O/T:- Betting odds for US Election [The USA Politics Thread]

[slack_pie]

Talking about the ‘madness’ of one side when the other has just put up and elected an adjudicated rapist and convicted criminal as president is insane.

The dems can very much be accused of complacency imo but to say Harris was only chosen because she was black is hugely racist and speaks volumes why you spend so much time on here as an apologist for Trump while all the time not having the cajones to admit being a ‘fan’.

Ah, using the "racist" card - very on-brand. Biden openly admitted that he'd pick a woman as VP before he selected Harris. He also explicitly said he would pick a black woman "for the courts".

https://time.com/5803677/joe-biden-w...ice-president/

If you don't think demographics played a role in Harris being chosen as the Dems' candidate, you are very naive. Put it this way - given Harris's inability to articulate basic points or demonstrate basic leadership qualities, do you think she'd have been the Dems pick if she was a white male?

Also, if I liked Trump the man, I'd admit it. Why wouldn't I? You suggesting I'm too afraid to merely speaks to the entrenched view that people on the left have that they are the good guys and those on the right are all nasty. I like some of Trump's policies (not all of them), and I rate some of the team he's assembled. But do I like him as a person? Nope, and for obvious reasons.

[Bohinen]

If you don't think demographics played a role in Harris being chosen as the Dems' candidate, you are very naive. Put it this way - given Harris's inability to articulate basic points or demonstrate basic leadership qualities, do you think she'd have been the Dems pick if she was a white male?

Well, Biden had a far worse inability to articulate basic points or demonstrate basic leadership qualities and they picked him in 2020, mainly because he wasn't Bernie Sanders.

You like so many others, mainly on the right but also on the left, seem obsessed with the idea this was a left/right contest, when really it wasn't. On some aspects of economic policy and certainly on foreign policy, Trump is further left than Biden. That he might actually intervene and stop the utterly pointless Ukraine war is not 'right-wing' is it? Left-wingers like Sanders and Corbyn have the exact same policy. Where Trump is 'right-wing'. if you must call it that (it's more authoritarian really), it is on social issues like abortion, trans-rights etc, but are they what matter most to ordinary working people? The election results suggest not, whether that offends us or not.

Here's some evidence ... (tip for the GB News viewers amongst us, it's OK, the Spectator is generally right-wing)

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/...ng-than-biden/

Is Trump more left-wing than Biden? The President has a surprising capacity for progressive-sounding political analysis.

A leftist anti-Trumper I may be, but I’ve been strangely impressed by the President’s capacity for perfectly credible, progressive–sounding political analysis, especially on the trade issues that sometimes bring together on common ground right-wing nationalists and left-wing defenders of labour rights. That an estimated eight million Obama voters chose Trump in 2016, and more than 200,000 Bernie Sanders supporters voted for him in the three crucial Midwestern states of Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania, testifies to his appeal among a portion of the disaffected working class who cannot simply be written off as racist, right-wing or lunatic.

[slack_pie]

Well, Biden had a far worse inability to articulate basic points or demonstrate basic leadership qualities and they picked him in 2020, mainly because he wasn't Bernie Sanders.

You like so many others, mainly on the right but also on the left, seem obsessed with the idea this was a left/right contest, when really it wasn't. On some aspects of economic policy and certainly on foreign policy, Trump is further left than Biden. That he might actually intervene and stop the utterly pointless Ukraine war is not 'right-wing' is it? Left-wingers like Sanders and Corbyn have the exact same policy. Where Trump is 'right-wing'. if you must call it that (it's more authoritarian really), it is on social issues like abortion, trans-rights etc, but are they what matter most to ordinary working people? The election results suggest not, whether that offends us or not.

Here's some evidence ... (tip for the GB News viewers amongst us, it's OK, the Spectator is generally right-wing)

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/...ng-than-biden/

Is Trump more left-wing than Biden? The President has a surprising capacity for progressive-sounding political analysis.

A leftist anti-Trumper I may be, but I’ve been strangely impressed by the President’s capacity for perfectly credible, progressive–sounding political analysis, especially on the trade issues that sometimes bring together on common ground right-wing nationalists and left-wing defenders of labour rights. That an estimated eight million Obama voters chose Trump in 2016, and more than 200,000 Bernie Sanders supporters voted for him in the three crucial Midwestern states of Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania, testifies to his appeal among a portion of the disaffected working class who cannot simply be written off as racist, right-wing or lunatic.

You are right, I am absolutely obsessed with the idea that this was a left-right contest. Like so many others. Thanks for pointing that out.

I agree with a lot of what you've said, but you've missed out a few key points. Trump is more right wing than Biden/Harris when it comes to his views on the size and role of the state and the scope of bureaucracy and regulation. He has a slight libertarian streak in this regard, whereas the Biden/Harris and the Dems instinctively want to control stuff.

[BigFatPie]

Ah, using the "racist" card - very on-brand. Biden openly admitted that he'd pick a woman as VP before he selected Harris. He also explicitly said he would pick a black woman "for the courts".

https://time.com/5803677/joe-biden-w...ice-president/

If you don't think demographics played a role in Harris being chosen as the Dems' candidate, you are very naive. Put it this way - given Harris's inability to articulate basic points or demonstrate basic leadership qualities, do you think she'd have been the Dems pick if she was a white male?

Also, if I liked Trump the man, I'd admit it. Why wouldn't I? You suggesting I'm too afraid to merely speaks to the entrenched view that people on the left have that they are the good guys and those on the right are all nasty. I like some of Trump's policies (not all of them), and I rate some of the team he's assembled. But do I like him as a person? Nope, and for obvious reasons.

The link you posted doesn’t say anything about ‘a black woman’. So before you claim I’m playing the race card, it was you who brought it up.

Like other right wing dingbats on here you didn’t reply to my actual post you replied to one in your head. I’ll repeat, to glibly talk like you did about the ‘madness’ of the Dems and how ‘they’re rotten to the core’ when the Republicans for the third time have nominated and again elected a rapist a criminal and a white supremacist is insane. ‘Like’ or ‘dislike’ is irrelevant.

Unlike you apparently I don’t know enough about Kamala Harris to know whether she would have made a decent president or not, but I know she isn’t a rapist, a criminal or a white supremacist so had I vote in the US she would have got it for those reasons. She also didn’t claim to win an election she clearly lost. I would have thought anyone with a shred of decency would agree.

Now the election is finished we can all watch how Trump will shaft not only the people who didn’t vote for him but also the ones who did, especially the poorer ones. Donald Trump is interested in one thing and that’s Donald Trump.

[BigFatPie]

I appreciate that "progressives" have to cling to the race card and identity politics for pretty much all they're worth these days, but their problem is that increasing numbers of minority voters are realising that they were/are being used and manipulated, not protected or represented, by a (predominantly white, middle class) liberal left intelligentsia. It turns out that a growing number of people from 'minority backgrounds' are now turned off by being told who to vote for based on, for example, their ethnicity.

How dare a black person like Kemi Badenoch get herself elected leader of the Conservatives?

How dare increasing numbers of (e.g.) Latino/Hispanic/Black voters support Donald Trump, of all people, effectively giving him the big push over the line into the White House?

It's the "black face of white supremacy", as Dawn Butler would say - indeed did say in a tweet that revealed everything about the content of her character. Or to put it another way, minority voters should know their role, much like white working class people should automatically vote Labour. Anybody who doesn't is an idiot or a traitor ... but remember everybody should "be kind".

Of course, people on the right of politics shouldn't complain about such insults from the illiberal left towards what they see as "their" own misbehaving support-base, indeed they should hope it continues, because it's phenomenally effective in convincing increasing numbers of that support base to look elsewhere.

That’s all remarkably well argued but again I don’t know why you quoted my post because it had nothing to do with what I said. You ascribed the values of Martin Luther King to members of the Tory party because they er voted for Kemi Badenoch instead of the non entity that is Robert Jenrick ( a man who lost an election when he was the only candidate). That is imo laughably ridiculous. To make that claim is as idiotic saying ‘I can’t be racist because my best mate is black’.

You said all this while at the same time speaking up for Donald Trump, a white supremacist who amongst other things recently claimed that Haitian immigrants are eating people’s pets ( a common far right trope). What do you think MLK would have thought of that? Be honest.

[slack_pie]

The link you posted doesn’t say anything about ‘a black woman’. So before you claim I’m playing the race card, it was you who brought it up.

Like other right wing dingbats on here you didn’t reply to my actual post you replied to one in your head. I’ll repeat, to glibly talk like you did about the ‘madness’ of the Dems and how ‘they’re rotten to the core’ when the Republicans for the third time have nominated and again elected a rapist a criminal and a white supremacist is insane. ‘Like’ or ‘dislike’ is irrelevant.

Unlike you apparently I don’t know enough about Kamala Harris to know whether she would have made a decent president or not, but I know she isn’t a rapist, a criminal or a white supremacist so had I vote in the US she would have got it for those reasons. She also didn’t claim to win an election she clearly lost. I would have thought anyone with a shred of decency would agree.

Now the election is finished we can all watch how Trump will shaft not only the people who didn’t vote for him but also the ones who did, especially the poorer ones. Donald Trump is interested in one thing and that’s Donald Trump.

Not the best link I guess. Try this one instead:

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/08/28/p...ick/index.html

Biden literally said: “Whomever I pick, preferably it will be someone who was of color and/or a different gender."

I'm not interested in getting into an argument about this. My point is simply that demographics almost certainly played a key role in Biden making Harris VP and then her becoming the presidential candidate. Me pointing out that this was likely a factor in their decision-making doesn't make me racist. The left loves to make things about race and gender.

As for the madness of the Dems - I'm talking about policies here primarily. A lot of people clearly feel the same, so it's unsurprising that most people voted for a party offering change and not more of the same. This doesn't mean I like Trump or am happy about the stuff you've mentioned.

As for what happens in a Trump presidency - I guess we'll have to wait and see. It's not like Biden and the Dems haven't been shafting Americans for years either.

[slack_pie]

Last thing I want to mention. I know you see me as a "right-wing dingbat", but I've spent my life voting for left-wing or centrist parties. I have more of a libertarian bent than I used to have, but that's just come about through life experiences, which you can't account for when you are younger. I don't see those libertarian views as fundamentally left or right. And they apply to certain issues but not others (i.e. I'm not actually a libertarian).

In recent years, however, the left has shifted in quite bizarre and extreme ways, and many people who were once somewhere in the middle or centre-left of the spectrum now find themselves somewhere they never expected to be. Now, you can be considered a conservative or even controversial for holding views that were consensus about 15 years ago. That's what I mean by "the madness of the Dems".

I know plenty of other people who feel the same way. Many of the high-profile people behind Trump are former Democrats or Democrat voters. It's pretty bizarre to be labelled "right-wing" (not that there's anything wrong with being right-wing) and "racist" by people you've never met for having discussions about this.

[jackal2]

That’s all remarkably well argued but again I don’t know why you quoted my post because it had nothing to do with what I said. You ascribed the values of Martin Luther King to members of the Tory party because they er voted for Kemi Badenoch instead of the non entity that is Robert Jenrick ( a man who lost an election when he was the only candidate). That is imo laughably ridiculous. To make that claim is as idiotic saying ‘I can’t be racist because my best mate is black’.

So let's accept your argument that Conservatives voted for Kemi Badenoch because she was better than a poor opponent in Robert Jenrick. I agree entirely that Robert Jenrick is a non-entity, but therein lies the obvious point. Conservative Party members concluded that Kemi was clearly the best candidate and voted for her on merit. A bunch of racists and white supremacists would surely have concluded that they wouldn't vote for a black candidate under any circumstances, even if it meant electing the crap white guy?

I didn't ascribe the entire value set of Martin Luther King to members of the Conservative Party. What I did do was take MLK's most recognised quote and observe that Conservative Party members did indeed judge Kemi Badenoch "by the content of her character" and not "by the colour of her skin", which was the dream he described: i.e. a situation where people are judged on merit not on ethnicity/skin colour.

You said all this while at the same time speaking up for Donald Trump, a white supremacist who amongst other things recently claimed that Haitian immigrants are eating people’s pets ( a common far right trope). What do you think MLK would have thought of that? Be honest.

Of course I'll be honest. I very much doubt MLK would have liked that comment and I thought it was nonsense too for that matter.

If MLK meant what he said about a world where people are judged on the content of their character (i.e. merit) and not by the colour of their skin, he would also surely be dismayed to see identity politics such as skin colour/ethnicity still being made an issue by any major political parties some 60 years on, when his dream was a world where it simply shouldn't be a factor. If he meant what he said and was not a forerunner of some of the hypocritical progressives these days, then I agree with MLK 100% that discrimination is senseless, be it negative or positive. For example, anybody running a business who appoints an employee based on 'identity' rather than ability and merit is an idiot, and will probably lose money and fail.

Similar to Slack Pie, my view of Donald Trump the man is mixed at best - I think he's astonishingly resilient and determined, but I also believe he is a narcissist (as many political leaders are) and I think some of the comments he makes are cringeworthy.

What does seem to be the case is that Trump has tapped into a feeling amongst a huge group of Americans that so-called progressive politics isn't working for them, and I certainly understand and agree with that. Even if we run with your view that a significant element of Trump's support are racist white people, he still would not have reached the White House - twice - without the ultimately decisive support of a growing number of minority group voters who the Democrats have traditionally and perhaps arrogantly regarded as 'their' property. It may well be that their votes for Trump represented more of a rejection of the Democrats rather than an enthusiastic endorsement of the Republican candidate, but if the response of the Democrats is to tell these people how stupid they all are, and what traitors they've all been to their heritage/gender etc., instead of analysing why Democrat policies failed working class voters across the board, then don't be surprised if even more minority group voters cross the political divide in the future.

Trump will only be a factor for a short time longer because of his age and the limitations on Presidential terms, but the movement he has spearheaded is likely to have a far longer shelf-life and could be taken forward by more politically astute leaders.

[keldsyke]

Hilarious!!

[upthemaggies]

Hilarious!!

That's the exact same tone and delivery I can't help but hear in my head when reading back some of the ideologically possessed rants from posters on here.