I don’t know, it’s too soon to call it. We’re not even at the October surprise yet, probably Vance is getting replaced. Harris win depends on voter turnout
Yeah, this type of “reporting” is infuriating to me. Claiming the election is in the bag is just a shitty attempt to depress voter turnout.
I won’t trust that Trump has lost this election until Harris is sworn in as POTUS.
And you don’t even need to win to be president!
You just need to have it be close enough to have the supreme court call it in your favor, just ask Al Gore about that one.
(And for anyone confused: the odds that our bought-and-bribed-for supreme court would vote for anyone but Trump are pretty much lol, lmao.)
I don’t see how Vance getting replaced that late in the game helps Trump.
It actually plays into the Harris point of Trump churning through staff that he feels like aren’t doing enough for him. And I can’t imagine he removes JD and then puts him in his cabinet or something, to which I would expect JD to flip back to his pre-VP-audition stance on Trump and spread the word of what is happening “behind the curtain”.
My feeling is that Clinton’s big problem was that she had a low ceiling and low floor because of 20+ years of smears; even though she was definitely qualified, there was just too much generalized negative baggage. I knew many democrats that believed something big would come out because republican muckrakers had spent so many years seeding that field. When Comey decided to break all tradition over nothing it just reinforced that perception.
Harris doesn’t have that, she has a high ceiling for perception. More people have no idea who she is and the more she can be the one to define herself while Trump looks crazier and crazier the better she’ll do. And the debate feeds that unlike Clinton.
I voted Clinton in 2016…but I didn’t exactly vote FOR her, moreso I voted against Trump. I feel like that’s why she lost - she repeatedly demonstrated that she’s an out-of-touch career politician. She had several How Do You Do, Fellow Kids? moments that turned off a lot of people. It also felt like they were putting way too much emphasis on her being a woman and that’s…just not a selling point. I don’t care what reproductive gear a candidate is equipped with.
I cringed a bit at those gaffs but there were two main reasons my vote was a reluctant one:
-
I can’t stand politician dynasties. I don’t want political families running the country and I definitely don’t want it to be a Clinton (who I admittedly would have voted for in the 90s if I was eligible). Staying with Bill after the scandal was a political move in my opinion.
-
The nomination didn’t feel deserved at all. Sanders got screwed in a time we needed him most and it felt like it did earlier this year when I intended on voting for Biden. Nobody likes thinking “this is not who I want to support but I have no choice.” She was/is a “generic politician” who doesn’t represent the people. 2016 was an awful time for the Democrats to hoist her up.
I don’t have the same reservations about Harris even though she wasn’t my first pick, for what it’s worth, so please don’t bring up misogyny. I was vocally against the ridiculousness of pizzagate and the “omg her emails,” too.
Fair. But tbh I wasn’t paying attention to him until then (except through decisions, which were still better than we had in a long time.) I assumed the MAGA feces-throwing was the usual gaslighting until I saw it.
Howabout [In a typical two-party presidential debate where the candidates are both under eighty years old] they mean nothing.
Kerry won all his. Hillary won all hers. The race is unchanged and will boil down to who gets out to vote and how successful republiQan election stealing efforts are.
I wish that was the case, but the orange turd is not easily flushed.
This isn’t news. It’s a talking head on a TV show.
Let’s make sure it is. Vote, get active, get involved
