Phylum of Alexandria Posted February 25 Author Share Posted February 25 9 minutes ago, TrackerNeil said: Replacing Biden is just not a realistic option unless we want to make Trump's victory even more likely. Yeah, that's the point Josh Marshall and Kate Riga made in response to Ezra Klein's recent argument in that vein. That it hinges on wish casting that is just fantasy at this point. LongRider 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kissdbyfire Posted February 25 Share Posted February 25 (edited) 10 minutes ago, Phylum of Alexandria said: Yeah, that's the point Josh Marshall and Kate Riga made in response to Ezra Klein's recent argument in that vein. That it hinges on wish casting that is just fantasy at this point. Even to me, looking from the outside, it sounds completely insane to even think about replacing a candidate 9 months from the election. And to be writing these pieces and pushing this type of idea, it's crazy. And Klein is very intelligent I'm sure, but doesn't he see that this is the type of thing a) is ridiculously impractical bordering on impossible and b) could potentially help Mango? Edited February 25 by kissdbyfire LongRider 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted February 25 Share Posted February 25 3 hours ago, DireWolfSpirit said: She pretty much has to stay in while theres so much unresolved with the legal cases agaist Trump slowly playing out. No. She doesn't. There is no requirement that the person stays in at all or that the delegates pledged to Trump if he drops out. At that point they can go to anyone they want. The value for her staying is in setting her up as a strong antipoint to Trump in 2028, but nothing about it is smart for 2024. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThinkerX Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 35 minutes ago, Kalbear said: No. She doesn't. There is no requirement that the person stays in at all or that the delegates pledged to Trump if he drops out. At that point they can go to anyone they want. The value for her staying is in setting her up as a strong antipoint to Trump in 2028, but nothing about it is smart for 2024. Unless Trump eats one hamburger too many. Or a near miracle happens and he is found guilty of insurrection in the next few months. Then, by default, Haley becomes the GOP POTUS candidate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Anti-Targ Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 37 minutes ago, Kalbear said: No. She doesn't. There is no requirement that the person stays in at all or that the delegates pledged to Trump if he drops out. At that point they can go to anyone they want. The value for her staying is in setting her up as a strong antipoint to Trump in 2028, but nothing about it is smart for 2024. You are assuming Trump loses this year and runs again in 2028? I don't think Haley is thinking about 2028, right now I think she's hoping Trump gets convicted of enough shit that there is no way he can stay on the ticket, and so long as she remains prominent as a public figure she's go the best chance of being the candidate. The minute she drops out of the primary she becomes irrelevant. 2028 is a year to target for Republican would-be presidents. AFAIK no Democrat has won the electoral college (they have won the popular vote, but that doesn't count for shit) after a Democratic president completed 2 full terms as POTUS ever since term limits became a thing. But that's something to think about after November not before. Hard to know what is the most probable thing if Trump wins this year and it's a competitive primary for both Democrats and Republicans in 2028. If Trump 2.0 is as bad as his opponents think it will be then the Democrat 2028 nominee is in a better position than any given Republican. So if I was a young enough Republican who is not in the MAGA cult and Trump wins in 2028 I would be thinking about 2032 or 36 as the year for my run at the White House. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Anti-Targ Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 It’s Been 30 Years Since Food Ate Up This Much of Your Income - WSJ https://nypost.com/2024/02/21/business/americans-spending-11-3-of-income-on-food-most-in-30-years/ Quote In 2022, US consumers spent 11.3% of their disposable income on food as raging inflation jacked up prices on everything from bacon, eggs and milk at local supermarkets to burgers and burritos at fast-food joints, according to data from the Agriculture Department. That’s the most since 1991, when President George H. W. Bush was ramping up the first Gulf War, Nirvana’s “Nevermind” was topping the charts — and food purchases accounted for 11.4% of shoppers’ disposable income, the USDA said. I don't think either of these papers are particularly friendly towards Biden. But it appears the stats are accurate. The graph in the NYP article is interesting in that is shows that despite inflation at home grocery spending in 2022 is still a lot less as a % of income than it was in 1990 and is comparable to the last 10 years. The total food spend more tracks the eating out graph both both the total and eating out graphs showing a sharp drop during the height of the pandemic and then a sharp rise when people stopped worrying about the pandemic. Over the last 30 years there has been relative food price deflation / stability, though as with all things the absolute price of food always goes up over the long term. Contrary to popular opinion it's not the price of food going up that's the problem, it's that wages are not rising to keep food affordable. In an era of massive profits for some of the biggest employers wage stagnation is the thing people should be talking about, not price inflation. In the end paying a higher % of your wage packet in food than you did 8 years ago makes people feel bad, and this influences voting decisions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 3 hours ago, ThinkerX said: Unless Trump eats one hamburger too many. Or a near miracle happens and he is found guilty of insurrection in the next few months. Then, by default, Haley becomes the GOP POTUS candidate. No, she doesn't. At that point it'll be decided at the convention, and likely others (especially desantis) will go back into the race. 3 hours ago, The Anti-Targ said: You are assuming Trump loses this year and runs again in 2028? I'm assuming he wins and is very unpopular. 3 hours ago, The Anti-Targ said: I don't think Haley is thinking about 2028, right now I think she's hoping Trump gets convicted of enough shit that there is no way he can stay on the ticket, and so long as she remains prominent as a public figure she's go the best chance of being the candidate. The minute she drops out of the primary she becomes irrelevant. Yeah, that's not really true. She is already irrelevant in this year as it stands. She has zero chance of winning while Trump is here. If Trump is gone she has some chance, but then she has to contend with whatever is left over. Regardless she can do that if she runs or if she doesn't right now, and arguably it's better if she doesn't waste her money now when so much of what would make Trump drop out is up in the air. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Anti-Targ Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 3 minutes ago, Kalbear said: No, she doesn't. At that point it'll be decided at the convention, and likely others (especially desantis) will go back into the race. I'm assuming he wins and is very unpopular. Yeah, that's not really true. She is already irrelevant in this year as it stands. She has zero chance of winning while Trump is here. If Trump is gone she has some chance, but then she has to contend with whatever is left over. Regardless she can do that if she runs or if she doesn't right now, and arguably it's better if she doesn't waste her money now when so much of what would make Trump drop out is up in the air. If Trump wins and is very unpopular then there's basically no shot a Republican wins in 2028; but I guess having a snowball's chance in hell of winning doesn't stop people from deluding themselves that they will win. Haley's best path to 2028 victory is Biden winning, or Trump winning and being very popular and voters wanting more Republican rule; and she rehabilitates her credentials over the next 4 years as being someone who was always a Trump supporter and all her past statements were manipulated by the Democrat controlled media. Though the danger of Trump being very popular is him finding a way to end term limits and running a third time. "The country loves me, and they deserve more of me". He doesn't even have to end term limits, he just has to find enough people willing to re-interpret term limit to mean serving 2 consecutive terms. Haley is irrelevant in terms of the nomination (while Trump remains), but she's not irrelevant in terms of media presence and public profile. People are still talking about her, and as Oscar Wilde famously said (or Monty Python's version of Oscar Wilde famously said): There's only one thing worse than being talked about, and that's not being talked about. If she drops out of the primary race people will stop talking about her. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyoshi Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 U.S. Air Force Member Sets Self on Fire Outside Israel’s Embassy in D.C. to Protest War in Gaza. AncalagonTheBlack 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bironic Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 I severely doubt that Trump will allow a regular election in 2028 if he’s elected this year. Prince of the North 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrackerNeil Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 12 hours ago, Phylum of Alexandria said: Yeah, that's the point Josh Marshall and Kate Riga made in response to Ezra Klein's recent argument in that vein. That it hinges on wish casting that is just fantasy at this point. I feel as though, nearly every election cycle, one or more candidates arise who seem to check all of the boxes, and yet they just don't do very well. In 2004 it was Wesley Clark; in 2008, Fred Thompson and Bill Richardson; in 2024 it was Ron DeSantis. No matter how well they seem to fit the political moment, they really don't, and primaries help expose that. If Biden were to step aside, I think it's likely a Wesley Clark would be selected to replace him, and without a primary to test that candidate, they will lose. Pundits and party bosses don't always read the political tea leaves very well, and leaving selections entirely up to them is, I think, not just a fantasy but a dangerous one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 3 hours ago, Kyoshi said: U.S. Air Force Member Sets Self on Fire Outside Israel’s Embassy in D.C. to Protest War in Gaza. I'm going to comfortably say this is the dumbest form of protest. 2 hours ago, Bironic said: I severely doubt that Trump will allow a regular election in 2028 if he’s elected this year. Yep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conflicting Thought Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 1 hour ago, Mr. Chatywin et al. said: I'm going to comfortably say this is the dumbest form of protest. Shouldnt be so comfortable saying that, its an effective way of getting attention, and speaks of the commitment of the person, im sure you have a problem in this case cuz you dont agree with what is being protested. But i mean you can look at thich quang duc and see that its not a dumb form of protest, wich, by the way, is a very dumb and insensitive thing to say. Rippounet, Kyoshi and Larry of the Lawn 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigFatCoward Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 5 minutes ago, Conflicting Thought said: Shouldnt be so comfortable saying that, its an effective way of getting attention, and speaks of the commitment of the person, im sure you have a problem in this case cuz you dont agree with what is being protested. But i mean you can look at thich quang duc and see that its not a dumb form of protest, wich, by the way, is a very dumb and insensitive thing to say. I'm happy to say that if this person was stood outside a hospital where my dying child was being denied medical attention, and they were protesting to get my child that attention, i personally would still think it was dumb. Tears of Lys, Prince of the North, Ran and 1 other 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 16 minutes ago, Conflicting Thought said: Shouldnt be so comfortable saying that, its an effective way of getting attention, and speaks of the commitment of the person, im sure you have a problem in this case cuz you dont agree with what is being protested. But i mean you can look at thich quang duc and see that its not a dumb form of protest, wich, by the way, is a very dumb and insensitive thing to say. I’m deeply uncomfortable with suicide as a method of protest. Sure it shows commitment… but… no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 16 minutes ago, Conflicting Thought said: Shouldnt be so comfortable saying that, its an effective way of getting attention, and speaks of the commitment of the person, im sure you have a problem in this case cuz you dont agree with what is being protested. But i mean you can look at thich quang duc and see that its not a dumb form of protest, wich, by the way, is a very dumb and insensitive thing to say. Setting yourself on fire is an amazing way to not achieve your goals. Just because once in a while it works doesn't mean it's a wise strategy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 It stems from one of the most memorable protests done in the last 60 years, causes no direct harm or even inconvenience, and is entirely nonviolent. It certainly has been far more effective in the past than a large rally, and genders much more support for the cause than most any other protest outside of being actually beaten by the government or agents of it. I get why people might have a lot of problems with it but it is empirically not ineffective. Durckad, Kyoshi, Rippounet and 1 other 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phylum of Alexandria Posted February 26 Author Share Posted February 26 7 minutes ago, Kalbear said: causes no direct harm or even inconvenience, and is entirely nonviolent. No physical harm to others maybe, but not no harm or violence whatsoever. It's extremely violent self-harm, and it's psychological terror for anyone who witnesses it. Bironic, TrackerNeil and Ser Scot A Ellison 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conflicting Thought Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 8 minutes ago, Mr. Chatywin et al. said: Setting yourself on fire is an amazing way to not achieve your goals. Just because once in a while it works doesn't mean it's a wise strategy. Its a protest, a very extreme form of protest, its not supposed to fix anything, its to get attention to a situation, and it is very effective at doing that. That goal was achieved. Larry of the Lawn and Kyoshi 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 14 minutes ago, Kalbear said: causes no direct harm or even inconvenience, and is entirely nonviolent It is quite violent and causes incredible harm to the person who does it to themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts