2023-24 Political Thread

[bjdeming]

If only he could be trusted to follow through with what he says.....

If...

 

[Mike S]

Biden's obvious senility and Harris's refusal to do her constitutional duty and assume temporary leadership of this country because of Biden's incapacity had a lot to do with the popular vote going to Trump.

That was her big chance to show us she had leadership potential, and she blew it. Trump OTOH is a known quantity, and the world is a scarier place than usual right now.

That is a point I have not considered. I think she could have invoked the 25th amendment, and people would have bought it. That would give her on the job experience to show what she could do. Which is exactly why I think it wasn't executed, because the Democrats knew that would be a disaster. She's terrible off script.


I still think the Democrats need to move towards the center, but had they run someone like Buttigieg, they might have won. If they anointed Harris, they could have anointed him. Votes don't matter. Shapiro would have been a slam dunk, but the antisemitism that is rampant in the modern Democratic party would never allow that.

 

[bjdeming]

That is a point I have not considered. I think she could have invoked the 25th amendment, and people would have bought it. That would give her on the job experience to show what she could do. Which is exactly why I think it wasn't executed, because the Democrats knew that would be a disaster. She's terrible off script.

Ah, that approaches the questions that many of us feel in our guts, even if we don't care to review Section 4 of the amendment: Who has such control over vice presidential decisions?

Who really makes the nation's executive decisions when the president is so incapacitated that he withdraws his candidacy -- a real point even if he did dance all around it in his speech -- and the VP is not exactly presidential timber?

Who is really the US chief executive now and through Inauguration Day? What if they screw up (or have already)? What if WWIII turns hot? To what people's representatives are they accountable; not to us, certainly; not to Congress exactly, AFAIK; and not to journalists (who probably know but do not report on it for various reasons).

And maybe not even to the judicial branch, if they cover any tracks that might need it well enough (as whoever is the real power in DC probably can do).

Is there a fifth estate? No.

I somehow don't think Mr. Trump is going to improve the transparency much. It will be interesting enough to see if the VP invokes the 25th should Trump fade (reality check: he did confuse Haley and Harris that one time, but that might just have been ill will since he must be in great shape physically and psychologically to have endured all that has happened to him over these past many months).

Just gonna hold on to that image of most Americans, unwittingly or consciously, playing Cheat The Prophet -- and hope for the best.

 

[maroonedinhsv]

-A balanced budget and the national debt still not getting the attention it deserves, and is why I voted for Chase Oliver.

I voted for Kennedy because he told everyone not to vote for him.

 

[TH2002]

I voted for Kennedy because he told everyone not to vote for him.

You and me both!

 

[Jacob]

I've been seeing the vote comparisons from 2012/2016/2020/2024 being passed around as far as vote totals. Which is a worthless exercise until you get all the votes counted, which some states are painfully slow with.

Fun fact: every single swing state had more votes cast in 2024 than 2020.

 

[maroonedinhsv]

I've been seeing the vote comparisons from 2012/2016/2020/2024 being passed around as far as vote totals. Which is a worthless exercise until you get all the votes counted, which some states are painfully slow with.

Fun fact: every single swing state had more votes cast in 2024 than 2020.

Not surprising that Trump is a big hit with swingers.

 

[SASQUATCH]

Thank God, regular annoying commercials are back.

 

[Evan]

I've been seeing the vote comparisons from 2012/2016/2020/2024 being passed around as far as vote totals. Which is a worthless exercise until you get all the votes counted, which some states are painfully slow with.

Fun fact: every single swing state had more votes cast in 2024 than 2020.

From what I've been able to tell in the brief time I've had to look, it does seem as if turnout overall will ultimately be very close nationally to 2020's turnout. It may even exceed it. It certainly did in swing states. In many swing states Kamala matched or exceeded Biden's total from 2020. In some she didn't (at least it appears that way, however, counting is still taking place in numerous swing states).

We still are probably a week to ten days away from having 99%+ of votes tabulated.

It also seems like it some swing states 3rd party vote shares were down (meaning Trump and Kamala siphoned off those voters with Trump likely getting the lion's share), however, in some 3rd party share might have been a tad higher. Just think we have to wait another week at least to get the full picture. That said, it seems like my initial read of GOP turnout being up was accurate. It also seems true that Trump was able to mobilize low propensity voters at a higher rate than Kamala was.

Still need more data to get a firm read on demographic shifts but Trump did improve significantly with male Hispanic voters.

 

[Mike S]

The Polymarket guy has been all over this, and he's been saying for days that this year's vote total will rival 2020's.

 

[Evan]

LOL

 

[Evan]

Quite frankly, I'm disappointed. Why nominate Gaetz as AG when Bannon is fit, rested, tan, and raring to go?

 

[SASQUATCH]

Wonder if he knows good and well that Gaetz won't be confirmed, but he will know who's not willing to play ball with him? Strange pick. I'll wait and see.

 

[Evan]

Wonder if he knows good and well that Gaetz won't be confirmed, but he will know who's not willing to play ball with him? Strange pick. I'll wait and see.

Loyalty. It is purely about who he sees as being unfailingly loyal. I'm not convinced he won't be confirmed. Not sure there's more than a couple of Senators who would cross Trump even though many of them absolutely detest Gaetz. In the case of a tie, JD Vance will be able to cast the deciding vote. So you have to have 4 votes to block him.

I could see confirmation being blocked if a dozen plus banded together to vote no. Otherwise, I don't see a handful of GOP Senators taking the risk unless they are willing to torch their careers. I could see Collins, Murkowski, and McConnell voting no. McConnell is done in 2027 and hates Gaetz. Ironically, Lindsey Graham and Rick Scott both hate him as well but they'll bend the knee. Rubio has nothing but contempt for Gaetz but he's already bent the knee and stated Gaetz is a great pick.

I don't see anyone willing to be the 4th vote unless there's someone up for re-election in 2027 who was planning to retire. He's either confirmed with only 2-3 defections or there's 12+ defections to block him. I could be wrong. Like you said, it is time to wait and see.

The Gaetz nomination and Gabbard's nomination aren't about competence. They are purely about loyalty as I said earlier. Gaetz, in particular, is not remotely qualified for the job. At best, you could argue he served on the Judiciary committee and practiced law for a few years. Otherwise, he doesn't have any real experience with the justice system. Same goes for Gabbard as DNI. She didn't serve in any Intel billets while in the military. Ironically, she did serve in an MP unit and sat on the Homeland Security committee. Could argue she has some qualifications from there to head DHS. But, that position was given to Noem who doesn't have any law enforcement experience. I dunno, but I am trying to be generous here.

 

[bjdeming]

Found this (autotranslated) on an Icelandic news site while checking volcano news today. It's worth sharing, even if only to encourage us, the people, to stand behind our congress reps and senators if and when such bullying tactics are used against them.

Excerpt (via GT):

FOREIGN

Warns Republicans not to stand in his and Trump's way​

Samuel Karl Ólason writes December 10, 2024 3:01 PM

Elon Musk and Donald Trump.GETTY/BRANDON BELL

Elon Musk, the world's richest man, has warned Republican lawmakers not to try to block President-elect Donald Trump's nominees, saying he will use his wealth and influence against them.

Musk founded a political action committee for the November presidential election and spent about $30 billion to help Trump win. After the election, Musk vowed to use his committee extensively in the Republican primary for the next congressional elections, which will be held in two years.

Musk later responded to reports that he might support opposing candidates against congressmen who refuse to support Trump's nominees, saying that was the only way to respond to such a situation...

Ah, conflict of interest, anybody?

If billions of dollars weren't involved, I'd say he's just spouting. As it is, I think that the decisions of hundreds of millions of Americans are "the only way to respond" to any situation involving US government -- and I hope that the Democrats are facing up to the fact that they only lost the White House because they led first with a demented Beltway insider and then with an obvious incompetent, and also have ignored for a long time a significant part of their 20th-century base (working class people) as well as, short term, the 2020 activist black group whose political effectiveness back then was probably a strong factor in Harris getting the VP nod in the first place.

Please get your act together quickly, Dems, and PLEASE deliver a leadership candidate that people of all sorts will actually vote for in 2028 (and similar candidates in intervening races to help lay a good foundation). We all want to do well, and to come into our country's Tricentennial strong, confident, and justifiably proud of our achievements.

</rant> At least I didn't use caps.

 

[bjdeming]

I honestly have to wonder if dementia played a role in this:

"In the interests of national security and world peace, the United States believes that ownership and control of Greenland is absolutely essential," Trump said in a post yesterday.

The source post is in Icelandic (and should autotranslate) but it does link back to the original BBC article, and it does convey a sense of the reaction this has stirred in the involved Nordic countries. Didn't see it mentioned at the UPI site but it's probably in there somewhere.

Yeah, world peace is so good right now that we can afford to offend Scandinavia. Sigh.

I am so not looking forward to the next four years, but then, either way, I wouldn't have been.

We Boomers do deserve some brickbats, but if everything hangs together til 2028, maybe we'll just be living history and not active troublemakers any more.

PS: Some interesting fallout (autotranslated) that obliterates every stereotype I have about Greenland -- wonder if this would have happened without Trump's comment:

The chairman of the Greenlandic government says that big steps will be taken towards Greenland's independence in the new year and that it is necessary for Greenlanders to have their own constitution. 2025 is an election year in Greenland, and this year there will be elections for seats in the Inatsisartut, the national parliament, and in local governments.