- cross-posted to:
- nyt_gift_articles@sopuli.xyz
- cross-posted to:
- nyt_gift_articles@sopuli.xyz
You must log in or register to comment.
He’s really not. No one voting for him will care, and everyone voting against him already knows.
The undecided voters only actually give a shit about things that matter to them personally, and his age and capacity are not The economy or taxes or healthcare or immigration, or whatever else it is those extraordinarily stupid people are still confused about.
A lot of people don’t pay much attention until shortly before the election.
His age and mental capacity can weigh on folks when he can’t give a decent explanation of what he’s going to do on a particular topic.
Yes, but for fewer than you think, and in not enough places to matter.
But you’re technically correct
Even if it’s small, that still can matter in some elctions. Small changes in tight states can make a difference. Mind you in 2000, the presidental election came down to just 537 votes in florida
Elections can be and often are won on the margins
Edit: or also provide more state wins to make republicans trying to overide state results much more difficult
Mind you in 2000, the presidental election came down to just 537 votes in florida
And that this led to the Supreme Court deciding who would be president instead of the voters. They didn’t finish recounting. How do we think it would go for us if the Supreme Court decided who would be our next president this year?
As a discarded Florida voter in that election, thank you for speaking up on my behalf. And I still feel pretty shitty about that.
Gore absolutely should’ve won— those hanging chads be damned!
The Brooks Brothers riot stopped the counting. Gore would have won. Thousands of votes were thrown out because they were black votes and some voters both punched their votes for Gore and wrote Gore’s name in. The riot was planned so that the Extreme Court would give Bush the election.
Alternatively, it could also provide small margins in additional states to make trickier harder. For instance a small with in north carolina and georgia would make republican plots against the elctions results more difficult
Yeah, but only if they actually get counted. The problem in 2000 is that they didn’t. The count was close and the Supreme Court decided to end counting early. We really need this election to be not down to such small numbers or our current Supreme Court will fuck us.
My point is less that it should come down to that, and more that any smaller gain can matter if things do
If you want to do something that it well known to increase turnout more significantly, I highly recommend volunteering for the campaign. Canavassing, for instance, can increase turnout by upwards of ~7-10% (or more or slightly less depending on the data you look at)
Here’s one site with both in person and virtual places listed
If nothing else, it can help turn the anxiety down a bit by taking action
Which is why we need to have another debate closer to the election. So those people might actually see it and the fact that he is completely senile and unable to form a coherent sentence.
Those who paid any attention during his presidency know it doesn’t matter what he says about anything anyway. His “policies” blow with the wind, can turn on a dime, and are for sale to the highest bidder.
A fair-sized chunk of this fall’s electorate was too young to vote in 2016, and doesn’t have a real sense of how awful he is, or how much has deteriorated over the past few years.
I would surmise young people voting for Trump are primarily from parents who are voting for Trump likely with very little crossover.
He may dupe a few rubes, but doubtful they are educated voters following the issues if they pull the lever for him imo.
Your first paragraph supports your interlocutor’s point and your second paragraph does little to argue against it.
Solid F
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
You’re right, but not for the reasons you think. His policies do matter and do have a tremendous effect, but his most dangerous policies never came to pass only because of the people he surrounded himself with during his last administration. They managed to stop the worst things from happening then. That won’t be true this time around, and only those who are already voting against him know that. The idiots who would vote for him this time didn’t care about the last time and don’t know any better this time either. All they care about is voting for the red team no matter what, and they don’t care about the cost.
If she puts him over her knee and gives him the spanking he deserves there is some slight chance that the strongman delusion will weaken and people will see him for the whiny toddler that most people see.
This won’t convince the people that matter, and it might have unintended consequences for the undecided voters, because they’re idiots.
Overall, it probably won’t have enough of an overall impact to matter. Mostly, because the people who would be impacted by this already know that he is an idiotic child. Those people will already be voting for Kamala.
I think people can care if it’s showcased well, and I think he’s dumb and old enough to give Kamala the opening.
He will likely blame the host and storm out.
Most notably his meandering answer to child-care
HE NEVER ANSWERED THE FUCKING QUESTION!
He never answers any question you sad excuse for a journalist! It’s gish gallop bullshit and you fuckers give him a pass every damn time!
What a nasty reply to a post. Nasty like we have never seen before. Probably the nastiest reply in the history of the internet. accordion hands intensify
He kinda did answer, basically “we’ll have import tariffs to pay for all we need including child care” while making it sound like other countries would pay for it. But of course that’s stupid because the money will come from the people who buy the imported goods, i.e. Americans.
He very vaguely implied that tariffs would take care of the childcare cost problem, but never said it outright or explained how that would be the case. Obviously, it wouldn’t, but he didn’t even try to put one and two together. He just rambled incoherently about wanting to raise prices on everything.
Capacity?
Small hands. He can’t hold much water.
Mental capacity.
He’s very good at tossing out free association, and showing that he’s in touch with the latest racist meme.
Anything else? Not so much.
The NYT actually commented on Trump’s age‽
I’m glad they published this article, but their framing still manages to be enraging. As if “of course Biden is a doddering senile old man, but come to think of it maybe Trump has some problems too.”
NY times has been giving Trump great coverage while dismissing Biden through this whole election cycle.
deleted by creator
Instead of testing his capacity, can we instead test his capacitance? Light him up like Topsy the Elephant?
New York Times - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for New York Times:
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this sourceSearch topics on Ground.News
NYT is about as left as my right hand.
I don’t think this spin is going to work, especially when Trump is pit against someone like Kamala Harris, but we’ll see. Post-debate analysis is certainly going to be “this man bumbled like a buffoon and is too old, he needs to drop out”, but that doesn’t mean it will stick.
Old mate really needs to work on his weave.
