Election 2024: beware of emotions

Post Reply New Topic

I don't believe 99% of what I see in the media. Mostly it is words taken out of context, parsed this way and that, distortions and exaggerations in order to portray a caricature of the other side. I don't think it is possible to know what is going on in the world by reading the media. It is only possible to form a very rough hypothesis, a sketch. Every media source has an agenda, none are objective, all want to control what people think and shape public opinion.

I think that it is not true that Trump is a fascist. He was President 2016-2020. There were a lot of Democrats he could have had prosecuted for one thing or another, he did not. He tweeted mean things, much like other men his age that sit up late at night writing on social media. The Jan. 6 stuff was amateur hour. It was not orchestrated, he just played along up to a certain point. Those clowns could not have taken over a dog pound, even if the dogs helped them. So, calm down. Trump wants to be popular, and wants to feel important and approved of by his supporters. He does what he thinks they want him to do. He cannot win this election, anyway. I voted for Trump and believe that he proposed some good ideas and made valid criticisms of the current Administration, which have been in part acknowledged and co-opted by the Democrats.

I think that Kamala is going to surprise us when she wins the election. She is going to steer away from the left, towards the middle. Already she is making comments in that direction. She played to San Francisco when she was there, now she is going to play to the U.S. She wants to be powerful, influential, and she has her own agenda, too, just a list of things she wants. She will make concessions on some things to appear more moderate. She is good at smiling for the cameras and projecting a positive and confident image, and that makes a big difference. Trump is always pictured frowning or scowling. The media absolutely loves her, and hates Trump. That is why she is going to win. She has the media, the social media, and the search engines. There is just no way that she does not win. She is also promising a lot of things that will help people that are struggling financially. People do not care about the national debt, they need help in the pocketbook, right now, today, but next year is OK too. It is understandable, when you are poor, you think about your bills a lot.

When I voted early, there was a crowd. Very heavy turnout. That typically favors Democrats. Based on that, and based on what I see in the media, I think that the Democrats will win by a landslide. The Democrats are very outraged by Trump, even though they are not especially enthusiastic about their own candidates. Most of them were even willing to vote for Biden, but Kamala seems much more plausible.

I think that the election results will be very clear very early, and the election will be called by midnight. This will not be a nail-biter election like previous ones.

There are some news services, such as Ground News, that specialize in showing news stories from across the political spectrum, to give a more balanced view. I'm not yet a subscriber to Ground News, but I'm considering it.


January 6 was amateur hour, but the next time around might not be. Trump is now surrounding himself with a lot more authoritarians than he did the first time around. See the separate thread J.D. Vance really wants a dictatorship.


I already perceive her as a moderate, not that much of a leftist.


Depends what you mean by "the media." There are plenty of right wing media that love Trump and dislike Harris.


I hope you're right about this, but I doubt it. I expect another nail-biter.

I think a second Trump administration will be more authoritarian than the first because he will have more loyalty from more competent people. His first administration had many traditional conservatives that moderated his populist agenda especially early on in the first administration. The traditional conservatives have been completely purged from the Republican Party and people who want an authoritarian agenda have learned lessons from mistakes made during the first go-round. I think any insurrection may very well be more successful due to the reasons stated above.

I also think the same applies to the left wing insurrection I expect if Trump wins.

Also, I expect many legal challenges to results and wonder if they can be wrapped up by the January 6th deadline for certification and January 20th inauguration day.

If anybody knows what Harris really thinks please tell me. Often candidates move to the center before an election and once they win govern more ideologically thinking they have a mandate.

Maybe Kamala will win handily but nine years of wrong predictions that this or that scandal will doom Trump, that this time he really has gone too far has made me very cynical about these predictions.

No, it wouldn't apply to any left wing attempt at an insurrection. A successful insurrection requires the support of the police and military, both of which lean right. Also, most gun owners lean right. There is simply no way that left wingers could pull off a successful insurrection at the present time.

The next right wing insurrection attempt might conceivably be successful or turn into a civil war. Any left wing insurrection attempt would be crushed before it got anywhere near that far.

Some on the left did attempt insurrections in 2020 but they were not called that then. They wrestled control from local governments setting up autonomous zones in Seattle and Portland. Antifa set fire to an ICE building in Portland, and George Floyd protesters burned down a police station in Minneapolis and attempted to storm police stations elsewhere. These are government buildings. Will they be successful who knows but I do expect them to escalate if Trump is reelected.

To Gentleman Argentum:

What do you make of the following remarks by Trump, at an event organized by the conservative group Turning Point Action in West Palm Beach, Florida: "in four years, you don't have to vote again. We'll have it fixed so good, you're not gonna have to vote." (Source: Reuters. On video: KSDK News.)

Seattle and Portland. NOT the U.S. Capitol.

Seattle and Portland are very unusual places. If anyone had tried to set up these so-called "autonomous zones" almost anywhere else, it would likely have been bloody.


But NOT attempts to take over entire governments, even at the city, county, or state level, much less the federal level.


Yes there will likely be some political violence, but it is very unlikely to accomplish anything.

Once again: I have no right to tell Americans to vote.

All I ask is: please be careful where you get your news. By all means watch a conservative-leaning channel, but balance it with the liberal-leaning view as well. (In Britain that would be Sky v. BBC.) Never watch a news channel specifically set up to push a far-right agenda (e.g. GBNews) - nor a far-left agenda, if of course you can find such a channel.

Never get your news from social media in any circumstances. By 'social media' I mean any channel where extremist voices have the same amplification as mainstream ones, i.e. the definition includes YouTube.

Thank you for looking after the world. We're all watching, and we're all powerless over what you choose to do.

- There's no such thing as an 'antifa' organization;
- The original anti-fascists were people like my father: WWII veterans;
- After 8 years of learning how Trump functions (if that word can even be used), Christian Nationalists have been putting everything in place to effectively take over immediately if Trump is re-elected (Project 2025, etc.);
- Deleting people from the voters' rolls, already claiming that the tabulation of the votes will be hacked, and openly creating a false group of electors in advance of the actual election are some of the techniques being used to force the result they want;
- Adding the youngest-ever VP candidate on the ticket with the oldest ever Presidential candidate (with serious medical issues) means the Christian Nationalists will have someone a lot smarter and more dedicated to fulfill their vision who will work with them without needing to be 'handled' the way Trump has been;
- The Democratic party now is further to the right than the Republican party was in 1980;
- Our economy is currently the envy of the world, for those who are not irrational about wanting to believe the opposite;
- The Republican party and its supporters have been driven almost entirely by emotion up to now, but the Christian Nationalists actively working to dismantle our entire system of law & order have added a cold, inhuman precision to the mix, which will be much more effective in eviscerating the country.

The latest stunt, of pretending to work at a McDonald's for 15 minutes (it was closed for business for the entire day to set up and shoot the photo op; only Trump supporters allowed on set), would actually have been illegal if it had been real: McD's doesn't hire convicted felons.

And yet somehow we're still pretending that it's an equal choice to be made between an unrepentant felon and someone who has given their entire career to public service. Forget political party affiliation: that alone should determine the vote.

Former Trump Whitehouse officials testify that Trump DID try to get every critic and rival in the nation arrested during that first term, Biden, Pelosi, media outlets shut down, etc. What stopped him was the checks and balances in the Constitution. Checks and balances that he has since cleverly undermined by stacking the SCOTUS and by appointing associates who are more loyal to him than to the Constitution. Trump has even promised to "suspend"the US Constitution. He obviously seeks to be El Presidente for life. Stating "Trump wants to be a dictator" is just a statement of fact (like the earth is round). Nothing "emotional" about it.

Harris may have the edge in the popular vote, but could still loose the electorial vote.

I like what I see of that, thank you for suggesting it. I believe I will subscribe... I certainly can afford $9.99/yr: https://ground.news/subscribe

I have been subscribed to the Wall Street Journal, but their introductory price of $6/mo. ends on Nov. 4th, at which point they demand $50/mo. As you might expect, I cancelled.



Each side says that about the other, it has become par for the course. The country as we know it will end, forever, because so-and-so becomes President. I think that is rather outlandish. However, I have heard it in multiple elections, including the ones for Bush. I voted against Bush, twice. I think he was the worst President we had in recent times. It was not what he said, but what he did, the wars. Too expensive in every way, and none of our business.



I surveyed the right wing media and left wing media, and found that the left wing media is a lot easier to find on computers, laptops, tablets, and phones. To find the right wing media, you have to search for it. I compiled a list of about twenty sites and put them into an html dropdown on a web page. They are little right wing sites that most people have never heard of.

My favorite site was for the National Review, and I subscribed to the print version for a while. I liked it, but found that I did not like reading about politics as much as I thought I did, and cancelled.

The only active subscription I intend to keep is to Consumer Reports and AARP. They have news I can use. If the Wall Street Journal ever offers me the bargain rate again, I will bite.



Part of that narrative is intended to encourage turnout. No one wants to portray the election as a shoe-in for one side or the other, because then people may not bother voting. The panic button has to be pressed. It gets pressed a lot in the media, I find.

I am not always right about my predictions of elections. I did not think that Trump would win in 2016. I voted for Hilary. However, he did win.

Still, I believe Kamala will win this time. I think that things are different now. One problem for Trump is that he is very old now.

Trump has a lot of scandals, reminiscent of Bill Clinton most of all, who paved the way for Trump. I voted for DeSantis in the Republican primaries, but Trump carried the day, and he did not even bother debating the other Republicans, his support was that strong.

Merriam-Webster

I see nothing in that definition that mandates the acts of revolting be against only the federal government, be successful or competent. If the police and ICE are not civil authorities I do not know what is. If taking over a bunch of streets by force and declaring them autonomous zones is not revolting against the local government I don’t know what is.

Jan 6th was worse and right wing terrorism worse so far, no arguments from me. That should not minimize what happened in this country in 2020. People want to try and minimize what happened by saying they were riots not insurrections, those people are trying the same deflection as all the MAGA excusers for 1/6. Both can be true. By the way Jan 6th was arguably a mostly peaceful protest. The videos show more people milling about outside waving their Trump flags then violently attacking the Capital. While saying 1/6 was a mostly peaceful protest might be literally true it is ludicrously misleading. IMHO so is calling what happened during the summer of 2020 mostly peaceful protests.

Many January 6th insurrectionists have paid a heavy legal price. I am hoping that acts as a deterrent. The summer of 2020 ones not really.

I find comparing the loosely organized group of street thugs that went under the name Antifa to World War Two veterans deeply offensive.

Both were fighting Fascism. Soldiers in WWII were doing it with military violence and Antifa only with property destruction and provocation. Both were doing the right thing.

You are really comparing Antifa who lit fires, disturbed some diners, and did their West Side Story imitation with fellow weekend warriors The Proud Boys with people who put their lives on hold for years and faced bullets and bombs?