"Race For The White House 2024" Open Chat

[MsKreed 1,185]

Since the DNC has already established that they will not hold any debates for primary candidates....this guy isn’t likely to get any more votes than Marianne Williamson. 

 I honestly think that if RFK Jr stayed in the primary, he would have gotten more votes than Dean and Marianne combined.

 Not that RFK could get enough primary votes to get close to the nomination.....just by name recognition from clueless people who knew nothing about him other than “Kennedy” and are not following any election news at all. And that name recognition is more than Phillips and Williamson have.

[Chris 2,172]

I cannot believe that the DNC thinks running Biden completely unchallenged is a good idea. Not that the GOP is exactly being remotely intelligent either. 

[Adam 373]

10 hours ago, Chris said:

I cannot believe that the DNC thinks running Biden completely unchallenged is a good idea. Not that the GOP is exactly being remotely intelligent either. 

i think the big difference between the two is this

Reps openly battle for personal power/gain with no thought to Party or optics(think frat-boy mentality)

Dems understand how to keep a lid on most things, the party prospers and by extension, they all profit more quietly(think WASPY dysfunctional family)

[Chris 2,172]

Mike Pence is out.

[Chris 2,172]

Tim Scott is out.

[Hal 341]

And Biden is Where ? Hell he doesn’t even know where he is , but he is going to give Trump a run for his money ! 
 

[Chris 2,172]

Imagine taking your kid that you took to an event why the former President talked about being pissed on:

Quote

Former President Donald Trump said that his wife, Melania, didn't believe allegations that sex workers had urinated on him because he is a "germophobe."

Source

[Chris 2,172]

Our politics and elections have become such a clown car that now there's debates involving people not even running for president.

[Adam 373]

reality politics:

[KarenK 383]

3 hours ago, Chris said:

Our politics and elections have become such a clown car that now there's debates involving people not even running for president.

Would that be the DeSantis/Newsom thing last night?  I heard about it and thought it odd because I didn't think Newsom was running.

[Chris 2,172]

It would be.

Newsom has vehemently denied he’s running a shadow campaign, but I can’t see any other reason to engage like this. I definitely have no clue why Desantis would think it was a good idea. 

[MsKreed 1,185]

3 hours ago, Chris said:

It would be.

Newsom has vehemently denied he’s running a shadow campaign, but I can’t see any other reason to engage like this. I definitely have no clue why Desantis would think it was a good idea. 

I figured the common reason both of them were doing it was because they both love to hear themselves talk.

[Hal 341]

There has been talk of Newsom running as a surrogate campaigner for Biden . I haven’t picked a horse in this race as of yet but if that particular swayback nag can’t make the starting gate then don’t send in a ringer for him ! 

[TTL News 308]

Quote

BISMARCK, N.D. (AP) — North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum ended his campaign for the Republican presidential nomination on Monday despite a stronger-than-expected showing fueled by a gift card-for-campaign donation gimmick that helped get him on the debate stage.

Source

[Chris 2,172]

On 12/1/2023 at 7:14 PM, Hal said:

There has been talk of Newsom running as a surrogate campaigner for Biden . I haven’t picked a horse in this race as of yet but if that particular swayback nag can’t make the starting gate then don’t send in a ringer for him ! 

The DNC knows full well he is too old. I'm beginning to think that they're banking on him being re-elected but not able to finish a full second term. Then we'll have another "first" to celebrate, yay!

[Hal 341]

3 hours ago, Chris said:

The DNC knows full well he is too old. I'm beginning to think that they're banking on him being re-elected but not able to finish a full second term. Then we'll have another "first" to celebrate, yay!

The way some Democrats are backing away from him we may get lucky . I just don’t see him up to the rigors of the campaign trail and wonder if other voters will see through other candidates jumping in for him .

[TTL News 308]

Quote

 

CNN — Former Republican Rep. Liz Cheney said Tuesday that she’s committed to doing what’s necessary to stop former President Donald Trump from returning to the White House, as she continues to mull a third-party presidential run in 2024.

“There’s a huge amount of work to be done after this election cycle, whether it’s rebuilding the Republican Party – which increasingly looks like, you know, maybe an impossible task – or helping to begin a new party that’s very focused on what the Republican Party used to stand for before this cult of personality. But right now and in this election cycle, I’ll do whatever I have to do to make sure Donald Trump’s not elected,” she told CNN’s Anderson Cooper on “AC360.”

Cheney, an outspoken critic of Trump, said a third-party challenge in 2024 should be considered, but warned that uniting against the former president “can’t be a partisan issue.”

 

Read more here.

[Chris 2,172]

I would consider voting for her.

[TTL News 308]

Quote

 

DENVER (AP) — A divided Colorado Supreme Court on Tuesday declared former President Donald Trump ineligible for the White House under the U.S. Constitution’s insurrection clause and removed him from the state’s presidential primary ballot, setting up a likely showdown in the nation’s highest court to decide whether the front-runner for the GOP nomination can remain in the race.

The decision from a court whose justices were all appointed by Democratic governors marks the first time in history that Section 3 of the 14th Amendment has been used to disqualify a presidential candidate.

“A majority of the court holds that Trump is disqualified from holding the office of president under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment,” the court wrote in its 4-3 decision.

 

Read the rest here.

[Chris 2,172]

I can’t stand the bastard, but this sets a precedent I like even less.

If he was convicted, he’ll, even charged with inciting an insurrection ( which I believe he did, or at least contributed to ) then I can see. But he hasn’t been.

This sets us on a slippery slope of citing the 14th Amendment anytime and all the time, so long as it’s politically beneficial. Just like impeachment has apparently become a political tool.

[MsKreed 1,185]

While the Capitol protest exceeded the definition of ‘peaceful’....the events were disruptive and confrontational. And even though there are numerous “violent” riots and protests where offenders with much deadlier weapons have caused more destruction and injury....Jan 6^th could be considered “violent” as well.

But it did not rise to the level of “insurrection” by any judicial definition (any more than the 3,000 protestors burning down the Kent State ROTC facility was an "insurrection"). I’m not just saying that because of some layman's interpretation; but because if “insurrection” was at all applicable.......of the 1,000+ charges that have been filed, we’d have seen at least one person (up to and including Trump) charge for it.

My only hope is that SCOTUS overturns the Colorado ruling swiftly and unanimously. If it's a split decision, I worry that partisan "disgruntlement" with boil over and  controversy that tries to dissolve (or at least endanger) the 3-branch system that keeps the nation running. 

Edited December 23, 2023 by MsKreed

[Chris 2,172]

55 minutes ago, MsKreed said:

But it did not rise to the level of “insurrection” by any judicial definition…

I initially was going to disagree with you on this. But I wasn’t entirely sure what the judicial definition could be. I looked it up and found: 

 

My guess is the difference is in the organization, or lack thereof in the case of Jan. 6th. As despicable as it was, I can see the other side of the coin that says had the vote not been certified the events of that day wouldn’t have happened. Therefore a defense attorney could shoot down a charge of “insurrection” relatively easy.

They’re still very lucky I wasn’t in charge that day.

But I agree and hope the SC overturns this, if only for the reasons I stated above.

[MsKreed 1,185]

19 minutes ago, Chris said:

My guess is the difference is in the organization, or lack thereof in the case of Jan. 6th.

Exactly.

I think some post Civil War actions by the KKK may have been legally considered insurrection, as they carried out strategic campaigns to attack local governments established by Reconstruction, etc. 

Whereas, in the Jan 6th incident it was disparate groups answering the online "calls" to participate with no structured "plans" (more like "Storm Area 51", but just a larger turnout since there was a few months notice for the government to warn the Area 51 idiots to back off). 

[Chris 2,172]

Not any less reprehensible, but perhaps not enough to meet the legal criteria. 🤷‍♂️

[Chris 2,172]

Apparently Maine has followed suit and declared Trump ineligible to appear on their ballot.