US Politics, September 2024 -- “I’m Not Going to Apologize For Posting a Joke”

I watched the MSNBC, Fox News and then the CNN after debate coverage. MSNBC was live with Tim Walz (only appearance last night) when the Swift endorsement dropped. Rachel Maddow read the whole thing to the US audience (no other network read out the full thing). Fox was interesting to say the least, all spin no substance. They all were saying the moderation was loop sided. When T come into the spin room, they all just bent the knee. CNN tried to do too many things all at once but had the most professional cast with like 25 guests. I did this all last night too because I was amped and was up way too late. It was past 2AM when I finally went to bed, work today was interesting,,,

lol @ whining about the mods fact checking you, if you don't like it then stop making shit up

loop sided

Good description of Fox, actually, but you forgot the 'y'.

I've seen some people ask "does Trump really think he won the debate?" and it seems pretty obvious that he does not, if he did he wouldn't be hanging out in the spin room talking about how great he did, that whole thing was him venting. I mean there were some points during the second half where I've never seen him look that shook before.

funny thing is he's only hurting himself doing shit like walking into the spin room and insisting 90% of people who watched thought he won. I know his voting base is crazy but most of them aren't Trump crazy. they know he's losing his mind but will vote for him anyway because the alternative, to them, is worse. same way we felt about Sleepy Joe. but he's demonstrating not only that he's actually terrible at getting shit done he's also really obnoxious and makes the entire Republican party look like idiots, how many of these folks just say fuck it, not taking an hour of my day to vote for him?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ez6phBoRvpc

Trump said that same exact shit the last time but nobody noticed because Biden sounded like he was dying

He may have said the same stuff but he said it different (obviously because of the higher caliber opponent, which rattled him). It wasn't just that Harris was better than Biden, Trump was worse than he was at the last debate. When he's winning, he's enjoying it, and when he's enjoying it he can be lighter and funnier and that can make some of the dumb stuff be "oh he's not being serious" to some people.

It doesn't work the same way when he's angrier and there's no levity at all to wash the medicine down with. The delivery is more important than the words for most people, who fill in their own words to at least some degree, which is why its easier to tell who won any kind of debate if you turn the sound off

the lack of enthusiasm for Trump among his voters was already very evident before this debate, but they'll get out and vote for him again anyway. that stubborn loyalty to him played out back in the primaries when they gave the cold shoulder to Nikki Haley and Ron DeSantis. the main reason that tepid levels of excitement in his base will matter going forward is the same old weirdness of the electoral college and thin margins in swing states we've been dragged through every four years since 2000. minimal shifts in voter sentiment and random noise will rule the day. it sucks, but its what we have until something changes that we can't yet foresee.

the lack of enthusiasm for Trump among his voters was already very evident before this debate, but they'll get out and vote for him again anyway. that stubborn loyalty to him played out back in the primaries when they gave the cold shoulder to Nikki Haley and Ron DeSantis.

Except for the 20% of them that voted for Haley. Do you think if Trump loses 20% of his base in the general election he can still squeak out an Electoral College victory? I don't.

I think he still doesn't know the difference between political asylum and a mental asylum - and that's one of the big reasons he keeps saying it

the numbers would indicate that those Haley voters are telling pollsters they will stick with Trump. the only way to know for sure is to hold the election and count the votes.

but they'll get out and vote for him again anyway

I don't think this is necessarily true. There will be people who voted for him twice before that won't vote for him this time (although there will also be people who voted different in the previous two elections that switch to Trump this time around as well). The difference is in the margins, but the margins do matter

Just saw a perfectly reasonable seeming guy from Pennsylvania being asked about Trump's performance in the debate, "Well, he's a lunatic, you have to factor that in when you vote for him". He's voting for him.

Aimless vmic being loudly, authoritatively and condescendingly wrong ITT while being obtuse about how elections work.

tbf lots of general elections feature candidates who did not even get 80% of the votes in their primaries.

I think undecided voters are largely a myth, and to the extent they do exist it's not really worth deciphering their politics. I do think however you have a lot of people who are mostly unplugged leaning one way or the other, who don't really care to take the time now to request a mail-in, who might show up on election day but they might not. They know along with the rest of us that their individual vote isn't really worth much. In order to vote you're taking an hour out of your day most likely, also it's a work day, people have kids and soccer practices and all sorts of shit to do, so when it comes down to it if one side is very motivated and the other is saying stuff like "well, granted he is a lunatic...", I do think that makes a difference, and hopefully a difference that isn't accurately captured in the polls

I think there are plenty of Haley voters who will vote for Trump bc at the end of the day they are Republicans and voted for her not out of some principled Never Trump stand but simply because they preferred her to him (while preferring both of them to a Democrat).

As far as I know (because we don't discuss it anymore) my parents despise Trump but will vote for him because he's not a Communist.

otoh, Alberto Gonzales (!) just endorsed Kamala: https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/09/12/alberto-gonzales-kamala-harris-endorsement-00178746

We spend a lot of time on this thread speculating about what most voters in particular groups will do when elections are decided at the margins rather than by most voters. A handful of states matter and to win them you either turn out more of your base, flip people who aren’t strongly committed, or both. That’s it. It makes zero difference if die hard Trump supporters will ever change, because there aren’t enough die hard Trump supporters to win swing states alone.

Yes, but as polarization continues, the uncommitted voters become fewer and fewer and turning out your base becomes the whole ball of wax.

a sticky problem

One reason for optimism beyond the polls: trump is relying on people who don’t usually vote and their field office situation seems like a shambles.

its interesting re polarization how its driven by the gop theyre very extreme where the dems are always trying to depolarize via centrism but the people dont care they want that sweet polarization baby

otm

the quirks of the electoral college makes polarization more favorable to the republican candidate

Aimless vmic being loudly, authoritatively and condescendingly wrong ITT while being obtuse about how elections work.

― longtime caller, first time listener (man alive)

thank you for saying this, I'm so sick of it

still a lot of voters out there to get if you can get them...

"About two-thirds (66%) of the voting-eligible population turned out for the 2020 presidential election – the highest rate for any national election since 1900."

xp nah i'm still a fan. i think aimless values clarity in a way that may come across as condescension but is not that. but this is more my feeling than an analysis of posts.

if Harris has really activated the Democratic ground game and Trump's campaign is still focused on vacuuming up as much money as possible, I'm not sure how Trump wins this one? Haven't seen many stories on the subject. Are the dark money PACs picking up the slack for the GOP with voter registration and the like?

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2024/07/trump-campain-election-2024-susie-wiles-chris-lacivita/678806/ covers their (pre-biden) GOTV plan this year. not clear they have the capacity or money to change the plan given biden dropped out and a trump blowout now seems out of the question.

I feel good about Harris's chances of winning the popular vote, it's the electoral college math I worry about

There were a LOT of moments during the debate — esp in the back half when he knew he was beaten and he was just making that toddler-grinding-out-a-crap face — when Trump was nodding at statements Harris made, even ones directly attacking him. A 60-second super cut of those would make a wonderful campaign ad.

I mean yes if she started speaking the way Trump does it would be very worrying

if Harris has really activated the Democratic ground game and Trump's campaign is still focused on vacuuming up as much money as possible, I'm not sure how Trump wins this one? Haven't seen many stories on the subject. Are the dark money PACs picking up the slack for the GOP with voter registration and the like?

I think undecided voters are largely a myth, and to the extent they do exist it's not really worth deciphering their politics

I don't think they're a myth at all! People say "oh who is still undecided at this point?" But an undecided voter may have only become undecided 8 weeks ago, or this morning. And one of the candidates has only been in the race for a few weeks, which changes the landscape for a lot of people (particularly the I hate them both camp)

We always come back to this point. Of course undecided voters exist! They may preen for the NYT reporters who call the same ones ten times i three months but they're the ones who don't engage with politics while still voting for the candidate who most aligns with their "views."

there are not many undecided voters who will actually vote, and it's not clear how to win them over (probably something different for each one), but the election is decided by 20,000 votes in 3 states, so there are enough to matter.

imo there arent many truly undecided voters, there prob arent even that many fakly undecided voters, theyre also by definition people who are hard to convince to vote for you, more reason to rile up the base

presumably riling up the base doesn't increase turnout among the base (they're the base), but it does result in 1) positive media 2) a sense of optimisim/viability that causes low propensity voters to turn out.

Also: media use "undecided" and "unaffiliated" and "independent" indiscriminately. If an "undecided" voter has voted for Republicans for 20 years, it might be time for Curious NYT Reporter to wonder if he should take her word for granted.

pure speculation here but undecided voters might find base riling interesting too, might want to ride the wave

presumably riling up the base doesn't increase turnout among the base (they're the base), but it does result in 1) positive media 2) a sense of optimisim/viability that causes low propensity voters to turn out.

― 𝔠𝔞𝔢𝔨 (caek), Thursday, September 12, 2024 10:18 AM (eighteen seconds ago) bookmarkflaglink

this might just be a semantic difference but riling up the base does increase turnout people are more likely to act when theyre riled up

makes sense. also in the case of the democrats in particular, riling up the base is difficult to do without also advancing policies that are especially popular with (otherwise low propensity) young voters.

hence their dilemma!

I heard an “undecided” college student on NPR yesterday who was disappointed that the debate didn’t focus enough on her #1 issue, global warming. Which, with Kamala waffling on fracking, fair enough. But which of the two parties is more vocally calling any attempts to mitigate it a scam? She could vote for Jill Stein, I guess.

dems prob could be propagating a wave election and bolstering their base with new young voters here if they cared to, oh well

The younger voters I know are way more excited about Harris than the fossil but they're not stupid: they know the DNC has rebranded Joe Biden into a younger, female-er candidate. And if they vote for her -- most say they will, whereas they certainly were not voting for Biden in May -- they know they're voting for youth and vibes. It's not that Harris has a better affordable housing policy than Biden, it's that her freshness makes them think she does -- and they go along with it.

(That was my impression after a chat last week).

lagoon consistently otm about the pathetic center-right Harris platform. i found it hard to fully get on board with the debate afterglow. great to see anybody get under Trump's skin that way, and I'm definitely happy that it seems more likely now that he'll lose. but half the time i was yelling out at the tv in vain hopes of hearing a policy idea i could actually get excited about (beyond abortion rights obviously). minimum wages? M4A? union rights? a serious climate agenda? she might as well have been John Kerry up there, versus where the party and the country are today.

would have also been nice to hear a full-throated condemnation of the hateful anti-immigration and anti-trans rhetoric for what it actually is (beyond "divisive" etc.). the Israel and "border" answers were depressing in more predictable ways.

basically: can we skip ahead to her winning this year, and then further ahead to her getting primaried from the left in 2028?

But which of the two parties is more vocally calling any attempts to mitigate it a scam?

‘Neither of them is going to do anything about but the Democrats will look sadder while they boil the seas, isn’t that enough?’

And then we nominate Pete Buttigieg, America's mayor

In 2028 we'll all have to rally behind Harris again as she fights off some MMA fighter or ICE agent turned politician.