2024 US Presidential Election

[Luman]

Biden's political standing is at the weakest point in his presidency, according to a report in the WSJ, just published today, December 9.

Trump is ahead of Biden, 47% to 43% and his lead is at 37% to 31% when the independent candidates' numbers are factored into the equations.

Electing this man was the single biggest mistake in half a century or more of presidential elections, and many voters are beginning to realize this, every day.

 

[Joey72]

Muslim voters organize swing state boycott. Bye, bye Joe.

Is this some kind of game, or what? The thread is about the 2024 election, Trump is one of the candidates but Biden is the current president and is running for reelection. He is doing very badly, in the polls and all you talk about is Trump, Trump and more Trump, lol. Can't you address why Biden's campaign has lost so much ground, and support?

It's called Trump Derangement Syndrome. Most of the limousine liberals and people that watch MSNBC and CNN lost their shit over Trump. Biden's track record is far worse than Trump's. Inflation war, crumbling roads and bridges, homeless people, the list goes on.

I think I'll vote for Trump just to watch their heads explode.

 

[just1morething]

Right Angle News Network:

Speaker Mike I speak on behalf of all of the Americans when I say we need to lock down and militarize our southern border so the Democrats can't use illegal immigrants to cheat in the 2024 election like we all know they're going to do.

 

[Elmer B Fuddled]

Right Angle News Network:

Speaker Mike I speak on behalf of all of the Americans when I say we need to lock down and militarize our southern border so the Democrats can't use illegal immigrants to cheat in the 2024 election like we all know they're going to do.

Crap.

 

[Luman]

Right Angle News Network:

Speaker Mike I speak on behalf of all of the Americans when I say we need to lock down and militarize our southern border so the Democrats can't use illegal immigrants to cheat in the 2024 election like we all know they're going to do.

Biden's illegals come here and expect us to roll out the red carpet, pay for their housing, children if they have any, medical care, food, and other expenses. This is what they were told they would receive, by the criminals who sent them here, for profit.

New York City is going broke because of its extremely stupid Sanctuary City designation, which the Democrats in charge refuse to end. The illegals cannot speak English and have few if any skills, yet expect to thrive in what is probably the most expensive and competitive city in the country.

They can go home or practically anywhere they want, for free, courtesy of the taxpayers. As winter sets in, and there is no room to house more than a very small percentage of them, some are starting to get the message that we cannot afford them, they are not wanted, and they will be kicked out of their free housing after 30 days for singles and 60 days for families.

When temperatures drop very low and/or it snows heavily in Chicago, NYC, etc., we'll find out how people who likely have never seen it before, react to living outside or in building lobbies when it's ten degrees outside, with several or more feet of snow.

 

[just1morething]

Mayorkas Called 'An Immediate, Imminent Threat To the United States' By GOP Lawmaker

 

[Elmer B Fuddled]

Biden's illegals come here and expect us to roll out the red carpet, pay for their housing, children if they have any, medical care, food, and other expenses. This is what they were told they would receive, by the criminals who sent them here, for profit.

New York City is going broke because of its extremely stupid Sanctuary City designation, which the Democrats in charge refuse to end. The illegals cannot speak English and have few if any skills, yet expect to thrive in what is probably the most expensive and competitive city in the country.

They can go home or practically anywhere they want, for free, courtesy of the taxpayers. As winter sets in, and there is no room to house more than a very small percentage of them, some are starting to get the message that we cannot afford them, they are not wanted, and they will be kicked out of their free housing after 30 days for singles and 60 days for families.

When temperatures drop very low and/or it snows heavily in Chicago, NYC, etc., we'll find out how people who likely have never seen it before, react to living outside or in building lobbies when it's ten degrees outside, with several or more feet of snow.

They should do what Malta has done on immigration, you have 90 days to find work or out you go back where you came from. It works.

 

[Luman]

They should do what Malta has done on immigration, you have 90 days to find work or out you go back where you came from. It works.

That would be a major improvement, over what we have, but since they are illegal, work permits take time. The only ones who are legally permitted to work, right away, are Venezuelans because they fled for fear of their lives.

The legal immigration system in the United States is not perfect, but adequate except for border security. Biden made the latter far worse, in an attempt to gain supporters. He does not care about the repercussions that his policies cause to the communities that are affected. The only way to stop this is to vote him out of office.

 

[Daniel Lion]

Hi politicos, how are you keeping?

I am feeling much better and just wanted to drop by and say hi.

I have one pressing question. Where the hell is @Juan and my inflation update?

Take care my friends and wishing you the best!

Go Team Tinnitus,
DL

 

[just1morething]

Speaker Mike Johnson is so damn sensible and articulate representing what Americans want to do with the taxpayers money. He listens to what the vast majority of people across this country want done in regard to the southern border and Ukraine.

The Democrats want to listen to bozos with big brass nameplates and asses the same shape as the seat of their chairs (Chuck Schumer). Why are the Democrats as stubborn as a mule regarding policy changes at our southern border to stop the record number of illegal aliens crossing the border and the havoc they create? They should listen to their constituents in which they were elected to serve and not the George Soros agenda.

 

[Elmer B Fuddled]

Speaker Mike Johnson is so damn sensible and articulate representing what Americans want to do with the taxpayers money. He listens to what the vast majority of people across this country want done in regard to the southern border and Ukraine.

The Democrats want to listen to bozos with big brass nameplates and asses the same shape as the seat of their chairs (Chuck Schumer). Why are the Democrats as stubborn as a mule regarding policy changes at our southern border to stop the record number of illegal aliens crossing the border and the havoc they create? They should listen to their constituents in which they were elected to serve and not the George Soros agenda.

It's called money.

 

[just1morething]

I am feeling much better and just wanted to drop by and say hi

I'm glad you are feeling much better buddy. Health is everything. I can't say my health is too good lately. Being I know you are watching this thread, I try to stay neutral and not side with either Democrats or Republicans. You know I wouldn't lie to you buddy.

 

[Daniel Lion]

I'm glad you are feeling much better buddy. Health is everything. I can't say my health is too good lately. Being I know you are watching this thread, I try to stay neutral and not side with either Democrats or Republicans. You know I wouldn't lie to you buddy.

Hi friend,

I want the best for all of us. As this is a US thread, I want what is best for the US and hope to see peace, balance and unity in our collective project as a nation. I understand the right and the left and find myself in the middle.

I hope your health issues get better and that you do your best to stay healthy.

Iook forward to seeing more photos of your critters that visit your house.

Take care my dear friend.

 

[Jammer]

Donald Trump is disqualified from appearing on presidential primary ballot by state Supreme Court because he engaged in an insurrection on Jan. 6, 2021, at the U.S. Capitol. This is the first application of the 14th amendment to the constitution ever.

Three questions: How long before this gets to the Supreme Court? Will they take up the case? How will other states decide?

 

[ZFire]

questions: How long before this gets to the Supreme Court?

Not long. I think they have until Jan. 4th to decide an immediate stay for review. SCOTUS is going to hate it because it'll likely pull them back into work over the holidays.

Will they take up the case?

Most certainly, especially if more states start to follow soon too. I think the SCOTUS has a vested interest in this ruling, because if the plain text of the Constitution isn't powerful enough to keep Trump from doing whatever he wants, there's a risk of him assuming dictatorial powers. SCOTUS might be signing its death warrant as an institution if they reject the argument.

Honestly though, I'm expecting the ruling will be overturned. Until Trump is actually found guilty of insurrection in a court of law, you can't really say "he's not allowed to run because he committed insurrection" even if we all know he did. It would be really dangerous for a court to start setting precedent that someone can be punished for a crime they haven't been convicted of yet.

How will other states decide?

I think some will wait for federal review before they decide. More importantly, a state like Colorado (or other blue states) won't hurt his nomination chances. But if he was barred from appearing on a ballot in a swing state like Georgia however, that would surely jeopardize his chances.

 

[just1morething]

It's comical when they call Trump a dictator on CNN, MSNBC, and other left wing media. He can only serve 1 term if he is elected. Trump laughed as he said he would be a dictator for 1 day to close the border and pump more oil if he was elected. I assume he meant executive orders. I'm sure SCOTUS will overrule any State rulings of Trump being off the ballots.

Trump or any of the other Republican candidates would close the border because of the chaos the illegal immigrants have caused. The Biden administration has caused enough damage by letting an estimated 8 million people into the U.S. illegally. The illegal aliens are being treated better than our veterans which is a travesty. Who knows how many billions the taxpayers are on the hook for already because of Biden's dumb border policies. Terrorists caught on the border are 4-5 times higher or more than during the Trump era, creating a very dangerous situation, all because of policy change.

 

[ZFire]

I think the absolute best outcome to hope for with this conservative Supreme Court is that they say criminal conviction in a federal trial of insurrection would suffice in disqualification. That seems like a fair benchmark, to be honest.

This is the first application of the 14th amendment to the constitution ever.

The Supreme Court is probably going to be forced to create a legal precedent for how insurrection is defined in relation to the 14th amendment.

 

[Luman]

I think that this latest stunt, in Colorado, to deny Trump his right to run in the 2024 presidential election, is only going to make him more popular.

The Democrats are scared because he is doing better than Biden. The wars must go on, the American citizens must be fleeced and oppressed, so Biden must be reelected. Perhaps if he's elected, he'll cause World War Three during his next term - that seems to be his goal.

 

[just1morething]

I think the absolute best outcome to hope for with this conservative Supreme Court is that they say criminal conviction in a federal trial of insurrection would suffice in disqualification. That seems like a fair benchmark, to be honest.

The Supreme Court is probably going to be forced to create a legal precedent for how insurrection is defined in relation to the 14th amendment.

I listened to Trump on January 6th. He said "Peacefully and Patriotically make your voices heard". How come the Democrats always omit that phrase? How come Ray Epps wasn't sent to prison for saying "We got to go into the Capitol" which was caught on camera? The Democrats are as "crooked as a dog's hind legs" and the majority of Americans see them in that way.

 

[Luman]

If Democrats succeed in keeping Trump off the ballots in Colorado, and perhaps other blue states, Republicans can do the same to Biden, in red states. Biden has allowed eight million undocumented aliens, many of whom are criminals, terrorists, insane, etc. to illegally enter our country. He should not be permitted to run for president, ever again.

 

[Jammer]

I think the absolute best outcome to hope for with this conservative Supreme Court is that they say criminal conviction in a federal trial of insurrection would suffice in disqualification. That seems like a fair benchmark, to be honest.

The Supreme Court is probably going to be forced to create a legal precedent for how insurrection is defined in relation to the 14th amendment.

Some key things that are missing from a lot of conversations. First, the Colorado's Supreme Court isn't banning Trump from the ballot, the Constitution is banning him from being on the ballot.

After more readig, the 14th amendment has been used multiple times after the civil war and at no point did it require a legal conviction. As the Colorado's ruling pointed out, there are three instances where a person is banned from running from President. Age, not being a citizen, and being involved in an insurrection. They are self enforcing at the state level. If the Supreme Court chooses to invalidate Colorado's method of enforcing the 14th amendment then states would no longer have any means to invalidate the other two banned classes. A 4 year old child from Iran could then run for US president.

For those who say it is un-democratic, there is a remedy already built in to the constitution where Congress can restore the person's ability to hold office. You don't see the GOP running to do that, do you?

 

[Luman]

Everybody who expected Trump to be in prison by the end of 2023, is silent. Now they think that Colorado will stop him. It's like a continuous joke, lol. The more they try, the better things turn out for him. It's as if the Democrats are trying to get him elected.

 

[Joey72]

Some key things that are missing from a lot of conversations. First, the Colorado's Supreme Court isn't banning Trump from the ballot, the Constitution is banning him from being on the ballot.

After more readig, the 14th amendment has been used multiple times after the civil war and at no point did it require a legal conviction. As the Colorado's ruling pointed out, there are three instances where a person is banned from running from President. Age, not being a citizen, and being involved in an insurrection. They are self enforcing at the state level. If the Supreme Court chooses to invalidate Colorado's method of enforcing the 14th amendment then states would no longer have any means to invalidate the other two banned classes. A 4 year old child from Iran could then run for US president.

For those who say it is un-democratic, there is a remedy already built in to the constitution where Congress can restore the person's ability to hold office. You don't see the GOP running to do that, do you?

I would think you would have to be convicted in a court of law first before getting banned. Seems too Banana Republic to me.

Why didn't the federal prosecutor Jack Smith charge Trump when he had the chance?

 

[Jammer]

If Democrats succeed in keeping Trump off the ballots in Colorado, and perhaps other blue states, Republicans can do the same to Biden, in red states. Biden has allowed eight million undocumented aliens, many of whom are criminals, terrorists, insane, etc. to illegally enter our country. He should not be permitted to run for president, ever again.

We had a candidate for governor in Louisiana named David Duke back in the 90s. He also ran for President at one point. People would tell you all day long about how his supporters weren't racist, or how he had some good ideas.

Let me tell you, though. As he is a former Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan, if you supported David Duke, you were literally supporting white supremacy and white supremacists. To a one, the folks I talked to would say "Oh I'm not racist" but then the views he espoused? The 'great replacement theory' for instance, or that AA-style minority assistance programs should be cut? "Oh yeah I can't let our culture be eroded, that's a great thing to fight against." "Freeloaders should be forced to work! Get them off their lazy butts and out into the workforce!"

To a one, those folks would repeat perspectives of Duke's which were straight out of the fascism and white supremacist playbooks - perspectives you'd expect to hear from hardcore racists, not from middle-ground conservatives. But, because the guy who'd been anointed the Party Candidate said them, they would internalize them, and repeat them, and soon be evangelizing them.

It taught me one thing really well. The vast majority of Republicans will accept the party's nominated candidate without much critical thinking about who that person is, and they will internalize that person's perspective and evangelize it naturally, because that's what they do - they parrot the party line. I watched it happen with Duke, who almost won the Louisiana governorship despite literally having called for the lynchings of black folks in his youth; I watched the national party support Duke when he ran for the Presidency.

In the late 90s Duke abandoned all pretense and resumed espousing white supremacy and anti-semitism, proving that he'd never actually abandoned those perspectives.

I've since watched Donald Trump run on a platform that espouses unfettered greed, contempt for the law, treats compassion and empathy as weaknesses, and which isolates and alienates minority groups by design. I've watched his supporters internalize, accept, and evangelize those perspectives. I've watched Trump say things like immigrants are "poisoning the blood of our country" and I've watched folks celebrate those words as if they are something positive to hear.

You want to say "but what about those people who are silent and disagree and yet still support Trump?" After 1/6? I'd suggest they're the same as those who'd vote for a former Grand Wizard of the KKK - complicit by their own choices, and clearly, failing to denounce ideas and people whose perspectives ostensibly conflict with their own for the personal gain of their party winning.

Which makes them no different from the guy pulling the lever because he wants Trump to deport every immigrant, legal or not, since 1950. They've chosen the company they keep, and it reflects on their character directly.

I would think you would have to be convicted in a court of law first before getting banned. Seems too Banana Republic to me.

Why didn't the federal prosecutor Jack Smith charge Trump when he had the chance?

As I said in my post, the 14th amendment has been used multiple times after the civil war and at no point did it require a legal conviction.

 

[Luman]

We had a candidate for governor in Louisiana named David Duke back in the 90s. He also ran for President at one point. People would tell you all day long about how his supporters weren't racist, or how he had some good ideas.

Let me tell you, though. As he is a former Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan, if you supported David Duke, you were literally supporting white supremacy and white supremacists. To a one, the folks I talked to would say "Oh I'm not racist" but then the views he espoused? The 'great replacement theory' for instance, or that AA-style minority assistance programs should be cut? "Oh yeah I can't let our culture be eroded, that's a great thing to fight against." "Freeloaders should be forced to work! Get them off their lazy butts and out into the workforce!"

To a one, those folks would repeat perspectives of Duke's which were straight out of the fascism and white supremacist playbooks - perspectives you'd expect to hear from hardcore racists, not from middle-ground conservatives. But, because the guy who'd been anointed the Party Candidate said them, they would internalize them, and repeat them, and soon be evangelizing them.

It taught me one thing really well. The vast majority of Republicans will accept the party's nominated candidate without much critical thinking about who that person is, and they will internalize that person's perspective and evangelize it naturally, because that's what they do - they parrot the party line. I watched it happen with Duke, who almost won the Louisiana governorship despite literally having called for the lynchings of black folks in his youth; I watched the national party support Duke when he ran for the Presidency.

In the late 90s Duke abandoned all pretense and resumed espousing white supremacy and anti-semitism, proving that he'd never actually abandoned those perspectives.

I've since watched Donald Trump run on a platform that espouses unfettered greed, contempt for the law, treats compassion and empathy as weaknesses, and which isolates and alienates minority groups by design. I've watched his supporters internalize, accept, and evangelize those perspectives. I've watched Trump say things like immigrants are "poisoning the blood of our country" and I've watched folks celebrate those words as if they are something positive to hear.

You want to say "but what about those people who are silent and disagree and yet still support Trump?" After 1/6? I'd suggest they're the same as those who'd vote for a former Grand Wizard of the KKK - complicit by their own choices, and clearly, failing to denounce ideas and people whose perspectives ostensibly conflict with their own for the personal gain of their party winning.

Which makes them no different from the guy pulling the lever because he wants Trump to deport every immigrant, legal or not, since 1950. They've chosen the company they keep, and it reflects on their character directly.

As I said in my post, the 14th amendment has been used multiple times after the civil war and at no point did it require a legal conviction.

Do you want psychopathic, criminal, begging, low-class, and insane immigrants? Call up Mayor Eric Adams and tell him to send them to your community, where they will steal packages from your porches, beg for money where you shop, ring doorbells, and ride motorized E-Bikes on the sidewalk while hitting and robbing people. Even the ones who are "not that bad" think they have it all coming to them, at the taxpayer's expense, thanks to Biden and the rest of the "Party of Slavery" Democrats. NYC no longer guarantees a bed to asylum seekers and others who are not citizens.

Trump said that he would focus on border security, to stop more from entering, and enact the largest deportation in our history. This would be the best solution, and the illegal migrants will be better off, as well.

 

[just1morething]

Sen. JD Vance, a Republican from Ohio, lashed out at a reporter asking about Trump's "poisoning the blood" comments, defending them as a reference to overdoses from fentanyl smuggled over the border.

"You just framed your question implicitly assuming that Donald Trump is talking about Adolf Hitler. It's absurd," Vance said. "It is obvious that he was talking about the very clear fact that the blood of Americans is being poisoned by a drug epidemic."

 

[ZFire]

Some key things that are missing from a lot of conversations. First, the Colorado's Supreme Court isn't banning Trump from the ballot, the Constitution is banning him from being on the ballot.

After more readig, the 14th amendment has been used multiple times after the civil war and at no point did it require a legal conviction. As the Colorado's ruling pointed out, there are three instances where a person is banned from running from President. Age, not being a citizen, and being involved in an insurrection. They are self enforcing at the state level. If the Supreme Court chooses to invalidate Colorado's method of enforcing the 14th amendment then states would no longer have any means to invalidate the other two banned classes. A 4 year old child from Iran could then run for US president.

For those who say it is un-democratic, there is a remedy already built in to the constitution where Congress can restore the person's ability to hold office. You don't see the GOP running to do that, do you?

Wow, had no idea the disqualification clause in the 14th Amendment was used after civil war to bar certain former Confederates from holding public office (unless pardoned by Congress). Very interesting indeed. Guess you learn something new everyday. Thanks for sharing this bit of knowledge.

Been rereading the 14th Amendment over and over again. Section 3 (Disqualification from Holding Office) of the 14th Amendment states "No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability".

It's going to be interesting to see how the conservative Supreme Court will interpret this bit of text in relation to Trump and January 6. I know most of Justices follow the doctrine of textualism — interpreting the constitution by focusing strictly on the literal meaning of the words used in the text. Apart from 'officer of the United States,' there's no direct mention of the President or Commander in Chief in the text. I'm curious if the Justices will view the term 'officer' as the President. It sure sounds like it to me. We'll see what happens.

Man, Trump's legal fees must be through the roof at this point...

 

[Luman]

Man, Trump's legal fees must be through the roof at this point...

They may be, but he can afford it because he is very rich, and many of his supporters donate to his legal fund, as well.

Trying to bring down a candidate through a witch hunt like this is turning out to be a lot harder for the Democrats, than if they simply had a qualified, honest candidate that the majority of voters trusted and believed in - somebody that is the exact opposite of Biden.

 

[Joeseph Stope]

Sen. JD Vance, a Republican from Ohio, lashed out at a reporter asking about Trump's "poisoning the blood" comments, defending them as a reference to overdoses from fentanyl smuggled over the border.

"You just framed your question implicitly assuming that Donald Trump is talking about Adolf Hitler. It's absurd," Vance said. "It is obvious that he was talking about the very clear fact that the blood of Americans is being poisoned by a drug epidemic."

The interpretation on this side of the Atlantic is that Donald has gone full Aryan. Talking about the drug problem, eh? It's a weird choice of words for a politician. They usually are expert wordsmiths.

I think Vance is being mighty protective, stretching the material to cover Trump's ass, so to speak. But believe whatever you want to believe. So yeah! The migrant caravan and the drug problem.

 

[just1morething]