2024 ELECTION THREAD
The next presidential race will be here soon! Please see current Bovada odds. Thoughts?
Kasich. trump told him he would be in charge of all domestic/foreign policy while trump focused on PR etc. The singular piece of input his campaign had wrt the existing R plank was to change the russia/ukraine stance.
bombs on apartment blocks arent cheap.
Trump would be worse
So wait, are Democrats trying to let too many immigrants in or keep too many immigrants out? I'm confused.
Depending on your margin of error, Michigan and Wisconsin are starting to look safe for Harris. I filled MI and WI in blue on this map to narrow down the swing stakes to five. Harris would be at 251 electoral college votes. She would be 19 votes shy of 270. Pennsylvania is 19 votes and gets her there. But if she loses Pennsylvania, then she will need to win multiple swing states. Pennsylvania is the easiest path for Harris winning, but not absolutely needed. However if MI and WI go for Harris, then Trump has to win PA. Blue wall still a powerhouse for Dems easiest path to the white house.
Remember when leftists were saying Biden was doing family separation and keeping kids in cages?
Yeah you guys aren’t who I turn to for rational analysis.
yes all of that stuff is still happening under the Biden admin. rationality has nothing to do with. objective reality is what we are talking about.
yes all of that stuff is still happening under the Biden admin. rationality has nothing to do with. objective reality is what we are talking about.
We need borders, but Biden ended many of Trump’s senselessly cruel policies. But because you want to own Democrats you’ll pretend it’s the same policies.
Vance’s private criticisms of Trump reportedly extended into 2020
4th of July, 2016,
The author of the piece was a young man by the name of JD Vance
Vance wrote in February 2020,
“Trump has just so thoroughly failed to deliver on his economic populism."
Around the same time, Vance also claimed via direct message
that he’d “turned down” an undisclosed job offer from Trump
Lol this guy has the worst political instincts. Every time I see him he looks over matched, confused or just not up to the task. The I'll create stories to get the media to cover things is just ludicrous. He's getting in the Palin territory of unqualified pick.
Depending on your margin of error, Michigan and Wisconsin are starting to look safe for Harris. I filled MI and WI in blue on this map to narrow down the swing stakes to five. Harris would be at 251 electoral college votes. She would be 19 votes shy of 270. Pennsylvania is 19 votes and gets her there. But if she loses Pennsylvania, then she will need to win multiple swing states. Pennsylvania is the easiest path for Harris winning, but not absolutely needed. However if MI and WI go for H
I agree with your take on things.
I have done some poll analysis for MI, NC, PA, and WI.
What I am finding in MI if the election were held now and 3rd party candidates including RFK Jr took 2% of the vote that Trump would need to win more than 82% of the undecideds to win. Over time Kamala has increased her share of the vote so I think that unless something catastrophic happens to Kamala she will take MI. Even if the 3rd party votes were only 1% Trump would still need more than 75% of the undecideds to win.
WI is even better for Kamala. At 1% 3rd party votes (and again RFK Jr is on the ballot) Trump would need over 92% of the undecideds. At 2% Trump couldn't win even with 100% of the undecideds.
PA is interesting though. Kamala is at about 49% in the Multi Candidate (MC) Likely Voter (LV) polls. Trump needs better than 83% of the undecideds if 3rd party candidates get 1% of the vote and he basically can't win if they get 2%. If they get 1.5% of the vote then Trump would need close to 89% of the undecideds to swing to him. So I think that right now PA is in better shape for Kamala than MI.
I have Kamala trailing in NC (16 electoral votes) by a lot more than 538.com, Nate Silver, 270 to win, and even RCP. She is just polling very poorly there since the debate. It could be that they are all counting on Republicans not voting because of the NC governor thing. From where we are now I think Kamala will need to win 75% of the current undecided voters in order to win NC (assuming only 1% vote for 3rd party candidates). But I am hoping that the problem for Trump will not be the polls but the turnout in rural areas.
Doesn't answer the question and starts babbling lies and gets booed.
Lol this guy has the worst political instincts. Every time I see him he looks over matched, confused or just not up to the task. The I'll create stories to get the media to cover things is just ludicrous. He's getting in the Palin territory of unqualified pick.
He seems like a bit of a weather wane. If he is the best that powerful tech-entrepeneurs like Thiel can muster, it shatters quite a few illusions about Silicon Valley billionaires.
i don't know how to further elaborate the difference between an soe to a private enterprise which received a bailout any further without being overly insulting and patronizing
i know you're not an idiot, so instead of asking me to treat you as such, why don't you specify what aspects of how drastically different they are is confusing to you?
i leaned on gpt in the meantime
I'm pressing you on this to challenge your thinking and beliefs about what it means to compete fairly and unfairly.
What most people default to on trade issues is a weighted bullet list of what that country did vs what we did and why their interventions are more "unfair" than our interventions. This completely misses the mark about the nature of competition and fairness.
In short, competing fairly means allowing market forces decide who wins and who loses. Digging deeper, this means making sure each competitor is forced to deal the with consequences of their decisions, both good and bad. In short, being accountable.
When a company is state-owned like in China, the vast resources of the state allow the company to avoid accountability because the normal financial constraints don't apply. The company can make strategic and investment decisions that are unavailable to non state-own companies, for example using very long investment timelines that would bankrupt market companies by cutting off their access to capital for failing to meet investors' ROI/ROE metrics or even just servicing their debt.
Non state-owned companies like in the USA don't have that luxury and so have to structure and operate in a way to assure performance within the timeframes demanded by investors. But what happens when they don't? They go bankrupt of course. But what if when they go bankrupt the government comes in and bails them out? They get to continue operating in spite of their poor strategic decisions - in other words, they're not held accountable for how they ran the business.
Whether a company is preemptively prevented from going bankrupt (state-owned) or being bailed out after they do ultimately makes no difference - in both scenarios the companies are operating in an environment where they don't have to be accountable to market forces and thus compete fairly.
This should be clear from even a cursory look at the situation. The current USA automobile industry would literally not exist in its current form if the government hadn't bailed them out. To argue China competes unfairly against an industry that wouldn't even exist without the US government's intervention just strikes as absurd. I don't understand how someone can reasonably take that position.
Is there any doubt at all that the 23andMe fiasco ends with Leon buying the app for all of the DNA samples they own, taking it private then rebranding it XXandXY the everything app?
He seems like a bit of a weather wane. If he is the best that powerful tech-entrepeneurs like Thiel can muster, it shatters quite a few illusions about Silicon Valley billionaires.
Pretty surprising that someone couldn't sit for Vance for 5 minutes and realize he's not going to be a popular leader. But good for anyone who doesn't share Thiel's vision that Pete is that incompetent.
He seems like a bit of a weather wane. If he is the best that powerful tech-entrepeneurs like Thiel can muster, it shatters quite a few illusions about Silicon Valley billionaires.
It's the best that is in politics and not already completely in the pockets of other interests.
Politics already selects for people that are very very very far from the idea of best you are implying here, as it takes some very weird kind of person to prefer political power to money in today society.
Even at the peak of political power you have to compromise so much about everything and you can only accomplish a small fraction of your goals (if you have any) compared to what you can achieve for yourself and your family by making 50 or 100 millions (which is eternal freedom from work for your heirs in perpetuity basically).
Other powerful interests had to accept stanning for Kamala Harris which is far worse than Vance quality-wise like not even remotely close
Is this real?
It can't be real
Can it be?
It's the best that is in politics and not already completely in the pockets of other interests.
Politics already selects for people that are very very very far from the idea of best you are implying here, as it takes some very weird kind of person to prefer political power to money in today society.
Even at the peak of political power you have to compromise so much about everything and you can only accomplish a small fraction of your goals (if you have any) compared to what you can achieve for you
Really? A quick glance at Harris' resume and I think she seems like a far more impressive person than Vance.
QElon trying so hard to move the needle.
40 days and all these mother****ers disappear back into their holes.
Vance’s resume is fine if you curve for conservative standards. But like Dessntis he’s just awful at thinking and coming off as intelligent at a national level. Not really a coincidence both have crashed on the national scene as people got to know them.
Vance’s resume is fine if you curve for conservative standards. But like Dessntis he’s just awful at thinking and coming off as intelligent at a national level. Not really a coincidence both have crashed on the national scene as people got to know them.
The DeSantis phenomena was something else. You saw this fairly big movement online that pushed him as an alternative to Trump, pretty much hailing him as "modern conservatism 2.0". Then this spread to the opposite side of the political spectrum, which leaped into action to paint him as the new devil, obviously fearing that he was in fact "modern conservatism 2.0".
Yet when he finally starting taking the stage, it just became clear that way too few people inside those groups had ever bothered to actually take a look at him for themselves, because he did not impress.
Leon trying so desperately to make his idiotic self indulgent purchase of Twitter matter
Trouble is the only people who would actually be swayed by him were already gonna vote for trump. There’s no independent or dem alive thinking man Leon makes good points MAGA
Btw whatever the hell this post was was brought to you buy a guy who started no less than 1% of his posts on this forum with the sentence ‘not a good week for trans visibility’
Pretty good correlation to ‘guy who parrots Leon’s Twitter feed’ to ‘guy who probably doesn’t raise a single point worth discussing’
