2024 US Presidential Elections Megathread

[Tamas]

But "taking a look" is not without its own implications. If you need to "take a look" at Harris why was she VP for 4 years?

I think you are just projecting your own uncertainty about her viability as a candidate. Which I understand, I am worried too, it feels like the euphoria over Biden resigning has resulted in the same kind of inward-turning confidence that they had with Hillary Clinton.

But a restarted primary process to ask the question: "do we really, REALLY want this Black Vice President as our next President?" would not exactly help with that inward focus.

[Tamas]

So, how likely is the SCOTUS to put out a ruling that Harris is not eligible to be a candidate due to "process" or some such?

Not, but very likely to take away Biden's campaign funds from her.

[Solmyr]

Where would those campaign funds go, and what's stopping whoever gave them to Biden from giving them again to Harris?

[garbon]

I think you are just projecting your own uncertainty about her viability as a candidate. Which I understand, I am worried too, it feels like the euphoria over Biden resigning has resulted in the same kind of inward-turning confidence that they had with Hillary Clinton.

How so? Because she's a woman? Because the Dem side has shown some excitement for the first time this year?  Beyond a few opinion columnists, I haven't seen anyone saying it is now a cakewalk. Just that there are now avenues like abortion that Biden was loathe to talk about that Harris can champion (and was apparently doing so recently as VP).

[garbon]

what's stopping whoever gave them to Biden from giving them again to Harris?

Nothing given how I believe she has outraised the funds that she got from Biden campaign.

[Tamas]

I think you are just projecting your own uncertainty about her viability as a candidate. Which I understand, I am worried too, it feels like the euphoria over Biden resigning has resulted in the same kind of inward-turning confidence that they had with Hillary Clinton.

How so? Because she's a woman? Because the Dem side has shown some excitement for the first time this year?  Beyond a few opinion columnists, I haven't seen anyone saying it is now a cakewalk. Just that there are now avenues like abortion that Biden was loathe to talk about that Harris can champion (and was apparently doing so recently as VP).

It's just a mix of vibe and anxiety. Although the whole "brat" thing I found very cringeworthy, a British pop "star" latches on to the news bandwagon and people handle it like the Yout of America have pledged undying support to Harris.


Will see how it goes. I am defo not on Sheilbh's side of starting a public contest between candidates for a facade of supposed legitimacy, though. I am just on the side of recognising the war hasn't been won and the Dems as per latest data are still the losing side.

[Sheilbh]

But "taking a look" is not without its own implications. If you need to "take a look" at Harris why was she VP for 4 years?

I think you are just projecting your own uncertainty about her viability as a candidate. Which I understand, I am worried too, it feels like the euphoria over Biden resigning has resulted in the same kind of inward-turning confidence that they had with Hillary Clinton.

But a restarted primary process to ask the question: "do we really, REALLY want this Black Vice President as our next President?" would not exactly help with that inward focus.

Yeah. I think that's definitely a large part of it.

I said I'm unsure this is the right decision because I am, but I think my main point now is actually that there was a choice here. Because I think that's what people seem to be disagreeing with - not least because "you're wrong" would be an insane response to someone saying they're uncertain

On the decision, as I say I don't know which was the right option. But people were making decisions - it was contingent not a mechanical inevitability.

[Crazy_Ivan80]

So, how likely is the SCOTUS to put out a ruling that Harris is not eligible to be a candidate due to "process" or some such?

Not, but very likely to take away Biden's campaign funds from her.

Would backfire as it would likely galvanise the undecided public more against trumpler

[Tamas]

But "taking a look" is not without its own implications. If you need to "take a look" at Harris why was she VP for 4 years?

I think you are just projecting your own uncertainty about her viability as a candidate. Which I understand, I am worried too, it feels like the euphoria over Biden resigning has resulted in the same kind of inward-turning confidence that they had with Hillary Clinton.

But a restarted primary process to ask the question: "do we really, REALLY want this Black Vice President as our next President?" would not exactly help with that inward focus.

Yeah. I think that's definitely a large part of it.

I said I'm unsure this is the right decision because I am, but I think my main point now is actually that there was a choice here. Because I think that's what people seem to be disagreeing with - not least because "you're wrong" would be an insane response to someone saying they're uncertain

On the decision, as I say I don't know which was the right option. But people were making decisions - it was contingent not a mechanical inevitability.

But, a decision has been made as per party rules, the delegates have confirmed they want Harris. Trying to coup the party process by some sort of popular vote would have been very divisive I am sure.

And there is the "small" fact that Harris has been slated to become President in the "extremely" unlikely even his 81 years old boss died. So publicly proclaimed lack of trust in her by the party would have raised at least as many questions as her clean march to candidacy, and more severe ones.

[crazy canuck]

The attack on Harris and buttigieg for being childless does carry a big whiff of the Elon musk school of "thinking" fascist. The only valid kids are your genetic off spring. A true man spreads his seed as far and wide as possible.

It's also worth keeping in mind that the Democrats are not the only party with difficulties picking the most electorally optimal candidate. The GOP has selected Donald Trump as a candidate three times in a row despite ample evidence that he is the electoral equivalent of skunk shit.

Is he though?
He did win against Clinton. He does have a unique ability to appeal to idiots in swing states.

On point 1, it goes deeper than that. The 2025 project explicitly plans to close the border and make up the population deficit by causing American women to have more children.


On the second point, skunk shit might have some use as a fertilizer, but you really gave to hold your nose to the point you lose your sense of smell.  The analogy is perfect.

[garbon]

It's just a mix of vibe and anxiety. Although the whole "brat" thing I found very cringeworthy, a British pop "star" latches on to the news bandwagon and people handle it like the Yout of America have pledged undying support to Harris.

You are holding it against the Dems that the news decided to play up a celebrity endorsement and Kamala's campaign has leaned into embracing memes by excited youth?

Will see how it goes. I am defo not on Sheilbh's side of starting a public contest between candidates for a facade of supposed legitimacy, though. I am just on the side of recognising the war hasn't been won and the Dems as per latest data are still the losing side.

Sure but where is it coming from that the Dems are now out of the woods?

These feels like some sort of goldilocks request that they should get people excited but not too excited. Have you considered that maybe you just don't like it when the Dems are showing excitement?

[garbon]

On the decision, as I say I don't know which was the right option. But people were making decisions - it was contingent not a mechanical inevitability.

Cool, so a truism?

[crazy canuck]

Tamas, the most recent polls have Harris two points up over Trump.  But as Garbon points out, I see no indication the Dems think they are out of the woods.  It's just that everyone is thrilled that they no longer have the feeling of inevitable defeat.

And no one is going to forget what happened when it was accepted that Hillary would win.

[Sheilbh]

Sure but where is it coming from that the Dems are now out of the woods?

These feels like some sort of goldilocks request that they should get people excited but not too excited. Have you considered that maybe you just don't like it when the Dems are showing excitement?

Because it's triggering RBG totebags, I'm Still With Her, Biden's pre-debate energy drink post.

Get people excited but don't get too into the online hype cycles (not least because there will be bad days and adversity in a campaign which you need people to be level-headed about and not spiralling into utter despair after all the euphoria). As Neil Warnock put it: by all means enjoy it, but enjoy it by being fucking disciplined

[garbon]

Sure but where is it coming from that the Dems are now out of the woods?

These feels like some sort of goldilocks request that they should get people excited but not too excited. Have you considered that maybe you just don't like it when the Dems are showing excitement?

Because it's triggering RBG totebags, I'm Still With Her, Biden's pre-debate energy drink post.

Get people excited but don't get too into the online hype cycles (not least because there will be bad days and adversity in a campaign which you need people to be level-headed about and not spiralling into utter despair after all the euphoria). As Neil Warnock put it: by all means enjoy it, but enjoy it by being fucking disciplined

Okay, so this is all about your own psychodrama.

I would suggest that perhaps in the first week, one shouldn't get so emotional and see how things play out rather than jump to panic stations.