• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

The Race For 2024

Because there was a Civil War that was just fought. The sides were well known. This was specifically about those traitors.
There was just an insurrection. The sides are well known. The traitor at the head of the insurrection is well known. This is specifically about that traitor.

The fact is that this traitor has supporters that comprise a significant (if minority) fraction of every State population.
That was not true for the post-civil war authors of the clause; the sides at that time were clear cut both ideologically and geographically. The problem we have today, while largely similar on the ideological front, is much much more intractable, partly due to geography.
 
Because there was a Civil War that was just fought. The sides were well known. This was specifically about those traitors.
There was just an insurrection. The sides are well known. The traitor at the head of the insurrection is well known. This is specifically about that traitor.
Come on. Calling it an insurrection does not carry the legal weight of it being adjudged an insurrection. If Trump were charged and convicted of seditious conspiracy, this conversation ends immediately. If he is convicted of the related charges against him, it is open discussion. But he hasn't (yet), and no amount of hope changes the result of that.

And do we want to know the final reason why this won't work? All 50 states and DC have to do it. Otherwise, that itself can create a Constitutional Crisis. And the last thing we need is the House voting for the President.
 
Calling it an insurrection does not carry the legal weight of it being adjudged an insurrection.

Considering that people have already been convicted of seditious conspiracy, the fact of an insurrection is indisputable. And Trump’s role in it has been attested to by friend and foe alike.
Come on!
 
When Trump isn't held back by the 14th Amendment are people coming back here and admitting error? It isn't as if I want the guy to run or think he should run or shouldn't have been punished by being unable to hold the office.

Which actually does lead to an interesting question. If Trump had been impeached and couldn't serve as President again, could he still have run as a Republican or Independent?
 
It isn't as if I want the guy to run or think he should run or shouldn't have been punished by being unable to hold the office.

Yeah, I know. And it’s not like I think he will be disqualified in any red States. The Colorado case will hopefully raise some interest but its impact will probably be … only to maybe raise some interest. Perhaps that alone will give pause to a trumpsucker here and there, but it will not be a determinative factor in the election.
 
You shouldn't sweat the polls because Biden needs WI, MI, PA, NV (or just one district in Nebraska). Trump can take AZ and GA and will still lose. Biden will campaign hard in the battleground wall states. Wisconsin is the weakest state, but that has been trending bluish purple for statewides, and with Roe v Wade on every ballot these days, that doesn't bode well for Trump or most Republicans. Hailey is the only Republican savvy enough to tread those waters.
 

There's a ton about the U.S. political landscape I don't get

But what if see right now is Biden, incumbent who built a career by winning elections and is backed up by Harris. Then Trump, who got his ass kicked in the last election and hasn't ever won a real election and is backed up by Corcoran.

It looks to me like it would take a violent insurrection to install Trump, at this point.
Tom

ETA ~I forgot the abortion thing Jimmy Higgins mentioned.~
 
Because there was a Civil War that was just fought. The sides were well known. This was specifically about those traitors.
There was just an insurrection. The sides are well known. The traitor at the head of the insurrection is well known. This is specifically about that traitor.
Disagree. Traitor, yes. Head, I consider unproven. I think His Flatulence is more a puppet than truly in charge.
 
Newsom is gearing up for his presidential run by having his own mini war on drugs;

SACRAMENTO - Governor Gavin Newsom is stepping up the state's war on Fentanyl by sending additional California National Guard troops to the U.S.-Mexico border. On Thursday, Newsom announced via a written statement that he is increasing the deployment of California National Guard service members by approximately 40 to 60 soldiers at the four U.S. ports of entry along the border to help with the detection of illegal drugs, including fentanyl. This is a move that builds on the state's billion-dollar investment to tackle the fentanyl and opioid crisis, the governor's office says.

News

I wonder where the billion dollars was spent.
 
Because there was a Civil War that was just fought. The sides were well known. This was specifically about those traitors.
There was just an insurrection. The sides are well known. The traitor at the head of the insurrection is well known. This is specifically about that traitor.
Disagree. Traitor, yes. Head, I consider unproven. I think His Flatulence is more a puppet than truly in charge.
I agree.
But they're not going to charge Putin.
 
Newsom is gearing up for his presidential run by having his own mini war on drugs;

SACRAMENTO - Governor Gavin Newsom is stepping up the state's war on Fentanyl by sending additional California National Guard troops to the U.S.-Mexico border. On Thursday, Newsom announced via a written statement that he is increasing the deployment of California National Guard service members by approximately 40 to 60 soldiers at the four U.S. ports of entry along the border to help with the detection of illegal drugs, including fentanyl. This is a move that builds on the state's billion-dollar investment to tackle the fentanyl and opioid crisis, the governor's office says.

News

I wonder where the billion dollars was spent.
Keeping Santa Monica’s weather pleasant.
 
Nikki Haley announces 2024 White House bid

Former South Carolina Republican Gov. Nikki Haley announced Tuesday in a video that she will run for president in 2024, becoming the first major rival to challenge former President Donald Trump for the GOP nomination.

“The Washington establishment has failed us over and over and over again. It’s time for a new generation of leadership to rediscover fiscal responsibility, secure our border and strengthen our country, our pride and our purpose,” Haley, who is expected to deliver remarks Wednesday in Charleston at a campaign launch event, said in the video.
Cornel West seems to be running for the Greens, giving hope to Don the Con. According to The Daily Mail, he thinks that "the Democratic Party is 'beyond redemption'" , and "He labeled progressives, Sen. Bernie Sanders and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, as 'window dressing, at worst,' ".
Ah, but that begs the question: what are they at best, in relation to the Dems?
 
Cornel West seems to be running for the Greens, giving hope to Don the Con.
Were I an enemy of the USA, I would totally fund Cornell West.

He's not just a spoiler for Biden and the Democrats. He's proof to the TeaParty dumbasses that Biden is worse than a communist.

West is the Sanders of 2024.
Tom
 
Some of Cornel West's supporters annoy me. They seem desperate to deny vote splitting, even though that's what the Green Party has done in past elections. There is also the problem of what would happen if, by some odd political earthquake, CW actually became President. I wrote an essay for Reddit about that: What if Cornel West wins? : BreakingPoints

I myself think that his candidacy is doomed to failure, and I could discuss in gory detail why I think so. But I’ll leave that aside, and I’ll consider what would happen if he won the majority of electoral votes next year, enough to elect him President.

He’ll be an absolute babe in the woods when it comes to governing and policymaking. He won’t know his way around any of the Federal Government, and he will be dependent on his underlings for that. Even worse, he would have no idea of who might make a good underling. Will he become dependent on the Democratic Party establishment for his White House staff?

He’ll have to work with a Congress that is dominated by the two major parties, to the point that the three self-proclaimed independents work with one of these parties and are effectively members of that party. Will he end up a de facto Democrat, like Bernie Sanders? Will he be able to twist arms to get what he wants?

He’ll also have to work with the Supreme Court, and given its current composition, that may be difficult.

He’ll have zero political coattails, since he has so far shown zero interest in supporting the candidacy of anyone else.

So his Presidency is likely to be an abject failure. Either he will seem hopelessly inept, like Jimmy Carter, or he will act like some latter-day Julius Caesar, like Donald Trump.
 
So what happens when a candidate for president dies or becomes incapacitated. Where the authority to replace lies depends on when it happens.

Bone up now.
Interesting read. Despite the author's assessment that both Biden and Trump are "superagers", the likelihood that at least one of them will suffer a "race-ending event" over the next year and change is significant. Esp. given Don's diet.

Something they have not written about - what if a candidate dies (or is incapacitated) during the election. It's not just the "Election Day"
any more -with early voting elections now last the better part of a month. What if somebody already voted for Biden and he keels over the following week? Does the vote transfer? Can there be a "redo"? Or is the ballot effectively lost?
 
I have to disagree with this piece. The authors acknowledged that midterm polling is extra difficult but nevertheless used Dems overperforming polls in 2022 for their Joe Biden hopium.

The recent Biden-Trump polls tend to be either tied or give a slight advantage to Trump.
Like the CNN poll from 9/7. Against Biden, Trump is +1, RdS is tied and VR is -1. Chris Christie (+2), Mike Pence (+2), Tim Scott (+2) and Nikki Haley (+6) would also beat Biden.
And that is only direct matchups. The authors completely ignore the possible effects of spoilers like Sibling Cornell West or a No Labels candidate to be named later.

You also have to consider that due to electoral college, Rs have a built-in advantage. And Biden's team has made "Bidenomics" a critical part of his reelection campaign. That is risky - a year is a long time in politics as well as economics, and there are warning signs re economy such as rising oil prices and increased default rates.
Barclays hikes 2024 Brent crude price forecast on tighter balance view
Delinquencies rise for credit cards and auto loans, and it could get worse

The oil prices are an unfortunate thing for the Biden administration, as he is caught between Scylla and Charybdis - he needs lower oil prices as a general economic driver and also because low gas prices are popular. But at the same time he also needs to be concerned about climate, which is why he does things like cancel oil leases.
Biden cancels last oil and gas leases in Alaska’s Arctic Refuge, overturns sales held by Trump
Anybody who things this and similar moves will not be part of the 2024 campaign is deluded. And esp. if WTI goes over $100/bbl, it will be effective.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom