The Race For 2024

[Politesse]

538 polling. Trump's positive ratings, 39.8%. Joe Biden's positive ratings, 40.3%. Essentially even at this point. A lot now hangs on Trump's indictments.

Polling is irrelevant at this time

I don't even think Trump is going to be the republican nominee

That is an incredibly optimistic view. The Republicans can't even appoint a House Speaker without the line-by-line approval of Trump's cohort, there's no question of keeping him out of the presidential race if he still wants to run. And he will.

 

[TomC]

That is an incredibly optimistic view. The Republicans can't even appoint a House Speaker without the line-by-line approval of Trump's cohort, there's no question of keeping him out of the presidential race if he still wants to run. And he will.

While I stopped putting much stock in polls back in 2016,
Trump has always been a loser in popular elections. 0 for 2. He pulled off an upset in 2016, due to the wonky system in the U.S.

But I don't think that the current political landscape gives him much chance in 2024. The billionaires who run this country aren't likely to see Trump as a good investment. Without the support of people like Murdoch and Putin and such, the people Trump is accustomed to grifting won't get much done.

If his Teaparty compadres weren't so busy running around with their hair on fire they might be able to find an effective challenger for Biden. But they can't even elect a Speaker in the House.
I'm just not seeing a POTUS in the Republican future.
Tom

 

[Politesse]

That is an incredibly optimistic view. The Republicans can't even appoint a House Speaker without the line-by-line approval of Trump's cohort, there's no question of keeping him out of the presidential race if he still wants to run. And he will.

While I stopped putting much stock in polls back in 2016,
Trump has always been a loser in popular elections. 0 for 2. He pulled off an upset in 2016, due to the wonky system in the U.S.

But I don't think that the current political landscape gives him much chance in 2024. The billionaires who run this country aren't likely to see Trump as a good investment. Without the support of people like Murdoch and Putin and such, the people Trump is accustomed to grifting won't get much done.

If his Teaparty compadres weren't so busy running around with their hair on fire they might be able to find an effective challenger for Biden. But they can't even elect a Speaker in the House.
I'm just not seeing a POTUS in the Republican future.
Tom

I certainly hope you're right about that, for many obvious reasons. I don't see anything stopping him from becoming the nominee for his party, though.

 

[bilby]

The billionaires who run this country aren't likely to see Trump as a good investment. Without the support of people like Murdoch and Putin and such, the people Trump is accustomed to grifting won't get much done.

Trump is dangerously disruptive, and can (indeed, already has) significantly harm the USA, even if he doesn't win power again.

This is excellent for the Murdochs and others who get rich from selling news - people buy more newspapers* when disasters are unfolding.

And it's excellent news for the Putins and others who seek to undermine American power on the international stage.

Trump will continue to be funded by both groups as long as he continues to make headlines and as long as his supporters can be relied upon to drown out factual reporting in a sea of fake news and propaganda.





*or boost ratings for television news channels, or provide more clicks on news websites, etc., etc.

 

[lpetrich]

TYT Interviews 2024 Republican Presidential Candidate Vivek Ramaswamy (FULL INTERVIEW) - YouTube - interviewed by Cenk Uygur and Ana Kasparian of The Young Turks, some progressive online broadcasters.

AK asked him about why he praises Donald Trump so much, even though he is running against DT. He said it was because DT was being politically persecuted, and that DT was a great President, keeping the US out of wars and making the economy grow. Conveniently leaving out the hit that DT ordered on Iranian military leader Qasem Soleimani.

RS called DT the best President of the 21st Century -- better than George Bush II? He said that he has something that DT doesn't. He is young. He also claims that he wants to unify the country and reach out to US youth, claiming that they aren't very big on national pride. Then saying that the US military has a 25% recruitment deficit. CU challenged him on why he's running against such a supposedly great President, and he said that he and DT are the two "America First" candidates.

CU then asked VR if Joe Biden has the right to reveal national secrets or if only DT has that right. Then CU mentioned VR promising to pardon DT on everything, and he responded by reiterating that this is persecution of political opponents.

AK then brought up fake-elector schemes, but VR returned to claiming that the Biden Admin is persecuting its political opponents, and saying that it's the voters who ought to decide. AK then said that VR was apparently saying that a Presidential candidate had an absolute right to steal an election and have fake electors, and VR didn't seem to have a good response.

Then where VR apparently forgot AK's name when remembering CU's name.

VR then claimed that nobody has ever been charged with what DT was charged with ever in US history. I say: so what?

He then said that he would pardon DT because of how unprecedented the charges against him are. This is someone who went to law school, I must note. He then claimed that DT's prosecutors were making up charges against him.

He then says that he wants to unite the country and move the country forward, instead of directing vengeance and grievance against any one man. Me: he's the subject of a personality cult, and discrediting him to his followers would be great.

He didn't get a straight answer on New-Mexico fake electors, though AK may have misremembered which state.

AK then got into VR and DT meeting at a DT golf course, and VR protested that the interview was about ideas. AK said that it was for asking why VR was running.

 

[lpetrich]

CU, AK, and VR then got into some policies.

Why raise the voting age to 25? Then saying that we need to revive civic duty. Then saying passing a civic test for voting will make the US stronger and more united. He then claims that young-adult voting rates will "skyrocket". He seems like he's a drug dealer who's high on his supply. Someone who grossly overestimates his competence, just like his hero Donald Trump.

He does have a good idea, however: making Election Day a national holiday.

CU then noted the long history of disenfranchisement of unwanted voters, and he asked about a scenario where Democratic voters were more likely to pass a civics test than Republican voters. He seems OK with that, and he continued with requiring 6 months of service in the military or as a first responder, making the "skin in the game" argument. Also saying that English should be the only language at the ballot box.

I notice that he does not propose requiring such a civics test for anyone over 25, or anyone running for office.

VR then got into money in politics, claiming that he opposes it. He then dismissed his rivals as "vessels for their super PAC's". Also mentioning bans on afterward becoming a lobbyist or trading stocks or being on the Board of Directors of a business that one is regulating. They got into some argument over Donald Trump's family getting big gifts like Jared Kushner getting $2B from Saudi Arabia, and Sheldon Adelson's supporting Donald Trump's campaign with super-PAC money. VR then claimed that CU suffers from Trump derangement syndrome.

Then to VR proposing cutting big parts of the Federal Government, like getting rid of the Department of Education, the FBI, and the IRS. Claiming that he wants to move the IRS into the Treasury Dept., and distributing the FBI and the Department of Education to other agencies. He claims to want to reduce bureaucracy, and he claims that the "administrative state" is the fourth branch, one not in the Constitution.

AK then pointed out that this fourth branch's heads are appointed by the President, making that branch a part of the executive branch. VR then grumbled about civil-service protections for Federal employees, making them hard to fire.

He supports "school choice" -- government-financed vouchers for private schools, schools that don't have to follow the standards mandated for public schools. Then claiming that less-funded schools do better than more-funded schools, and grumbling about teachers' unions.

A final question: VR says that secularism is bad, so which religion should be the dominant one? Then calling diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) a sort of religion. After VR claims to support freedom of belief and practice, CU said that that is secularism.

 

[lpetrich]

Cornel West defends donation from Harlan Crow, accuses critics of hypocrisy | The Hill
noting
Cornel West on X: "As an independent candidate …" / X

As an independent candidate and a free Black man, I accept donations within the limits of no PACs or corporate interest groups that have strings attached. I am unbought and unbossed. Despite my deep political differences with brother Harlan Crow (who is an anti-Trump Republican), I’ve known him in a non-political setting for some years and I pray for his precious family. I find it hypocritical for those who highlight his $3300 donation to my campaign but can’t say a mumbling word about the PAC-driven billion dollars to support the genocidal attack in Gaza sponsored by their candidate! I’m fighting for Truth, Justice, and Love! Onward! #TruthJusticeLove
#PeaceNow #EndTheGenocide

"Brother Harlan Crow"???

Cornel West returns donation from Harlan Crow | The Hill
noting
Cornel West on X: "How sad that …" / X

How sad that perceptions so quickly triumph over truth in our decadent culture. This holds in our major catastrophe in the Middle East where the rich humanity of Palestinians is rendered invisible. It also holds at home in the minor scandal about Harlan Crow's donation to my campaign. He is a staunch anti-Trump Republican who has "Never Forget" collections of tyrants (Stalin, Mao, Hitler, and many others) and patriotic collections of Washington, Jefferson, and Lincoln. Does this disqualify him from contributing to my campaign? Most people holler yes, I say no. As a jazzman, I listened and decided to give the money back to brother Harlan - but still state the truth! #TruthJusticeLove #Onward

Where was Harlan Crow's opposition to Donald Trump during DT's presidency?

Cornel West is a total babe in the woods in politics.

 

[lpetrich]

RealClearPolitics - Election 2024 - 2024 Republican Presidential Nomination

Ron DeSantis is now holding steady at around 13%, and Nikki Haley is slowly rising, now at around 7%. Vivek Ramaswamy slumped recently, and is now at 6%. Mike Pence is at 4%, Chris Christie at 3%, and Tim Scott at 2%, and Doug Burgum and Asa Hutchinson are at 1%.

 2024 United States presidential election Some more dropped out: Corey Stapleton and Perry Johnson.

 

[ZiprHead]

Lawsuit to block Trump from Colorado 2024 ballot survives more legal challenges

A judge has rejected three more attempts by former President Donald Trump and the Colorado GOP to shut down a lawsuit seeking to block him from the 2024 presidential ballot in the state based on the 14th Amendment’s “insurrectionist ban.”

The flurry of rulings late Friday from Colorado District Judge Sarah Wallace are a blow to Trump, who faces candidacy challenges in multiple states stemming from his role in the January 6, 2021, insurrection. He still has a pending motion to throw out the Colorado lawsuit, but the case now appears on track for an unprecedented trial this month.

A post-Civil War provision of the 14th Amendment says US officials who take an oath to uphold the Constitution are disqualified from future office if they “engaged in insurrection” or have “given aid or comfort” to insurrectionists. But the Constitution does not spell out how to enforce the ban, and it has been applied only twice since the 1800s.

 

[Elixir]

I am skeptical …
It’s comfortable to imagine that driving turnout for Trump runs its head against a ceiling of his own creation, or that his net popularity cannot be anywhere near the 2016 days of Trump frenzy, especially in light of his Post Presidential episodic failures.
But I don’t know any of those things.

 

[ZiprHead]

What Biden Did This Week - Week of 10/15-10/21

Welcome to What Biden Did This Week, a series where we spread the word about Joe Biden’s amazing accomplishments as President by providing a week-by-week account of everything he did that week. This is the fifth article in the series so far. Last...

www.dailykos.com

The quick and dirty list...

-Announced a variety of actions to support home-buyers
-Announced the largest ever federal investment in strengthening the electric grid
-Got 2 more Judges confirmed and announced the nomination of 2 more
-Following pressure from Biden, Israel agreed to turn on water supply to southern Gaza
-Announced the appointment of a new “special envoy” to support humanitarian causes in the Middle East
-Spoke with Iraqi Prime Minister Mohammed Shia Al-Sudani and Egyptian President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi on the situation in Israel
-Traveled to Israel, his second trip in the middle of a war zone as President, which almost never happens, and met with prime minister Netanyahu
-Announced $100 million in humanitarian aid for Gaza and the West Bank
-Spoke again with President El-Sisi
-Spoke with President Zelenskyy on the situation in Ukraine
-Secured the release of the first two American hostages in Israel
-Brought together the US and EU to a joint summit to show unity for Israel, Ukraine, and more
-After securing a deal with Egypt and Israel to allow aid to enter Gaza, the first trucks made it across the border

 

[Politesse]

It must be embarassing for Trump fans that the supposedly "senile and mentally ill" Biden routinely gets more done in Washignton in your average month than Trump ever managed during his term.

 

[Copernicus]

It must be embarassing for Trump fans that the supposedly "senile and mentally ill" Biden routinely gets more done in Washignton in your average month than Trump ever managed during his term.

A lot of that has nothing to do with Biden's own personal involvement. He has hired a very competent and experienced team of administrators who do all of the real work in crafting the legislation. Biden's role is just to help get the legislation through Congress, and his long experience in the Senate and Obama's two terms really helped with that. Of course, a great many Americans would prefer to elect amateurs to office who don't really know who to hire to run all of the agencies and fill positions that an administration needs to fill.

 

[Politesse]

A lot of that has nothing to do with Biden's own personal involvement. He has hired a very competent and experienced team of administrators who do all of the real work in crafting the legislation. Biden's role is just to help get the legislation through Congress, and his long experience in the Senate and Obama's two terms really helped with that.

Or, as they say in the biz, "leadership".

I do not personally think presidents should be involved in the legislative process at all aside from signing the results into law, but as most Americans seem to fervently disagree with me on that, I prefer to at least have someone competent (and convincingly literate) in the role.

 

[Copernicus]

A lot of that has nothing to do with Biden's own personal involvement. He has hired a very competent and experienced team of administrators who do all of the real work in crafting the legislation. Biden's role is just to help get the legislation through Congress, and his long experience in the Senate and Obama's two terms really helped with that.

Or, as they say in the biz, "leadership".

I do not personally think presidents should be involved in the legislative process at all aside from signing the results into law, but as most Americans seem to fervently disagree with me on that, I prefer to at least have someone competent (and convincingly literate) in the role.

I think that the Constitution pretty much guarantees executive involvement in the legislative process. After all, the Vice President presides over the Senate and can break a tie vote.

 

[Politesse]

A lot of that has nothing to do with Biden's own personal involvement. He has hired a very competent and experienced team of administrators who do all of the real work in crafting the legislation. Biden's role is just to help get the legislation through Congress, and his long experience in the Senate and Obama's two terms really helped with that.

Or, as they say in the biz, "leadership".

I do not personally think presidents should be involved in the legislative process at all aside from signing the results into law, but as most Americans seem to fervently disagree with me on that, I prefer to at least have someone competent (and convincingly literate) in the role.

I think that the Constitution pretty much guarantees executive involvement in the legislative process. After all, the Vice President presides over the Senate and can break a tie vote.

That would explain why my critique is not of Vice Presidents breaking ties in the Senate. But I would prefer that a literate and generally well informed man or woman be elected to that role as well.

 

[bilby]

I think that the Constitution pretty much guarantees executive involvement in the legislative process. After all, the Vice President presides over the Senate and can break a tie vote.

But surely the VP having a close relationship with the President is a novelty not anticipated by the constitution.

As I understand it, presiding over the Senate is basically the VPs only job (according to the constitution), while he waits for something unpleasant to happen to the President.

Until that unpleasantness comes, the VP is part of the executive branch only by the whim of the President; Constitutionally, the VP is part of the legislature, but is poised to move to an executive position if and when required.

Is that not the case?

I seem to recall that the original idea was that President and VP would be separately elected, and could be from completely different political ideologies (but then party politics was invented, and it all went in a very different direction than was anticipated by the writers of the constitution).

 

[Politesse]

But surely the VP having a close relationship with the President is a novelty not anticipated by the constitution

An originalist argument? The Congress that passed the 12th Amendment was aware of the Senatorial role of the Vice President when they moved to elect those offices separately, so "The Constitution" was aware of the acrimonious logical flaw in its original edition, by that time. By the time of the 25th Amendment's passage, the present convention of having a close and direct relationship across the executive branch was well established.

 

[Tigers!]

I do not personally think presidents should be involved in the legislative process at all aside from signing the results into law, but as most Americans seem to fervently disagree with me on that, I prefer to at least have someone competent (and convincingly literate) in the role.

The rest of the world looks forward to that blessed day.

 

[Politesse]

I do not personally think presidents should be involved in the legislative process at all aside from signing the results into law, but as most Americans seem to fervently disagree with me on that, I prefer to at least have someone competent (and convincingly literate) in the role.

The rest of the world looks forward to that blessed day.

Glass houses...