2024 U.S. Presidential election

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

There's transformational and there's aspirational. There's a big difference when the rubber hits the road and you have to involve another branch of government.

-jk

Especially in a day and age in which working across the aisle is reason to be excommunicated by one's own party.

[Bostondevil]

https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/04/polit...021/index.html

Wikipedia describes the Build Back Better Plan as follows:

The Build Back Better Plan or Build Back Better agenda was a legislative framework proposed by U.S. president Joe Biden between 2020 and 2021. Generally viewed as ambitious in size and scope, it sought the largest nationwide public investment in social, infrastructural, and environmental programs since the 1930s Great Depression-era policies of the New Deal.

If that's not trying to be transformational, I'm not sure what is. Ron Klain said as much on multiple occasions as well, although he was generally careful in the language he used.

Holding a Supreme Court seat open for a year then ramming through another nomination in less than a month is way more transformational than fixing roads and bridges, if you ask me.

The Build Back Better plan is only the most ambitious plan since the 1930s. If it's been done before - how can it be transformational? I'll give you cyclical. I see a trend - when the world breaks apart due to global depression or a global pandemic, ambitious reinvestment in the basics follows.

[bundabergdevil]

There's transformational and there's aspirational. There's a big difference when the rubber hits the road and you have to involve another branch of government.

-jk

Arguably, we’ve not been great at passing infrastructure legislation in lockstep with the need so the scale might have have felt unduly large A lot of it isn’t all that controversial but, for most in the GOP and certain Dems, the “green” investments were pretty transformational and what the GOP would consider in line with the green regs in the EU and what the AOC wing was proposing.

[nmduke2001]

I’m sure you’re not baffled by the narrative. I’m sure what is baffling to you., at least it is to me is why a large segment of the population consistently believes it. But the explanation I think is simply that politics has become tribalistic, and accepting whatever slanderous remark one side lobs at the other validates your place in the tribe. There is no political pay off for the Republicans to paint the Biden administration as moderate. Democrats have been guilty of the same thing in the past. I could argue to a lesser extent, but my viewpoint may be biased.

It will be interesting to see if Biden’s compromise on the debt ceiling will change this perception among that small percentile of persuadable voters in the center of the electorate. Biden could’ve driven the message hard that Republicans routinely increase the debt ceiling under Trump and tried to force McCarthy and the Republicans to capitulate. The Republicans have been holding the debt ceiling hostage for a number of years during democratic presidencies and have always paid, the price politically. If memory serves, this is the first time, the Democrats have negotiated a compromise. I think Biden is clearly trying to send a message that he is “reasonable”

I was at the capitol minutes before the deal was announced. Our tour walked by McCarthy's office and there were reporters everywhere. His door opened as we walked by and everyone jumped, but no one came out. About 20 minutes later, I got a notice on my phone that a deal had been reached.

Anyway, I haven't had a lot of time to read about the "compromise" but I did see something about stopping the funding to the IRS. I find this really funny. The IRS is woefully understaffed. Try calling the IRS and see how that works out. I have a client that somehow was tabbed as deceased on the IRS data base. It took him three years and a call from his Senator to get it fixed. They still haven't refunded his 2021 and 2022 taxes and penalties.

The funding in the bill would have paid for itself. There are estimates that there is over $1 Trillion in unpaid taxes right now. If you are a law abiding, tax-paying citizen, wouldn't you want all these tax dodgers to pay their fair share? I know I do. $1 trillion is a lot of money and it should be collected. In addition, the other resources would help the rest of us should we actually have a tax concern that needs the IRS to remedy.

PS. it was my first time in the Capitol Building and it made me even more angry about January 6.

[Bluedog]

I suppose it might be interesting to see what a celebrity candidate who was pro-LGBTQ rights, pro-gun control, pro-abortion rights but anti-immigration, wanted to cut taxes, and pro-smaller government would get in polls... essentially a fiscally conservative protectionist who was socially liberal.

-Jason "did I just craft the perfect candidate?" Evans

I think the opposite candidate might be more interesting to American voters. The NY Times recently ran an analysis that showed American was moving more socially conservative / fiscally liberal (they called them scaffles) in particular with the rise of populism. Traditional libertarian positions were decidedly less common, so the polar opposite of your candidate I think would have a better chance with todays electorate.

I was about to call out the same thing. To my surprise, Jason's "perfect candidate" is actually the LEAST aligned to the number of Americans apparently (lower right quadrant represents socially liberal, fiscally conservative). Here's the chart:

social fiscal axis chart.jpg
https://static01.nytimes.com/newsgra.../index-600.png

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/25/b...-desantis.html

[dudog84]

I was about to call out the same thing. To my surprise, Jason's "perfect candidate" is actually the LEAST aligned to the number of Americans apparently (lower right quadrant represents socially liberal, fiscally conservative). Here's the chart:

social fiscal axis chart.jpg
https://static01.nytimes.com/newsgra.../index-600.png

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/25/b...-desantis.html

I feel (quite strongly) that there is a fairly large gap between what people say they are and what they really are. Simplest and most prevalent example: They want their social programs funded, but not the other guy's. Need I go on? Law and order for you, not for me and mine. Keep my factory job in the U.S., but keeping giving me my cheap other stuff from overseas. Stop immigration, but don't you dare raise the price of my fruits and vegetables. Strong national defense, but my kid's not joining the military. I'm exhausted already.

[CameronDuke]

If you’re a voter and disgusted with the most likely Dem and GOP candidates on the ticket, is a vote for a 3rd party candidate or unrelated “write-in” candidate, partially out of protest at what an entire circus the state of affairs has become on both sides, just as bad as a vote for one of the rival mainstream parties? That’s what I have been counseled for before. But I’m not sure I will be able to resist the urge in 2024. Anyone ever submitted a write-in vote in a presidential election? If so, whose name did you submit?

Mickey Mouse? Donald Duck? Goofy?

[camion]

If you’re a voter and disgusted with the most likely Dem and GOP candidates on the ticket, is a vote for a 3rd party candidate or unrelated “write-in” candidate, partially out of protest at what an entire circus the state of affairs has become on both sides, just as bad as a vote for one of the rival mainstream parties? That’s what I have been counseled for before. But I’m not sure I will be able to resist the urge in 2024. Anyone ever submitted a write-in vote in a presidential election? If so, whose name did you submit?

Mickey Mouse? Donald Duck? Goofy?

Check my earlier posts where I already proposed a perfect third party, or any party candidate that is Taylored to the current generation and Swiftly touring the country drawing large enthusiastic crowds.

[PackMan97]

If you’re a voter and disgusted with the most likely Dem and GOP candidates on the ticket, is a vote for a 3rd party candidate or unrelated “write-in” candidate, partially out of protest at what an entire circus the state of affairs has become on both sides, just as bad as a vote for one of the rival mainstream parties? That’s what I have been counseled for before. But I’m not sure I will be able to resist the urge in 2024. Anyone ever submitted a write-in vote in a presidential election? If so, whose name did you submit?

Mickey Mouse? Donald Duck? Goofy?

At least in NC, write in view must petition to be on the ballot and counted. Fur Patuxent that hurdle is 500 valid signatures.

Unless you are writing in a valid write-in candidate, you are literally throwing your vote away. Might as well put it in the trash. It won't be counted.

This is not the same thing as voting third party, at least then you will get counted.

https://www.ncsbe.gov/candidates/petitions/write-candidate-petitions

[ClemmonsDevil]

There's transformational and there's aspirational. There's a big difference when the rubber hits the road and you have to involve another branch of government.

-jk

Absolutely. This is all Overton window stuff, like the jumping off point for Republicans during the debt ceiling negotiations.

[wavedukefan70s]

If you’re a voter and disgusted with the most likely Dem and GOP candidates on the ticket, is a vote for a 3rd party candidate or unrelated “write-in” candidate, partially out of protest at what an entire circus the state of affairs has become on both sides, just as bad as a vote for one of the rival mainstream parties? That’s what I have been counseled for before. But I’m not sure I will be able to resist the urge in 2024. Anyone ever submitted a write-in vote in a presidential election? If so, whose name did you submit?

Mickey Mouse? Donald Duck? Goofy?

No did one in the town election of awendaw when we lived there.
Several write ins made the news.
Even harambe the gorilla got a couple of votes.

[ClemmonsDevil]

I feel (quite strongly) that there is a fairly large gap between what people say they are and what they really are. Simplest and most prevalent example: They want their social programs funded, but not the other guy's. Need I go on? Law and order for you, not for me and mine. Keep my factory job in the U.S., but keeping giving me my cheap other stuff from overseas. Stop immigration, but don't you dare raise the price of my fruits and vegetables. Strong national defense, but my kid's not joining the military. I'm exhausted already.

This is exactly where my head was when I made this statement that Democrats are in no mood to moderate. If you ask nebulous questions you get a poorly thought out response. But as soon as you delve into the particulars then people don't want to lose funding for any of the programs they hold dear. Mountain mentioned this, but look at the ire directed at Manchin even though he took the most moderate path possible for Democrats with his spending plan.

[CameronDuke]

At least in NC, write in view must petition to be on the ballot and counted. Fur Patuxent that hurdle is 500 valid signatures.

Unless you are writing in a valid write-in candidate, you are literally throwing your vote away. Might as well put it in the trash. It won't be counted.

This is not the same thing as voting third party, at least then you will get counted.

https://www.ncsbe.gov/candidates/pet...date-petitions

Thanks for the info. Some may say the greatest act of patriotism could be to literally throw your vote away in an act of protest than vote for some of the candidates we get the opportunity to vote for these days. I may or may not agree with that. I vow to do my civic duty to research and be informed of what potential candidates are running on as well as be able to articulate a high level defense of my decisions, but I think I’ve got a good idea on what a few of them are running on and I want nothing to do with it. I hope to live to see the day when a third party candidate wins a US presidential election. But I won’t hold my breath. Millard Fillmore was the last president to win the US presidency and not be affiliated with the Democratic or Republican Party. Although he was affiliated with the Whig party. That was some 170 years ago.

[sagegrouse]

Oh my, RSVman, do you and I disagree! The perfect loner would be a failure unless he immediately built coalitions with groups and people who could help him govern. The government is a huge complicated mechanism and foreign affairs/international security is also and separately huge and complicated. The sole hero would fail miserably. Eisenhower was a political outsider,but one who truly understood international security. He handled domestic politics by agreeing to continue FDR's New Deal which the Taft wing of the Republican party still wanted to do away with in the 1950's.

And as an ineffective lone operative, we have some [ahem] recent experience that is truly scary.

Sorry for the tangential post.

[ClemmonsDevil]

Oh my, RSVman, do you and I disagree! The perfect loner would be a failure unless he immediately built coalitions with groups and people who could help him govern. The government is a huge complicated mechanism and foreign affairs/international security is also and separately huge and complicated. The sole hero would fail miserably. Eisenhower was a political outsider,but one who truly understood international security. He handled domestic politics by agreeing to continue FDR's New Deal which the Taft wing of the Republican party still wanted to do away with in the 1950's.

And as an ineffective lone operative, we have some [ahem] recent experience that is truly scary.

Sorry for the tangential post.

I agree with this take. Anyone who would be a good leader would have built political coalitions with one of the two parties by now. Because this person would be a politician. And I firmly believe that having experienced people power is the proper path. I believe in the ascendancy of career politicians because I believe that experience, an understanding of political machinations and expertise is important. I feel like that's the lesson we have learned recently. Having someone who is a political expert is a good thing.

[wavedukefan70s]

Thanks for the info. Some may say the greatest act of patriotism could be to literally throw your vote away in an act of protest than vote for some of the candidates we get the opportunity to vote for these days. I may or may not agree with that. I vow to do my civic duty to research and be informed of what potential candidates are running on as well as be able to articulate a high level defense of my decisions, but I think I’ve got a good idea on what a few of them are running on and I want nothing to do with it. I hope to live to see the day when a third party candidate wins a US presidential election. But I won’t hold my breath. Millard Fillmore was the last president to win the US presidency and not be affiliated with the Democratic or Republican Party. Although he was affiliated with the Whig party. That was some 170 years ago.

I think people are voting against whom they don't want .not actually whom they like which is sad that with over 300 million people we can't come up with a candidate that most people could agree on.
I'm not happy with any politician in Washington at this point .
Hoping something changes .
A 3rd party would be welcomed .but as you've stated most likely unwinnable.

[luvdahops]

Oh my, RSVman, do you and I disagree! The perfect loner would be a failure unless he immediately built coalitions with groups and people who could help him govern. The government is a huge complicated mechanism and foreign affairs/international security is also and separately huge and complicated. The sole hero would fail miserably. Eisenhower was a political outsider,but one who truly understood international security. He handled domestic politics by agreeing to continue FDR's New Deal which the Taft wing of the Republican party still wanted to do away with in the 1950's.

And as an ineffective lone operative, we have some [ahem] recent experience that is truly scary.

Sorry for the tangential post.

We just saw what you describe play out on a smaller scale with Lori Lightfoot's tenure as Chicago Mayor. Though officially a Democrat, and an openly gay black woman, she was never part of the "machine" and in fact had a wide ranging set of prior experiences that included representing Republicans and Chicago police officers while in private law practice. A very impressive person in many respects, but also something of a loner and hothead who failed miserably at making allies and building coalitions.

[sagegrouse]

Unfortunately, politics is rarely "Educated, measured, reasonable, thoughtful, young...". I think you could argue Carter was the best combination of these things in the past 50+ years and he is generally considered the worst President of the past 50+ years (we'll give 1 exception to each party ). You have to get things done. You can't just be a good guy/gal.

OMG, what do you think of the personal handling by W. of Iraq/WMD and the resulting debacle and the untethering of the housing market, leading immediately to the Great Recession?

Carter has significant accomplishments, the most memorable being the Mideast deal between Egypt and Israel, which he personally negotiated. Before that deal Israel occupied the Sinai, and the Suez Canal was closed; now Israel has productive diplomatic relations with most of the Arab world and is no longer threatened, except by Iran.

[CameronDuke]

I think people are voting against whom they don't want .not actually whom they like which is sad that with over 300 million people we can't come up with a candidate that most people could agree on.
I'm not happy with any politician in Washington at this point .
Hoping something changes .
A 3rd party would be welcomed .but as you've stated most likely unwinnable.

Agree 100%. We really do still have the best country on the planet to me. I haven’t been everywhere in the world, not even close, but to a fair amount of foreign countries to (in my mind) form reasonable conclusions about how our American society stacks up against others. It really is great in America. But definitely not perfect including politics at the US presidential level. I wish we would all vote for what we want instead of what we don’t and I also wish the US presidential candidates ran more on diplomatic, bipartisan, stately, respectable and reasonable solutions to our many issues and not on attacking the other candidates. I think we all know a certain candidate that loves to attack others and seems like he won’t stop anytime soon. I think if presidential candidates and political parties could give a little ground and we could come more to the middle rather than the extremes on either side, we’d be a rip roaring society for many more folks. But make no mistake about it, despite our many political flaws and issues, this is still a great country. I wish more felt that way!

[bundabergdevil]

I feel (quite strongly) that there is a fairly large gap between what people say they are and what they really are. Simplest and most prevalent example: They want their social programs funded, but not the other guy's. Need I go on? Law and order for you, not for me and mine. Keep my factory job in the U.S., but keeping giving me my cheap other stuff from overseas. Stop immigration, but don't you dare raise the price of my fruits and vegetables. Strong national defense, but my kid's not joining the military. I'm exhausted already.

I agree with your premise. There are also lots of “partisan blind” surveys that ask about issues without labels like democrat or republican or liberal or conservative.

I’d need to dig but my general recall is for most non-social issues, allegiance / identity is a greater predictor than actual belief.

Im also often surprised about the fluidity of allegiance versus belief. Certain elements of the ACA famously came out of Heritage; Trump took the GOP 180-degrees on foreign power dynamics and ally ship.