DISASTER: Trump WINS the 2024 US Election

[Ladle Ghoulash 52,588]

3 minutes ago, Franch Toast said:

Real question: if that happens before he's sworn in, would Vance automatically be president? I ask because Trump isn't technically president yet, so I'm not sure what would happen. 

I think technically yes. 

[HeavyCapiLover 4,389]

9 minutes ago, Morphine Prince said:

I seriously think they’re plotting something or he’s ill. 

Something isn’t computing about this. 

Both the dems AND the reps are unusually silent, this is very weird 

[Franch Toast 27,737]

14 minutes ago, Ladle Ghoulash said:

I think technically yes. 

I looked it up. It depends on when. Before the Electoral College meets: no one has no idea what's going to happen. After the Electors have voted: it goes to the VP. 

 

[MOT 3,605]

17 hours ago, StrawberryBlond said:

It's highly unlikely the people will vote the same party into power over and over, it naturally ebbs and flows. It can't be a world ending reaction every time the Republicans win. View it as a simple handing over of (temporary) power and the 4 years will pass a whole lot easier. 

Here's a couple of stats. Let's go way back, to 1960, and start the clock with Kennedy beating Nixon. That's 64 years ago. Divide by 4, add 1, that's 17 elections from 1960 to 2024 inclusive. The score in those 17 elections ? GOP 9 DEMS 8. And how often during those 64 years has either side won 3 in a row ? Once. That was Reagan x 2 followed by Bush Snr.

So you're right I think, it's ebbs and flows. Look at the numbers this time, it's normal stuff. It's basically 50/50 and the deciding swing has gone to the GOP. It is not a case of the US going lock stock and barrel over to Trumpism. Look at those six people in Dixville. They voted 3-3 this year having voted 6-0 for Biden in 2020. The fact that they could go 6-0 tells you that they are not Trump lovers, that they are capable of looking at Trump and saying nope. Why did three of them defect this time ? I'd be guessing at least one of them baulked at voting for a woman, and a non-white woman at that.

Having said all that, I believe there is a difference this time. The GOP have gone 100% to the bad, and I think they are likely to go to lengths, lengths like nobody has ever seen before, to suppress Dem votes in 2026 and beyond. I would guess that both parties in their turn have made attempts to suppress the other side's vote in the past, but the Trumpian GOP have walked away from the game at this point. They went for the steal in 2020 and would have done the same this time if necessary. They have the Presidency, the Senate, SCOTUS and probably the House as well, and there are no rules or guardrails that they will hesitate to trample over once they have figured out a way, and if they can't figure out a 'way', they'll probably just announce it anyway and who's gonna stop them.

[AsleepOnTheCeiling 6,940]

20 minutes ago, MOT said:

Here's a couple of stats. Let's go way back, to 1960, and start the clock with Kennedy beating Nixon. That's 64 years ago. Divide by 4, add 1, that's 17 elections from 1960 to 2024 inclusive. The score in those 17 elections ? GOP 9 DEMS 8. And how often during those 64 years has either side won 3 in a row ? Once. That was Reagan x 2 followed by Bush Snr.

So you're right I think, it's ebbs and flows. Look at the numbers this time, it's normal stuff. It's basically 50/50 and the deciding swing has gone to the GOP. It is not a case of the US going lock stock and barrel over to Trumpism. Look at those six people in Dixville. They voted 3-3 this year having voted 6-0 for Biden in 2020. The fact that they could go 6-0 tells you that they are not Trump lovers, that they are capable of looking at Trump and saying nope. Why did three of them defect this time ? I'd be guessing at least one of them baulked at voting for a woman, and a non-white woman at that.

Having said all that, I believe there is a difference this time. The GOP have gone 100% to the bad, and I think they are likely to go to lengths, lengths like nobody has ever seen before, to suppress Dem votes in 2026 and beyond. I would guess that both parties in their turn have made attempts to suppress the other side's vote in the past, but the Trumpian GOP have walked away from the game at this point. They went for the steal in 2020 and would have done the same this time if necessary. They have the Presidency, the Senate, SCOTUS and probably the House as well, and there are no rules or guardrails that they will hesitate to trample over once they have figured out a way, and if they can't figure out a 'way', they'll probably just announce it anyway and who's gonna stop them.

I'm not gonna say that Democrats have never suppressed votes, but the chances are low. They have always known that voter turnout favors them, so they've tried to make it more accessible. 

 

I don't think this is the end of the world. GOP universally hates Obamacare and were unable to repeal it even without majorities in 2017. It's gonna be hard for them to get on the same page. 

[Ivy 13,718]

19 hours ago, Ivy said:

I think there's actually so much hate for women involved in this election, and it's not really being talked about much here in GGD

When people like this are rising in popularity can it be denied it must play a large part?

 

What happened to my link 

Anyway it was this

https://x.com/FuentesUpdates/status/1854012747027189907?t=upKns5cH3B18ZxXOcQmw7g&s=19

[Franch Toast 27,737]

17 minutes ago, Ivy said:

What happened to my link 

Anyway it was this

https://x.com/FuentesUpdates/status/1854012747027189907?t=upKns5cH3B18ZxXOcQmw7g&s=19

I’m seeing comments like that all over. People really hate women. I’m terrified 

[LateToCult 41,831]

Is it too early for me to mention my crackpot theory that Kamala was flirting with the idea of running for Governor of California when it was looking likely that Joe was gonna lose (but before he actually dropped out)? And thats why new housing was such a big (and surprising) part of her plans for her presidency? Could it be that she was workshopping ideas that would appeal to Californians but then Joe went and blew the whole thing up so she had to flesh things out fast for her new presidential campaign?

[Horny Chicken 10,932]

On 11/7/2024 at 6:23 PM, Jill said:

This is an overtly simplistic view. If fear was the only factor, then the Democrats and third parties would be much stronger.

Trump is the personification of an economic and social necessity right now in the United States, which includes, among other things, the way they're responding to the rise of the multipolar world with Russia, China, Iran, and others; the way they're responding to a multiple-side war and proxy war with Ukraine, Palestine, and others; internally, the way they're dealing with being outcompeted by countries outside the US orbit of influence; internally as well, the constant economic problems, lower standards of living, surging inequality, and surging debt, among many, MANY other interlinked problems.

The US ruling class is fighting to the death with itself over the way they should tackle all of these symptoms of a waning world influence. This election, far from being "the most consequential elections of a lifetime" (despite repeating this time and time again, even Hillary Clinton said that "America is much bigger than one election"), is another expression of that confrontation. 

As I've said time and time again, if your diagnosis of this election is to blame the "left", blame Trump individually, or saying that "everyone's afraid that's why they follow him", then you won't get anywhere and there will be a million problems that you won't be able to explain.

I’m not very educated in politics but I pray to god or whatever deity that you’re right. I mean it. 

[southpaw773 4,364]

“A great man once said that the true symbol of the United States is not the bald eagle. It is the pendulum. And when the pendulum swings too far in one direction it will go back."

-Ruth Bader Ginsburg 

[StrawberryBlond 15,558]

On 11/8/2024 at 5:46 AM, Reality said:

In my first reply, my entire first paragraph was me agreeing with you.

To the points you made in your first paragraph, I think that it is obvious that people don't like to be demonized. On that point, I agree. I think that Trump supporters feel demonized and put down by Democrats, and from a purely electoral perspective, I think it's wrong to do that. Like you said, you're not encouraging people or getting any new votes by insulting the electorate. That being said, I think (purely from a moral standpoint) they deserve to be demonized. We are not talking about "normal" Republicans. Trump stands on the promise of racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, and xenophobic rhetoric and policies. Again, I understand that demonizing these people isn't going to attract them to "our" side, but you gotta call a spade a spade. If people want to debate and discuss real issues, that's perfectly fine. But when so much of the Republican Party is just blatantly bigoted, there is almost no room for coherent discussion.

Also, I want to put out when you said, "They say joining the Trump side is like joining a big happy family but leftists are so depressed and fear mongering. Trump fans talk in positives and how they're going to improve things, Democrats talk in negatives and how the other side is going to do bad things and take rights away." Are you talking about that from the perspective of a Trump supporter or do you genuinely believe that? From the perspective of a Trump supporter, yeah, that's what they believe, but if we want to operate in reality, that's simply untrue. Kamala's whole campaign was literally about bringing up hope and joy: two words that consistently defined her campaign's message. Trump's rhetoric is founded on fearmongering. He blames liberals, he blames the media, he blames the immigrants, he blames other Republicans who don't like him, etc. They talk about "how they're going to improve things," sure, but in a way that's centered around nationalist, Christian-based authoritarianism. Trump supporters also don't talk in positives at all, unless you think them saying stuff like "your body, our choice" to women is their version of "positive."

Finally, to your last paragraph, I think you are fundamentally misunderstanding that Trump represents a long-term movement that, if unchecked, could result in serious and very dangerous consequences. MAGA may not get another leader to the level of Trump, but that isn't going to stop it from continuing the way it is. The party has fundamentally shifted. Sure, it might not stay this way forever, but it will take generations upon generations to strip that away. Trump is one person, but the people who support him (which is tens of millions of people in the US) are the ones with the power. He represents bigoted and discriminative viewpoints, and that will never go away. And yes, while it's unlikely that the same party stays in power forever, the point is that the Republicans now are dangerous. We cannot treat it like a "simple handing over of (temporary) power" when Trump incited an insurrection when he first had to leave office. He is a dangerous man and he and his base have only gotten more extreme. We cannot guarantee he'll leave peacefully or that he won't fundamentally change how politics operates, especially now that the Supreme Court has practically given him immunity to do anything.

I do get it that it's very difficult to hold your tongue when a group of people are spouting really hateful and harmful rhetoric. Perhaps the key is to just pick apart their points in a calm and measured way without shouting and name calling? One of the biggest things that liberals get criticised for is being too emotional and supporting issues but not actually knowing why. It's about being the bigger person in this situations to look and sound better and reasonable. 

I was saying that quote from the pov of a Trump supporter but I do kinda get what they go on about when they say liberals are fearmongers. It has been rather doom and gloom for a while and pointing out problems but not providing much in the way of solutions. I may not agree with what Trump plans to do but he seems to have a plan at least. I don't really know what the Democrats want to do. Kamala was onto something with the Brat campaign but she never went as self-deprecating as Trump did by working in McDonalds and driving a garbage truck. Sure, I think Trump fans are hypocrites by finding anything Trump does as funny and endearing but finding everything that Kamala does is cringe but you can really tell that Trump takes a lot more risks to appear normal and just like everyone else and it pays off. Kamala was very distant in this election. Trump was doing interviews everyday, Kamala only did a handful. 

Maybe an upside to Trump winning is that his fans get closure in knowing that he fulfilled as many terms as he possibly could? It makes it more likely that they will move on because there's nowhere left to go from here. I'm just trying not to bring about negatives by focusing on them and willing them to go wrong. If Trump can make some things better, good. Things getting better can only be good, regardless of who's doing them. As I said before, I don't want America to go to the dogs just to prove a point that it was wrong to elect him. Maybe a population not so down on their luck will be open to the idea of Democrats next time? People vote based on how the current government treats them. I think the tide will turn again before we know it.

But I get all your concerns. I just don't want people to get too disheartened. It will only breed more of that which you do not want. You can still make your opinion heard and campaign even when you're not the party in power. And one day, we'll look back on Trump as a long fever dream that we woke up from.

[REALITY 80,162]

18 hours ago, StrawberryBlond said:

I do get it that it's very difficult to hold your tongue when a group of people are spouting really hateful and harmful rhetoric. Perhaps the key is to just pick apart their points in a calm and measured way without shouting and name calling? One of the biggest things that liberals get criticised for is being too emotional and supporting issues but not actually knowing why. It's about being the bigger person in this situations to look and sound better and reasonable. 

But why is the onus always on Democrats to seem like the reasonable people? When it comes to basic things like not being a racist, misogynist, homophobe, etc., it's practically impossible to not call out other people for those inane beliefs. Republicans are allowed to act with such hate and vitriol but the Democrats are always criticized for "demonizing" the other side. That just doesn't make sense. They don't act like the "bigger person," actively insult, berate, and even kill us, but we are supposed to do better? 

Again, I understand that generally doesn't help from an electoral perspective, but after this election, honestly maybe it does. Trump's rhetoric has only gotten more vile and he won by a bigger than 2016 and he won the popular vote for the first time. Dems need to fight back harder instead of constantly placating Republicans, which is obviously not working.

18 hours ago, StrawberryBlond said:

I was saying that quote from the pov of a Trump supporter but I do kinda get what they go on about when they say liberals are fearmongers. It has been rather doom and gloom for a while and pointing out problems but not providing much in the way of solutions. I may not agree with what Trump plans to do but he seems to have a plan at least. I don't really know what the Democrats want to do. Kamala was onto something with the Brat campaign but she never went as self-deprecating as Trump did by working in McDonalds and driving a garbage truck. Sure, I think Trump fans are hypocrites by finding anything Trump does as funny and endearing but finding everything that Kamala does is cringe but you can really tell that Trump takes a lot more risks to appear normal and just like everyone else and it pays off. Kamala was very distant in this election. Trump was doing interviews everyday, Kamala only did a handful. 

What?? What plans does Trump have? He was literally mocked at for saying he has "concepts of a plan" in his debate with Kamala. He has no plans. The only plans he has are things in Project 2025 and his awful tariffs plan which would undeniably be awful for the US.

I think Kamala should've done better by distancing herself from the Biden administration and clearly communicating her messages more, but let's not act like Kamala didn't have anything; she had far more than Trump. And the garbage truck and McDonald's thing? That moved the needle for no one. They were completely opportunistic and he did it to look like an "everyday" man, which he is not. He did the former because he was mocking people's responses to that comedian in the MSG rally calling Puerto Rico a "floating island of garbage."

The one thing I agree with in this paragraph is that Kamala should've done more interviews early on. She did a slew of them in the last few weeks of her campaign, but it would've been better if she started that process early on.

18 hours ago, StrawberryBlond said:

Maybe an upside to Trump winning is that his fans get closure in knowing that he fulfilled as many terms as he possibly could? It makes it more likely that they will move on because there's nowhere left to go from here. I'm just trying not to bring about negatives by focusing on them and willing them to go wrong. If Trump can make some things better, good. Things getting better can only be good, regardless of who's doing them. As I said before, I don't want America to go to the dogs just to prove a point that it was wrong to elect him. Maybe a population not so down on their luck will be open to the idea of Democrats next time? People vote based on how the current government treats them. I think the tide will turn again before we know it.

But I get all your concerns. I just don't want people to get too disheartened. It will only breed more of that which you do not want. You can still make your opinion heard and campaign even when you're not the party in power. And one day, we'll look back on Trump as a long fever dream that we woke up from.

We can only hope that he'll do good, but I have no faith. I would love for him to actually do good, but I frankly don't see how that's possible. Our hopes are that he either doesn't get to do much of his administration's plans or that he does go through with them and it makes people's lives worse. If all goes well, either way it'll wake up people to just how awful he is.

Like honestly, part of me wants his tariffs plan to go through so the idiots who thought that he would be good for the economy see why he isn't.  

[sarahb 17,187]

44 minutes ago, Reality said:

 or that he does go through with them and it makes people's lives worse. If all goes well, either way it'll wake up people to just how awful he is.

Like honestly, part of me wants his tariffs plan to go through so the idiots who thought that he would be good for the economy see why he isn't.  

To me it's like if you had a kid that insisted on touching a hot stove. He thinks it'll feel good and he'll yell at you and call you an awful person for not letting him touch it. At some point you just have to go "fine, touch the damn stove" so he shuts up about it.