The 2024 Presidential Election- The LONG General Election

[BigRedBuster]

7 hours ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

This guy is like a 10 cent rise in gas prices from becoming President again. 

And the Saudis are helping as much as they can.

[Dr. Strangelove]

6 hours ago, BigRedBuster said:

And the Saudis are helping as much as they can.

While not incorrect, I place the blame on the median American voter for being a moron.

[Guy Chamberlin]

No one seems to be talking about the increasing likelihood of President Deion Sanders. 

[teachercd]

On 9/14/2023 at 3:02 PM, Dr. Strangelove said:

Agreed. The youth vote has always been a presumed savior for democrats but the 18-24 turnout is always among the lowest. 

 

The main issue is that the election hinges on 4 or 5 swing states. Every other state is unlikely to change. In 3 of them: 

 

Arizona - In 2022 the Arizona GOP nominated the worst candidates imaginable. Kari Lake for governor, who played into Trump's (now criminal) assertion that the Dems stole the election. She dabbled in other conspiracies and was otherwise terrible in all fronts. She lost by a sliver, 17k votes and just .7% overall. In the Senate, the GOP nominated Blake Masters, a terrible candidate. He still got 46.5%, while a Libertarian candidate siphoned off a lot of his support.

 

Georgia - In 2022, Hershal Walker showed just how terrible a candidate is and can still be viable. After faking being a cop, FBI agent, possessing a secret COVID spray to cure you, his environmental policy of moving bad air to China for good air, and literally so many insane statements it's hard to fathom. He pushed his Democrat opponent into a runoff election before losing by 1.8%.

 

Wisconsin - in 2022 they re-elected climate change denying, COVID conspiracy loving, crackpot Senator Republican Ron Johnson, winning by 1%.

 

The real point is, no matter how crazy the Republican candidate for President is in 2023 - and you can bet your house they will be a crackpot - their base of support in important swing states automatically gives them a chance to win them. The worst candidate imaginable has a floor of support at 48.5% in all 3 states, making them all toss ups and thus the 2024 election a toss up.

 

If Stalin, Pol Pot, and Hitler fused into a single entity and rose from the depths of hell itself, if they have an R next to their name on a ballot, they have a 45% chance of winning as a base.

18-24 year olds pretend to care about s#!t, but that is all it is, pretending.  I have said that 1000 times.  For some reason people don't want to believe me.  Most of the "caring" they do, is an act.

 

3 hours ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

No one seems to be talking about the increasing likelihood of President Deion Sanders. 

He ain't hard to find!

[teachercd]

On 9/16/2023 at 12:52 PM, knapplc said:

Wow. Orange Man Bad had a night for the ages last night. Here's a couple more gems.

 

 

 

[BigRedBuster]

 

[TGHusker]

Another candidate in the race.  Terrisa Bukovinac is a pro-life, progressive, atheist,  Democrat (That is a mouth full - her description).   She is trying to raise awareness that the Dems need to broaden their tent to accommodate the 25% (her stats) of Dems who are pro-life as well as

the  pro-life independents who oppose the GOP.   She doesn't expect to win, but she wants to communicate as a 'voice for the babies'. 

 Article quoted in part below. 

 

 

https://www.christianpost.com/news/pro-life-democrat-terrisa-bukovinac-running-for-president.html

 

 

Quote

 

A pro-life Democrat is running for president to serve as a “thorn in the side of the Democratic Party” and draw attention to what she describes as the “genocide” of pre-born babies. 

Terrisa Bukovinac, a pro-life progressive atheist who founded the anti-abortion group Progressive Anti-Abortion Uprising two years ago, launched her campaign as a Democratic candidate for president on Thursday.

In an interview with The Christian Post, Bukovinac recalled how she went to “every single Democratic debate” in 2019 and 2020, seeking to provide representation for pro-life Democrats. According to her campaign website, one-fourth of Democrats oppose abortion.

“I thought … I just can’t go into another election cycle doing the same thing, demanding representation if I'm not willing to get out and do it. So, I decided this year, I’m going to step into the ring and be that representation,” she said. 

Another factor that spurred Bukovinac to run for president was the horrific discovery of the remains of 115 aborted babies in a container marked for disposal picked up by a medical waste truck outside the Washington Surgi-Clinic abortion facility. 

The contents included the remains of five full-term babies who Bukovinac believes could have either been killed in partial-birth abortions, a violation of federal law, or possibly could have survived the abortions if abortionist Cesare Santangelo and his staff had rendered urgent medical care to save the babies' lives. 

Bukovinac and other pro-life activists have launched a “Justice for the Five” campaign that's calling for an investigation into the deaths of the five full-term babies and the revocation of Santangelo’s medical license.

Reflecting on seeing the babies' remains, Bukovinac told CP she “had never seen abortion up close and seen such animosity toward our own humankind in such a personal and intimate way, and it changed my life forever. I just feel called to be a voice for these children, and I'm going to show these victims to the American people.” 

The candidate plans to run campaign ads highlighting the discovery of the late-term aborted babies. She's currently raising money to cover the cost of the ads in the states where her name will appear on the ballot. “I’m planning to hopefully get on the ballot in between five and 10 states,” she said, including New Jersey, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, Michigan (her home state), South Carolina, Iowa and Washington, D.C.

“This is not a campaign to win,” Bukovinac clarified to CP. Rather, she sees the purpose of her campaign as “being a voice for these babies” and “refusing to give up and allowing our society to bury these victims.” “It's about refusing to give up and allowing our society to bury these victims, and I’m going to use every opportunity I can to be a voice for them and to represent pro-life Democrats in the political sphere.”

 

 

[funhusker]

2 minutes ago, TGHusker said:

Another candidate in the race.  Terrisa Bukovinac is a pro-life, progressive, atheist,  Democrat (That is a mouth full - her description).   She is trying to raise awareness that the Dems need to broaden their tent to accommodate the 25% (her stats) of Dems who are pro-life as well as

the  pro-life independents who oppose the GOP.   She doesn't expect to win, but she wants to communicate as a 'voice for the babies'. 

 Article quoted in part below. 

 

 

https://www.christianpost.com/news/pro-life-democrat-terrisa-bukovinac-running-for-president.html

 

 

 

There is, and always will be, a contingent of GOP voters that vote solely on the abortion issue.  They will hold their noses to all the other nonsense because they want to believe the candidate they're voting for will support pro-life policies.  Why dems don't embrace that is crazy!

[BigRedBuster]

5 minutes ago, funhusker said:

There is, and always will be, a contingent of GOP voters that vote solely on the abortion issue.  They will hold their noses to all the other nonsense because they want to believe the candidate they're voting for will support pro-life policies.  Why dems don't embrace that is crazy!

Well....how would you suggest they do that?  There's at least an equal and opposite base in the Dem party that is a single issue vote on abortion rights.  What good is it if they gain the pro life crowd if they lose the abortion rights crowd?

[funhusker]

9 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

Well....how would you suggest they do that?  There's at least an equal and opposite base in the Dem party that is a single issue vote on abortion rights.  What good is it if they gain the pro life crowd if they lose the abortion rights crowd?

In Nebraska, for example, a Dem candidate would simply say "I support a ban after "X" weeks with exceptions for rape and incest".  I think a lot of Nebraska dems would still support that in a general election if the opposing candidate would support a total ban, including rape and incest.  It definitely wouldn't get all prolife, but even a portion wouldn't hurt.

 

P.S.: Primaries are stupid.  They give us bad candidates in G.E.

[BigRedBuster]

2 minutes ago, funhusker said:

In Nebraska, for example, a Dem candidate would simply say "I support a ban after "X" weeks with exceptions for rape and incest".  I think a lot of Nebraska dems would still support that in a general election if the opposing candidate would support a total ban, including rape and incest.  It definitely wouldn't get all prolife, but even a portion wouldn't hurt.

 

P.S.: Primaries are stupid.  They give us bad candidates in G.E.

That works in Nebraska for state elections.  However, most states aren't like Nebraska in being SO red.  Any swing state or national election, I don't think that will work.

[funhusker]

Just now, BigRedBuster said:

That works in Nebraska for state elections.  However, most states aren't like Nebraska in being SO red.  Any swing state or national election, I don't think that will work.

Probably not.  But using one issue as a litmus test to an otherwise great candidate is silly. In my opinion.

[BigRedBuster]

3 minutes ago, funhusker said:

Probably not.  But using one issue as a litmus test to an otherwise great candidate is silly. In my opinion.

Agree.

[TGHusker]

2 hours ago, funhusker said:

Probably not.  But using one issue as a litmus test to an otherwise great candidate is silly. In my opinion.

 

2 hours ago, funhusker said:

Probably not.  But using one issue as a litmus test to an otherwise great candidate is silly. In my opinion.

I agree wt you both.   2 many good candidates get defeated by one issue causes in the primaries.  If the Dems could find a moderating position on abortion I think it would give a lot of GOPers who are tired of MAGA a place to call home.   GOP isn't even 'right' on the abortion issue any longer- in many cases they have gone full bore Genghis Khan. 

[Lorewarn]

57 minutes ago, TGHusker said:

 

I agree wt you both.   2 many good candidates get defeated by one issue causes in the primaries.  If the Dems could find a moderating position on abortion I think it would give a lot of GOPers who are tired of MAGA a place to call home.   GOP isn't even 'right' on the abortion issue any longer- in many cases they have gone full bore Genghis Khan. 

 

 

What's the moderate position between "its murder" and "it's not murder"?