Forum menu
The odds are still pretty much 50/50 with Harris as the fave according to the bookies...
How on earth can that be possible?
I mean, If you said to me, who is the most reprehensible person alive, Trump would probably top the list, but only because Epstine 'hung himself'.
You can watch live counts of mail in ballots in Florida, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania here
Pretty meaningless obviously with 40 days still to go!
https://projects.votehub.us/pages/early-voting-tracker
I mean, If you said to me, who is the most reprehensible person alive, Trump would probably top the list, but only because Epstine ‘hung himself’.
Trump will end up implicated in the P Diddy scandal, either supplying underage models via his agency or a video of him at a party will emerge.............. and the MAGA loons would still vote for him
As far as I know he hasn't yet shot anyone on 5th Avenue, so there's a long long way to fall before anyone might change their mind
How on earth can that be possible?
Because, at a fundamental level, a sizable chunk of the American public pays very little attention to politics but really objects to having to pay tax.
As a result, in a 2 party system there will always be a sizable audience for whichever party is perceived to be the one that will tax you the least.
People are happy to tie themselves in rhetorical knots to try and justify this morally but a vast swath of US political discourse can largely be boiled down to this and so long as Trump remains the candidate who is perceived as the lower tax option he will remain in contention because for a vast swath of America that is what decides their vote.
as Trump remains the candidate who is perceived as the lower tax option he will remain in contention
And a lot rests on 'perception'. Trump's all about who he seems to be and what he seems to do.
He marketed his tax cuts as being of benefit to the 'middle classes'* but they were very heavily skewed towards the rich - under those cuts the richest 400 people in the US ended up paying a lower rate of tax than the poorest 40%. People who actually saw the most noticeable diffence in their take home pay would have been in the 98th percentile - household incomes over $360,000. Those tax cuts in turn added $2 Trillion** to the US national debt.
While Trump has is core fans, theres a sizeable chunk who will hold their nose and vote for him even though they don't like him just because they believe they will be taxed less or because of a largely unfounded belief in the US that the economy does better under republican presidencies.
Bear in mind.... those Tax Cuts have not been reversed - what Trump is offering voters is what they already have - even with a Democrat president at the helm.
sizable chunk of the American public pays very little attention to politics but really objects to having to pay tax.
To be frank we have the same childish rhetoric about tax here, across the whole political spectrum. It would be political suicide to just talk about tax like adults.
* middle class is a pretty nebulous term in the US - its an income bracket rather than a social class but even then seems to span the bit between 'poverty' and 'millionaire' although many millionaires would still term themselves middle class, So it's a very easy term to throw around politically as almost everyone who hears it thinks it pertains to them. (it would perhaps be better phrased as The Working class - as its the people in between the people unable to work and people who can afford not to work maybe - which is why millionaires feel 'middle class' if they're actually working to earn their millions rather than having their millions work for them)
** thats $6000 of dept for every US citizen just from that one measure
Just watched the Ch4 documentary which puts more substance and focus to the ‘steal’ news stories. Wow!
Wall to wall lifetime Republicans seeing it for what it really is. A total ****ing clown show.
Yet here we go again…
Well, there's a surprise.
Trump’s “Vastly Overpriced” $100,000 “Swiss Watch” Is Probably Made in China, Experts Say
![Trump-Gold-Watches-Publicity-H-2024[1]](https://stw-forum-images.s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/13399668/0m3x0gt0itpufa49jtbwg0xoe0h8dsxs.jpg)
I see Vance seems to have sleezed to a narrow victory in the VP debate last night
I doubt will change many minds but polls are still 50/50 and a few lately edging back toward Trump in the swing states, plus war in middle east (& rising pump prices) and hurricane all are headwinds for Harris
Dementia Don will be pleased on the whole
I watched the debate and Vance came across as slick and polished, much like a plastic faced Fox News host so that’s trump won the election, walz came across with facts and figures but not as polished in delivery.
I find this is pretty convincing.
Vance had a good night- it's pretty interesting, because it's really obvious that his move to trumpworld is entirely cynical and tactical and that it's not his natural stance, but that's true of a lot of people and often they seem to forget it themselves and end up basically gaslighting themselves. Whereas clearly with Vance it's something he's continuing to decide to do and he can actually still be more reasonable and civil, he just mostly chooses not to. Urgh.
Walz was stodgy but solid enough, he did land some pretty good blows though. It was never likely to be the part of the job that he shone at tbf. But across the entire debate I think it was a pretty clearcut if narrow Vance win. And not just a "Trump win" of "he didn't just shit his pants and speak in tongues so he exceeded expectations". Vance was dishonest both in position and in statement while Walz was mostly pretty straight but, that's the game.
Thing is though, when you look away from the total debate and put it into the 10 second videos and buzzwords and such, it's a bit different. Walz's handful of direct attacks like on January 6th end up looking better, and he didn't really do anything that makes for a 10 second <bad> video. Whereas Vance inevitably had a bunch of lies that will play really well to the Trumpists, but he also had a couple of really bad moments that look bad to everyone- getting caught outright lying, fact checked, then responding with whiny mumbling and "the rules were that you weren’t going to fact check" is a terrible look and was almost perfectly delivered for the internet age.
In the end, it's almost the definition of the "do no harm" debate but it was more of an opportunity for Walz.
Well, there’s a surprise.
Trump’s “Vastly Overpriced” $100,000 “Swiss Watch” Is Probably Made in China, Experts Say
Sounds familiar...
I wonder if that's a Trumpian standard play, or Charlie sheen mixing himself up with Ray Cohn?
Vance kept himself under control which is what Trump can never do - there was a degree of political good behaviour.
Which means that Vance would be a better Prez than his running mate. #shudder#
Fascist **** already dialled up to 11 on the right wing rhetoric. God knows how unhinged he’ll be come election day. The within people are presumably the election officials.
“I think the bigger problem are the people from within. We have some very bad people. We have some sick people,” he said on Fox’s Sunday Morning Futures programme.
“It should be very easily handled by, if necessary, by the national guard, or if really necessary, by the military, because they can’t let that happen.”
I did think him stranding all his fans in the desert he cause he hadn't paid his coach bill was quite amusing
What's not so funny is that everyone of them will still vote for him, without once wondering if he can't run a small gathering of people on a farm, why he'd be able to run a country
Polls are still incredibly tight, especially in the swing states, 5 million votes have already been cast and it's exactly 3 weeks until polling day.
It's hard to be optimistic at this stage.
Atm I'm reading an interesting book about narcissists. Apparently there are varying degrees. But there is no doubt that Trump is in the highest degree, the worst type. Lying, cheating, making up stories, unable to show love, care or consideration to others, let alone his own family members, especially his children. He's probably envious of his children (sons). Has to control, be in power, is needy and usually an extrovert (read show off).
Throwing childish comments at Harris eg," I'm better looking than she is, she's bad, bad, so bad", is typical narcissistic behaviour. I've not yet finished reading the book, but it was clear from the first chapter that he's the real thing. Interestingly, the book also states, that these people are genuinely unhappy and usually something happened very early on in their life to make them this way.
It’s hard to be optimistic at this stage.
I'm gloomy.
At what point is prejudice against the people of a nation justifiable/understandable? Whichever way it goes, a sufficiently large number of the US electorate will have voted for him that becoming president is a realistic possibility. For the third election in a row. This is the richest nation in the world - so they have collectively got the intelligence to make stuff happen. And they should have the funds to have great education for all. They should be able to see through him, yet they still see him as a reasonable prospect as their leader. Which leads me to the only logical conclusion - they are just an unpleasant nation of people in terms of their collective personality that I'll never understand or want to spend time around.
I was optimistic for a while. I do think there could be a silent group who will vote against Trump in quite large numbers, that even a republican state or 2 could flip, I still think he will be trounced in the popular vote, but I am losing confidence that he will lose the election due to the rigging of the election system.
Yegads it is stressful, and we're still 3 weeks out. As far as I can see, if Kamala wins Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin she's home and dry. Lose either Michigan or Wisconsin and she'd need to win either North Carolina or Georgia. Or win both Nevada and Arizona. Lose Pennsylvania and she'd need two of Nevada, Georgia, North Carolina or Arizona (though not Nevada/Arizona combo as she'd be two short). Lose Pennsylvania and one of either Wisconsin and Michigan and she's basically done unless there's a massive upset in the Southern States (ie she might well win one of North Carolina, Georgia and Arizona, more than that would be a surprise..)
Complicated.
As said above, most voters focus on the micro issues relevant to them (usually tax) and the US is no different (other than being even more so). The fact that someone as obviously incompetent as DT is even in the running though is incredible. Fingers are crossed and really hoping that the Harris plagiarism thing that seems to have appeared doesn't get traction..
Anyone seen Trump's one-man disco last night?
Apparently declared that he'd take a few more questions, didn't take any, and just stood around on stage looking weird for half an hour while they played a few classic power ballads:
https://bsky.app/profile/cooperlund.bsky.social/post/3l6j6c3mf6c2m
I am increasingly pessimistic I have to confess. Yes it's too tight to call but that's the point, it really shouldn't be.
There did seem to be some Harris momentum but lately it seems that there's lots of mud n shit being thrown at trump but it doesn't stick. It seems a little desperate.
It's incredible that we are now about 3 weeks out from such an important event, and we're reduced to crossing fingers.
I'm optimistic. Just spent a few days in deepest redneckistan and there was hardly a trump banner to be seen. Somewhat reminiscent of the recent UK GE when our very safe tory seat hardly had any billboards in the fields. (the seat remained tory but on a very small margin this time.)
Coincidentally, I was also here in 2016 when Trump won very marginally. That felt very different.
It's as much about energy and turnout as it is opinions and preferences.
Because, at a fundamental level, a sizable chunk of the American public pays very little attention to politics but really objects to having to pay tax.
There's a demographic in current US voters referred to as "boat people", and it's not an immigration slur this time.
It's those stereotypical midwestern, middle income, middle aged men. They've bought a big house in the suburbs, drive a big truck, and thanks to Don's tax cuts bought a boat.
Trump needs to get his far right base to vote for him as well, but that's not the 50%. The 50% is people who just want to pay less tax. And in a country where you don't get healthcare in return for your tax, you can sort of see why. You've finished with school, you're not at war, your only interactions with the police are getting speeding tickets. Where's the intrinsic benefit benefit in paying tax? A boat on the other hand is cool, you can drink Coors light on a boat.
There did seem to be some Harris momentum but lately it seems that there’s lots of mud n shit being thrown at trump but it doesn’t stick. It seems a little desperate.
Those voting for him are already holding their noses, they can't smell whatever s*** is thrown his way.
Last time (well I mean 2016) there was all the “but her emails” nonsense even coming from democrat-leaning educated women that we were talking to. And that still came out as a really close election (remember Clinton actually got more votes). I can’t help think that the comparison this time is much more favourable for Harris. She’s not Clinton for starters! And Trump is much more obviously a batshit-crazy senile fascist. Last time he still had a bit of charisma.
If Trump wins, I'll be straight down the bookies with a £100 that Trump will be assassinated before the completion of his term.
I'd have a chance of doubling my money.
If he does get elected I expect he'll spend a bunch of those tax dollars on reinforcing his secret service protection. This year we've had 3 known situations where an armed individual has been close to him and he knows that becoming POTUS is likely to flush a few more out
kimbers
Full MemberI did think him stranding all his fans in the desert he cause he hadn’t paid his coach bill was quite amusing
What’s not so funny is that everyone of them will still vote for him, without once wondering if he can’t run a small gathering of people on a farm, why he’d be able to run a country
Even while it was still happening they were hatching conspiracy theories, it was all Harris's fault, she'd personally cancelled all teh buses, that sort of thing.
This despite the fact that Trump did <literally the same thing> at at least one rally in 2020.
And it seems like it's not even "hadn't paid the bill", both times it looks like they literally just booked the buses one way. The audience only matters until they turn up, afterwards they might as well die.
Theoretically, Can Trump win, then cut a deal and concede the presidency to the Dems in order for them to not prosecute.. ever?
No
Theoretically, Can Trump win, then cut a deal and concede the presidency to the Dems in order for them to not prosecute.. ever?
No, in short. The only thing he can do once elected is resign and allow something even worse (his VP) to ascend to power.
If Trump wins, all his charges will probably evaporate anyway. It's not the Dems prosecuting him, it's various states and the DOJ.
If he does get elected I expect he’ll spend a bunch of those tax dollars on reinforcing his secret service protection.
I don't think it's his call even as as president. He can ask - thats it.
Currently Biden wants to increase funding for Trump's secret service detail following the recent attempts / breaches (in fact he'd already made the request before the second attempt happened), but all he's actually able to do is say he thinks it should happen, its up to congress to actually do it.
I want to think the polling companies know what a cock up they made in 2016 by showing Clinton with a strong lead. And are now very conservative in assessing Harris' chances. As posted above, I see far fewer Trump signs and stickers and far more Harris signs and stickers, even in Texas and Arizona. I've completed my ballot, which will be in the box tomorrow!
I have also noted that he isn't dominating the YouTube discourse so much, in fact I see quite a bit more Harris and Waltz stuff on youube now. We know that Trump and the far right have dominated social media for the past decade or so, and it was a highly financed operation to do so. What isn't clear to me is if the dems are now pumping money in as well or if it is a ground swell of grass roots surge of people just making their voices heard. It feels like the latter, but that may be deliberate, pushing that homely Waltz mid western down to earth image.
We have a warehouse and office space in Georgia. Pretty much everyone that works there is planning to vote for Trump. They seem to think it will be better for them and the economy. I think they're ****ing idiots
They seem to think it will be better for them and the economy.
Even though there is vast amounts of evidence to the contrary, I can't understand this: Trump voters think they will gain under Trump. But they won't unless they're earning in the top 5%.
I want to think the polling companies know what a cock up they made in 2016 by showing Clinton with a strong lead
hhmmm going over this one in my brain. Wasn’t it that the polling companies did their usual work, and the media outlets did their usual in that they ignore that polls have massive tolerances built it? iirc the result was within those tolerances
Even though there is vast amounts of evidence to the contrary, I can’t understand this: Trump voters think they will gain under Trump.
They’ll gain the ability to lord it over the woke libtards or something, perhaps larger portions of freedom fries, preferably seasoned with some vile laxative that leaves them shitting so much that their bowels detach and hang out their arse to be eaten by stray dogs, and raccoons…..can’t forget about raccoons.
And in a country where you don’t get healthcare in return for your tax,
And let's just remember why - because proposing such a concept would be electoral suicide and a sure sign you are a communist. As Obama found out even some Dems think this. They are just plain weird as a nation. Nasty even.
The more I think about it, the more I think they probably deserve an unstable orange shit gibbon for president. It's just a shame there might be same fallout beyond their borders.
The more I think about it, the more I think they probably deserve an unstable orange shit gibbon for president. It’s just a shame there might be same fallout beyond their borders.
Indeed, if places like Ukraine wouldn't be screwed it he got in and laid it on a plate for his mate Putin I'd be tempted to celebrate the good ol' us of a voting him in and watching the realisation unfold.
Theoretically, Can Trump win, then cut a deal and concede the presidency to the Dems in order for them to not prosecute.. ever?
Theorectically, I get the impression if Trump did win then he's looking at never having elections again and modelling his reign much like Putins, let alone conceding the Democrats might ever get into power again. Can't imagine there'll be much left of the DoJ and the likes once he's finished with it.
There are lots of really nice, kind, thoughtful, generous people living in the USA. Saying they all deserve Trump is like saying we all deserved the tories and brexit and the rest of the shit of the last decade. Might as well say someone deserved to get run over when they happened to share road-space with an SUV driven by a drunk.
Indeed this /\ I’ve visiting and worked in the US many times and have never encountered this fat, stupid, American centric personality that so many outside of the US ascribe to them.
I have uniformly encountered intelligent, kind, often gregarious, largely normal body type, hard working and diverse people.
Who I also believe the majority of support, gun control, womens right to choose, and even state backed healthcare.
It isn't the voters who shoulder the largest blame, it is the system, the politicians and the oligarchs. In fact it is right wing rhetoric 101 to blame the victims rather than the perpetrators.
Indeed this /\ I’ve visiting and worked in the US many times and have never encountered this fat, stupid, American centric personality that so many outside of the US ascribe to them.
I've encountered both in the same family.
My best man was born and grew up in Texas, his parents were senior execs at NASA*, Shell, McDonell Douglas, etc.
He's lived in LA for +25 years now and is liberal as you like.
His parents are classic gun-owning, Trump voting Covid-denying nutjobs.
*when he first starting driving as a teenager he could access launch-pads when driving his parents cars because of the sticker on the windscreen!
I get the impression if Trump did win then he’s looking at never having elections again and modelling his reign much like Putins, let alone conceding the Democrats might ever get into power again.
Great Freakonomics Radio episode on this recently, I like the view given there:
"POSNER: He won’t become a dictator, I think there are a number of reasons. First of all, I think it’s actually pretty hard to be a dictator. You have to be kind of smart — shrewd, at least. You have to be tough. You have to be brave.
DUBNER: You’re saying Trump is none of those — even brave, yeah?
POSNER: From what I know about him, it’s just hard to imagine him having this ambition to be a dictator. I know he wants power, and he wants to hold on to power. But I think he does it in an ad hoc way rather than the kind of shrewd, planned way that real dictators do to obtain power. And then the other thing is just that, I do think that the other institutions — the press, Congress, the courts — they’re not going to let him be a dictator. "
https://freakonomics.com/podcast/how-to-predict-the-presidency/
It isn’t the voters who shoulder the largest blame
I don't think I can be persuaded of that. Same in this country. Spend any time in a staunchly true blue South coast of England constituency in the UK and you can sense it in the personality types. Go just down the coast to Brighton where they've voted in the Greens and tell me you can't sense the difference without ever talking politics. We pretty much always get the government we deserve. Sometimes it's when too many people vote for unpleasant policies and sometimes because the electorate have been mugged off by charlatans who the electorate should have been able to see through....if they had wanted to.
Trump is just a completely harmless wazzock..........until the people give him the power. They/we are only the victims if we're too (collectively) daft to know no better. I don't see why we should give them that excuse.
I have also noted that he isn’t dominating the YouTube discourse so much,
Have you checked a representative sample of people's feeds across the US?
There are lots of really nice, kind, thoughtful, generous people living in the USA. Saying they all deserve Trump is like saying we all deserved the tories and brexit and the rest of the shit of the last decade. Might as well say someone deserved to get run over when they happened to share road-space with an SUV driven by a drunk.
I think this is a thing worth remembering - The Republican Party has tirelessly and consistently worked to skew electoral systems and disenfrancise certain voters for their benefit - the whole system from school boards, through state and federal government to the Whitehouse is rigged for republican minority rule. Even out of power in any layer of government their gaming of the 'checks and balances' means they exert power by blocking. Much of the US political apparatus was built around Majorty Consensus is well meaning but allows a minority to over-rule/undermine the will of a majority.
Clinton had millions more votes than Trump to lose. Democrats require millions more votes that republicans just to split the house or senate 50:50. But it's not really any different to what we have here - we're a country that mostly votes for left leaning, progressive parties and more often than not elects the Conservative Party. This recent collapse is is the first time in our lifetimes that the tories share of the seats roughly reflects their share of the vote.
The increased heat and light we're seeing in US politics is the polarising effect of all that Gerrymandering coming home to roost - minority rule gives power to the few at the price of them feeling constantly under threat, the rights increasingly violent rhetoric is an expression of that fear. There have been other countries geared towards supporting a politically dominant minority- Liberia, Sierra Leone, Ba'athist Iraq, Tutsi era Rwanda, Assad's Syria. What have they all got in common I wonder?
I don’t think I can be persuaded of that. Same in this country. Spend any time in a staunchly true blue South coast of England constituency in the UK and you can sense it in the personality types. Go just down the coast to Brighton where they’ve voted in the Greens and tell me you can’t sense the difference without ever talking politics. We pretty much always get the government we deserve. Sometimes it’s when too many people vote for unpleasant policies and sometimes because the electorate have been mugged off by charlatans who the electorate should have been able to see through….if they had wanted to.
Trump is just a completely harmless wazzock……….until the people give him the power. They/we are only the victims if we’re too (collectively) daft to know no better. I don’t see why we should give them that excuse
Actually, thinking about it again I'll go further. If you are a middle of the road American (i.e. you've not been dragged into being a conspiracy theory MAGA fan club member) and fully aware of his (civil) guilty finding of sexual assault...then slander of the victim; and paying off a porn star; and his company being found guilty fraud; and his part in the Jan 6th riots, and....well suggesting to his people they should consider injecting themselves with bleach. If you are aware of all of that and much much more yet you are able to hold your nose and vote for him because you think you just might be personally be a little bit better off financially......you are a *anker plain and simple.
And if a typical American character trait is to think of themselves before all else is at the root of this, then yes it's pretty fair to blame the nation for who they vote for.
Trimp will win, little or nothing will change just like last time, Trump is bone idle with no attention span for anything except golf and burgers. I agree with comments above he is not dictator material.
Worked a lot in the US in the 90s in the industrial areas and some Redneck communities- they are (no disrespect) simple folks with very short horizons and so poorly educated it's shocking. They all cling on to the American dream even though it's long gone, they think healthcare is communism even though their health problems are disgraceful for a first world country.
They cling to this way of life because they know nothing else and have witnessed nothing else. Theydon travel even within their own country and many over leave their county let alone the state.
All this makes them easy to manipulate.
I have also noted that he isn’t dominating the YouTube discourse so much,
Its hard to know what 'YouTube' is like becuase you change it by looking at it
Have you checked a representative sample of people’s feeds across the US?
It's worth having a look at Marianna Springs work with 'Undercover Voters'. She creates dozens of social media accounts across a range of demographics which don't actively engage - don't post, like, share - so while 'partial' they're not actively creating or shaping echo chambers in the way we might do individually - in order to see how information is being targeted, promoted and amplified through or by social media.
I don’t think I can be persuaded of that.
What choices are they, the oligarchy control the policies that are offered, if the politicians can only offer the policies that their financiers will allow, nobody can really offer a realistic health plan for voters get decide, because their election pot would be non existent. So all the voters get to choose from two parties wedded to the same ideology, just with one throwing a few more crumbs from the table.
We have the same here now as well, two right wing parties offering virtually identical economic policies. Both using the culture war to "display" separation but without offering fixes to the economic disparity that is really at the heart of the culture war.
Trump, Farage, Boris etc have made an impacts, not because they are skilled orators or have anything worthwhile to say, but because they had huge financial backing and media coverage by the super wealthy, they were able to repeat their message repeatedly with paid for talking heads supporting them.
If all you offer to change major issues is minor tweaks, then the conversation will always be about is semantics. Offer real change and give people something to vote for. If you are meant to represent the parties of the people like the democrats and labour, then rule for the whole of society not just the few. If they won't or can't do that, then blaming the electorate is just victim blaming, and again that is right wing rhetoric that it appears many are happy to indulge in.
Trimp will win, little or nothing will change just like last time, Trump is bone idle with no attention span for anything except golf and burgers. I agree with comments above he is not dictator material.
It's not Trump who is the danger, as such. It's the people who he will put into power, Project 2025 is real and it's clear what they want to do.
His VP is also intelligent, ruthless and massively ambitious.
well suggesting to his people they should consider injecting themselves with bleach
I'd (somehow) forgotten about that pearl of wisdom, it really should've been the end of any credibility he'd managed to achieve but the fact he's got a very real chance of being voted in again says it all
Trump, Farage, Boris etc have made an impacts, not because they are skilled orators or have anything worthwhile to say, but because they had huge financial backing and media coverage by the super wealthy, they were able to repeat their message repeatedly with paid for talking heads supporting them.
This, or words to this effect, is said a lot. But it's always said by people would personally never ever vote Trump/Farage/Johnson. The counter question is - so why have you not been duped by the aforementioned wealthy backing and media coverage - what makes you immune? The response to that is normally imo way too polite. If you are I are immune, what deficit exists in those that had be won over? In the past (I'm thinking Brexit now) I've been guilty of thinking they were just too stupid to know any better but I think I've moved on from that. It doesn't take a genius not to buy the bull. I'd contend now that the money and honeyed words have liberated normal people with shitty views that's it's ok to hold them.
Because when these events happened my life is reasonably comfortable. In my earlier life when getting a job was difficult and having a decent job was just a pipedream, then the rhetoric and blaming of foreigners and others may have had a greater impact on me. Also having had largely shit jobs for 20 years before getting a good job (by leaving the country) I still am unable to buy a home or establish a decent pension, and for that I very much blame the asset inflation that has served the "already haves" much more than those coming after them.
But I can very much understand how the rhetoric can distort reality for those who are "victimised" by the system, especially when the party that is meant to represent them really offers little economic difference to the party that always serves the wealthy.
Hang on, let's not get sidetracked into thinking Trump preys in the poor for his vote base and that being disadvantaged in life makes you vulnerable to the likes of Trump. This is the votes distribution by income in 2016...Plenty of comfortable middle class folk finding their way to vote for him.
They are saying on the BBC that there are record numbers of early voters in Georgia.
More than 328,000 people voted in person or by post on the first day of voting, officials said - more than double the previous record of 136,000 in 2020.
In the last election the democrats had a significant advantage in postal and early votes, so I hope that is indicative of an energised opposition to another Trump term (got to find hope where I can).
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cx2kv219d2go
In the last election the democrats had a significant advantage in postal and early votes, so I hope that is indicative of an energised opposition to another Trump term (got to find hope where I can).
Do they count and declare the mail ins and early votes separately? It's been a fairly constant news story that DT is at odds with the GOP on the ground with his conspiracy theories about mail in ballot fraud working against party activists trying to get people to vote early.
In the last election the democrats had a significant advantage in postal and early votes, so I hope that is indicative of an energised opposition to another Trump term (got to find hope where I can).
worryingly The Republicans are heavily pushing the vote early idea, Musk & Thiel have been pumping a lot of money into tech and ground games to do just this as well as using cash to bribe voters indirectly https://www.forbes.com/sites/maryroeloffs/2024/10/07/elon-musks-pac-is-paying-47-for-each-solicited-petition-signature-from-a-swing-state-voter-heres-why-its-controversial/
It’s worth having a look at Marianna Springs work with ‘Undercover Voters’. She creates dozens of social media accounts across a range of demographics which don’t actively engage – don’t post, like, share – so while ‘partial’ they’re not actively creating or shaping echo chambers in the way we might do individually – in order to see how information is being targeted, promoted and amplified through or by social media.
I recently read How to Stand Up to a Dictator by Maria Ressa. The second half of the book is a quite fascinating expose of how "the algorithms" can be exploited for political gain.
Do they count and declare the mail ins and early votes separately?
That would probably depend on which state it is. Each state is responsible for administering its own elections, they aren't administered federally. I know for certain that some states don't start counting the mail-in votes until after the ballot boxes close, but I don't know if that's universal. This was a source of complaint from the Trump team last election because the mail-in ballots skewed Democrat so it looked like there was a big surge of votes for Biden once they started counting the mail-in votes, which Trump tried to portray as fraudulent ballots. One problem with counting mail-in votes as soon as they are received is that some voters will die after mailing in their ballot, so those will (I assume) have to be disallowed.
Whatever the case, Trump's team is making a lot of noise about these things trying to dishonestly cast doubt about the process.
So long as you're alive when you cast your ballot, your vote counts. The only time a mail-in will be discounted is if the ballot was mailed TO the recipient after they died. In Georgia last time, this was the sum total of 2.
I really hope there’s a substantial silent majority wanting Harris.
It's hard to remain optimistic
Trump saying Jan 6th was a day off f love, Vance said the 2020 election was rigged...
All of that crap should see them marginalised, yet half the country loves it ?
Waking up to the Brexit outcome was "WTAF?"
Waking up to a Trump victory will seem like the End of Days.
On Radio4 yesterday they were saying that the election campaigning isn't about trying to convince people to change their mind about who to view for (views are pretty entrenched and floating voters are very rare in their political system).
The campaigning is to encourage people to get off their bum and vote as many just can't be bothered. There are millions of people who are disengaged but their votes could be critical. Hence Harris and Trump's slightly left field activities this week in key areas.
Do they count and declare the mail ins and early votes separately?
That would probably depend on which state it is. Each state is responsible for administering its own elections, they aren’t administered federally.
Thats the odd thing really - and part of the reason that the republican candidates in particular can win with a minority of votes. The presidential election isn't one election, it's 50 elections. Each state manages its election in its own way. I was looking at an example of a (I think Iowa) ballot paper from 2016 - voters would have turned up at the voting station to find 10 candidates for president on the ballot paper. Even when it comes to the electoral collage they again manage that differently. In some states all the 'electors' will vote for the candidate that won that state - so a candidate could win a state by one vote and all that state's electoral college votes will go to the that candidate, in others the state will split their electors proportionally between the candidates so a candidate can lose convincingly and still gain a significant number votes towards the electoral college..
There is a bit of an odd anomaly with early, particularly mail-in voting which is they don't necessarily count the votes but they know who has voted. Many voters declare their affiliation on their voter registration, so without counting the votes you know how many 'Registered Republicans' and 'Registered Democrats' have voted and that information is often made public ahead of poling day.
In the last election, I think the postal votes were actually counted last in many states (at least in the swing states that mattered). This was known before the election and was part of the trumpers plans to discredit the result due that creating the apparent late democrat surge as the postal votes were counted.
views are pretty entrenched and floating voters are very rare in their political system
The way floating voters are portrayed has always been something of a myth, it has always been largely disparate groups, that are either encouraged or not to get out and vote, rather than people who will flip between parties. It is unfortunate that in both the US and the UK both major parties are more happy to disenfranchise voters rather then even try to offer progressive changes.
In the last election, I think the postal votes were actually counted last in many states
Also, as I understand it, the ballot has to be postmarked by election day, but it can be received later (which is fair because there are service members all around the world whose mail-in ballots might be delayed through no fault of their own.) So it actually makes sense to count the mail-in ballots last because they will be received last.
California mail-in ballots can be received one week after election day, if they are postmarked on or before election day, for example.
https://www.usvotefoundation.org/california-election-dates-and-deadlines
Trump also says: "There were no guns down there, we didn't have guns, the others had guns, but we didn't have guns."
I thought this was an interesting line. We........one of Trump's lines of defence for the Jan 6th riots was it was nothing to do with him. But if it's now 'we'........
I really do hope enough people selfish enough to vote for him can be sufficiently embarrassed to go through with it and he looses. Then someone finally has the balls to put his nuts in a blender via the courts. When he is dead and long gone it's really important his legacy can't be that you had behave as he has done and get away with it. For the future of democracy it would be so much better if he died in prison rather than been having pardoned of all charges as an elderly statesman.
I'll be up late for the big night for sure.
I've been there for the:
Referendum
Trump in '16
Biden in '20
Our GE
Now USA '24... Could be a long night. My main concern is Ukraine/ Gaza, though a Trump win will cause so much collateral damage I can't even begin to get my head around it...
In some states all the ‘electors’ will vote for the candidate that won that state
All but two do this. Even the two exceptions use 1 vote per congressional district winner (one has 2 districts and one has 3) + 2 for the overall winner. So whilst better than the rest still aint great.
Then you have the faithless elector issue.
Only 14 states have a law that if they disregard the vote then their choice is voided, 3 the vote still counts although the elector might be punished (doesnt seem heavy though eg one recent example was a 1000 dollar fine. Given the cost of presidental campaigns thats not even a rounding error), some others have a law but no enforcement and the rest dont even bother.
I recall seeing a news article that there's some initiative to get states to sign up to a commitment to cast their electoral college votes according to whichever candidate won the national popular vote. The idea is that the plan isn't enacted until enough states have signed up to it that they have a majority of electoral college votes between them. I don't recall how close the initiative is to that magic number though.
There is an ongoing effort to get states to agree to award all their electoral college votes to the candidate who wins the national vote. A bunch of states have signed onto it, with the condition that it will come into effect once states with a combined total of 270 electoral votes have signed on. That would have the effect of neutralizing the electoral college and awarding the Presidency to the winner of the national vote. So far, states with a total of 209 EC votes have signed on, which is 77% of the total needed. Unfortunately, those are the easy states to get on board, getting another 61 votes will be much tougher.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Interstate_Compact
I think the propensity for shooting solutions that this election campaign has witnessed will focus the minds of anyone contemplating screwing around with results.
This morning I was reading about election staff being concerned for their personal safety
What an absolute dire state of affairs
Not alot to add here but we did have a guy in a Trump hat come into the shop yesterday. He really stood behind it aswell. Anti woke/imigration ect ect
We're in the sunny west midlands. Wonder if he knows he cant vote.