Why can’t our county have weekend early voting. It’s 8 to 5 from Mondays to Fridays until Oct 26th. Yet somehow staffed during the weekdays. Who votes during the work hours weekdays? I have four days remote and I can’t do that.
US 2024 Presidential Election
- Thread starter gorfias
- Start date
To discourage voting from the blue collar class.
Euthanasia should never be banned. Heavily regulated yes. Banned absolutely not
I don't know why you need to ban things that aren't your busines
Yes, you can mail in ballots, but you have to request them in Ohio. So, my solution was basically to wake up at 7 AM and then go, but not everyone can do that.
In a small Michigan town, election mistrust among Trump voters is on full display
Election workers faced an unprecedented wave of threats in the last presidential election. What are poll workers and election clerks in the swing state of Michigan doing to keep voting secure?
www.kpbs.org
Yes it’s no secret Trump has the linguistic finesse of a drunk bull in a China shop. While Kamala typically sounds like her responses are being fed through a dial-up modem whenever she has to think of an answer without help. And they’re usually ad-nauseum generic feel-good bs.
Speaking of Detroit (where that Trump video was from IIRC), how much good has democratic leadership done for the black community over the last half a century+? Sure they’ve changed since the Jim Crow era but have certainly had a tough time shaking the rep. Even with LBJ who’s considered the civil rights champion, originally voting against it while in the senate (along with Al Gore’s dad filibustering against it in ‘64) ultimately signed it into law in ‘67 because he knew it would fortify the party’s black voting base. Because he was notoriously racist, even Snopes can’t disprove the quote of him saying he’d “have them n***ers voting democrat for the next 200 years. “
Malcolm X observed this beforehand too -
https://www.dailytribune.com/2014/0...percent-dem-malcolm-x-called-them-chumps/amp/
Both democrats and republicans have their fair share of good and bad, but the problem is things aren’t quite as square as what media portrays them to be, which is why so little true “progress” has been made since the sixties.
Last edited:
Probably because politics is a vast amount more than being slick on media. Performing in public is one, specific skill that doesn't necessarily reveal competence in other key skills for successful politicians. If you think performing in public is the highest calling of a president, you should probably be selecting your candidates from raconteurs rather than legislators and administrators. I mean, sure, your silver-tongued president might not understand anything, be incredibly shit at running the country or easily outwitted by the leaders of hostile foreign states, but at least they'll be good on TV.
You even illustrate part of the problem: on the one hand, you criticise Harris for shooting her mouth off regarding guns. It's precisely that sort of reason that politicians instead try to constrain their public utterances into heavily-rehearsed, bland and/or vague comments. That's why she's trying to come up with bland, vague platitudes, and you're criticising her for not being slick enough at it... to the point of arguing it makes her unfit for office. It's like you are sort of answering your own question.
I'll give Trump some credit in the sense he realised that many people have also come to hate the political theatre that US society has birthed, and managed to cultivate a voter base who couldn't give a shit what he says or how he says it - even to the irony that he can be lauded as "authentic" whilst he lies about literally everything. However, not all politicians have that luxury.
There are plenty of reasons Harris might be unfit for office (it's not like there's a shortage of her / Biden's / The Democrats' policies to warrant criticism). However, few of them are usefully revealed by her lacking the gift of the gab in front of a camera.
With the Republicans being far far worse as far as i'm concerned. I'm not trying to fend every action of Democrats, but at least they try and get shit done. Not everything, And a delay all certain stuff too. Bud, they at least tell their people to fall in line and not do the crazy shit Republicans are doing in screwing everyone over the moment the person next to them in front of them, next to them, or behind them isn't convenient anymore. We kind of already had this discussion. So i'm not going to go in circles with it.
- Feb 7, 2011
- 8,610
- 3,140
- 118
- Country
- 'Merica
- Gender
- 3 children in a trench coat
Speaking of
Trump insults Detroit during speech … in Detroit
The famously loose-lipped presidential candidate couldn’t help but insult a key battleground state’s largest city
www.theguardian.com
And he'll probably not lose any votes for that, even in Michigan.Trump insults Detroit during speech … in Detroit
The famously loose-lipped presidential candidate couldn’t help but insult a key battleground state’s largest city
Firstly, because his voters mostly don't look at the news sources that would cover it. Secondly, because that's probably what they believe. Detroit was once great, and then black people moved in and the Democrats won the elections, and it became a shithole: after all, they didn't all move out into the suburbs and wider metropolitan area because they loved and respected Detroit.
Another irony of course of the Republicans is you'll hear from them endless stories about how much the Democrats hate America whilst they're busy throwing shit at every state, county and city that votes other than deep red.
Just so we're clear: most Detroiters told Trump to politely fuck off. Second, Detroit has been doing decent, all things considered. We still got a lot of abandoned house and buildings, but at least they're getting reused or knocked down to build something better. Not to mention, the Downtown Detroit has the monorail and trolley system. Helps a lot for those without vehicles and tourist attractions. I know I am only cover basic stuff, but most of us are more sensible than whatever Trump is giving us "credit" for.
Fuck off Trump. You did nothing to help Detroit once in your entire fucking life.Speaking of
Trump insults Detroit during speech … in Detroit
The famously loose-lipped presidential candidate couldn’t help but insult a key battleground state’s largest city
I'd prefer to call it the Tucker Carlsoning of politics
If you listen to Tucker, you sometimes get accurate, detail analysis of the problems of society. Then he quickly swerves into absurd policy ideas to 'solve the issue' that, at best, have nothing to do with the issue or, at worst, make things dramatically worse
When you critise Tucker's policy ideas, you get blame for calling him racist and he turns back to the original facts (which were true). Which means he is not actually dealing with problem of his policies
It's true. Trump and others saw what Agema is describing. I would agree with Trump here. But he decided to take this concept and put all his turds in there instead of doing something beneficial for society.
So, I can understand Trumpers detecting politicians. That does not mean Trump replacement is better. It's way worse
Yet this asshole got dropped hard, and everybody forgot about after getting fired from Fox, and writing that shitty book. Which sold super poorly. His "fans" only wanted his vitriol and hatred. They didn't give a shit about the actual man, his ego, nor his (exaggerated) history.
Well, Tucker Carlson hardly invented the idea, pointing to real problems so you can propose "solutions" is nothing new. The Depression was bad, Germany was in a bad place after WW1, and the Reichstag really did burn down.
For that matter, 9/11 really did happen, and there were KGB agents in the US during the Cold War. All of those things got used to justify any number of things, and opposing what they justified meant supporting the problem.
EDIT: Oh the image was a poster about voting in one of the referendums for conscription in Australia in WW1, BTW.
Just to be clear. The reason why Harris, and many politicians, are robotically following teleprompters is that THAT'S WHAT WE WANT THEM TO. If Harris says something offensive, there will be full page spreads in paper/websites. And every speech has to cater for at least 100 different interest groups that have many mutually exclusive to each other
For example, if you're pro-Big Business, you are actively hurting workers, farmers, small business and unions. Perhaps soceity and trust in government institutions if the topic is food/drug safety or climate change
Speeches need to thread a needle between these interest groups. Trump doesn't have to do any of that because he only ever talks to three interest groups: big business, blue collar workees who think giving all their taxes to big business will help them and racists
Was it called Sinn Fein back then? I thought they were called something else during Eaater Rising and it was a Splinter factionWell, Tucker Carlson hardly invented the idea, pointing to real problems so you can propose "solutions" is nothing new. The Depression was bad, Germany was in a bad place after WW1, and the Reichstag really did burn down.
For that matter, 9/11 really did happen, and there were KGB agents in the US during the Cold War. All of those things got used to justify any number of things, and opposing what they justified meant supporting the problem.
EDIT: Oh the image was a poster about voting in one of the referendums for conscription in Australia in WW1, BTW.
Anyway, sorry didn't mean to say he started it. He's just the current prominent example. Eg. 9/11 is another great example of taking a bunch of facts and some people turning it into a conspiracy theory that does not, in any shape or form, fit the facts
He did recently give us a golden interview of a racist saying racist things pretending Churchill was the worst leader in WW2, pretty much forcing Hitler to murder people. Tucker just let him rant without interrupting, only once saying he had a wry smile when the interviewee stepped back from actually saying the word Jew and said 'financiers' and 'global backers' instead
Good for him; people will forget about him in a week. I honestly don't care, but is Tucker even working for a network anymore, or is he still solo?
Oh sure, not meaning to imply you were saying that he was the first, it just seems odd to name such a longstanding thing after such a minor user of the technique.
Bit of Googling says that Sinn Fein was around since 1905, though it seems not as important back then as it was later on, though the poster doesn't go into detail either.