Donald Trump

[KS55]

Political reporting and commentating tends to be hyperbole on steroids. The betting, cold hard cash, suggests Trump is 60% and Harris is 40%. It's going to be very, very close regardless of what any of the political experts may tell you.

Edit: That's 60% chance of winning not % of vote.

The odds are somewhat misleading as a ton of money went on Trump after the debate debacle. Current odds reflect that money. It makes more sense to look at the direction the odds are going in to gauge current sentiment.

 

[Dax777]

Secret service director resigned.

After the bullying MTG was doing I don't blame her.

The incompetence of her unit which bordered on complicity was enough reason for her to resign.

 

[TinFoilHat]

The incompetence of her unit which bordered on complicity was enough reason for her to resign.

MTG?

I bet you've had a few knuckle shuffles over her.

 

[Dax777]

MTG?

I bet you've had a few knuckle shuffles over her.

No, the head of the Secret Service. They did a horrible job on that day. And she should have resigned immediately.

As for MTG, I really don't like her. She talks like a liberal. Full of abuses.

She's like SWP and a few others here. Just with a different politics

 

[TonyM]

2. The media will go back to being supporters of Democrats rather than being inquisitive reporters of the news no matter who it affects.

There are 4 media flavours in the US as far as I remember from living there.
1. Fox News and the crazy right wingers who just shout at everything and wave flags for Americay. Generally beautiful looking and caked in makeup.
2. CNN, NBC, ABC, etc who try to walk a tightrope so as to not offend anyone but get labelled leftist by the nutjobs. To be fair they are beautifully caked in makeup too.
3. Idiots, shock jocks and religious nut jobs who just shout at everything and wave flags for Americay. Probably topless or bottomless.
4. PBS affiliates who are more like the Americans you see at work in that they are smart, interesting, well intentioned and globally minded. Probably not concerned with looking too made up.

The media are not all Democrates. Just the smart ones.

 

[halfcenturyup]

I very much appreciate open-mindedness and the understanding that someone disagreeing with you in good faith on a subject does not make them a bad person.

But do you genuinely think that someone that would vote for Trump now, after everything that has come before, and everything that he and the MAGA apparatus surrounding him are indicating they would undertake if they were to regain the presidency, knowing who Trump is, what he has done, and what he represents, should be treated as a reasonable person that merely has a different political view?

I think this argument was more reasonable during the 2016 campaign, when his true nature (and the nature of the apparatus building around him) was less understood by many outside of those that had direct connections to him or those that knew people that had interacted with him over the decades (especially those living in NYC). But that “fog of war”, for lack of a better phrase, has well and truly lifted over the past eight years—no rational, intelligent person should be confused about what supporting Trump represents.

Maybe the question for America to ask itself is why, after everything you have mentioned, nearly 50% of the population are still going to vote for him. There must be some genuine grievances. You can't think all those people voting for him are unreasonable, irrational and confused stupid people, surely?

 

[FogBlueInSanFran]

No, the head of the Secret Service. They did a horrible job on that day. And she should have resigned immediately.

As for MTG, I really don't like her. She talks like a liberal. Full of abuses.

She's like SWP and a few others here. Just with a different politics

She's abusive. And you'd vote for her anyway.

Because "policies."

 

[FogBlueInSanFran]

Maybe the question for America to ask itself is why, after everything you have mentioned, nearly 50% of the population are still going to vote for him. There must be some genuine grievances. You can't think all those people voting for him are unreasonable, irrational and confused stupid people, surely?

Well, you need to take the voting age population, and then subtract out those that won't vote at all, and you'll get to a total far less than 50% of Americans.

But what do YOU believe his supporters' genuine grievances are? And I'm not talking about the grievances of conservatives -- I'm talking about those who are so upset they'd not only happily hand the reins over to a fat old hyper-narcissistic morally-degenerate grifting con man dumbfuck former Democrat who attempted to overthrow the results of a free and fair election, but give him money, put signs in their yards, wear red hats, put flags on their trucks, lose friends and family members or even their jobs in support of him?

 

[SebastianBlue]

Maybe the question for America to ask itself is why, after everything you have mentioned, nearly 50% of the population are still going to vote for him. There must be some genuine grievances. You can't think all those people voting for him are unreasonable, irrational and confused stupid people, surely?

But the question of whether there are genuine grievances (there are, and I have discussed them in this and other threads at length) is completely separate from whether supporting Trump and MAGA now, today, makes one a rational, reasonable person.

Edit: Would you say Germans still supporting Hitler in 1940, who perhaps started off supporting him in the early 1930s because of genuine grievances they had, were still reasonable, rational people?

 

[Vic]

@SebastianBlue can you let Me. K know that the V.P changed his mind on Trump just like the Cyclops of West Virginia KKK changed his on Race

Surely, if a Democrat who ran a KKK chapter can change his mind on black people, surely other men can do the same about others, yes? Or no?

Byrd changed his mind because he was wrong.

Has Vance actually changed his mind that Trump is America's Hitler or just changed his mind to think that's now a good thing?

Unless you think Trump or Vance are eventually likely to get this sort of "eulogy":

When Byrd died at age 92 on June 28, 2010, the NAACP released a statement saying that over the course of his life he “became a champion for civil rights and liberties” and “came to consistently support the NAACP civil rights agenda.”