Who do you think is going to win and why?

[Anonymous]

It's Bezos who owns Post and has said he did not want to endorse anyone - similar to the LA paper not endorsing because of owner prohibiting any endorsement.

In Bezos' case, it's business not politics that drives his actions so I get it.

I am not voting for either candidate but I did say early on that LA Times not endorsing Harris is H U G E !!!!! And I think we're seeing a lot of pushback to that stance. LA not endorsing Kamala is really huge news as she should be the darling of CA. Fact that she can't have that public image of support is pretty big disadvantage from a mainstream perspective.

The Post not supporting her is big in that DC is the political capital but she has the bad luck of a businessman owning that paper. No way Bezos hedges his bet against either and loses when one of them ascends to the throne of power.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First, the LA times, now this. I think it’s safe to say people have no faith in Harris.

No they don’t want to be murdered by Trump and his generals!

Yeah, your side is the side that is shooting people. Keep up the rhetoric and you might just get your wish.

Please, I’m just quoting Trump himself.

[Anonymous]

Neither newspaper wants to support a loser.

The writing is on the wall.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harris for a few reasons.

1) She is significantly younger vs Trump. Trumps age is a problem.

2) Harris has a highly developed and well funded ground game in all the swing state. Ground game wins elections. It is worth 2-3% and Trump has no ground game. This means if it is even in the polls(which it is not) the better ground will win. Trump has no ground game none.

3) Trump is extremely negative, talks negatively about the US and everyone living in it. The majority of Americans are not dark, mean and hate filled.

4) Trump rambling speeches spend too much time on his opponents vs actually selling himself. You only have a limited time in front of voters. Talking about how bad your competition is never works in sales. Also his attacks on Harris really have not landed any hits(remember Little Marco, etc).

5) Trump has a huge unfavorable rating(just like Hillary did).

6) People tired of Trump.

7) Running a campaign on fear and anger is hard. You have to keep the level of fear and anger high. After 8-9 years of this the Trump people are not able to maintain the high level of hate and anger.

8) She destroyed him in the debate.

9) Trump lies.

You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time.”

― Abraham Lincoln

10) Harris is running even or up by huge margin on the issues. Add in Jan 6, Trump hate of the military, most of Trump’s staff have denounced him, abortion, etc.

11) Listen to Trump speak. Every time he does he loses votes.

You could shorten this post down to Trump had the job previously and while on the job went AWOL for three hours while a mob of hundreds roamed our Capitol Building halls looking for prominent leaders to "hang" and it would be just as effective. This is the most significant reason he shouldn't be POTUS and it's also something that was proven without a shadow of doubt so nothing much else needs to be said.

I get Dems pushing the 1/6 event as it's probably the ONLY fearful thing that's applicable to voters deciding v Trump. Every other thing is subjective - you can say he has ill manners, talks trash and has no class and acts like a child but it is neither here nor there as long as you're sticking with black/white policy/facts. BUT for the 1/6 event - he definitely exhibited behavior not consistent with leadership. I can't make up my mind if sticking to that story and rallying people v him is more effective for Kamala than touting her own abilities/talents/potential for a voter. For me personally, the fact she doesn't choose the latter is meaningful - I would prefer someone confident enough and brave enough to take the attention to persuade me to give her support rather than be fearful enough of someone else so as to give her a shot. It's a sign of weakness for me but I don't blame her for employing this tactic to focus on. I don't like either of them but it's interesting to see how she goes about campaigning.

I am convinced that the sprint of the next 2 weeks will decide the election. There's really still a lot of time left and whomever in the lead today may not win. It's really impossible to say who wins until we get through this race. On one hand I don't think it's really that close but in the swing states it may be.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Neither newspaper wants to support a loser.

The writing is on the wall.

They didn’t back Trump either.

[Anonymous]

Let's do a simple comparison.

It's reasonable to say 2020 Biden is stronger than 2016 Hilary and 2016 Hilary is stronger than 2024 Kamala.

Trump is Trump.

Then we get:

2020 Biden > Trump > 2016 Hilary > 2024 Kamala

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And ordered to believe those truths at the expense of their livelihoods. At my job we were encouraged to write DEI statements and add pronouns. My boss said it wasn't required but "would be considered in all advancement path decisions."
Every doctor at my hospital was required to take the knee for a stupid photo op in summer 2020.

I have a very hard time believing this. I have been in federal service for 15 years (today is my compressed day off) and this is not a thing in my agency nor is it with any of my colleagues. In my org (this is under the Biden administration, mind you) there is virtually no mention of DEI and we are not being asked to write "DEI statements" and it is absolutely not a "consideration in advancement path" and in fact any manager who did do this, or absolutely "required" someone to "take a knee" would face scrutiny and calls for their firing.

I think some of the MAGA posters here have greatly distorted ideas about what they think is happening out in the world, and attempt to give fake anecdotes to try and project it.

OK? Where did I say I was in federal service. I said I work at a hospital. They handed out T shirts with our hospital's name on the back and Black Lives Matter on the front. They posted photos of every department kneeling. They posted all the docs in front of the hospital kneeling. No one could say "This is ridiculous and I'm not doing it."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harris for a few reasons.

1) She is significantly younger vs Trump. Trumps age is a problem.

2) Harris has a highly developed and well funded ground game in all the swing state. Ground game wins elections. It is worth 2-3% and Trump has no ground game. This means if it is even in the polls(which it is not) the better ground will win. Trump has no ground game none.

3) Trump is extremely negative, talks negatively about the US and everyone living in it. The majority of Americans are not dark, mean and hate filled.

4) Trump rambling speeches spend too much time on his opponents vs actually selling himself. You only have a limited time in front of voters. Talking about how bad your competition is never works in sales. Also his attacks on Harris really have not landed any hits(remember Little Marco, etc).

5) Trump has a huge unfavorable rating(just like Hillary did).

6) People tired of Trump.

7) Running a campaign on fear and anger is hard. You have to keep the level of fear and anger high. After 8-9 years of this the Trump people are not able to maintain the high level of hate and anger.

8) She destroyed him in the debate.

9) Trump lies.

You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time.”

― Abraham Lincoln

10) Harris is running even or up by huge margin on the issues. Add in Jan 6, Trump hate of the military, most of Trump’s staff have denounced him, abortion, etc.

11) Listen to Trump speak. Every time he does he loses votes.

You could shorten this post down to Trump had the job previously and while on the job went AWOL for three hours while a mob of hundreds roamed our Capitol Building halls looking for prominent leaders to "hang" and it would be just as effective. This is the most significant reason he shouldn't be POTUS and it's also something that was proven without a shadow of doubt so nothing much else needs to be said.

I get Dems pushing the 1/6 event as it's probably the ONLY fearful thing that's applicable to voters deciding v Trump. Every other thing is subjective - you can say he has ill manners, talks trash and has no class and acts like a child but it is neither here nor there as long as you're sticking with black/white policy/facts. BUT for the 1/6 event - he definitely exhibited behavior not consistent with leadership. I can't make up my mind if sticking to that story and rallying people v him is more effective for Kamala than touting her own abilities/talents/potential for a voter. For me personally, the fact she doesn't choose the latter is meaningful - I would prefer someone confident enough and brave enough to take the attention to persuade me to give her support rather than be fearful enough of someone else so as to give her a shot. It's a sign of weakness for me but I don't blame her for employing this tactic to focus on. I don't like either of them but it's interesting to see how she goes about campaigning.

I am convinced that the sprint of the next 2 weeks will decide the election. There's really still a lot of time left and whomever in the lead today may not win. It's really impossible to say who wins until we get through this race. On one hand I don't think it's really that close but in the swing states it may be.

I'm not a Democrat and I'm not pushing a narrative about Trump's poor "behavior" on any certain date. I'm an American that pays attention to facts. There is a big difference between poor behavior and dereliction of duty by a Commander-in-Chief of the United States. What Trump did in that moment was dereliction of duty. Even if it were just 5 people that ran past the security checkpoint that day and they never made it to the House Chamber, it would still be the Commander-in-Chief's job to take phone calls, make phone calls, or run down their and kick their ass like GW or Andrew Jackson would have... whatever it takes to assist in re-securing that building from the moment the POTUS is notified to the moment at which authorities confirm the situation is under control is what the Commander-in-Chief has to do or else it's dereliction of duty which is a very significant thing when the POTUS is the culprit. No other POTUS in our history has failed to act in a moment like that. Not even close.

If we ignore dereliction of duty by a Commander-in-Chief of the US Armed Forces, we have just set ourselves up to tumble down a very slippery slope. I'm not ignoring it.

[Anonymous]

DJT stock up 11% today. Probably on early vote blowouts happening in all swing states.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let's do a simple comparison.

It's reasonable to say 2020 Biden is stronger than 2016 Hilary and 2016 Hilary is stronger than 2024 Kamala.

Trump is Trump.

Then we get:

2020 Biden > Trump > 2016 Hilary > 2024 Kamala

Biden 2020 stringer than Hillary 2016? You are not thinking clearly. Hillary, even at 69 years old was still an elite politician relative to Biden at 77 years old. She was never a great "candidate" because she her brilliant brain focused on thorough policy and proper leadership as opposed to vote buying and telling the simpletons what they want to hear. Biden won because Trump was a much weaker candidate in 2020 than he was in 2016. A lamp post could have beaten Trump in 2020. Trump beat Hillary because he was willing to tell people in the rust belt whatever they wanted to hear in order to earn their vote and he campaigned his butt off with that message. After 8 years of a Dem being in the The White House it was easy for Trump to effectively use that message to garner votes in those swing states.

If you need further proof of how Biden couldn't carry HRC's lunch as an elite politician, look at the 2008 POTUS race. If Biden ever had a political prime, it was around that time frame. What happened when a much more mentally and physically fit Biden ran against two elite politicians that were actually of presidential caliber in HRC and Obama in the Dem primary? His campaign fizzled and closed shop after he received less than 1% of the vote in the Iowa Caucus. He was out of his league by far. Biden was a better option than Trump in 2020; otherwise, he probably reached the max of his potential as Senator.

[Anonymous]

I have thought Harris will get the popular vote and Trump will win the electoral college.

But I think Trump is going to win both.

And I'm a Kamala fan....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think Trump, and I think because voters have a sense of being gaslit by Democrats:

Crime is not down, as anyone who has been robbed in the past four years (after never having been robbed before) and been told that the cops don’t even want to take a report knows. This is also known by all the people who can’t walk into their local drugstore to shop since so many of the goods are under lock and key.

Immigration is not an untrammeled good, as anyone who lives in a mostly lower-income community, especially with kids in public schools, knows.

Inflation is not mostly under control, as anyone who has to watch a grocery budget closely knows.

Boys who want to take the spot of girls and have access to girls’ private and safe spaces are not the victims and are not more important than those girls, as anyone with a minimal amount of common sense and respect for girls knows.

Spreading US military resources out around the world makes the US more vulnerable, not less vulnerable, as anyone who has studied military history knows.

Leaning in hard on identity as being the single most important aspect of a person is just an effective and corporate-backed anti-labor move, as anyone who has noticed that all the corporations with their millions spent on DEI somehow neglect to support the creation of a “Lower Class” internal affinity group.

And so on.

The Republicans lie all the time too, but they don’t make their lies out to be fundamental truths the same way. The Democrats have adopted all these positions with the fervor of evangelicals. It is a demand for belief, not just a policy statement. And people don’t like being ordered to believe truths they feel in their bones aren’t true.

+1 to all of this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harris for a few reasons.

1) She is significantly younger vs Trump. Trumps age is a problem.

2) Harris has a highly developed and well funded ground game in all the swing state. Ground game wins elections. It is worth 2-3% and Trump has no ground game. This means if it is even in the polls(which it is not) the better ground will win. Trump has no ground game none.

3) Trump is extremely negative, talks negatively about the US and everyone living in it. The majority of Americans are not dark, mean and hate filled.

4) Trump rambling speeches spend too much time on his opponents vs actually selling himself. You only have a limited time in front of voters. Talking about how bad your competition is never works in sales. Also his attacks on Harris really have not landed any hits(remember Little Marco, etc).

5) Trump has a huge unfavorable rating(just like Hillary did).

6) People tired of Trump.

7) Running a campaign on fear and anger is hard. You have to keep the level of fear and anger high. After 8-9 years of this the Trump people are not able to maintain the high level of hate and anger.

8) She destroyed him in the debate.

9) Trump lies.

You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time.”

― Abraham Lincoln

10) Harris is running even or up by huge margin on the issues. Add in Jan 6, Trump hate of the military, most of Trump’s staff have denounced him, abortion, etc.

11) Listen to Trump speak. Every time he does he loses votes.

You could shorten this post down to Trump had the job previously and while on the job went AWOL for three hours while a mob of hundreds roamed our Capitol Building halls looking for prominent leaders to "hang" and it would be just as effective. This is the most significant reason he shouldn't be POTUS and it's also something that was proven without a shadow of doubt so nothing much else needs to be said.

I get Dems pushing the 1/6 event as it's probably the ONLY fearful thing that's applicable to voters deciding v Trump. Every other thing is subjective - you can say he has ill manners, talks trash and has no class and acts like a child but it is neither here nor there as long as you're sticking with black/white policy/facts. BUT for the 1/6 event - he definitely exhibited behavior not consistent with leadership. I can't make up my mind if sticking to that story and rallying people v him is more effective for Kamala than touting her own abilities/talents/potential for a voter. For me personally, the fact she doesn't choose the latter is meaningful - I would prefer someone confident enough and brave enough to take the attention to persuade me to give her support rather than be fearful enough of someone else so as to give her a shot. It's a sign of weakness for me but I don't blame her for employing this tactic to focus on. I don't like either of them but it's interesting to see how she goes about campaigning.

I am convinced that the sprint of the next 2 weeks will decide the election. There's really still a lot of time left and whomever in the lead today may not win. It's really impossible to say who wins until we get through this race. On one hand I don't think it's really that close but in the swing states it may be.

I'm not a Democrat and I'm not pushing a narrative about Trump's poor "behavior" on any certain date. I'm an American that pays attention to facts. There is a big difference between poor behavior and dereliction of duty by a Commander-in-Chief of the United States. What Trump did in that moment was dereliction of duty. Even if it were just 5 people that ran past the security checkpoint that day and they never made it to the House Chamber, it would still be the Commander-in-Chief's job to take phone calls, make phone calls, or run down their and kick their ass like GW or Andrew Jackson would have... whatever it takes to assist in re-securing that building from the moment the POTUS is notified to the moment at which authorities confirm the situation is under control is what the Commander-in-Chief has to do or else it's dereliction of duty which is a very significant thing when the POTUS is the culprit. No other POTUS in our history has failed to act in a moment like that. Not even close.

If we ignore dereliction of duty by a Commander-in-Chief of the US Armed Forces, we have just set ourselves up to tumble down a very slippery slope. I'm not ignoring it.

leaving a border open for years is dereliction of duty.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have thought Harris will get the popular vote and Trump will win the electoral college.

But I think Trump is going to win both.

And I'm a Kamala fan....

Trump will win the popular vote by 1.5 or more%.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think Trump, and I think because voters have a sense of being gaslit by Democrats:

Crime is not down, as anyone who has been robbed in the past four years (after never having been robbed before) and been told that the cops don’t even want to take a report knows. This is also known by all the people who can’t walk into their local drugstore to shop since so many of the goods are under lock and key.

Immigration is not an untrammeled good, as anyone who lives in a mostly lower-income community, especially with kids in public schools, knows.

Inflation is not mostly under control, as anyone who has to watch a grocery budget closely knows.

Boys who want to take the spot of girls and have access to girls’ private and safe spaces are not the victims and are not more important than those girls, as anyone with a minimal amount of common sense and respect for girls knows.

Spreading US military resources out around the world makes the US more vulnerable, not less vulnerable, as anyone who has studied military history knows.

Leaning in hard on identity as being the single most important aspect of a person is just an effective and corporate-backed anti-labor move, as anyone who has noticed that all the corporations with their millions spent on DEI somehow neglect to support the creation of a “Lower Class” internal affinity group.

And so on.

The Republicans lie all the time too, but they don’t make their lies out to be fundamental truths the same way. The Democrats have adopted all these positions with the fervor of evangelicals. It is a demand for belief, not just a policy statement. And people don’t like being ordered to believe truths they feel in their bones aren’t true.

+1 to all of this.

yes!!