|
| Thread: US General Election 2024 Predictions |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 · «PREV / NEXT» |
|
Blizzard
Adventuring Hero
Where the hell is my driveway?
|
posted October 19, 2024 10:22 PM |
|
Edited by Blizzard at 22:26, 19 Oct 2024.
|
JollyJoker said:
@ Blizzard
You are just prattling now - like Trump. Coincedence?
It is not a coincidence. I didn't want to tell anybody this, but I feel like now is the time to do it: I am Melania Trump.
You also will never admit it when you're wrong under any circumstance, so I guess it is personal insult time now  That's the drill.
____________
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted October 19, 2024 10:42 PM |
|
|
Things is, I'm not wrong - you ARE prattling. And nothing is an insult, when it's true. In that case it's just a statement of fact.
Better luck next time.
|
|
Ghost
Undefeatable Hero
Therefore I am
|
|
posted October 20, 2024 01:27 PM |
|
|
Bytebandit said:
tRump is a rapist.
tRump is a covicted Felon.
tRump was impeached twice as President of the United States.
tRump is a cheat to his followers.
tRump is a grifter.
tRump is a habitual liar.
tRump is a Narcissist.
tRump is a thief. (Stolen U.S. Documents.)
tRump is a racist.
tRump is a denier of truth. He lost in 2020.
tRump abused his power as President. (Handling of COVID)
tRump is a fascist.
Loser. Loser. Loser.
Still an American sign language destroyer.. Hell! Had to know! In Finland we've a sing language law.. But America  So tRump gets a very small deaf group voters..
|
|
Ghost
Undefeatable Hero
Therefore I am
|
|
posted October 22, 2024 08:46 PM |
|
|
Google translated:
"The United States still has a long way to go to a system where every citizen would have the same opportunity at the ballot box and everyone's vote would carry the same weight."
You need Google translator..
|
|
Blizzard
Adventuring Hero
Where the hell is my driveway?
|
|
posted October 22, 2024 09:26 PM |
|
Edited by Blizzard at 21:40, 22 Oct 2024.
|
By "long way" that means 2/3rds of the states for a convention followed by 3/4th of the states to ratify any amendments to the election process. Don't hold your breath.
For 2024, it is starting to look like Trump will get the popular vote either way, so probably not a repeat of 2016 or 2000.
BTW, since a constitutional amendment to change or remove the electoral college would be difficult/impossible to ratify, state legislatures are coming up with creative ways to try to bypass it lol:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbsnews.com/amp/minnesota/news/electoral-college-shift-to-national-popular-vote/
So there you go. I'm really skeptical on how far it will go, but it's a good attempt.
____________
|
|
Blizzard
Adventuring Hero
Where the hell is my driveway?
|
|
posted October 22, 2024 09:53 PM |
|
Edited by Blizzard at 22:07, 22 Oct 2024.
|
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/oct/22/arab-americans-poll-trump-harris-
And Arab Americans are now slightly favoring Trump as well. More proof that the country is a more complex place than 20 years ago. Arabs used to reeeaaaally not like the Republican party.
"'If Harris were elected', Trump wrote on his Truth Social site, 'the Middle East will spend the next four decades going up in flames, and your kids will be going off to War, maybe even a Third World War.'"
Also, a female candidate has actually not improved the female vote ratio for Democrats. Harris has the clear advantage with that constituency, but it is not a better advantage than with Biden in 2020. Comparing 2024 polls with 2020, women are slightly more likely to vote for a male than a female within the Democratic Party.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted October 23, 2024 12:59 PM |
|
|
It's not more complex, it's pretty simple. Arabs are - in their majority - muslims. Muslims aren't known for their enthusiam for women in responsible positions other than head of family/household, that is, DOMESTIC authority. Middle East/Israel/Palestinians are not a domestic/family/household problem, so the male candidate has a competence advantage (in their view).
In my opinion (other than "half of the Americans are idiots") the generally stronger religious ties within the US (and it doesn't matter what the denomination is) as opposed to the more secular Europe leads to generally more voters seeing a competence disadvantage with a woman at the helm and in the highest office.
Trump lost against Biden - who wasn't the greatest candidate ever - but won against Clinton. He may also win against Harris. If you ask me, that says a lot about the willingness of the American people to have a Madam President. If Harris loses, I doubt that within the next 20 years you'll see a woman as a candiate with either Reps or Dems.
You saw that also with what happened with Nikki Haley. She had not a chance against Trump, even though she would have been the reasonable pick. Haley vs. Harris would have been an interesting thing to see. Healey vs. Biden would have been interesting as well (old age of Biden might have cancelled out viewed male competence advantage.
True, Trump vs. Harris is interesting as well, because it's a battle of The Joker vs. Batwoman - but to really savour this, there is too much on the line. Just think about Trump getting elected, him getting a stroke and Vance overtaking.
|
|
Blizzard
Adventuring Hero
Where the hell is my driveway?
|
|
posted October 23, 2024 04:14 PM |
|
Edited by Blizzard at 16:23, 23 Oct 2024.
|
Eh. Kinda, but not really. It's more complex than that. I know you're not going to process/care about anything I'm about to say, but for others who are reading, I'll give my spiel.
Do you mean Europe or specifically Germany? USA isn't really a more religious place than Europe. Percentage-wise, there are more Christians and other people in organized religions in Europe than there are in the States, and USA has more people in the None category percentage-wise than Europe. Also, "sexism" is very difficult to measure, but in terms of females in management/leadership positions, USA is less sexist than Europe, not more sexist.
Arabs on average might be more triggered by the idea of a ma 'dam president, but they were already warming up to Trump before he was ever running against Harris. The post-9/11 wars put Arab Americans pretty strongly against the GOP but they have been gradually warming up to them over the past decade. And that is bad for Harris in Michigan with its large Arab population because it is more than likely going to be a must-win state unless she can somehow win over some other states where Trump is expected to win. Liberal Arabs might vote for the Green Party instead of Harris as a form of protest, which is essentially the same thing as not voting, because there is no preferential voting in the US and once you check your candidate of choice, that's it. The electoral college is putting the Democrats at a slight disadvantage.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted October 23, 2024 05:08 PM |
|
|
Blizzard said:
Eh. Kinda, but not really. It's more complex than that. I know you're not going to process/care about anything I'm about to say, but for others who are reading, I'll give my spiel.
Do you mean Europe or specifically Germany? USA isn't really a more religious place than Europe. Percentage-wise, there are more Christians and other people in organized religions in Europe than there are in the States, and USA has more people in the None category percentage-wise than Europe. Also, "sexism" is very difficult to measure, but in terms of females in management/leadership positions, USA is less sexist than Europe, not more sexist.
Arabs on average might be more triggered by the idea of a ma 'dam president, but they were already warming up to Trump before he was ever running against Harris. The post-9/11 wars put Arab Americans pretty strongly against the GOP but they have been gradually warming up to them over the past decade. And that is bad for Harris in Michigan with its large Arab population because it is more than likely going to be a must-win state unless she can somehow win over some other states where Trump is expected to win. The electoral college is putting the Democrats at a slight disadvantage.
The hell are you talking about? I mean EUROPE as in, say Moldova (if you know where that is). Britain's Thatcher (who became Prime Minister in 1979 and even won a real war), Portugal got a female Prime Minister the same year, Italy (where a woman leads the neo-fascists, same as in France, although she isn't head of state there, yet), even Poland has had one.
The difference Europe and the US is that in the US religion is much more IMPORTANT than in Europe. Scandinavia has left that ship completely, Britain has their own variant of protestantism, but they are used to women in high position due to the fact that they had female monarchs for long streches lof time, plus they are also used to religion being instrumentalized for politics, not the other way round. In the US, the law is still widely based on the Bible. All the vice laws, all this in-God-believing and having God's grace and whatnot - plus in the US you have all those TV preachers (who obviously make money with their crap), and all those nutcase fringe groups, beside the Mormons, the Quakers, JWs, Amish, you name them, plus the really radical fringe groups who would like to stone the adultresses, ban all fun and burn down every hospital that does abortions.
And that's only the Christians.
And we are not talking about the GENERAL population here when it comes to presidential elections. In the US, we are talking about "Swing States". For the rest it doesn't matter who is nominated, they will always vote REP or DEM. But in the seven (or, in very extreme cases, like they would nominate a gorilla or something, let's say ten) states, where more or less every vote counts, because the margin of undecided votes is big enough to let it go both ways, other things are decisive, and here we are just looking at those minorities that CAN vote this way or that. And with THOSE (who don't vote according to party label) OTHER things decide. And - and that's a case for Occam's Razor - sex is one of those and the most obvious with a view on religion.
Look at the Guardian article: 46% of the Arab-US are certain that Arabs wil have a harder time under Trump (23% for Harris). 43% are backing Trump and 41 Harris, they are split 38% on who would be better for the Middle East and Trumnp is marginally more competent (38/33) in ending the Israel/Palestine conflict. So, from that, Trump shouldn't be backed by 43%. Also Trump is seen more pro-Israel than Harris. So the EASY conclusion is, a lot of the 43% pro-Trump come from other things, and the obvious conclusion is that "other" is sex. What else iss it supposed to be?
You don't think that strong religioues ties, be it to the Islam or to more archaic Christian outfits, skew the world-view with regard to male-female role perception?
Ask yourself this: would male muslims vote for a female muslimic presidential candidate?
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted October 24, 2024 10:41 AM |
|
Edited by artu at 11:03, 24 Oct 2024.
|
I dont know specifically about the tendecy of Arabs but guessing from Turks, a lot of U.S. Arabs may not be your typical conservative Muslim. Where as Europe takes in mostly working class Middle Easterns, U.S. has Mexico for that and their Middle Eastern immigrants have a more white collar, upper class profile. A lot of those people leave their country in search of a more modern, secular environment to begin with.
Also keep in mind that both Turkey and Pakistan had female prime ministers in the past.The kind of sexism you talk about sometimes dont apply to the top, just think of female European monarchs in pre-modern times. You can claim Arabs are usually more literal about religious norms though, but it would still be just a guess.
They may have other reasons to vote Trump or Republican in general. They can be anti-SJW level conservative, Trump never sent troops in a foreign conflict and a lot of Arabic nations dont support Philistine. A lot of them are anti-Iran too. Sunnis and Shiites have a historical conflict between them like Catholics and Protestants used to have.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
Ghost
Undefeatable Hero
Therefore I am
|
|
posted October 24, 2024 02:03 PM |
|
Edited by Ghost at 14:05, 24 Oct 2024.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted October 24, 2024 08:48 PM |
|
|
@ artu
Yeah, but I don't buy that. Dems are no SJWs; Harris especially isn't and doesn't come about as one. And I'm not talking about simple "sexist" behavior, not in the usual sense. Most religious conservatives would deny sexism, point to equality in the sense of "worth", but point to different abilities and naturally given fields of competence. Both Christian conservatives and orthodox muslims see female competence with home, family and kids. In Iran women reign absolutely over the household.
But being the executive power of the mightiest military power in the world? That's clearly male territory.
And before we start getting overboard with muslim state female government leaders, the one in Pakistan was the daughter of the first democratically elected president in Pakistan, which ended via coup, and she came to power after the junta ended 11 years later. Later she was assasinated - you might say that the othodox muslimic elements didn't want a woman high up in politics.
In Turkey, we had a female PRIME MINISTER for not even 3 years - an office that was usurped by the President 20 years later and was never that powerful.
I'm sure, though, if Turkey was Istanbul, the country would probably be fine in that regard.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted October 25, 2024 02:10 AM |
|
|
Well, that is still sexism regarding their vote and it is what we’re talking about.
How many years she stayed in power is irrelevant. The point is she was elected and not with votes only from Istanbul.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted October 25, 2024 09:16 AM |
|
|
It IS sexist, but they don't think it is. It's like ... you wouldn't think a dwarf made a good Basketball player and wouldn't vote for one being in the team - except if he had proven he was a great dribbler and might well play point guard when your team has the ball (a situation which would arise once every 100 years or so)
And you do realize, how ridiculous that sounds, don't you? "Hey, they are not sexist, they voted a woman into a relatively powerful position once, a generation ago." 
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted October 25, 2024 01:55 PM |
|
|
I didnt claim such sexism didnt exist. I said yours doesnt seem like a spot on explanation of why Muslim Americans would vote for Trump instead of Harris. Muslims voting for women were one of the many factors I presented for not finding it convincing.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted October 25, 2024 03:36 PM |
|
|
Yeah, because if republicans proposed a women for run, democrats would be so relieved, finally USA is ready for a woman, let's vote for her.
I mean, look in France, the right is the only one to propose 2 women, the left said "not These women" , lol
|
|
Blizzard
Adventuring Hero
Where the hell is my driveway?
|
|
posted October 25, 2024 03:50 PM |
|
Edited by Blizzard at 17:52, 25 Oct 2024.
|
Well JJ, you just got done citing some female PMs in Europe as evidence that Europe is a progressive place, which it isn't, at least not in the way that you think it is. Sexist attitudes towards women are ubiquitous in Europe.
And if Kamala Harris does manage to pull off a win, that likewise isn't going to cause any major change in the lives of women in the USA. That sort of wooden and simplistic thinking reminds me of when Obama was president and some people used to think it would signal a massive change in the lives of African Americans. It didn't, because that isn't how the world works. Having a female monarch/PM/president doesn't have much effect at all on the lives of everyday people.
And back to Arabs and/or Muslims: the sex of the candidate doesn't appear to be the main factor. Lots of imams in the US have endorsed Harris, and there are a variety of reasons for why they would do that. I'll also point out here that the Green candidate on the ballot is Jill Stein, and she is polling better than both Trump and Harris among Muslims. Female candidates being able to attract Arab and Muslim voters doesn't appear to be a major issue (again, I'm not claiming that sexism doesn't exist).
Edit: oh, I forgot to mention: Jill Stein comes from a reformed Jewish background lol.
This is why people like you who so strongly champion/fixate on identity politics miss the mark by quite a lot. These things simply don't influence voting as much as you think they do.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted October 25, 2024 10:59 PM |
|
|
No one claimed the things you say, least of all me.
If you would care to again look at what I said, then it was, that in the US there are more people who feel quite strongly about RELIGION (than in Europe). And ORTHODOX standard religion (and the US has more of those) has no place for women in positions that are traditionally male-dominated, because orthodox religion distributes competences according to sex. Men have competences here and women there, and political leadership position are not part of the female list of competences.
THAT was what I said - not that women will have a better time, if Harris gets elected.
You aren't discussing THAT: You discuss what you want to, to counter a point I didn't make.
So:
Would anyone deny that the US has a higher percentage of people who take religion really serious - orthodox believers, no matter the actual religion?
Would anyone deny thaat these orthodoc guys (and no matter whether male or female, for the most part), concur, that there are sex-specific competences?
I doubt that.
So the only thing to discuss is, whether THAT - religiously motivated gender-specific competence assignment - explains baffling voting decisions or not.
I say, yes, it's an obvious explanation. You say, wait a minute, it's not. I still wait for a good reason WHY it's not. Other than, well, nutcases. So I wait for a better one.
Your turn.
And don't give me, "Imams have endorsed Harris". Well, yes, but "Many other Muslim groups and leaders that have endorsed Democrats in the past have withheld their endorsements or declined to back any candidate for president."
The things is - again - that if you look into the initial Guardian article, all REASONABLE points would mean, they SHOULD vote Harris, because Harris will be better for both them personally as well as the Palestinians - but they dont.
Go figure.
I EDIT this post to add something I just read (in German, so I won't link it here). It said, that the Dems are losing voters that would usually vote Democrat because Harris is a woman. They quoted a guy with a military background (but long since retired), who said, that "women are emotional, men are logical. Can't afford to have someone at the helm who might falter and waver when the going gets tough". He also said, with Trump he would be more likely to get to keep more of his pension after taxes.
|
|
Drakon-Deus
Undefeatable Hero
Qapla'
|
|
posted October 30, 2024 12:42 PM |
|
|
Hey Blizz, have you got any more thoughts or predictions? 
____________
Horses don't die on a dog's wish.
|
|
Ghost
Undefeatable Hero
Therefore I am
|
|
posted October 30, 2024 04:06 PM |
|
|
|
Trump is a good military leader..
|
| |
|
|
