is to be won in the Electoral College--which is where Trump won in 2016. Hillary beat him by 2.1% in the popular vote but lost in the electoral 304-227. When it comes to numbers, it's all about the leverage provided by the way the electoral college is structured. And Trump's non-stupid staffers know that. Trump's base is amazingly solid, and what I hear the undecided and "centrist" voters interviewed on CNN, MSNBC, and NPR is not exactly sharp-eyed when it comes to what seem to me to be Trump's manifest shortcomings as a human being and politician. I see a consistent failure to pay attention to what his administration actually accomplished, who benefitted from his policies, and what the Biden administration has managed to get done. Trump seems to own the emotional territory defined by hurt feelings, resentment of "elites" (which for some reason seems to include people like me and most Soundholers), and fears of people-not-like-us. Not that ordinary working people aren't still facing hard times, but Trump is good at directing their resentment not at, say, venture-capital firms that buy up distressed real estate (and mess with the housing markets), corporations that pursue quarterly ROIs and distributing managerial rewards, or transnational oil companies that have more influence on energy prices than any government. And then, of course, there's the torrent of lies that muddy the waters even for those with the energy and willingness to do basic fact-checking. Yeah, you nailed it. We're a nation of bigots, racists, and stupid people who lack the brains required to have principles. And they all love Trump. Except you. Somehow you acquired the moral bearing of a foreigner.
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Aug 16, 2024 18:45:50 GMT -5
I am not so John, Kamala has yet to actually show her chops unscripted and live under hostile fire. Where is that ever going to come from? ...and when? It's clearly not going to come from Trump in a debate. His level of debating skills isn't even junior high level. If calling her "bugger brains" would win a debate, I'd give him a chance. Honestly, I'm not trying to be snarky. It's obvious that this "accidental" candidacy is the most winning strategy since the Bulls drafted Michael Jordan. She can skate into a landslide right now if she just doesn't say anything. And nobody is going to make her say anything. If they haven't by now, they aren't going to. There is nobody who is going to ask her any question that will be hard to answer. For one thing, nobody even knows what that tough question would be. But even if they asked her about her complicity in covering up Biden's condition?......so what? None of you would blink. Who cares? I'm reminded of Harry Reid when he was confronted about spreading the false accusation that Mitt Romney didn't pay taxes. His response was "Well, it worked, didn't it?" Even if they asked her "You were raised by a Marxist Socialist. Can you enumerate any problems with implementing socialism in the United States? She wouldn't answer and nobody who is interested in her would care. Even if someone in a position to be heard (like a moderator or a journalist) asked her, "I own an AR15 "assault style" rifle. Should I be allowed to keep it? Should it be confiscated, or would you prefer something akin to a "buy-back" program? Who would care? Even if someone asked "By a very large margin, most Americans still favor limits on abortion. You don't. Would you still work towards abortion-on-demand? Isn't that counter to the majority view?" Who would care? There isn't a tough question to ask her because she clearly holds the majority views. The kickback to Kamala seemed to have started today with her first policy related speech. Two takeaways that I've seen are: 1. $25,000 in government money (taken from taxpayers) to buy a first home. And one would think somebody would tell her about the inflation situation she already participated in creating, and 2. Price controls. Seriously. I guess she's too young to remember the 70's. Like I tell my wife, it's still early. And Kamala now has to actually do something to demonstrate she's capable. "Last one out of Michigan turn out the lights." Still rings in my memory.
|
|
|
The Latest
Aug 16, 2024 18:52:53 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Rob Hanesworth on Aug 16, 2024 18:52:53 GMT -5
John, I find it hard to figure where a "landslide" for Harris would come from. Unless, of course, "landslide" has come to mean "more than a 3% margin in the popular vote." As Cornflake has already noted, the election is to be won in the Electoral College--which is where Trump won in 2016. Hillary beat him by 2.1% in the popular vote but lost in the electoral 304-227. When it comes to numbers, it's all about the leverage provided by the way the electoral college is structured. And Trump's non-stupid staffers know that. Trump's base is amazingly solid, and what I hear the undecided and "centrist" voters interviewed on CNN, MSNBC, and NPR is not exactly sharp-eyed when it comes to what seem to me to be Trump's manifest shortcomings as a human being and politician. I see a consistent failure to pay attention to what his administration actually accomplished, who benefitted from his policies, and what the Biden administration has managed to get done. Trump seems to own the emotional territory defined by hurt feelings, resentment of "elites" (which for some reason seems to include people like me and most Soundholers), and fears of people-not-like-us. Not that ordinary working people aren't still facing hard times, but Trump is good at directing their resentment not at, say, venture-capital firms that buy up distressed real estate (and mess with the housing markets), corporations that pursue quarterly ROIs and distributing managerial rewards, or transnational oil companies that have more influence on energy prices than any government. And then, of course, there's the torrent of lies that muddy the waters even for those with the energy and willingness to do basic fact-checking. Yeah, you nailed it. We're a nation of bigots, racists, and stupid people who lack the brains required to have principles. And they all love Trump. Except you. Somehow you acquired the moral bearing of a foreigner. That's the sort of condescending snark you claim to detest.
|
|
|
Post by Russell Letson on Aug 16, 2024 19:02:37 GMT -5
That is about the least reasonable reading of my post that I can imagine. Well, maybe third-least in the Soundhole context.
My point is that the margins required for a Harris "landslide" are not in evidence based on Trump's past popular-vote performance--or, that matter, on what most polls are currently showing. And winning will happen in the electoral college, not in the popularity contest of the general election.
As for the "nation of bigots, racists, and stupid people who lack the brains required to have principles"--well, that's not even a cartoon of what I wrote. Most of the polling I've seen put stable pro-Trump numbers at around 37% of the electorate. And by "stable," I mean "people whose support is not swayed by, say, guilty verdicts or sustained accusations of sexual assault." People who are not bothered by Trump's easily-contradicted claims (Harris's crowd is AI-generated) or by the childish vulgarity of his name-calling. Does this base include "bigots, racists, and stupid people"? It certainly does, as a read-through of any number of comment threads will confirm. But it also includes those who see in Trump someone who will serve their material (as distinct from cultural) interests. I think they're deeply mistaken, but then, they're the ones facing their actual material conditions, so what do I know. But I do wonder what exactly are the sources of information on which they base their analyses of who will serve those interests. The guy whose tax cuts overwhelmingly favored the very rich? The guy who claims that the job market they inhabit is somehow the result of immigrant labor?
|
|
|
The Latest
Aug 16, 2024 20:09:36 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by factorychef on Aug 16, 2024 20:09:36 GMT -5
I'd vote for roadkill before I would vote trump as I think he and vance wear a little bit to much makeup.Oh and other thing. I watched his presser yesterday and the lies just kept coming. He is becoming more unhinged everyday.
|
|