Harris vs Trump;

[zapatos]

3 hours ago, StringJunky said:

The drubbing in the electoral college for president doesn't translate to a free rein in Congress, does it?

 

Correct. Other than bragging rights, the drubbing is irrelevant now that the election is over.

6 hours ago, npts2020 said:

so where are voters going when they feel like one party hasn't been helping them?

I see your point that the Democrats have a weak record, but my question remains. Where do the voters go when they feel like BOTH parties haven't been helping them? Don't you choose the party with the better record? Unless you are saying you believe the Republicans have the better record.

[iNow]

There’s also the issue of vibes versus facts. The facts on many issues are clear, but apparently not to many voters 

 

[StringJunky]

1 hour ago, zapatos said:

Correct. Other than bragging rights, the drubbing is irrelevant now that the election is over.

Any idea how the remaining 20 House seats will fall, from what you can see?

Edited Sunday at 03:40 PM by StringJunky

[iNow]

9 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

Any idea how the remaining 20 House seats will fall, from what you can see?

GOP predicted to take the House

[StringJunky]

2 hours ago, iNow said:

GOP predicted to take the House

Right. Cheers. How many of those 20 left will go their way do you think-ish?

Edited Sunday at 06:36 PM by StringJunky

[swansont]

11 hours ago, npts2020 said:

He is talking about current Democratic Party leadership. What have Democrats done to promote unions? AFAIK the auto workers strike during the most recent election was the first time Joe Biden ever showed up on a picket line. In addition, he supported NAFTA (even though people like Ross Perot described exactly what would happen) and the failed Trans Pacific Partnership. I am only using Biden as an example because his record is far from unique amongst Democrats.

That’s an interesting take. Yes, even if it was the first time Biden walked a strike picket line, can you name another president who has done so? No, you can’t, because he was the first.

It’s not hard to find articles chronicling the ways he supported unions

https://www.americanprogressaction.org/article/8-ways-the-biden-administration-has-fought-for-working-people-by-strengthening-unions/

https://www.govexec.com/management/2024/05/bidens-labor-report-card-historian-gives-union-joe-higher-grade-any-president-fdr/397002/

Another thing that’s far from unique is promoting a narrative without regard for facts.

On 11/8/2024 at 9:46 PM, iNow said:

Also, a VP hasn’t been elected into the POTUS slot for almost 200 years. It was Martin Van Buren the last time it happened. 

George HW Bush was a sitting VP. Biden was a VP. So was Nixon. (though I suspect you meant sitting VP)

[swansont]

6 hours ago, zapatos said:

I see your point that the Democrats have a weak record

In addition to supporting unions, Biden expanded overtime eligibility. created millions of jobs while dropping unemployment to historic lows, real wages rose, and he forgave a craptonne of student debt (and tried to do even more but was thwarted by the GOP). His policies created manufacturing jobs that disappeared under Trump’s.

Not being aware of the record is not the same thing as actually having a weak record.

—-

Add to iNow’s post about the misinformed

“The now-president-elect, according to that NBC survey, posted his biggest margin of 53-27% among voters who don’t follow any news. Trump’s win was a triumph of the ill-informed.”

https://www.inquirer.com/opinion/commentary/trust-mainstream-media-2024-election-20241110.html

https://archive.li/NFeTA (archive link)

[Peterkin]

8 hours ago, zapatos said:

I see your point that the Democrats have a weak record, but my question remains. Where do the voters go when they feel like BOTH parties haven't been helping them? Don't you choose the party with the better record? Unless you are saying you believe the Republicans have the better record.

The records were never compared by voters and only sporadically by news media - the ones most Republicans don't listen to. He's been campaigning non-stop since 2016 and has more megaphones than any candidate ever has before. The Trump megaphones call him a great businessman (Untrue. So what?) and the fans buy his vastly overpriced made-in-China merchandise. "See, he's a businessman, so he knows what to do about prices."

Mostly, he's leading them in a decade-long tantrum. No graphs or statistics can rival "I am your retribution!!!" I don't expect him to stop campaigning just because he's won - he didn't last time.  

But I do - in fear and sorrow  - expect a great many casualties. I expect both domestic and hate crimes to go through the roof in the next few months.     

Edited Sunday at 11:21 PM by Peterkin

[CharonY]

1 hour ago, Peterkin said:

But I do - in fear and sorrow  - expect a great many casualties. I expect both domestic and hate crimes to go through the roof in the next few months. 

Well, there were a big deal of casualties (e.g. COVID-19) the first time round. Plenty of chances to improve that record.

[iNow]

8 hours ago, StringJunky said:

How many of those 20 left will go their way do you think-ish?

Only 11 right now remain to be called, but given the way things have been going this past week I’m just gonna say probably all of them will go GOP since that seems to be the trend right now.

7 hours ago, swansont said:

though I suspect you meant sitting VP

Indeed. Thanks for the clarification 

[npts2020]

14 hours ago, zapatos said:

Where do the voters go when they feel like BOTH parties haven't been helping them? Don't you choose the party with the better record?

That seems like it would be logical but what in this election have you noticed to be logical? Personally, I would choose a third party but Americans don't realize there are third parties any more than they can tell you what the real record of any party or candidate is. If you remember the "Jay Walking" segments Leno used to do on the Tonight Show or Jordan Klepper's "Fingering the Pulse" on the Daily Show, the idiocy being made fun of is all too commonplace. It's kind of like a person drowning 50 meters offshore and a would-be rescuer having two ropes, one 20 meters long and another 10 meters long. Which rope do they use? Or should they spend time looking for a rope actually adequate for the task? 

10 hours ago, swansont said:

That’s an interesting take. Yes, even if it was the first time Biden walked a strike picket line, can you name another president who has done so? No, you can’t, because he was the first.

Joe Biden has only been President for less than 4 years of an almost 50 year political career. If you like I can compile a list of some Senators and Representatives who have done so. The fact that he is the first President to do so (and only after being in the middle of a close election campaign) indicates (to me, anyway) just how strongly Democrats in leadership support unions... 

10 hours ago, swansont said:

It’s not hard to find articles chronicling the ways he supported unions

I can find articles chronicling how great Donald Trump is, too. Can you give me an example or two in your opinion of how Biden has supported unions?

Edited Monday at 05:16 AM by npts2020

[StringJunky]

4 hours ago, iNow said:

Only 11 right now remain to be called, but given the way things have been going this past week I’m just gonna say probably all of them will go GOP since that seems to be the trend right now.

Indeed. Thanks for the clarification 

Ok. Ta.

[Luc Turpin]

On 11/8/2024 at 11:37 AM, swansont said:

Stop making stuff up. If you can’t deal in facts, go away.

Coming back after a pause!

I refute your allegation that I have not provided facts for my assertions and that I am "making stuff up". Here are some examples:

•  In describing the abortion situation in Canada and that most were early terms (a tangent topic in the Harris Vs Trump thread) – legal through all nine months; no providers except hospitals beyond 23 weeks; 90% of abortions are done in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy, while less than 1% beyond 21+ weeks. Reasons for late-stage abortions are: fetus gravely or fatally impaired; woman’s life or physical health at risk; abusive relationship; children or young teens unaware of pregnancy or in denial (+2 on this one).
• In determining whether or not early voting could constitute an indication of election results - charts on who was voting in battle state grounds by age and by party registration, and number of early votes; seven data sources on trends in early voting.
• In determining if late polling could give us an indication of election results - two data sources on the Iowa shocker; the last poll of the campaign.
• In determining paths toward winning for Harris - A data source on various Harris-Trump electoral paths to the White House.
• In determining that fear was probably a factor in the election - A New York Times article stating that “survey after survey showed that Americans were deeply fearful and intensely pessimistic”; Trump’s own words and their effect on the American public.
• In determining that Harris was probably not going to win the election even before results were known - An exit poll showing that 72% of voters were dissatisfied or angry (my emphasis) about the direction of the country and 67% called the economy bad or poor. Incumbents do not win with these kinds of numbers.

Most data sets, except the Iowa shocker, were generally in line with what occurred.

Remaining posts were opinions of mine that I shared with others as others were doing the same.

Finaly, a plurality of "voices", especially on a political topic, makes for a richer conversation.

On 11/8/2024 at 1:11 PM, zapatos said:

LOL! It is rare when someone actually admits they are lying.

How does this constitute lying (see above)?

Not wasting more of my time on false accusations.

Carry on!

Edited Monday at 11:47 AM by Luc Turpin

[swansont]

7 hours ago, npts2020 said:

can find articles chronicling how great Donald Trump is, too.

That cite facts? LOL

 

7 hours ago, npts2020 said:

Joe Biden has only been President for less than 4 years of an almost 50 year political career

And when he was running for re-election it was for president, not for any other office he held. So it seems to me his record as president would be the appropriate yardstick to use. Besides, he didn’t have to propose legislation to support unions before republicans eroded protections, because the protections were in place.

45 minutes ago, Luc Turpin said:

I refute your allegation that I have not provided facts for my assertions and that I am "making stuff up". Here are some examples:

Funny how none of these address the exchange where I told you to stop making stuff up.

[Luc Turpin]

31 minutes ago, swansont said:

Funny how none of these address the exchange where I told you to stop making stuff up.

The statement "Democrats did not ignore the GOP strategy; they used to wrong tools to combat it. They thought that disdain over Trump, a rosy picture of the situation and a plan not expressed in layperson’s term would be sufficient to win them the election", was an opinion of mine as you and others were also doing, but, indeed funny that I was the only one being called-out for it!

[dimreepr]

1 hour ago, Luc Turpin said:

The statement "Democrats did not ignore the GOP strategy; they used to wrong tools to combat it. They thought that disdain over Trump, a rosy picture of the situation and a plan not expressed in layperson’s term would be sufficient to win them the election", was an opinion of mine as you and others were also doing, but, indeed funny that I was the only one being called-out for it!

I think you'll find that the 'other's' were explaining why your opinion is inaccurate, you're only being called out bc you continue to ignore, rather than imbibe the information.

[swansont]

1 hour ago, Luc Turpin said:

The statement "Democrats did not ignore the GOP strategy; they used to wrong tools to combat it. They thought that disdain over Trump, a rosy picture of the situation and a plan not expressed in layperson’s term would be sufficient to win them the election", was an opinion of mine as you and others were also doing,

Whether something happened is not opinion.

You should be able to show that the ads and speeches were about disdain over Trump, painting a rosy picture of the situation, that their plan was not expressed in layman’s terms.

You offered nothing to back this up. 

Quote

but, indeed funny that I was the only one being called-out for it!

If you bother to read the past few pages you’ll see that you’re not the only one being called out for not offering substantiation

[toucana]

Inamullah Samangani, head of the information and culture department of the Taliban in Kandahar has formally congratulated Americans for  “Not handing leadership of their great country to a woman” -  in a post on X.

https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/taliban-congratulate-americans-for-not-handing-leadership-of-their-great-country-to-a-woman-385406/

[Luc Turpin]

29 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

I think you'll find that the 'other's' were explaining why your opinion is inaccurate, you're only being called out bc you continue to ignore, rather than imbibe the information.

That my opinions may be called out as inaccurate is part of a healthy discussion. I have no problem with that. 

32 minutes ago, swansont said:

Whether something happened is not opinion.

You should be able to show that the ads and speeches were about disdain over Trump, painting a rosy picture of the situation, that their plan was not expressed in layman’s terms.

You offered nothing to back this up. 

If you bother to read the past few pages you’ll see that you’re not the only one being called out for not offering substantiation

I was not the only one not backing up things, many were doing the same thing, but only a select "few" of us were being call-out for it.

Moving on!

[dimreepr]

4 minutes ago, Luc Turpin said:

That my opinions may be called out as inaccurate is part of a healthy discussion. I have no problem with that. 

I was not the only one not backing up things, many were doing the same thing, but only a select "few" of us were being call-out for it.

Moving on!

It's like you're complaining about not being the teacher's pet, bc they said the same thing, it's not an argument...

[Phi for All]

6 minutes ago, Luc Turpin said:

That my opinions may be called out as inaccurate is part of a healthy discussion. I have no problem with that. 

If you're stating opinion only, please use phrases like, "I think..." to let us know. The post in question was full of assertions about what Democrats did, that Harris should have stumped in rural areas (she did), and that you somehow knew what the Democrats were thinking and what they underestimated, all without any examples to support the stance. You even claimed, "Those that changed camps this election cycle were those bothered by the direction and economy of the country", again without citing a source for your beliefs.

[swansont]

1 hour ago, Luc Turpin said:

That my opinions may be called out as inaccurate is part of a healthy discussion. I have no problem with that. 

Opinions are opinions; accuracy is only an issue for factual statements.

1 hour ago, Luc Turpin said:

I was not the only one not backing up things, many were doing the same thing, but only a select "few" of us were being call-out for it.

You really think this absolves you? Try it when you get pulled over for speeding and see if it works.

1 hour ago, Luc Turpin said:

Moving on!

I don’t think so.

[MigL]

On 11/8/2024 at 10:03 PM, iNow said:

On 11/8/2024 at 9:54 PM, MigL said:

Why did 14 ( sorry 12 ) Million Democrats fail to vote in this election ???

Some didn’t vote. Some voted for 3rd parties. Some voted Trump. Some of Joe Biden’s voters weren’t democrats in the first place. Doesn’t matter. Just found your premise misguided. 

Really ?

Voter Turnout in 2024: Democrats’ Low Enthusiasm Fueled Trump’s Win - WSJ

Maybe in 2028 they will be outraged enough to be bothered to vote.
This time a lot of them simply didn't care.

Edited Monday at 04:58 PM by MigL

[swansont]

14 minutes ago, MigL said:

Really ?

Voter Turnout in 2024: Democrats’ Low Enthusiasm Fueled Trump’s Win - WSJ

Maybe in 2028 they will be outraged enough to be bothered to vote.
This time a lot of them simply didn't care.

Have all the votes been counted yet?

[MigL]

No.
My original post stated it was an estimate.