2020 Presidential Election

[dudog84]

*sigh*

I think this is a real problem (not just for one specific party, it is a bipartisan complaint). My hope is that we start tapping into younger leadership sooner rather than later, although it is obviously too late for this presidential cycle.

I think that was another + in Kamala's column. She was significantly younger than the other serious possibilities (8 years younger than my betting favorite, Val Demings), but not as young as what OPK is looking for. (upon reflection, I don't mean that the way it sounds )

Yes Susan Rice is same age, but I never thought she was a serious contender despite Biden liking her, due to her complete lack of campaign experience (gotta win before you can govern). And Benghazi!

[Steven43]

I think this was a giant gaffe by the Dems. AOC is a star and a huge galvanizing force for younger voters. Wasting her with a 1-minute speech where she endorsed the OTHER GUY was baffling. Check out political twitter -- lots of people were confused by what was going on and came away with the impression that AOC was refusing to back Biden and still supported Sanders.

I know, I know, if you were really paying attention it was clear what was happening but expecting the American public to understand convention rules and be educated about processes is not a smart electoral strategy.

And while AOC is a big GOP boogeyman who the Republicans love to use to scare moderate voters (along with Bernie, Warren, and Pelosi), I still think it was a mistake to not give her a slightly longer speech and have her to speak on behalf of Biden. She has forcefully endorsed him in the past but doing it on national TV at the convention was the smart move. I cannot fathom what the DNC was thinking in having her speak for Sanders instead. Let someone lower profile do the seconding.

I don’t really see how any of these very minor details really matter. Honestly, who is going to change their vote from Biden to Trump — or simply decide not to vote at all — based on what Ocassio Cortez says or doesn’t say at the Democratic National Convention?

People know for whom they are going to vote. They will either follow through on voting for their preferred candidate or they’re not going to vote at all. I just don’t see voters switching from Biden to Trump or vice versa based on minor issues that will occur between now and November 3.

[Mike Corey]

The Press Secretary at the White House said today that her boss "has always said he'll see what happens and make a determination in the aftermath," when asked what he would do if he should lose in November.

This strikes me as more important than anything that happens at the DNC or the RNC.

[dudog84]

The Press Secretary at the White House said today that her boss "has always said he'll see what happens and make a determination in the aftermath," when asked what he would do if he should lose in November.

This strikes me as more important than anything that happens at the DNC or the RNC.

Alex Trebek says "oooh, sorry, wrong answer". Unfortunately, I heard this a few too many times.

[johnb]

Agreed, but I guess the question is "why did it take this long?" It seemed like it was happening at the turn of the century (looking at the nominees in the general election, not the primary pool) with Al Gore and then, obviously notably, Barack Obama. Other than that we've basically seen the same high school graduating class (slight exaggeration) running for president for the last 24-28 years (obviously in 1992 H.W. Bush was part of the previous generation compared to Clinton and or recent string of nominees).

I’d never put that together. Just checked, and GWBush, Trump, and Bill Clinton were born within a couple months of each other, summer 1946. Jimmy Carter and GHW Bush were born within 2 months of each other in 1924. Nixon and a Ford within 6 months in 1913.

I also hadn’t known that 3 of the first 5 presidents died on July 4. Adams and Jefferson on the same day (7/4/26) and then Monroe a decade later.

[CrazyNotCrazie]

The Press Secretary at the White House said today that her boss "has always said he'll see what happens and make a determination in the aftermath," when asked what he would do if he should lose in November.

This strikes me as more important than anything that happens at the DNC or the RNC.

And then when I lose because someone obviously cheated me I'm going to take my ball and go home and won't let any of the rest of you play!

[cato]

I’d never put that together. Just checked, and GWBush, Trump, and Bill Clinton were born within a couple months of each other, summer 1946. Jimmy Carter and GHW Bush were born within 2 months of each other in 1924. Nixon and a Ford within 6 months in 1913.

I also hadn’t known that 3 of the first 5 presidents died on July 4. Adams and Jefferson on the same day (7/4/26) and then Monroe a decade later.

I am torn between the kismet of Adams and Jefferson, two of the most important early political figures in the formation of the country, actually dying not only on the same day, but also the 4th of July, and thinking how easy it would have been back then to fudge a date of death a few days forward or backward to achieve such a notable confluence of events.

[Steven43]

The Press Secretary at the White House said today that her boss "has always said he'll see what happens and make a determination in the aftermath," when asked what he would do if he should lose in November.

This strikes me as more important than anything that happens at the DNC or the RNC.

What exactly does he think he could do to defy an election loss? Declare martial law?

Besides, there is growing speculation that he really doesn’t want to deal anymore with the day-to-day job of being president. Losing gives him an out. He’s just talking b.s.

[OldPhiKap]

And then when I lose because someone obviously cheated me I'm going to take my ball and go home and won't let any of the rest of you play!

But will he go home? What spooks so many people is that the answer is not self-evidently "yes."

It really is hard to believe we're having this discussion. But this is a thing.

[cato]

But will he go home? What spooks so many people is that the answer is not self-evidently "yes."

It really is hard to believe we're having this discussion. But this is a thing.

I’m curious: does DC have an eviction moratorium in place?

[CrazyNotCrazie]

But will he go home? What spooks so many people is that the answer is not self-evidently "yes."

It really is hard to believe we're having this discussion. But this is a thing.

OK. My analogy is not perfect. It does remind me of the story of Duke alum Stephen Miller and the piece of pizza.

I explained this situation to my two elementary school aged kids and asked how they would feel if someone did something similar. I don't want to be their friend and would never play with them again was the unanimous answer. But I guess some people see this as a sign of strength. Always winning...

[CameronBlue]

What exactly does he think he could do to defy an election loss? Declare martial law?

Besides, there is growing speculation that he really doesn’t want to deal anymore with the day-to-day job of being president. Losing gives him an out. He’s just talking b.s.

But will he go home? What spooks so many people is that the answer is not self-evidently "yes."

It really is hard to believe we're having this discussion. But this is a thing.

These two posts back to back should give everyone here a chuckle. That they probably don't is a little disturbing because it indicates how deeply Trump has penetrated our collective psyche. It's like we took the monster that terrorized us all as children out of the closet and put him into the White House.

So where does the truth lie between the two extremes of Trump doesn't want the job or Trump won't leave? If Steve Bannon is correct--a guy who apparently believes that authoritarianism is a fair and just replacement for a democracy that is encumbered by an oppressie bureaucracy and the guy who may know Trump best--wresting power from Trump's grasp will be an all-out war. As he stated: Good luck getting your country back. Time will tell I guess if he was being hyperbolic.

[dudog84]

I am not worried about him leaving. I believe (and hope) it is bluster.

If it is not bluster, I'm still not worried. But it will be quite a show.

[DukeDude]

I am not worried about him leaving. I believe (and hope) it is bluster.

If it is not bluster, I'm still not worried. But it will be quite a show.

I expect him to use the courts to challenge the results in every state he lost.

[CrazyNotCrazie]

I expect him to use the courts to challenge the results in every state he lost.

I wish I could buy stock in law firms as there is going to be a lot of lawyering up this fall. An acquaintance of mine is a law professor who is an expert on constitutional law and election law - he is likely going to be a very busy guy this fall - 2000 is going to be nothing compared to this.

[Jeffrey]

I wish I could buy stock in law firms as there is going to be a lot of lawyering up this fall. An acquaintance of mine is a law professor who is an expert on constitutional law and election law - he is likely going to be a very busy guy this fall - 2000 is going to be nothing compared to this.

I also wish I could acquire equity in a few strong firms. However, I’d be purchasing for a different reason... Covid based suits. Death frequently yields financial punishment. Instead of equity, I’ll consider partially funding a few strong cases. Any leads would be appreciated.

[JasonEvans]

Well, Trump did something unprecedented -- for him -- that could produce some backlash. He officially embraced QAnon.

"I don't know much about the movement other than I understand they like me very much, which I appreciate," Trump said in the White House briefing room.

It was a striking nod to a group that has been likened to a virtual cult and has been labeled a potential domestic terrorist threat by the FBI.

...

Asked if he believed the crux of the (QAnon) theory, described by a reporter as the belief that the President "is secretly saving the world from this satanic cult of pedophiles and cannibals," Trump said: "Well, I haven't heard that, but is that supposed to be a bad thing or a good thing?"

"If I can help save the world from problems, I'm willing to do it," he went on. "I'm willing to put myself out there. And we are, actually, we're saving the world from a radical left philosophy that will destroy this country."

It is pretty clear that he does not know all that much about QAnon, except for the fact that they like him. Still, it feels like this could produce backlash somewhat similar to when Trump said, "There are good people on both sides" about the Alt-Right protests in Charlottesville.

This ind of thing is just undisciplined on his part. He's making unforced errors and is his own worst enemy. QAnon has been rejected by many prominent Republicans who are worried that followers of it are making inroads in the party. Now, Trump has put GOP senators and congresspeople in a situation where they are likely to be asked about it and rejecting it could be seen as going against their party leader.

-Jason "or maybe he is playing 3-dimension chess with all of us and trying to upstage Kamala... I'm beyond understanding his strategy" Evans

[sagegrouse]

I’d never put that together. Just checked, and GWBush, Trump, and Bill Clinton were born within a couple months of each other, summer 1946. Jimmy Carter and GHW Bush were born within 2 months of each other in 1924. Nixon and a Ford within 6 months in 1913.

I also hadn’t known that 3 of the first 5 presidents died on July 4. Adams and Jefferson on the same day (7/4/26) and then Monroe a decade later.

Which was the 50th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence.

[gumbomoop]

-Jason "or maybe he is playing 3-dimension chess... I'm beyond understanding his strategy" Evans

He is, indeed, beyond your MSM understanding, for you grossly misunderestimate our President, who plays 5D chess. I suggest you follow QAnon’s analysis much more closely.

Q-understanding may seem unbelievable right now, but Secrets will be revealed during our President’s second term. And even more during his third term.

[YmoBeThere]

It is pretty clear that he does not know all that much about QAnon, except for the fact that they like him. Still, it feels like this could produce backlash somewhat similar to when Trump said, "There are good people on both sides" about the Alt-Right protests in Charlottesville.

But backlash from whom? According to this thread, evangelicals won't abandon him because they vote on a single issue. His "base", whatever that means, won't abandon him because of what they he will do for them regarding immigration and crime/safety, so why should a few "harmless" theories change their minds?