Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

USA 2024 presidential election

13468946

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,320 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,849 ✭✭✭Brussels Sprout


    The effect of a VP on the ticket is minimal. Moreso with Trump at the top of the ticket. The state they're from is irrelevant.

    As for 2028. He'll think that he'll somehow be able to run again - after all, this is a man who thought that he'd be able to stay in office after losing an election. As such he'll pick someone who poses absolutely no threat to him and who kisses his ass.

    By virtue of the fact that they ran against him and criticised him (mildly) both Hailey & De Santis will be out of the running.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,711 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    The effect of a VP on the ticket is minimal. Moreso with Trump at the top of the ticket. The state they're from is irrelevant.

    Well precisely. When a candidate behaves and speaks like the Presidency is or should be that of an absolute monarch, the "vice president" role means nothing. Mike Pence was a useful tool to get and keep the evangelicals on side - now the mask the off, the pretence is gone. I don't know who'd be mad enough to take the VP role - but from Trump's PoV I can't imagine what strategic value it might bring this time.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,141 ✭✭✭Flaneur OBrien


    Mad enough you say? I think I know the perfect foil.





  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 16,486 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    Too mouthy and too interested in her own Media profile - Trump wants a "Stepford wife" as a VP.

    They are there to be seen and not heard and on the rare occasions they are to be heard it will only be to tell everyone how utterly awesome Donald is.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,141 ✭✭✭Flaneur OBrien


    You want to look at previous winners of "The Apprentice" to gauge what he's looking for.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 36,440 ✭✭✭✭LuckyLloyd


    Her defamation case looks set to go to trial after a second judge threw out her request to quash the charges. Trump is too smart to want anything to do with that imo.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,218 ✭✭✭✭Rjd2


    Pence definitely helped with the God squad in 2016 so it can be a bonus if got right sometimes.

    Don't want to lower the tone but Haley is attractive. On Haley people are ignoring while she has somewhat begin to politely ding Trump she has spent an absolute fortune in attacking RDS and sinking him in Iowa thus doing Trump a favor which he will be very aware off. Ron was always struggling but the money she has spent on burying him is remarkable especially considering she has spent sfa attacking the front runner.

    On looks, I have money on Stefnik but she may struggle because she is someone people might think is not that attractive. I don't think she is ugly especially compared to the gargoyles we see in politics, but Trump is a pig so that will probably sink her unfortunately.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,218 ✭✭✭✭Rjd2


    She is running for senate also so that also rules it out.

    That's an issue for November for such a key battleground state, having such polarising candidates in Lake and Trump on same ticket is such a high risk, because while Arizona is still a Conservative state its most certainly not a MAGA state.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,320 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose


    Pence was essentially a zombie who delivered Evangelical votes, and had zero visibility while VP. Trump won't want anything that distracts from the attention on him. Stefanik's way too political and likely too east coast. Noem seems sufficiently zombie and photogenic to make the cut plus has some anti-mask anti-vacc "credibility" that would help with keeping the MAGAts in line. Thing is, there's some salacious gossip about her and that brute Corey Lewandowski were doing the dirty while she was married to someone else and despite being all family values .

    "He's definitely banging her."




  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 88 ✭✭Lucien_Sarti


    Since 1868 (or arguably a few elections earlier, with party name changes) the Republicans & Democrats have between them won 100% of elections held.

    What a simply splendid record for their backers! </sarc>

    Both parties donors come from the same pool of benevolent, generous oligarchs; and in all cases the candidate with the largest election fund has won (maybe the alternate party has won before with the 2nd largest fund, I’m not sure).

    What I’m seeing on social media, very few voters under 35 are buying the 3rd party is a wasted vote canard any longer. No need to say they’d laugh at the suggestion of voting R or D.

    Ross Perot got almost 20 million votes 18.9% in 1992. So if there is even a little co-ordination, I think West or Stein, for example, could win the vote.  

    If things are judged to be slipping from the 100% track record later in the year, I would not rule out oligarch party (D & R) subterfuge or dirty tricks.



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 16,486 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    There's not a snowballs chance in hell of a 3rd party candidate winning anything.

    Ross Perot got 19.7M votes you say?

    How many Electoral college votes did he win?

    ZERO.

    Not saying that's right , not at all, but the way the Electoral college is structured a 3rd party candidate simply hasn't got a hope.

    All Perot did was bleed away votes from the incumbent (Bush) and hand Clinton an easy win.

    All ANY 3rd party candidate will do is takes votes away from one or other of the main candidates.

    Perot was right leaning so most of his votes were ones that would have been expected to go to Bush.

    3rd Party candidates are spoilers, nothing more nothing less.

    Yes, that's a massive failing of the Electoral system but absent a root and branch restructuring of how they vote for President that's all they will ever be.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 28,445 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    Ah yes, that bastion of voter turnout that is the under 35s.

    Anyway, there is literally zero chance of West or Stein even winning a single electoral vote.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 88 ✭✭Lucien_Sarti


    I’d put it that the electoral college is working as designed. Not unlike the senate, It was set up as a further (geographic) obstacle to democracy - since the slave owning founding fathers knew democracy and capitalism are mutually exclusive. Even in the 1790s the gatekeepers to information (& thus winning elections) were the wealthy newspaper owners. Any one non-conformist newspaper owner or pamphlet distributor could be drowned out geographically by the cartel and thus have no impact on the result.

    As for 3rd party being spoilers: Yes that system worked well, until now where potentially the entire participating electorate has access to seeing thousands of fellow USians expressing disgust for the entire electoral regime. I think Obamas fraudulent PR in 2008, (in hindsight, fool me once ….) & Biden funding genocide in 4k in Gaza are the final straw for the ancien régime – one can hope.

    The younger age groups, that I see on social media, are saying that legacy media only influences or engages boomers or older nowadays. In other words, legacy media has no power or effect on the under 35s (maybe upto under 50s) – it may as well not exist as far as they’re concerned. This is a fast change, it could manifest in this election or the next.

    If any of the 80 or 90 million who don’t vote (I mean those who make that decision because they see the presidential elections as basically a sham run by the oligarchy, not the 18 million racially disenfranchised by states) see a momentum for real change they might reregister and also vote 3rd party. Overall, I am suggesting this charade of a system is on its last legs.



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 16,486 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    Never said the EC wasn't "working as designed" , it absolutely is but that design ensures that a 3rd party candidate hasn't a snowballs chance in hell of getting elected.

    Let's accept your hypothesis and the roughly one third of US adults currently not registered to vote all decide to do so and can their votes for a 3rd party candidate.

    The demographic reality is that the overwhelming majority of those "new voters" will be split across perhaps 6 States (CA , TX , FL , NY , PA , IL)

    Only 2 of those States are really swing states , - Even the addition of ~10M 3rd party votes in California for example wouldn't alter the result , same in Texas , NY and Florida.

    And even in those swing states , 25/30% more voters all voting for a 3rd party likely won't be enough to actually win - Remember winning only requires a plurality of the vote , not a majority.

    IF it were a National Popular vote , then a 3rd party candidate absolutely has a shot in an "American Spring" style scenario with a popular rising of the Under 30 voting block.

    But it isn't , so they don't.

    No matter how broken the Electoral college process is and it IS broken, until it is changed it will continue to deliver a Democrat or a Republican to the White House for ever more.

    And given what legislative hoop would be required to be jumped through to change it (and Turkeys don't vote for Christmas) , it's never getting changed.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,218 ✭✭✭✭Rjd2



    This is probably one of the most interesting groups to keep an eye on 2024.

    Biden and Trump will likely retain about 90% or so of their voters from 2020 so both guys need to ensure they hold their various constituencies and right now Biden's numbers with younger people are concerning. Their are numerous caveats, ages away , small polling size etc.

    Trump doesn't need to win this voting bloc but if they don't come out like they did in 2020 then Biden is in all sorts of trouble.

    Israel, climate change, the economic climate and the fact he was never young peoples choice in 2020, heck Clinton wasn't in 2016 makes it very interesting.

    Vox who are a safe space for Dems did a reasonable article on it the other day.

    https://www.vox.com/politics/24034416/young-voters-biden-trump-gen-z-polling-israel-gaza-economy-2024-election



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 28,445 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    Yes, it's a concern/problem. Mind you I have seen polls with a plurality of support for Trump among U30s and I just struggle mightily to believe that is true.

    I still think there is a large element of "out of sight, out of mind" with Trump. He has mostly been doing his own rallies to his die-hards with no real coverage. Skipping the Republican primary just keeps him out of the limelight even more. His name is mentioned obviously, but it's not quite the same. Eventually all his talk of dictatorships and his complete incoherency will become more apparent.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,711 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    Trump doesn't need to win this voting bloc but if they don't come out like they did in 2020 then Biden is in all sorts of trouble.

    Israel, climate change, the economic climate and the fact he was never young peoples choice in 2020, heck Clinton wasn't in 2016 makes it very interesting.

    If wandering centrists and left wing Americans can't hold their nose again to keep a man (and movement) openly touting authoritarianism, then there's no hope for the American Experiment.

    2020 was to boot out the man, 2024 is to keep him out. The stakes are pretty clear and if that can't get the young, PoC and liberal out to vote, I don't know what will.

    Post edited by pixelburp on


  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 28,445 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    To that point, this is interesting

    If one thing has noticeably changed since 2016, it’s how the audience reacts to Trump. During his first campaign, the improvised material was what everyone looked forward to, while the written sections felt largely like box-checking. But in Mason City, the off-script riffs—many of which revolved around the 2020 election being stolen from him, and his personal sense of martyrdom—often turned rambly, and the crowd seemed to lose interest. At one point, a woman in front of me rolled her eyes and muttered, “He’s just babbling now.” She left a few minutes later, joining a steady stream of early exiters, and I wondered then whether even the most loyal Trump supporters might be surprised if they were to see their leader speak in person.

    My own takeaway from the event was that there’s a reason Trump is no longer the cultural phenomenon he was in 2016. Yes, the novelty has worn off. But he also seems to have lost the instinct for entertainment that once made him so interesting to audiences. He relies on a shorthand legible only to his most dedicated followers, and his tendency to get lost in rhetorical cul-de-sacs of self-pity and anger wears thin. This doesn’t necessarily make him less dangerous. There is a rote quality now to his darkest rhetoric that I found more unnerving than when it used to command wall-to-wall news coverage.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,320 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose



    Paywalled.

    ^^^(https://archive.is/f2tcf)



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,218 ✭✭✭✭Rjd2


    Iowa was never in play for Haley or RDS, but proof if ever needed , the media want and need Trump. Calling this when people were still voting, dire.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 698 ✭✭✭ghostfacekilla


    Photo emerges of Trump watching CNN and FOX on two televisions during the voting. A great insight into whose opinions he cares the most about. FOX presenters bigging him up bigly im their interviews with anyone on the shows. Rupert’s son knows he needs him onboard if they’re to reverse their financial decline, but it’s a tightrope walk for them between now and election day if this is their new change of direction. Delighted Ramasmarmy is getting hockeyed. What a horrible individual to have in a race for public office, in addition to the rapist.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,849 ✭✭✭Brussels Sprout



    There's zero chance of a third party breaking through anytime soon. Yes, the big money follows the two big parties but the real issue is the voting system. Almost everywhere in the USA they use first past the post. That's a terrible system that almost always results in two large parties and makes the emergence of smaller parties (outside of regional parties) almost impossible.

    The one chink of light is that citizens have been trying to change this through voter-led propositions. Maine brought in ranked choice voting in 2018. Alaska brought in ranked choice voting for the 2022 elections and both Nevada & Oregon are voting to bring it in later this year. New York city also brought in in for their municipal elections.

    These should, in time, result in more parties running in those elections as Ranked Choice Voting doesn't penalise voters for voting third party in the way that First past the post does. That's likely going to take years or decades though.



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 20,228 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 71,581 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Basically yeah. Single seats so how we do it for by elections and the president.



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 16,486 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    Very simplified version , but basically the same.

    You vote in order of preference for the single candidate and if no one reaches 50% they then look at the second preferences.

    It's what did for Sarah Palin in Alaska - There was a second GOP candidate running and his 2nd preferences all went to the Democrat candidate as they all hated Palin.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 377 ✭✭breatheme


    The problem is that both major third parties emerge every 4 years trying to win the presidency, they don't try to start at the bottom and win local elections, or even seats in the House.

    I understand where they're coming from (since if you get like 5% of the vote in a presidential election your party is entitled to federal funding) and I think it's still putting the cart before the horse.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,218 ✭✭✭✭Rjd2


    Lets check in on the Haley campaign lol. Lost to "none of the above" in Nevada and absolutely goosed in all primary states. Monumental lack of judgement from those who bet on someone with such low approval ratings on beating Trump in a primary.

    If somehow Trump has to drop out , it won't be her, the donors may want her but you cant pick someone your party supporters don't like in a general IMO.


    https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1755218477508337732


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-68225999



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,167 ✭✭✭✭AbusesToilets


    A strategy focused on winning seats in cities would probably be a more effective method. Focus on one or so at a time per election cycle, build up a base of support in the major population centers. Even a handful of Congressional seats could sway massive decisions.



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 16,486 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    Exactly , imagine what a block of 20-25 House seats under a 3rd party banner could achieve ? , they would absolutely hold the balance of power and more importantly prove to the American public that a 3rd (or 4th party) is a realistic voting option.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 71,581 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    There's a growing number of places using ranked choice voting too - basically single seat STV - which could let this happen easier.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,218 ✭✭✭✭Rjd2


    A very poor day for Biden and unless you are a MSNBC type echo chamber chap, you're very naive to think his decline won't be an issue for the voters. You can make an argument for Biden been superior on policy and character, but for Joe Bloggs does that matter?

    Luckily for him Trump is so repulsive so it probably balances it all out but nonetheless the more we see from Biden its obvious the man is just isn't what he is.

    I don't think they will replace him though, no obvious replacements who would win the EC college and tbf while not having the best of times in the polls he is far from doomed in them.

    https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1755704576743772328?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1755704576743772328%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=

    Post edited by Rjd2 on


  • Moderators, Computer Games Moderators Posts: 23,304 Mod ✭✭✭✭Kiith


    Yeah, pretty bad day for Biden and the Democrats. Trump pretty much definitely on the ballot, and Biden gets this grenade thrown at him. He also got the presidents of Mexico and Egypt mixed up, which didn't look great in a speech where he was trying to say his memory was fine.

    On a non-political note, to publicly say that a father doesn't remember when his son died...jesus christ, what an absolute dick move.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,711 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    The only caveat worth saying is that this coming out now and not during the white heat of the Trump v. Biden campaign? That's a little odd. Maybe there's method in the madness here: not saying it's all contrived or orchestrated but it's interesting that the grenade got thrown in February and not as an "October Surprise". Seems like the whole "Biden is in decline" angle won't go away and perhaps one of those issues where people's minds are gonna be made up. So if there are any stories around it, better them outed now and not when Trump could truly run with it.

    Does come back to the repeated notion that if the GOP ran anyone even vaguely centrist & not so patently tainted as Trump, this would be a walk in the park for them. Instead they're sticking to a failed past president who increasingly cuts an unhinged figure, and keeping their noses close to a lunatic movement such as MAGA.



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 20,228 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    Trump is 78 in a few months, older than Biden was in 2020.

    Trump is showing signs of senility. Confeve anyone? Anyone visiting Nambia? - a new African state according to Trump.



  • Moderators, Computer Games Moderators Posts: 23,304 Mod ✭✭✭✭Kiith


    Doesn't matter, most Republicans will vote for him no matter what he says or does.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,711 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    I don't even think it's "signs" anymore: even in the intervening years since 2020 Trump's mood, temperament and basic coherence has gone out the window; his 2016+ record and overall rhetoric (or lack thereof) has clearly turned off wandering voters when one delves into the stats of the Primaries so far.

    As said, this isn't proving to be true as the Primaries have shown Trump underperforming relative to expectation. While 50% of Nikki Haley voters (however few that amounts to) have said they'd vote Biden come November,; for sure the Base will probably induce the head trauma needed to vote for this charlatan again but the wandering, independent voters look to be already lost.

    Trump has a pretty transparently awful record as President, even before one gets to the sticky issues of his refusal to operate even close to democratic norms.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,218 ✭✭✭✭Rjd2


    Trump's brain is made of mush yes, but looking at polling its not something the Dems can kill him on unfortunately.

    I think because Trump is generally pretty energetic he can somewhat get away with it while at times Biden can be a little bit doddering. Obviously some of the Biden stuff is RNC cynical editing, but nonetheless it is sticking much more than the clips you see from Trump making a clown of himself sadly.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,711 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    Problem is all the rhetoric in the world doesn't matter 'cos this is a re-run of 2020: minds will have been broadly made up. It's all down to the independents & how mobilsed the left/democrats will be. But that said, I'm not sure Trump is as energised looking as he was 'cos from what I've seen, he's sweaty, looks tired and is even more rambling (if such a thing is possible) - perhaps just driven to distraction by his mountain of legal peril but the guy looks and talks like shít.

    Maybe the plain truth is Trump avoided the GOP primary debates not because he thinks monarchs shouldn't have to debate (though that's part of it, no doubt), but because everyone could see he was & remains a total mess. Put on national TV versus Biden and it may become even more transparent.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,461 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    Whoever wins it's really time for an upper age limit.



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 20,228 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    Well, Jimmy Carter, at 99, would be a better President than Trump.

    However, an upper age limit should apply to all such positions, including the USSC.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,711 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    Realistically, term limits are the key. And to be fair, the President has it so really it's the senate and SC that it needs to introduced. It is facial Chuck Grassley and his ilk still hold the balance of power in the country, but term limits would at least ensure he's put to pasture eventually.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,461 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    Upper age limit is more "key" than term limits of the idea is to stop people too old from running the country.

    There seems to be no issue with lower age limits but everyone gets precious about excluding the elderly.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,141 ✭✭✭Flaneur OBrien


    Term limits for politicians and judiciary is probably a good thing. Career politicians for the most part, aren't a great thing as they lose connection with the people they're meant to represent.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,711 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    Not precious, just if we wanna talk where the simplest way to apply sensible ceilings to American politics it makes sense to follow what's already there than try to apply something that'd likely meet more resistance. Let's face it, Biden v Trump is a pretty extreme matchup for all sorts of reasons while generally elections have featured younger politicians.

    Problem with old v young is that the old tend to be the ones with more power and money; thus you meet the most resistance. Lifetime appointments are insane whatever way you swing it, especially with an unelected body like the SC. At least the young, old and in between can be voted out of the Oval Office.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,383 ✭✭✭✭rossie1977


    As far as polling this far out I wouldn't pay much heed to it.

    This sounds very very familiar https://www.politico.com/story/2011/12/poll-obama-trails-in-swing-states-070344



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,834 ✭✭✭eire4


    Totally agree and for me there should be one for the house the senate and for federal judges as well.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,218 ✭✭✭✭Rjd2


    I wonder what Clarence Thomas's plans are if we don't have a GOP president in 2020 or 2024? I assume like RBG die on the job, that's so bleak that either had that option.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,849 ✭✭✭Brussels Sprout



    I can't imagine him wanting to retire even if Trump were to win. He's only 75 which is nuts considering he's been on the court since 1991. He probably thinks that he's get alt least another decade in him (Stephen Breyer retired at 84). Besides, if he's not a supreme court justice then he won't have all of his billionaire "friends" willing to ferry himself and his lunatic wife around on private planes and taking them on fancy holidays.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,167 ✭✭✭✭AbusesToilets




Advertisement