2024 Election - Thread #1

[Labster]

If he does drop out of the race for one reason or another, are the DNC delegates expected to vote for whoever got the second-largest number of ballots in each state's primaries? Or do you go straight to the backroom horse-trading that typifies practically every Canadian party convention before the first ballot?

Neither.  The party has coalesced around Vice President Kamala Harris, for a few reasons:

• She's already vetted for competence and closet skeletons, having run for VP before and currently
  
• If she moves up, she can continue to use the campaign cash that Biden raised for their collective campaign
  
• There were zero viable runners-up, in what was supposed to be a coronation (just like the Republicans oddly)
  
• It's really late, only 4 months to the election, and it's impossible to introduced a new candidate in so little time (ignore rest of world's elections)
  

Now I do think that this sort of horse trading could actually occur over the vice president slot, unless Kamala has someone that she really, really wants.  I think that's far from decided.  I mean, besides Joe Biden not yet being convinced that he needs to quit.

[robkelk]

Well, that changes everything. Not that it was unexpected.

AP: Joe Biden drops out of the 2024 race

[Labster]

[Norgarth]

so now the question is who becomes Harris' running mate?

Presumably a white male to calm the potential voters

[robkelk]

so now the question is who becomes Harris' running mate?

Presumably a white male to calm the potential voters

One wonders whether Bernie Saunders would want the job. That would protect Harris from assassination if she gets elected President -- kill her and an actual socialist takes over.

... No, I don't really believe that'll happen, either.

[Dartz]

Imagine an old dehydrated dog which has spent it's entire life being fed bothing but the cheapest, most bonemeal-full dogfood imagineable. It's more bone that meal. Imagine taking that dog to the centre of the Atacama desert - where it hasn't rained for 4 centuries - and waiting while it curls out a thick log of shite.

Now imagine that shite just squatting there under the sun, desiccatting, bleaching a brilliant bone white. Days, weeks, months and years pass. It bakes under the sun, fossilising. Image the absolute dryness of that white shite. The absolute dearth of any iota of moisture.

Now imagine a human as dry and white as that bleached and baked coprolite and you'll be halfway to whatever they manage to dredge up.


Biden probably made the right choice if he really has been bagged by the Corvids. He does not look well at all. The only downside is that he'll be forever called 'Bottler' when he goes into a pub - and everyone will blame him when Trump wins in November. They'd blame him if he stayed and Trump won so - I suppose that one's a Morton's fork. But at least now he can retire with his Pontiac Firebird and flip the bastards off as he roars into the sunset.

[Labster]

I mean, they probably will pick a white man.  I don't know if it will do any good -- would a voter who is worried about having a black/Indian candidate be reassured by the presence of a European-American?  I honestly have no clue, because the more I try to understand racism, the less I actually know, because none of it makes any damned sense.  Like I realize that it matters to people, but I don't for the life of me understand why or in what way.

Culture, though; culture matters.  Kamala Harris is culturally NorCal, just like lots of people I knew in college.  Not the same culture as me, I'm from the Southland, but close enough.  I look forward to her spreading her California values.  All other cultures of North America, and perhaps even the world, will revolve around the Hollywood-SF-Seattle axis.

[Labster]

I'm really surprised by the naiveté of the press in covering the Democratic party these days.  The New York Times ran an editorial yesterday afternoon where they praised Biden for dropping out, and then looked forward to an open selection process for the nominee -- I knew right then Harris would have the thing sewn up by the time it appeared in print the following morning.  It's like they want there to be a story here, some sort of suspense, but reality stubbornly refuses to comply.

NPR had a segment on how Biden's campaign team was now operating as Harris' campaign staff, and they had all of this work to do to get things moving.  "All of these campaign logistics that have to be done that would have be inconceivable just a few hours earlier."  Inconceivable?  I do not think that word means what you think it means.  We Democrats have all been thinking about this for three weeks now.  People who were interested in running might have looked at a few polls, but when it came down to it, the Vice President was the only one with a serious chance of victory in the time remaining, if she wanted it, and she wants it.  This groundswell of endorsements today is not some big campaign to get everyone in line, but simple recognition of reality.

Well, except Senator Joe Manchin, who has talked about rejoining the Democratic Party (after he left it a few months ago) to run for President.  Um, no thanks.  I think I'd take my chances with Trump instead of him, at least you know which side Trump is on.

The Republican line seems to be that Joe Biden was always old and unqualified, and it was about time he left -- and also that by leaving, Biden is defying the will of the primary voters who voted for him, and empowered smoke-filled back rooms to pick a replacement.  Also, why aren't we talking about Trump's ear?

[classicdrogn]

I watched her speech, and she makes the right mouth-noises. I still have doubts that a non-white non-man can get enough of the mid-right who aren't impressed with Cheatoman but are still pretty conservative to win, but there really doesn't seem to have been anyone better either. It'll be as "the opponent of Trump" if she does, but hey, he's old too, maybe we'll get lucky and he'll catch something or trip on air and roll down a ramp before November.

[robkelk]

Also, why aren't we talking about Trump's ear?

"Dude, that is so last week."

[nemonowan]

I'm really surprised by the naiveté of the press in covering the Democratic party these days.  The New York Times ran an editorial yesterday afternoon where they praised Biden for dropping out, and then looked forward to an open selection process for the nominee -- I knew right then Harris would have the thing sewn up by the time it appeared in print the following morning.  It's like they want there to be a story here, some sort of suspense, but reality stubbornly refuses to comply.

From what I heard, Kamala is the only candidate that can legally touch the 200+ million dollar war chest originally raised for the Biden-Harris ticket. 

And she is also the only Democrat candidate registered in states where regitration closes before the Democrat convention, and where Republican officials would be very unlikely to emit a waiver allowing Democrats to change their registered candidate.

When you take into account these two practical issues, it was clear that Kamala was the only possible candidate and that suggesting any other would be just a flight of fancy.

And speaking of such flights, now we will have a week of speculation about who will be the new VP candidate. I already heard about trying to recruit Michelle Obama for the position...

[hazard]

Michelle is a pipe dream.

That said, the flailing of the Republican party as they try to pivot towards fighting a Kamala Harris presidency instead of a Joe Biden presidency is horribly funny.

And by that I mean it's both horrible and funny.

Their angles of attack are basically what you'd expect, but they clearly never even anticipated the need so they've been caught with their pants down.

[robkelk]

One of the most out-there suggestions I've heard for Harris's running mate is Liz Cheney. Apparently to make it a "women's rights" ticket.

Thing is, that's about all the two have in common. And a mixed Dem/GOP ticket isn't going to fly unless there's an actual war on and the USA needs to look united in the face of the enemy. So... well, it's possible, but it's about as possible IMHO as is climate change undoing itself spontaneously.

---

More realistically, this is a definite personality test. Anybody who wants the job as a stepping-stone to the Oval Office has to be willing to work for a woman... and that's a rare ability in men over 45. Too much unconscious training from their fathers that "men work and women tend house" (never mind that tending the house is just as much work as any paying job is). If the Dems have such a person, now is the time for them to make themselves known... to the party brass, at the least.

[classicdrogn]

I think you might do better to add 10-15 years to the age bracket, Rob, but otherwise all too correct, and that still covers the majority of realistic VP candidates anyway.

[robkelk]

I believe this is the first time Randall Munroe has endorsed a candidate.



Hard to imagine political rhetoric more microtargeted at me than 'I love Venn diagrams. I really do, I love Venn diagrams. It's just something about those three circles.'

[GethN7]

Bear in mind I'm trying to not prejudice either side here, and I'm not inclined to vote for either option, but from where I'm sitting, the Democrats despite the bluster look like they lost the plot to me.

The Republicans have a candidate they are sticking with, generally have their act together, and while I don't want to have to vote for them because I really wish they had someone other than Trump if I absolutely had to make a choice, they at least have a candidate and plans to follow through with them.

The Democrats, well, they just chucked Biden, who had actual groundwork laid, and effectively sidelined him only a few months before election and are shilling Kamala Harris to the moon despite her having no groundwork laid and basically having to start from scratch while Biden at least had the advantage of being an incumbent with a war chest, which the FEC told Harris she cannot legally touch due to election laws governing the financing.

She's only got a few months to convince people she's got a shot, and considering how 2020 ended ignominiously for her and she's basically a late-game player switch, she's going to have an uphill battle if you ask me.

The Democrats have practically never won doing stuff like this. Lincoln won in 1860 because the Democrats were horrifically fractured, ditto Nixon in 1968. From a historical standpoint, I'm doubtful Harris can break the precedent.

[Dartz]

I'm seeing two groups of people.

Some are genuinely excited.

Some are doom coated doom biscuits with doom filling who probably would've prefered DOOM.

---

The consequences of Lincoln winning were somewhat different from the expected consequences of Trump winning.

Licoln ended a civil war and got shot.
Trump got shot and - well - remains to be seen.

[Labster]

Bear in mind I'm trying to not prejudice either side here, and I'm not inclined to vote for either option, but from where I'm sitting, the Democrats despite the bluster look like they lost the plot to me.

The Republicans have a candidate they are sticking with, generally have their act together, and while I don't want to have to vote for them because I really wish they had someone other than Trump if I absolutely had to make a choice, they at least have a candidate and plans to follow through with them.

The Democrats, well, they just chucked Biden, who had actual groundwork laid, and effectively sidelined him only a few months before election and are shilling Kamala Harris to the moon despite her having no groundwork laid and basically having to start from scratch while Biden at least had the advantage of being an incumbent with a war chest, which the FEC told Harris she cannot legally touch due to election laws governing the financing.

She's only got a few months to convince people she's got a shot, and considering how 2020 ended ignominiously for her and she's basically a late-game player switch, she's going to have an uphill battle if you ask me.

The Democrats have practically never won doing stuff like this. Lincoln won in 1860 because the Democrats were horrifically fractured, ditto Nixon in 1968. From a historical standpoint, I'm doubtful Harris can break the precedent.

Okay, the FEC thing is just not true. Like, at all. There are some conservative lawsuits alleging that this is true, and Harris can't touch the money she raised. But even if that were the case, after the Democratic convention the entire fund could be donated to the DNC, which is the same result, a month later. There is such a thing as peaking too early.

The other thing here is saying that Democrats are horrifically fractured, which for the Democratic Party is like, an ordinary Tuesday? I mean, we are basically always about one step removed from the "Judean People's Liberation Front" sketch. Nothing has changed on that front. There's always a tension between the leftist wing, the social justice wing, the pro-business wing, and the environmental wing.

None of this lack of unity has stopped the Democratic Party from winning the majority vote in all presidential elections this century with the exception of 2004. The problem is that the system is completely rigged against Democrats. In a fair election, we wouldn't have to worry so much about swing states, and appeal to every voter. But instead we have decided that some voters are more equal than others, and rigged it so that my vote is counted at only about 26% as much as a voter from Wyoming.

What a complete and utter rig job.

[robkelk]

I'm not saying the Parliamentary system is perfect -- far from it. But from what I see in this forum, it sure seems to be better than the Congressional system...

[GethN7]

Bear in mind I'm trying to not prejudice either side here, and I'm not inclined to vote for either option, but from where I'm sitting, the Democrats despite the bluster look like they lost the plot to me.

The Republicans have a candidate they are sticking with, generally have their act together, and while I don't want to have to vote for them because I really wish they had someone other than Trump if I absolutely had to make a choice, they at least have a candidate and plans to follow through with them.

The Democrats, well, they just chucked Biden, who had actual groundwork laid, and effectively sidelined him only a few months before election and are shilling Kamala Harris to the moon despite her having no groundwork laid and basically having to start from scratch while Biden at least had the advantage of being an incumbent with a war chest, which the FEC told Harris she cannot legally touch due to election laws governing the financing.

She's only got a few months to convince people she's got a shot, and considering how 2020 ended ignominiously for her and she's basically a late-game player switch, she's going to have an uphill battle if you ask me.

The Democrats have practically never won doing stuff like this. Lincoln won in 1860 because the Democrats were horrifically fractured, ditto Nixon in 1968. From a historical standpoint, I'm doubtful Harris can break the precedent.

Okay, the FEC thing is just not true.  Like, at all.  There are some conservative lawsuits alleging that this is true, and Harris can't touch the money she raised.  But even if that were the case, after the Democratic convention the entire fund could be donated to the DNC, which is the same result, a month later.  There is such a thing as peaking too early.

The other thing here is saying that Democrats are horrifically fractured, which for the Democratic Party is like, an ordinary Tuesday?  I mean, we are basically always about one step removed from the "Judean People's Liberation Front" sketch.  Nothing has changed on that front.  There's always a tension between the leftist wing, the social justice wing, the pro-business wing, and the environmental wing.

None of this lack of unity has stopped the Democratic Party from winning the majority vote in all presidential elections this century with the exception of 2004.  The problem is that the system is completely rigged against Democrats.  In a fair election, we wouldn't have to worry so much about swing states, and appeal to every voter.  But instead we have decided that some voters are more equal than others, and rigged it so that my vote is counted at only about 26% as much as a voter from Wyoming.

What a complete and utter rig job.

Maybe. Again, I'm just a political bystander looking from the outside, I really don't want a dog in this fight because I'm not enamored of either option, I just hope we don't have yet another threat of civil war over whoever wins or loses again. Maybe I'm just cynical, but I'd like to see a transition of power that goes by without seeing another January 6 or worse, 1860: Electric Boogaloo.

Seems like it was so long ago we had a winner and loser that didn't cause all hell to break loose.

[classicdrogn]

Eh, Harris has picked up as the Demnocrat canidate right where Biden left off, with things running within the margin of error as even between her and Cheatoman with a few percent unaccounted for. I agree that she's got an uphill battle against being a brown woman to get past that, but it's also where she's starting from as "spare in case of Presidential disaster" without having spent a minute or a dime on Kamela For President 2024 campaigning... I think that's more a measure of "anyone but Trump" than people having really been for Biden, let alone her in their own rights. The question now is how much interest she can rouse among people who were still unconvinced.

I do have to admit I love the former prosecutor vs. convicted criminal narrative, though I would legitimately vote for Dr. Doom over Trump; DOOM would at least be a competent dictator. Alas, as he is not a natural-born citizen (or a real person) Victor von Doom is not qualified as a candidate.

[hazard]

Well, if you don't want another civil war.

Either pick the group who believes that violence is not a valid political tool and work hard to ensure their victory is sufficiently overwhelming nobody denies it.

Or pick the group for whom violence, including political violence, has consistently been the answer to any question they can't lie their way out of and hope they never aim for you while you desperately attempt to ignore the dead piling up. Because violence is the answer to them, and I hope you realize that if they run out of conveniently available targets they will designate a new group to fit that role regardless of how insane the reasoning.

After all, it's not a civil war if nobody calls it one. It might just be a purge.

[classicdrogn]

I doubt violence is even in question anymore. The questions now are "by whom," "when," and "how much?"

I would very much like to be wrong.

[Labster]

I'm too lazy to make the meme image, so here it is in text form

(Panel 1)
Man, smiling: How's it going little buddy?
TRUMP/VANCE campaign sign sits in the lower right corner

(Panel 2)
Various webpage captures:

Trump tells Christian voters they 'won't have to vote anymore' if he's elected
> "You won’t have to do it anymore. Four more years, you know what? It’ll be fixed, it’ll be fine. You won’t have to vote anymore, my beautiful Christians," he said.

Some House Republicans slam Vance as Trump’s VP pick: ‘The worst choice’
> “He was the worst choice of all the options. It was so bad I didn’t even think it was possible,” one House Republican said. “Anti-Ukraine, more of a populist. He adds nothing to the Trump ticket. He energizes the same people that love Trump.”

JD Vance defends "childless cat ladies" remark amid backlash
> "I've got nothing against cats. I've got nothing against dogs."

Harris sees boost in favorability after Biden drops out of race: POLL
> Forty-four percent of independents have a favorable view of Harris, up from only 28% a week ago.

(Panel 3)
Man, with blank face: beat

(Panel 4)
Man, smiling: ... Yeah

[GethN7]

I doubt violence is even in question anymore. The questions now are "by whom," "when," and "how much?"

I would very much like to be wrong.

Same. I'm going to bow out of this thread after this, but I will wish the same peaceful attempt to campaign on Kamala Harris I do Trump. I hope both are able to reach election day without harm (or any further harm in Trump's case), the voting goes with as little shenanigans or accusations of such, and whoever wins can peacefully transition into power and that the loser and who supported them can accept that with grace and civility.