2024 US Presidential Election Thread

  • Thread starter ryzno
  • 88 comments
  • 3,733 views

Dotini

Premium
15,725
United States
Seattle
CR80_Shifty
You spent the first two years of Trump's presidency describing Trump as the "peace and prosperity" President rather than the self-serving, narcissistic, traitorous jackass that he actually is.
Unfortunately, his personality, which I already knew and said (for decades) was defective, overcame the good he did in the pursuit of peace and prosperity. Today, we have a much better president in terms of personality, but Joe is failing badly in the peace and prosperity department. At this moment, both parties are war parties, and both are pointing the finger at each other for the sudden and dramatic failures of the economy. It strongly looks like the voters will throw out the Democratic majority in Congress, and the next year will or two will be gruesome at best.
 
5,942
Simcoeace
Unfortunately, his personality, which I already knew and said (for decades) was defective, overcame the good he did in the pursuit of peace and prosperity. Today, we have a much better president in terms of personality, but Joe is failing badly in the peace and prosperity department. At this moment, both parties are war parties, and both are pointing the finger at each other for the sudden and dramatic failures of the economy. It strongly looks like the voters will throw out the Democratic majority in Congress, and the next year will or two will be gruesome at best.
The idea that the President - any President - has much responsibility for "prosperity" is highly debatable. At best, Trump rode a continuing economic cycle up to the point where the pandemic & his ludicrously inadequate response to it, reversed the cycle. As far as "peace" is concerned, Trump's aggressively nationalistic "America First" policy alienated all America's allies, while his cozying up to dictators & authoritarians around the world emboldened their own nationalistic impulses. Neither of these approaches set the stage for continuing peace in the world. Domestically, Trump supercharged the partisan divisions in the US, deliberately set out to undermine democratic institutions, and inspired a seditious attack on the US Capitol. And most of this simply in pursuit of gratifying his own narcissism.
 

Dotini

Premium
15,725
United States
Seattle
CR80_Shifty
The idea that the President - any President - has much responsibility for "prosperity" is highly debatable. At best, Trump rode a continuing economic cycle up to the point where the pandemic & his ludicrously inadequate response to it, reversed the cycle. As far as "peace" is concerned, Trump's aggressively nationalistic "America First" policy alienated all America's allies, while his cozying up to dictators & authoritarians around the world emboldened their own nationalistic impulses. Neither of these approaches set the stage for continuing peace in the world. Domestically, Trump supercharged the partisan divisions in the US, deliberately set out to undermine democratic institutions, and inspired a seditious attack on the US Capitol. And most of this simply in pursuit of gratifying his own narcissism.

Partially agreed. Fortunately, Trump's miserable presidency is over, hopefully won't be coming back, and voters will have better options for 2024.

Right now, Biden is claiming he will run again, but obviously the odds of that are very low. On the GOP side, there are over a dozen candidates in the offing. Trump will try to be kingmaker, but there's still a chance he could wind up in jail.

It's more than two years until the presidential election. Now, the voters are extremely unhappy with the handling of the economy - "prosperity" is the central issue. It seems very likely the voters will make sweeping changes in November, and the race for the 2024 presidential nominations will be on in earnest. I hope the issues will revolve around economics, and violence domestically and abroad will not be a problem.
 

Scaff

Moderator
28,358
United Kingdom
He/Him
ScaffUK
ScaffGTP
A bit of a read, but worth it, it will be interesting to look back on and see how it ages (I 100% hope the answer to that is not well).

 

Blitz24

Chromalusion Member
Premium
17,860
United States
NJ/USA
Blitzbay
Blitzbay
A bit of a read, but worth it, it will be interesting to look back on and see how it ages (I 100% hope the answer to that is not well).

On that note:
 

Danoff

Who is John Galt?
Premium
31,295
United States
Mile High City
A bit of a read, but worth it, it will be interesting to look back on and see how it ages (I 100% hope the answer to that is not well).

This is coming from a case that the supreme court is going to hear soon regarding whether a state legislature can completely disregard the governor, state constitution, etc. in regard to election laws. It's not yet clear how the Supremes will rule on that, but giving the state legislature the ability to completely disregard the remainder of the state (including the state constitution, etc.) is the kind of move that seems a little too extreme for the court. I know that there are some justices that are willing to do it (alito and thomas), and those people are insane, but I'm not remotely convinced that the court will rule that way. It would overturn even more precedent than Roe.
 
Last edited:

Blitz24

Chromalusion Member
Premium
17,860
United States
NJ/USA
Blitzbay
Blitzbay
This is coming from a case that the supreme court is going to hear soon regarding whether a state legislature can completely disregard the governor, state constitution, etc. in regard to election laws. It's not yet clear how the Supremes will rule on that, but giving the state legislature the ability to completely disregard the remainder of the state (including the state constitution, etc.) is the kind of move that seems a little too extreme for the court. I know that there are some justices that are willing to do it (alito and thomas), and those people are insane, but I'm not remotely convinced that the court will rule that way. It would overturn even more precedent than Roe.
Agreed 100%. While I wouldn't put it past them to try to make the argument go that direction, it is VERY HARD to see them just throw away people's votes for whoever the people in the legislature likes.
 

Scaff

Moderator
28,358
United Kingdom
He/Him
ScaffUK
ScaffGTP
Agreed 100%. While I wouldn't put it past them to try to make the argument go that direction, it is VERY HARD to see them just throw away people's votes for whoever the people in the legislature likes.
Would it not however be the case that SCOTUS are not doing that, but rather thatbits a state matter and up to the states if they wish to do that?

This is coming from a case that the supreme court is going to hear soon regarding whether a state legislature can completely disregard the governor, state constitution, etc. in regard to election laws. It's not yet clear how the Supremes will rule on that, but giving the state legislature the ability to completely disregard the remainder of the state (including the state constitution, etc.) is the kind of move that seems a little too extreme for the court. I know that there are some justices that are willing to do it (alito and thomas), and those people are insane, but I'm not remotely convinced that the court will rule that way. It would overturn even more precedent than Roe.
A few years ago I would have agreed, but then a few years ago Row v Wade being overturned arguably had the same likelihood.
 

Danoff

Who is John Galt?
Premium
31,295
United States
Mile High City
Would it not however be the case that SCOTUS are not doing that, but rather thatbits a state matter and up to the states if they wish to do that?


A few years ago I would have agreed, but then a few years ago Row v Wade being overturned arguably had the same likelihood.
It would effectively make the state legislatures the electors, which would really screw up basically everything since the state legislature becomes the defacto presidential election - regardless of any state law or constitution.

It's pretty insane. It's basically the fake elector scam that Trump tried to pull and Pence refused.

Edit:

In fact, if the georgia legislature tried to usurp the election process, I could easily see some other state legislature try to balance them out to prevent the overthrow. And chaos ensues.
 
Last edited:
3,121
United States
Alabamistan
It would effectively make the state legislatures the electors, which would really screw up basically everything since the state legislature becomes the defacto presidential election - regardless of any state law or constitution.

It's pretty insane. It's basically the fake elector scam that Trump tried to pull and Pence refused.

Edit:

In fact, if the georgia legislature tried to usurp the election process, I could easily see some other state legislature try to balance them out to prevent the overthrow. And chaos ensues.
But if you approach a conservative and say that eliminating the Electoral College would take care of the whole issue so now you would have one person equals one vote, they absolutely hate that idea. They know this is their shot to ensure that the smallest number of voters can still control the White House.
 

Danoff

Who is John Galt?
Premium
31,295
United States
Mile High City
But if you approach a conservative and say that eliminating the Electoral College would take care of the whole issue so now you would have one person equals one vote, they absolutely hate that idea. They know this is their shot to ensure that the smallest number of voters can still control the White House.
Totally. The Electoral College is completely absurd and is being used to attempt to overthrow democracy (multiple ways). But no, a popular vote, that's just crazy talk.
 

Blitz24

Chromalusion Member
Premium
17,860
United States
NJ/USA
Blitzbay
Blitzbay
But if you approach a conservative and say that eliminating the Electoral College would take care of the whole issue so now you would have one person equals one vote, they absolutely hate that idea. They know this is their shot to ensure that the smallest number of voters can still control the White House.
And to ignore the state constitution, both the EC and popular vote would be discarded in favor of authoritarianism or a monarchy. There wouldn't be any other way to describe it and I would be stunned if this gets overturned.
 

McLaren

Premium
42,899
United States
Texas
But if you approach a conservative and say that eliminating the Electoral College would take care of the whole issue so now you would have one person equals one vote, they absolutely hate that idea. They know this is their shot to ensure that the smallest number of voters can still control the White House.
I mean, even this nitwit tweeted such an idea earlier this year. :cool:
 
9,598
United States
Marin County
In nothing to see here news, 94% of self-identified Democrats under the age of 30 want someone else other than Joe Biden to run for President in 2024, according to a poll conducted by the NYT.

Joe Biden's weakness, IMO, is that he has just sat in the backseat watching the culture wars continue to burn. Come to think of it, he's sat in the backseat for a lot of things. It's not that he's incompetent (not offering an opinion either way on that), it's that he's not really there. I don't ever remember a time in my life when the office of the President just felt...vacant. It certainly didn't under Trump, Obama, Bush, or Clinton, for better or for much worse. I voted for the guy (and would do so again if it came to it) but Joe Biden is not a leader. Joe Biden was what the country needed at the time (IMO) to rid of us Trump who I strongly believe was an existential threat. But Trump wasn't/isn't the only threat. I'm not very optimistic about 2024 to be honest - it's looking like a matter of managing expectations and preparing accordingly regardless of who wins the thing. Go-bag time?

I think Gavin Newsom is a good Governor and could be a good President, but California politicians come with political baggage in nation-wide elections. It would be a risky bet - and he would need a bonafide heartland running mate. Matthew McConaughey comes to mind. Other than Newsom...honestly...who else is even out there? Pritzker? Whitmer? I just don't know.

We all know that DeSantis is all set to take the GOP nomination, and I think he would even beat Trump in the primary should Trump fight him for it. But I don't think Trump will fight him for it...because he won't like the prospect of losing again.
 
3,121
United States
Alabamistan
In nothing to see here news, 94% of self-identified Democrats under the age of 30 want someone else other than Joe Biden to run for President in 2024, according to a poll conducted by the NYT.

Joe Biden's weakness, IMO, is that he has just sat in the backseat watching the culture wars continue to burn. Come to think of it, he's sat in the backseat for a lot of things. It's not that he's incompetent (not offering an opinion either way on that), it's that he's not really there. I don't ever remember a time in my life when the office of the President just felt...vacant. It certainly didn't under Trump, Obama, Bush, or Clinton, for better or for much worse. I voted for the guy (and would do so again if it came to it) but Joe Biden is not a leader. Joe Biden was what the country needed at the time (IMO) to rid of us Trump who I strongly believe was an existential threat. But Trump wasn't/isn't the only threat. I'm not very optimistic about 2024 to be honest - it's looking like a matter of managing expectations and preparing accordingly regardless of who wins the thing. Go-bag time?

I think Gavin Newsom is a good Governor and could be a good President, but California politicians come with political baggage in nation-wide elections. It would be a risky bet - and he would need a bonafide heartland running mate. Matthew McConaughey comes to mind. Other than Newsom...honestly...who else is even out there? Pritzker? Whitmer? I just don't know.

We all know that DeSantis is all set to take the GOP nomination, and I think he would even beat Trump in the primary should Trump fight him for it. But I don't think Trump will fight him for it...because he won't like the prospect of losing again.
Oh I think Trump has every intention of fighting DeSantis for the nomination because in his mind he never lost the first time so the prospect of losing again is never going to enter the picture.
 

Joey D

Premium
45,076
United States
Holladay, UT
GTP_Joey
GTP Joey
Matthew McConaughey comes to mind.
If he ran, I'd probably have to say...

Animated GIF


And vote for him.
 

McLaren

Premium
42,899
United States
Texas
He doesn’t seem interested in running for state governor. I wonder what would get him to actually consider running on a national stage, even as a VP?
 
9,598
United States
Marin County
Oh I think Trump has every intention of fighting DeSantis for the nomination because in his mind he never lost the first time so the prospect of losing again is never going to enter the picture.
I'll say this - I won't be surprised if Trump runs again, but in my head it's more likely that he will not. Immediately after the mid-terms I think we will know what's going to happen, but I think it will involve one of these strands, with branching permutations :lol::

Strand A: If Trump & DeSantis don't come to some sort of private power-sharing agreement:

I suspect that DeSantis will almost immediately throw Trump under the bus and say that the J6 litigation and Trump's scandal-prone personality will be a distraction for conservative goals.

Trump will then either:
  • I: Come out swinging, calling DeSantis, preposterously, woke and a RINO and ultimately become a Shakespearean tragic protagonist, losing with greatly diminished influence. In this scenario Trump recedes almost entirely from public view, back to his Florida compound.
  • II: Come out swinging superficially, but then concede the race due to unspecified "health" issues or other excuse. This scenario would probably maintain Trump's influence but more as a kingmaker/influence peddler rather than an outright political figure.

Strand B: If Trump & DeSantis do come to a power sharing agreement:
Trump runs for President with DeSantis as his running mate. This would tee-up DeSantis for 2028 due to Trump's term limit should the pair win.

I think DeSantis is too ambitious for Strand B and I don't see him losing to Trump in Strand A. I think A-II is most likely.
 

Blitz24

Chromalusion Member
Premium
17,860
United States
NJ/USA
Blitzbay
Blitzbay
I'll say this - I won't be surprised if Trump runs again, but in my head it's more likely that he will not. Immediately after the mid-terms I think we will know what's going to happen, but I think it will involve one of these strands, with branching permutations :lol::

Strand A: If Trump & DeSantis don't come to some sort of private power-sharing agreement:

I suspect that DeSantis will almost immediately throw Trump under the bus and say that the J6 litigation and Trump's scandal-prone personality will be a distraction for conservative goals.

Trump will then either:
  • I: Come out swinging, calling DeSantis, preposterously, woke and a RINO and ultimately become a Shakespearean tragic protagonist, losing with greatly diminished influence. In this scenario Trump recedes almost entirely from public view, back to his Florida compound.
  • II: Come out swinging superficially, but then concede the race due to unspecified "health" issues or other excuse. This scenario would probably maintain Trump's influence but more as a kingmaker/influence peddler rather than an outright political figure.

Strand B: If Trump & DeSantis do come to a power sharing agreement:
Trump runs for President with DeSantis as his running mate. This would tee-up DeSantis for 2028 due to Trump's term limit should the pair win.

I think DeSantis is too ambitious for Strand B and I don't see him losing to Trump in Strand A. I think A-II is most likely.
If A-I happens, the Democrats might have the best chance to win in 2024 as the Republicans will have completed an incredible own-goal.
 
9,598
United States
Marin County
I'll say this - I won't be surprised if Trump runs again, but in my head it's more likely that he will not. Immediately after the mid-terms I think we will know what's going to happen, but I think it will involve one of these strands, with branching permutations :lol::

Strand A: If Trump & DeSantis don't come to some sort of private power-sharing agreement:

I suspect that DeSantis will almost immediately throw Trump under the bus and say that the J6 litigation and Trump's scandal-prone personality will be a distraction for conservative goals.

Trump will then either:
  • I: Come out swinging, calling DeSantis, preposterously, woke and a RINO and ultimately become a Shakespearean tragic protagonist, losing with greatly diminished influence. In this scenario Trump recedes almost entirely from public view, back to his Florida compound.
  • II: Come out swinging superficially, but then concede the race due to unspecified "health" issues or other excuse. This scenario would probably maintain Trump's influence but more as a kingmaker/influence peddler rather than an outright political figure.

Strand B: If Trump & DeSantis do come to a power sharing agreement:
Trump runs for President with DeSantis as his running mate. This would tee-up DeSantis for 2028 due to Trump's term limit should the pair win.

I think DeSantis is too ambitious for Strand B and I don't see him losing to Trump in Strand A. I think A-II is most likely.
Trump may be taking a third path...

In my head I was assuming that everything RE 2024 GOP primary would wait until after the midterms. That's the approach that would be most favorable to the GOPs chances in the 2022 mid-terms. No internal drama, let Biden and inflation continue to push voters to them. What I keep forgetting is that Trump is, if nothing else, crafty. If he announces his bid before the midterms, that changes the calculus a good bit. It's not necessarily good for the GOP if he announces his bid, because it will compel anti-Trump moderates to go to the polls and possibly create some rift in the party. But it's probably good for Trump.

If somebody like DeSantis is wanting to hold out until after the mid-terms to turn up the heat on Trump with the hope that he will simply not run, Trump's approach here wrecks that. Trump would already be in the race, gathering momentum. DeSantis won't risk dividing the GOP before the midterms by trying to campaign against Trump, but Trump has nothing to lose. If Trump announces his bid before DeSantis can come out against Trump, then it's going to be an uphill battle for DeSantis.

There's gonna be some fireworks I suspect.
 

Blitz24

Chromalusion Member
Premium
17,860
United States
NJ/USA
Blitzbay
Blitzbay
Trump may be taking a third path...

In my head I was assuming that everything RE 2024 GOP primary would wait until after the midterms. That's the approach that would be most favorable to the GOPs chances in the 2022 mid-terms. No internal drama, let Biden and inflation continue to push voters to them. What I keep forgetting is that Trump is, if nothing else, crafty. If he announces his bid before the midterms, that changes the calculus a good bit. It's not necessarily good for the GOP if he announces his bid, because it will compel anti-Trump moderates to go to the polls and possibly create some rift in the party. But it's probably good for Trump.

If somebody like DeSantis is wanting to hold out until after the mid-terms to turn up the heat on Trump with the hope that he will simply not run, Trump's approach here wrecks that. Trump would already be in the race, gathering momentum. DeSantis won't risk dividing the GOP before the midterms by trying to campaign against Trump, but Trump has nothing to lose. If Trump announces his bid before DeSantis can come out against Trump, then it's going to be an uphill battle for DeSantis.

There's gonna be some fireworks I suspect.
As long as Biden isn't running and there isn't a Sanders-like candidate winning the nomination for the Democrats, they might luck out. If Biden runs/Sanders gets nominated, that will be a disaster.
 

ROAD_DOGG33J

Premium
12,437
United States
IL, USA
holyc0w1
holyc0w
In nothing to see here news, 94% of self-identified Democrats under the age of 30 want someone else other than Joe Biden to run for President in 2024, according to a poll conducted by the NYT.

Joe Biden's weakness, IMO, is that he has just sat in the backseat watching the culture wars continue to burn. Come to think of it, he's sat in the backseat for a lot of things. It's not that he's incompetent (not offering an opinion either way on that), it's that he's not really there. I don't ever remember a time in my life when the office of the President just felt...vacant. It certainly didn't under Trump, Obama, Bush, or Clinton, for better or for much worse. I voted for the guy (and would do so again if it came to it) but Joe Biden is not a leader. Joe Biden was what the country needed at the time (IMO) to rid of us Trump who I strongly believe was an existential threat. But Trump wasn't/isn't the only threat. I'm not very optimistic about 2024 to be honest - it's looking like a matter of managing expectations and preparing accordingly regardless of who wins the thing. Go-bag time?

I think Gavin Newsom is a good Governor and could be a good President, but California politicians come with political baggage in nation-wide elections. It would be a risky bet - and he would need a bonafide heartland running mate. Matthew McConaughey comes to mind. Other than Newsom...honestly...who else is even out there? Pritzker? Whitmer? I just don't know.

We all know that DeSantis is all set to take the GOP nomination, and I think he would even beat Trump in the primary should Trump fight him for it. But I don't think Trump will fight him for it...because he won't like the prospect of losing again.

His other problem is his age. And it's a pretty stressful and demanding job to be president. The democrats should at least have a strong back up plan.
 

Danoff

Who is John Galt?
Premium
31,295
United States
Mile High City
His other problem is his age. And it's a pretty stressful and demanding job to be president. The democrats should at least have a strong back up plan.
Biden was not elected because he was particularly popular among democrats. If he were to be re-elected, it would still not be because he's particularly popular with democrats. Biden was seen as a safe choice in light of the crazy that we endured from the previous president.

I do think that someone else should run on the democrat side - and not an agitator, but someone seen as stable and safe. I don't think it's going to make democrats stay home or vote republican simply because they're not Biden.

I'm a bit scared that it'll end up being the Colorado Governor. Polis has been really outstanding, and I'd vote for him for president against just about anyone the republicans put up in a heartbeat. I'm not sure he wants the job of US president, and these days governor means even more than it used to, so I don't want to lose him as governor. But I guess if I had to lose him as governor, losing him to the presidency would be the way to go.

At the moment, I can't think of a democrat I prefer over Polis. Come to think of it, I'm not sure I can name any politician I prefer over Polis.
 
Last edited:

Liquid

Fission Mailed
Premium
26,042
Slovakia
Bratvegas
GTP_Liquid
When it comes to Biden sitting on his safe hands and being criticised for it and Republican nutjobs abusing executive privilage and also being criticised for it I think the bigger question should be asked more frequently or brought up more frequently:

What does the United States of America want from its President?

A non-interventionist executive who comes across as powerless and indecisive?
An interventionist executive who comes across as powerful and decisive?

Obviously the Sixth Party System that the USA is currently in means, on the whole, it is quite cut and dry the Democratic Party is a bunch of do-gooders who play nice, closer to the first of my suppositions, and the Republican Party is a bunch of fascist, wannabe dictators, closer to my second supposition, but I'm asking more in an ideal world.
 
Last edited:
9,598
United States
Marin County
When it comes to Biden sitting on his safe hands and being criticised for it and Republican nutjobs abusing executive privilage and also being criticised for it I think the bigger question should be asked more frequently or brought up more frequently:

What does the United States of America want from its President?

A non-interventionist executive who comes across as a powerless and indecisive?
An interventionist executive who comes across as powerful and decisive?

Obviously the Sixth Party System that the USA is currently in means, on the whole, it is quite cut and dry the Democratic Party is a bunch of do-gooders who play nice, closer to the first of my suppositions, and the Republican Party is a bunch of fascist, wannabe dictators, closer to my second supposition, but I'm asking more in an ideal world.
I think Barack Obama was about right. Forceful, pretty decisive, and charismatic, but fairly pragmatic and reasonable. Biden has almost zero charisma, he's a manager not a leader.