2024 Presidential Race

#58,177
#58,177
evillawyer said:
So why do so many prominent Republicans continue to advance the idea that if Harris wins it had to be cheating?
Click to expand...
Probably because there are identified legitimate issues with our electoral processes that no one seems interested in resolving.
We deal with the same issues election cycle after election cycle.
We should all ask ourselves "why?"

NO ONE should have faith in this particular "institution." It should be incumbent on our government to show that the process is reliable and accurate. Where it is not, it should be incumbent on our government to be transparent in their efforts to remedy problems and to articulate a plan for eliminating those problems in future elections.

Why do we defend a flawed process when there are solutions to the problem. Once solved, people will only be able to take issue with the results, not the process. Why should the government not fix the problem rather than asking the citizens to accept problematic results?

Unless, or course, sowing mistrust, chaos and discord provides greater benefit to the government than solving the problem does.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MemphisVol77, marcusluvsvols, USF grad in TN and 3 others
#58,179
#58,179
MontyPython said:
Well, I'm a registered Independent, so it ain't my deal. But, I'll say this: The Dems did, indeed, have an open convention and - ultimately - they chose Kamala. Of note, the concept of voting for the establishment of a candidate is hardly "democratic" at all - it's really left in the hands of a very small number of delegates which, of course, really is republican in nature. Pretty sure this is the way both parties normally work, but honestly, who cares?
Click to expand...
No. Trump won the Republican Primary.

And I care.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceCoastVol, marcusluvsvols, UT_Dutchman and 2 others
#58,180
#58,180
me_grag53 said:
Where is there no exception for severe birth defects? That being said: Maybe God would see it more as a labor of selfless love than just the monetary burden on ones life you mentioned. He works in mysterious ways.
Click to expand...
Because that's not a provision sought by the most restrictive state laws. It's not even possible in a state with laws like Florida as genetic testing isn't done before 10wks
 
#58,181
#58,181
VOLS INC. said:
It seems curious to me that the party constantly screaming about “Defending Democracy” chose to install a candidate no one voted for. No open convention. Nothing.

Y’all literally installed your candidate. And by y’all I mean the rich and powerful people that run your party.



Democracy!!!
Click to expand...
Liberals are having a hard time spinning this one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols
#58,185
#58,185
Sea Ray said:
Re: Nate Silver and "he doesn't know"...

If we all knew we wouldn't need his expertise. I love how these experts are saying "we don't know". That's what they're paid to do
Click to expand...

I think Nate is trying to drive traffic to his site. If Kamala is up +1 nationally, she will lose tonight. Nate knows this....
 
#58,189
#58,189
RockyTop85 said:
I’m going to forego asking it another way to see if you figure it out and just say that I’m glad that everybody finally came around to my side of that argument.

Alternative theory: Maybe they didn’t ignore the word “retired.” 🤷🏻‍♂️ I’m not an election lawyer or campaign lawyer, this isn’t legal advice, but I don’t think it’s illegal to hire foreign citizens to help a campaign. What statute does that violate?
Click to expand...
you really think they hired Steele because he was a private citizen with no affiliations? are you that naive that they went out and hired some civilian who knows nothing more than the general public to dig up crap on Trump? if he is still marketing his skills and doing work in the industry, he isn't just a citizen. he wasn't uncovering/making up information that was publically available. I very much doubt "he is a retired X" holds up as a defense in too many court cases. at least if it was my industry it doesn't.

most people don't give Putin's FSB/KGB background a pass because he is "retired", not sure why Steele would get a pass either. heck his CIA background was used against Bush. with the incestual relationships developed in DC, I doubt its different with the Brits, with lobbyists becoming politicians, and politicians becoming lobbyists, spys becoming politicians, generals becoming lobbyists and politicians, its not really an argument to try and defend the report of a "retired" spy as just something a civilian could do.

and they didn't have Steele knocking on doors or handing out pamphlets. that is a complete mischaracterization to say he was helping with the Clinton campaign. nothing he did had anything to do with actual campaigning. he was hired to dig up dirt on Trump.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MemphisVol77 and InVOLuntary
#58,190
#58,190
utvolpj said:
Because even the dems didn't want her. She didn't make it out of state 1 in the last primary the dems had yet is going to now win a national vote?
Click to expand...
Sure.....because 50 million will rightfully vote for any viable candidate but trump.

So only about 20 million need to vote for Harris because they actually like her in order for her to win.
 
#58,195
#58,195
luthervol said:
Sure.....because 50 million will rightfully vote for any viable candidate but trump.

So only about 20 million need to vote for Harris because they actually like her in order for her to win.
Click to expand...
That’s a dumb way to vote. Her bar is exceptionally low if only 20M genuinely like her as the best option. This against Trump vote got played in 2020. A big reason he’ll be back in office

Under your logic, they can vote 3rd party and make a statement to both.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UT_Dutchman, mr.checkerboards and InVOLuntary
#58,197
#58,197
evillawyer said:
Isn't this a problem for everybody, especially with both parties are lurching further left and further right? The candidate most likely to win a primary in that system is less likely to be a centrist that would appeal to more voters in the electorate at large.
Click to expand...
what is your argument here? Kamala is too centrist to win the Democrat nomination, but not too far left to win the general?

you have that backwards, at least imo. its got nothing to do with actual policy in this race, its all about falling in line with the party here. a party which pulled some incredibly shady moves to make happen.

like imagine Trump did exactly what Kamala has done. doesn't get a single vote in the primary. but gets the R's nomination anyway over the guy who did win it. then goes from polling terribly, to leading the election. you guys would be up in arms about Russian plants, pee tapes, black mail, rube voters, corrupt system, removal of the electoral system.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MemphisVol77, zhangliao04, hog88 and 1 other person
#58,198
#58,198
Majors said:
That’s a dumb way to vote. Her bar is exceptionally low if only 20M genuinely like her as the best option. This against Trump vote got played in 2020. A big reason he’ll be back in office

Under your logic, they can vote 3rd party and make a statement to both.
Click to expand...
The 50 million who don't "like" her still view her as a better option than trump.

How are you guys still not grasping that point after 8 years????
 
#58,200
#58,200
luthervol said:
Sure.....because 50 million will rightfully vote for any viable candidate but trump.

So only about 20 million need to vote for Harris because they actually like her in order for her to win.
Click to expand...

I have thought she would win all along, but if Harris really needs 20 million to "like" her in order to win, she is in big, big trouble.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kristy* and Majors
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top