U.S. Presidential Election

[pink_triangle]

12 hours ago, FloopFiller said:

Whatever progress was made to move millennials to the left has been completely obliterated with gen z, and that’s a real issue. So many young guys have just gone full misogynist, racist, and red pilled.

I agree about this point, my daughter is 14 and says all the boys in her school love Trump and Farage. I find this quite a scary fact.

 

I agree about your podcast point to the extent that the right are using the platform more effectively, but think it’s simplistic to say the right are talking about simple solutions and the left realism. To me the left need to get better at delivering a message and understanding the priorities of people. If they are prioritising issues like Israel/Palestine or trans rights they will lose many people straight away.

 

I also do feel the right sometimes has a point about a tendency of some on the left to no platform or try to protect people from views they don’t agree with. This macho politics isn’t going away so we need our next generation of  left wing politicians to fight it head on and encourage the debate.

[pink_triangle]

12 hours ago, philipsteak said:

 

It's not like people on the right are full of love, compassion and respect for left wingers.

I have met compassionate people and twats on both ends of the political spectrum. I think it’s dangerous ti generalise depending on how people vote.

[pink_triangle]

7 hours ago, steviewevie said:

I wonder if AOC will have a go in 2028? She'll be old enough, is very charismatic, a great speaker and streetwise and hugely popular amongst a certain part of the electorate...but would probably get trounced nationally. I kept hearing people complaining that Harris was a communist.

Still, she might have a go.

The trouble is someone like that may increase the vote in liberal areas they win anyway,  but would be toxic in the swing states.

[pink_triangle]

6 hours ago, FloopFiller said:

Newsom or Shapiro for ‘28. Unfortunately just gonna have to stick to the tried and tested white guy and they’re both confident and good in the debate side of things so good counters to, presumably, Vance. 

While I like Kamala she came across very establishment and I think Newsom may be the same. I think the California liberal image would work against in areas they need to win.

[FloopFiller]

8 hours ago, pink_triangle said:

While I like Kamala she came across very establishment and I think Newsom may be the same. I think the California liberal image would work against in areas they need to win.

All candidates are gonna have their problems, but from what I’ve learnt Newsom hates Republicans with a

 passion and is completely ruthless, and after Kamala tried and failed to pander to them and still got her clock cleaned, maybe Democrats need to go full tilt and have their own Liberal strongman/psychopath; guy’s already setting things up to kneecap any effect Trump’s policies could have on California. Running him might end up completely blowing up in their faces, but pandering clearly isn’t the way forward and being Mr/Mrs nice guy ain’t working either. 

 

[pink_triangle]

18 minutes ago, FloopFiller said:

All candidates are gonna have their problems, but from what I’ve learnt Newsom hates Republicans with a

 passion and is completely ruthless, and after Kamala tried and failed to pander to them and still got her clock cleaned, maybe Democrats need to go full tilt and have their own Liberal strongman/psychopath; guy’s already setting things up to kneecap any effect Trump’s policies could have on California. Running him might end up completely blowing up in their faces, but pandering clearly isn’t the way forward and being Mr/Mrs nice guy ain’t working either. 

 

I wouldn’t say Kamala was a choice to pander to the swing states. I would say that Californian liberal rag is a tough one to sell in those areas.

[FloopFiller]

13 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

I wouldn’t say Kamala was a choice to pander to the swing states. I would say that Californian liberal rag is a tough one to sell in those areas.

I meant her choice to have the likes of Liz Cheney on the campaign trail with her in a fruitless effort to appeal to the more moderate Republicans. Didn’t work at all. 
 

Maybe Newsom won’t be the eventual nominee, but he’s 100% gonna go for it and, in the case that Trump’s policies end up being the disaster some are predicting, would be great at going scorched earth against Vance and MAGA. 

[charlierc]

55 minutes ago, FloopFiller said:

I meant her choice to have the likes of Liz Cheney on the campaign trail with her in a fruitless effort to appeal to the more moderate Republicans. Didn’t work at all. 
 

Maybe Newsom won’t be the eventual nominee, but he’s 100% gonna go for it and, in the case that Trump’s policies end up being the disaster some are predicting, would be great at going scorched earth against Vance and MAGA. 

I think the week after the election is going to be tricky to say "This guy's absolutely the right guy to be the 2028 nominee". We don't really know what the terrain will be like in 2027 when the contenders begin to assemble.

[charlierc]

I just clocked that Arizona and Nevada are still yet to finish counting.

 

I know it's one of those whats and ifs for alternative realities but that would've been such a shitshow if those two were the deciding states based on 2020 and the pre-election threats were anything to go by. Guess it's moot now.

[MilkyJoe]

33 minutes ago, charlierc said:

I just clocked that Arizona and Nevada are still yet to finish counting.

 

I know it's one of those whats and ifs for alternative realities but that would've been such a shitshow if those two were the deciding states based on 2020 and the pre-election threats were anything to go by. Guess it's moot now.

I think k Nevada has projected for trump now.
 

Weirdly, I read this morning that state laws in Arizona prohibit any counties declaring until the 11th November. 🤷🏼‍♂️

[steviewevie]

Doesn't feel like left vs right anymore, but conspiratorial paranoia vs reality.

[charlierc]

20 minutes ago, MilkyJoe said:

I think k Nevada has projected for trump now.
 

Weirdly, I read this morning that state laws in Arizona prohibit any counties declaring until the 11th November. 🤷🏼‍♂️

Site I was using says nearly there for Nevada but not yet called. Although Arizona deciding to legally mandate itself that it has to take it's time huh.

[pink_triangle]

18 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

Doesn't feel like left vs right anymore, but conspiratorial paranoia vs reality.

See I think that’s missing the point. I think the conspiratorial paranoia people are just the group that shout the loudest. I think there are many people who voted for Trump, despite not really liking him or or believing the election denial. They vote despite all of this thinking they will overall be better off and the crap is worth putting up with.

[pink_triangle]

2 hours ago, charlierc said:

I think the week after the election is going to be tricky to say "This guy's absolutely the right guy to be the 2028 nominee". We don't really know what the terrain will be like in 2027 when the contenders begin to assemble.

To some extent, but you can be pretty sure of the states Democrats will need to win and the types of voters they will need to convince in those states. I have just come back from America and what really struck me from talking to a few people is the mistrust they have with anything relating to California or New York, almost treating them as different countries ! The wrong choice could easily win the popular vote by racking up more votes in areas they already hold, but that isn’t the path to victory.

Edited 4 hours ago by pink_triangle

[steviewevie]

6 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

See I think that’s missing the point. I think the conspiratorial paranoia people are just the group that shout the loudest. I think there are many people who voted for Trump, despite not really liking him or or believing the election denial. They vote despite all of this thinking they will overall be better off and the crap is worth putting up with.

I didn't say which side was which...🤨

[charlierc]

14 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

To some extent, but you can be pretty sure of the states Democrats will need to win and the types of voters they will need to convince in those states. I have just come back from America and what really struck me from talking to a few people is the mistrust they have with anything relating to California or New York, almost treating them as different countries ! The wrong choice could easily win the popular vote by racking up more votes in areas they already hold, but that isn’t the path to victory.

This is why I doubt Newsom is the best way forward. I've seen clips of him and he comes across well and I think he could make something work, but this bizarre hatred of California & East Coast states is a problem that's hard to overcome.

 

But like I said, I don't think you can ever predict the future with these things. I don't know who the favourite for the Dems nomination was in 2004 after Kerry lost to Bush but I suspect it wasn't Obama, yet there he was in 2008 pulling it off. Conversely I am very much aware nobody saw Trump even winning the Republican candidacy in 2016 coming - hell, even after the primaries started and he had a few early defeats, people thought it was all for nothing but nearly a decade later and he's very much not scuttled back to just hosting The Apprentice.

[steviewevie]

and this inflation thing kind of unfair on Biden, US economy has done better than most and they've had a soft landing...prices are still high as they are just rising slower now and you have to wait for wages to catch up..and Trump will probably benefit from that unless his tarrifs and deportations and whatever drive up inflation again...

[steviewevie]

1 hour ago, charlierc said:

This is why I doubt Newsom is the best way forward. I've seen clips of him and he comes across well and I think he could make something work, but this bizarre hatred of California & East Coast states is a problem that's hard to overcome.

 

But like I said, I don't think you can ever predict the future with these things. I don't know who the favourite for the Dems nomination was in 2004 after Kerry lost to Bush but I suspect it wasn't Obama, yet there he was in 2008 pulling it off. Conversely I am very much aware nobody saw Trump even winning the Republican candidacy in 2016 coming - hell, even after the primaries started and he had a few early defeats, people thought it was all for nothing but nearly a decade later and he's very much not scuttled back to just hosting The Apprentice.

Ok so has to be white straight protestant male not from California and who likes Macdonald's. Surely they can find one of those...? Walz maybe.

[charlierc]

4 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

and this inflation thing kind of unfair on Biden, US economy has done better than most and they've had a soft landing...prices are still high as they are just rising slower now and you have to wait for wages to catch up..and Trump will probably benefit from that unless his tarrifs and deportations and whatever drive up inflation again...

Well I'd be surprised if they didn't. The historical precedent to cite is when Herbert Hoover signed a law in 1930 to counteract economic trouble caused by the previous year's stock market crash, which hiked up tariffs across the board, lead to tit-for-tat tariff hikes across the world and is widely seen now as a great failure that made the Great Depression worse.

 

Saying that Trump raised tariffs on many products in 2018/19 and people somehow seem to think those were rosier days. So.. pfft. Maybe this isn't the place for the great economic debates.

Edited 3 hours ago by charlierc

[FloopFiller]

1 hour ago, charlierc said:

This is why I doubt Newsom is the best way forward. I've seen clips of him and he comes across well and I think he could make something work, but this bizarre hatred of California & East Coast states is a problem that's hard to overcome.

 

But like I said, I don't think you can ever predict the future with these things. I don't know who the favourite for the Dems nomination was in 2004 after Kerry lost to Bush but I suspect it wasn't Obama, yet there he was in 2008 pulling it off. Conversely I am very much aware nobody saw Trump even winning the Republican candidacy in 2016 coming - hell, even after the primaries started and he had a few early defeats, people thought it was all for nothing but nearly a decade later and he's very much not scuttled back to just hosting The Apprentice.

Yeah there’s every chance that some new blood enters the fold or somebody else makes waves in the next few years and comes out as the front runner, I just think he currently seems like a good opposition to the machismo strongman thing Reps have obviously fallen for. 
 

But of course you’re right that it’ll all depend on the landscape around then, and hell, if Trump does well and people are feeling the benefit in 4 years it could be another lost cause and people just want more MAGA so Vance or DeSantis or whoever will dominate. 

[charlierc]

58 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

Ok so has to be white straight protestant male not from California and who likes Macdonald's. Surely they can find one of those...? Walz maybe.

Eh. Don't think it's very often somebody who is a losing Veep pick goes on to win the following election. He started well but seemed to fade as the campaign went on imo.

 

Shame is he actually has quite a bit about him that could fit the profile. But again, we'll see who's up to it in 2027. And likely who's second out of the blocks given the early front-runner usually falls flat on their face - i.e. Hillary and Guiliani 2008 or Jeb Bush 2016.