2024 US Presidential Election Thread

  • Thread starter ryzno
  • 3,993 comments
  • 211,669 views
And you still need to say loud that you voting for "russian agent" and "dictator" and against strong woman of colour. Average human is conformist and not too comfortable with idea of saying unpopular opinions, even to faceless poller.
Pollsters literally just ask who are you voting for, & what demographic you might be.

Coming to those conclusions is a reflection of you, not the pollsters. :lol:
 
I reckon there's definitely an embarrassment (even shame) factor about voting for Trump - and that this likely does affect polling.

With a bit of luck, however, people who are too embarrassed to admit they intend to vote for Trump might actually stop to think why they are going to vote for Trump before actually doing it. It says alot about the GOP that Trump is still their candidate, in spite of being so unbelievably horrendous a person - and I would imagine that there is a large swathe of GOP voters who would much rather be voting for someone else as their President. I reckon the same cannot be said for the Democrats, so there is likely some bias in the polls because, simply put, admitting you're a Trump voter is (and damn well should be) a real embarrassment.
 
Last edited:
Problem with polls is same as in 2016 and 2020. With how demonized Trump is, people just too scare to say they would vote for Trump.
Spider Man Lol GIF
 
Days since JD Vance has said something unhinged: 0
Unhinged but somewhat accurate. 😭

Other presidential candidates had policies people didn't like, with Trump, he has policies that people don't like and is an enormous asshole. It's not exactly rocket surgery to conclude that more and more people don't like him today than 4 or 8 years ago. Now that Democrats are going to roll out someone who isn't old enough to have gotten an invite to the last supper, some people see Trump as the crazy old man yelling at clouds (which he definitely is).
Just today in fact he has gone beyond yelling at clouds. This video shows that from the very beginning his Q&A at National Black Journalists Association convention went off the flipping rails. It gets worse than this.



Here's the full interview from a local Fox affiliate:



I reckon there's definitely an embarrassment (even shame) factor about voting for Trump - and that this likely does affect polling.

With a bit of luck, however, people who are too embarrassed to admit they intend to vote for Trump might actually stop to think why they are going to vote for Trump before actually doing it. It says alot about the GOP that Trump is still their candidate, in spite of being so unbelievably horrendous a person - and I would imagine that there is a large swathe of GOP voters who would much rather be voting for someone else as their President. I reckon the same cannot be said for the Democrats, so there is likely some bias in the polls because, simply put, admitting you're a Trump voter is (and damn well should be) a real embarrassment.
This is and has been a real phenomenon for many years so I'm not sure why people are questioning it. It hasn't been documented recently I don't think, and it's very difficult to measure, to the point where hard evidence was never really gathered, but the phenomenon was documented back during the 2016 election season. US News as well. Since then, his voters have obviously been emboldened, but Trump shame is still a thing.
 
Last edited:
This is and has been a real phenomenon for many years so I'm not sure why people are questioning it. It hasn't been documented recently I don't think, and it's very difficult to measure, to the point where hard evidence was never really gathered, but the phenomenon was documented back during the 2016 election season. US News as well. Since then, his voters have obviously been emboldened, but Trump shame is still a thing.
Your articles are from 2016 - 8 years ago, and before an insurrection. It's still conjecture as to why there is a different between polling and results. It's not clear that the conjecture was correct back then. It's far less clear that the conjecture holds 8 years later in a very different environment.
 
Last edited:
Ah.

Edit: Clip to replace screenshot.


Hating Trump is a pretty mainstream opinion.
Damn, I miss pathetic Trumpers squawking "TDS" like developmentally disabled parrots.

Edit:

Screenshot-20240731-163314-Samsung-Internet.jpg


trump-kamala.jpg
 
Last edited:
Problem with polls is same as in 2016 and 2020. With how demonized Trump is, people just too scare to say they would vote for Trump.
That's absolute confirmation bias. With the exception of the most populated places in the country, there are very few people emboldened to wear or show off anything proclaiming Democratic values at their homes, clothing, or vehicles. Conversely, you don't have to ask if someone's MAGA, they'll tell you...

In real life within America, many people will not discuss politics in polite company, so there is generally no way of knowing. It depends on context; in a crowded place or amongst strangers, it is generally (somewhat) taboo to discuss such things in a public setting. It's considered divisive around strangers, because one generally seeks generally a calmer and easier path to acceptance, rather than immediate difficulties. At home, amongst your peers, like-minded individuals, and The Internet; it is totally different; you can be as brash as you want and get away with it*.

Source: I have personally been to 48 states since the dawn of 2015; accounting for travels in roughly 25-33% of the counties/parishes in America (there are 3143 of these units** within all of the states).

* House rules may apply. See terms and conditions for details. Closed-minded driver on an open course. Wear your seatbelt.
** Yes, I count them.


I reckon there's definitely an embarrassment (even shame) factor about voting for Trump - and that this likely does affect polling.

With a bit of luck, however, people who are too embarrassed to admit they intend to vote for Trump might actually stop to think why they are going to vote for Trump before actually doing it. It says alot about the GOP that Trump is still their candidate, in spite of being so unbelievably horrendous a person - and I would imagine that there is a large swathe of GOP voters who would much rather be voting for someone else as their President. I reckon the same cannot be said for the Democrats, so there is likely some bias in the polls because, simply put, admitting you're a Trump voter is (and damn well should be) a real embarrassment.

The phrase "lesser of two evils" has been a part of democratic politics for decades, or probably at least well over a century, I'd guess. So there's always going to be those that hold their nose and vote, and probably have nothing much to say on the morning after Election Day and move on their their lives. There's always percentages that don't show up to vote or don't care one way or another, traditionally among younger demographics.

"Shame" definitely depends on the environment. In my city of 250,000 there's likely a little more shame in wearing a red hat in public, especially in a large public gathering. Step outside those confines of the city or the large group, and he's the golden calf with a tinfoil hat in a lot of places. Just the same, there are seriously racist and sexist card-carrying Democrats out there who will probably not vote and will be even more silent.
 
Last edited:
Ah.

Edit: Clip to replace screenshot.



Damn, I miss pathetic Trumpers squawking "TDS" like developmentally disabled parrots.

Edit:

Screenshot-20240731-163314-Samsung-Internet.jpg


trump-kamala.jpg

They can't begin to fathom how many brown people there are in the world but they're scared of it regardless. Wait til they hear about how how dark Italians and Greeks get! Are they brown or European, you can't be both?!

Doesn't matter, none of them are Great Americans.
 
Last edited:
Ah.

Edit: Clip to replace screenshot.



Damn, I miss pathetic Trumpers squawking "TDS" like developmentally disabled parrots.

Edit:

Screenshot-20240731-163314-Samsung-Internet.jpg


trump-kamala.jpg

An old white man telling the black community that a specific person is not black is not going to go well.

She's Indian but she's also Jamaican. She can be an African-American President & an Indian-America President at the same time.
 
Last edited:
Repöblican's Harris

She's black but not really black enough to be a real black person.
She's not really black enough to be black black but she's not in the white club.
She's an ultra-left, wet Democrat but she was a horribly persecutive DA out to victimise everyone.
She was a horribly persecutive DA out to victimise everyone but not right-wing enough to be likeable to Republicans.
She's not black because she's Indian.
She's not Indian because she's black.
She's not black because she's not from the hood.
She's not from the hood but she's not well-off enough to be in the club.
She's an anti-Semite even though her husband's Jewish.

repeat ad nauseum

You know how it was said what a great melting pot the United States was supposed to be? When faced with someone who actually is a reasonable embodiment of those things, Republicans are in such a tizz because they don't know which pathetic prejudice to prey upon.
 
Repöblican's Harris

She's black but not really black enough to be a real black person.
She's not really black enough to be black black but she's not in the white club.
She's an ultra-left, wet Democrat but she was a horribly persecutive DA out to victimise everyone.
She was a horribly persecutive DA out to victimise everyone but not right-wing enough to be likeable to Republicans.
She's not black because she's Indian.
She's not Indian because she's black.
She's not black because she's not from the hood.
She's not from the hood but she's not well-off enough to be in the club.
She's an anti-Semite even though her husband's Jewish.

repeat ad nauseum

You know how it was said what a great melting pot the United States was supposed to be? When faced with someone who actually is a reasonable embodiment of those things, Republicans are in such a tizz because they don't know which pathetic prejudice to prey upon.
Everything you just said were actual beliefs held by my parents and all the other suburban Boomers who raised me here in Ohio. Just depended on what you asked them, and who was asking. It's not new at all, they've literally been trying to make sense of black Americans and other ethnicities their entire lives and they just don't get it because they believe everybody can only be one thing. My dad was born in 1949...my parents' educational foundation existed alongside real institutional racism. You can't fix that. Like how I'm still pissed that Pluto isn't a planet anymore, they're still pissed that they don't get special water fountains anymore.

But if you'd meet them out in public they'd be the nicest people in the world. If only the rest of the world could be as white polite as them society would be a much better place.
 
If only the rest of the world could be as polite as [my parents]
I suppose that's the difference between your parents and today's Republican party; the Republican party is shameless, obnoxious, prejudiced and devoid of any class, accountability and responsibility.
 
I suppose that's the difference between your parents and today's Republican party; the Republican party is shameless, obnoxious, prejudiced and devoid of any class, accountability and responsibility.
This is arguable, but personally I find it refreshing that these people have been so emboldened to out themselves publicly. That kind of speaks to the "polite" problem I mentioned. Before, nice people were nice people, and you never knew the difference, and although they thought it was funny to hang black bowling balls from trees on Halloween, ultimately their voting choices were between folks like Bill Clinton, George Bush, and Ross Perot. So even though the people were vehemently racist in private, in public the idea of being an extremist wasn't a thing. There was no point because the politicians weren't extreme, they were actually quite mundane. So you never knew who was an asshole and who wasn't.

But now it's pretty easy to tell who is worth your time and who isn't. They've got the bumper sticker to prove it.
 
More Republicans losing their **** trying to figure out what to call Harris.


Calling her Kamala Harris is too difficult. We need to be more specific and derogatory without putting our foot in our mouth.
 
Calling her Kamala Harris is too difficult. We need to be more specific and derogatory without putting our foot in our mouth.

You'd think President Vice could acknowledge a current Vice President...
 
Ah.

trump-kamala.jpg


lol. lmao.

Let's face it, Trump could walk on water and all you'd be hearing is how terrible he is because he can't swim.
Or cure cancer and then be called a homophobe because he didn't cure AIDS instead. Actually they would just call him a racist because everything is racism these days even when it has nothing to do with race. That whole post-modernism thing...
 
Last edited:
Screenshot-20240801-171452-Samsung-Internet.jpg


Wait What Peter GIF by The Bachelor


So I've remarked at length about the notion of exceptions and exemptions to abortion prohibitions and I'm not going to do that here. Instead I want to point to a couple other things in that brief passage.

By "allowing" that child "to live even through the circumstances of [their] birth," Vance means ignoring consent and violating individual sovereignty, forcing an individual ("woman" is used in the question but even those who aren't likely, in other circumstances, to be referred to as such due to age may be pregnant and therefore subject to coercion by the enforcement of law) to carry a child to term, even as successful childbirth is not guaranteed.

Look, there's a valid notion that an individual conceived by rape had no part in perpetrating that violation and so one should not bear the burden of that violation, and an individual that is pregnant because of a violation may consider such a notion when deciding for oneself how to proceed, but that notion is not a reasonable justification for ignoring consent and denying individual sovereignty, indeed ignoring the consent and denying the individual sovereignty of one whose consent was ignored and whose individual sovereignty was denied by the perpetrator of the violation is especially egregious. But Vance has chewed on that notion, attempted to swallow it, gagged on it, and finally regurgitated it in...okay maybe not the most unhinged way possible, but my brain isn't sufficiently addled to imagine worse.

And then there's the bizarro definition of "woman" that includes fetuses determined to be female.

...

This one's not nearly so unhinged, instead just stupid and pathetic.

trump-sports.jpg
 
Just to add to that last one.

1) It's overseas, so Donny has no power as much as he thinks his "1 phone call" has.
2) Imane Khelif competed in the 2020 Olympics and made it 1 fight to Quarter Finals until she was beaten by Irish boxer, Kellie Harrington. Imane is currently back in the Quarter Finals set to fight Hungarian boxer, Luca Hamori.

It's interesting how many conservatives never cared about Tunisian boxer Mariem Homrani when she got beat during that 2020 Olympics fight, or the other women Imane has been able to defeat. Or acknowledge that Imane has been beaten by other women multiple times, herself.

Oh wait, it's not interesting at all, it's just performative outrage b/c they don't actually care about Angela Carini or the fact she was "fighting for her late father". It's really just a bunch of weird conservatives who have had such a long disgusting, gross obsession with wanting to look at everyone's genitals, that now they can't help but want to judge every single woman they see as not conforming to their idea of the female body.
 
I'm so curious who on the campaign team decided that these dudes being "weird" would be a great tool to use against them. Obviously they are weird, and we've all thought so for a long time, so maybe they realized that focus groups kept using that term because it's like a universal belief. And the concept of "weird" is so well understood even though it's super hard to define in any given situation. Everybody just inherently knows when something is weird. And nobody likes being called weird in a negative way so this is really gonna piss them off and it'll be hilarious to watch.
 
Just to add to that last one.

1) It's overseas, so Donny has no power as much as he thinks his "1 phone call" has.
2) Imane Khelif competed in the 2020 Olympics and made it 1 fight to Quarter Finals until she was beaten by Irish boxer, Kellie Harrington. Imane is currently back in the Quarter Finals set to fight Hungarian boxer, Luca Hamori.

It's interesting how many conservatives never cared about Tunisian boxer Mariem Homrani when she got beat during that 2020 Olympics fight, or the other women Imane has been able to defeat. Or acknowledge that Imane has been beaten by other women multiple times, herself.

Oh wait, it's not interesting at all, it's just performative outrage b/c they don't actually care about Angela Carini or the fact she was "fighting for her late father". It's really just a bunch of weird conservatives who have had such a long disgusting, gross obsession with wanting to look at everyone's genitals, that now they can't help but want to judge every single woman they see as not conforming to their idea of the female body.

Regardless of all your well-made points. I am curious of your personal opinion on the matter is. I too also think you’re an individual of reason.



Even at my athletic peak, I would have still been a 2/10ths off of Sha’ Carri Richardson’s 100m time, or her estimated 40 yard dash time. But then again, that’s precisely the reason why I didn’t have what it took to be a division 1 college athlete, let alone Olympic athlete, in either biological sex
 
Regardless of all your well-made points. I am curious of your personal opinion on the matter is. I too also think you’re an individual of reason.
My personal opinion doesn't matter. She's been boxing other women for years, taking wins & loses. It's only an "issue" now b/c she got a clean jab on her opponent who quit due to a broken nose just a minute in & for whatever reason, someone decided, "Yo, she looks kinda like a dude, I bet that's why she beat Carini so fast".

She's biologically female, she possesses the ability to birth children, the very things anti-trans folks argue are what define a woman. But the people going, "She has XY, therefore she is a man" are gonna be in a for shock when/if she has kids.
 
My personal opinion doesn't matter. She's been boxing other women for years, taking wins & loses. It's only an "issue" now b/c she got a clean jab on her opponent who quit due to a broken nose just a minute in & for whatever reason, someone decided, "Yo, she looks kinda like a dude, I bet that's why she beat Carini so fast".

She's biologically female, she possesses the ability to birth children, the very things anti-trans folks argue are what define a woman. But the people going, "She has XY, therefore she is a man" are gonna be in a for shock when/if she has kids.

Well.. I mean, I was asking your personal opinion. It’s not like I’m going to hold you to the fire like Ube ice cream or anything.

As far as I can tell, “reportedly” Imane is a Female. According to her passport she’s a female.

But being that Algeria’s treatment and “recognition” of LGBTQ’s is dubious at best, I would also expect the same level of transparency. Even if we’re going to give Imane the benefit of the doubt; it’s still not a level playing field to have testosterone levels that of a man, while playing woman sports. Just like a man cannot take steroids to gain an advantage in the Olympics.

JMHO though
 
Back