I had little or few problems with the Black Woman by the name of Kamala Harris.
She put Trump in his place during their debate. So well, the jackass would not meet with her again. As the numbers and alternative candidates go, I do take issue with the 3 million people who did not vote in 2024. Was Kamala such a bad pick as compared to Trump. Worst than the jackass Kennedy. So bad as to have 900,000 for write-ins and others, votes for the assorted other named candidates.
Can't have a Black woman for the pres. Didn't want a white woman either. Instead, we got an ignorant jackass in the presidency and Kennedy as a cabinet member. They-all showed them what they wanted twice within a decade. And their willing to pay for it too by suffering from the results of 8 years of Trump.
Both women did some scurrilous shit and they both ran sub-par campaigns—even allowing for Biden's sabotage—and both came close to winning anyway. Clinton did win the popular vote. Undoubtedly there's substantial resistance to a woman president but that really does not seem to have been the decisive factor in either instance. In any event I'm never going to fault someone for refusing to support a génocidaire.
I gave you the numbers for Kamala Harris - Trump election. People did not vote or avoided her by voting for others. We ended up with the worst there could be a second time and that is ok? That is not decisive?
You would have to go a long way to equal Trump's actions with regard to Harris for sure.
Of course, Clinton had her issues. Even so, Trump had decades of past history revealing his beliefs and actions with regard to people, minorities, and women. Turnout for Clinton and Trump was 137 million (55%). Well below the almost 60% turnout during Trump and Harris.
I disagree Weldon. In each case, the nation chose the worst there could be by not voting or voting for others,
I never have and never would argue that racism and misogyny don't play a role in elections, but Clinton did win the popular vote despite her manifest flaws, and Harris did come close to winning despite supporting genocide and running a campaign which wasn't significantly better than her 2020 one—where you may recall she bested Biden in an early debate before flaming out—and was additionally saddled with Biden's refusal to keep his promise and bow out. I'm also never going to regard backing a genocide as an acceptable policy position for any candidate, let alone a presidential one.
Was Clinton more flawed than Trump? Far less than 60% turned out for 2016 election than the 2024 election. The key for the 2016 election was the state votes. And yes, the electorate does care about gender.
As well as Harris stuck it to Trump in their debate. In neither case when it came to the election, gender did count in both cases either by national or state voting. A greater percentage of the vote went to Harris than did Clinton. But again, Dems lost the Electoral Vote (227 for Clinton and 226 for Haris).
It does not matter if you have more votes and you lose the electoral vote.
!37 million turned out for the Clinton-Trump Election (57$) and 155 million turned out for the Harris Election (60%). The difference here is more people (2024) voted for others than for either candidate.
More people turned out for the Harris Election with 3 million for others. In the Clinton Election 10 million voted for others. I would not call either race close as each \candidate lost in the states giving Trump the Electoral Vote.
And what is Trump doing today in the US? Hmmmm? Targeting minorities and different nationalities. Genocide exists in the United States. Send "us" off to war and what do you think happens? You are talking to an old XMarine Sergeant.
Great talk Weldon. I hope you are doing well . . .
The numeric comes from Dave Leips Atlas of US Elections.
It's hard for me to understand why, fifty years later, there are still "Vietnam war apologists." I knew people who were there, not a single person that I knew who spent actual time in Vietnam ever thought that there was a good reason for it. Now, of course, they're allies and trading partners, I mean, insofar as we have any allies and trading partners left.
As far as understanding that we're the Genocide Country--I find that liquor helps me quash that understanding. Also, I watch a lot of birds, and also, read books and magazines about said birds. All better than thinking about the truth.
We still have "let them fight/don't tie their hands" dead-enders, two of whom are directly in charge of the military at the moment. Our noble warfighters/warriors/heroes only did what they were told to do and they woulda won if they'd been allowed to do what they needed to do.
Birds are good. Fucking mongooses.
Did you like today's music? Mostly new to me but pretty good if it's me as says so.
I’m always reminded of Camus in questions such as these:
“The task of every thinking person is to not be on the side of the executioners.”
And therein lies the crux of the biscuit. We don’t have thinking people in positions of power with the imagination to conceive of different outcomes, different policies.
Hey, Lee, thanks for stopping by. I wish I had a head for quotes; that's a sterling one.
It seems as though some of our elected officials can think of alternatives, but find them threatening in one sense or another. I think that makes it worse—knowing what's the right thing to do and not doing it because the political consequences might be personally unpalatable.
Weldon:
I had little or few problems with the Black Woman by the name of Kamala Harris.
She put Trump in his place during their debate. So well, the jackass would not meet with her again. As the numbers and alternative candidates go, I do take issue with the 3 million people who did not vote in 2024. Was Kamala such a bad pick as compared to Trump. Worst than the jackass Kennedy. So bad as to have 900,000 for write-ins and others, votes for the assorted other named candidates.
Can't have a Black woman for the pres. Didn't want a white woman either. Instead, we got an ignorant jackass in the presidency and Kennedy as a cabinet member. They-all showed them what they wanted twice within a decade. And their willing to pay for it too by suffering from the results of 8 years of Trump.
Keep feeding him cheeseburgers.
Both women did some scurrilous shit and they both ran sub-par campaigns—even allowing for Biden's sabotage—and both came close to winning anyway. Clinton did win the popular vote. Undoubtedly there's substantial resistance to a woman president but that really does not seem to have been the decisive factor in either instance. In any event I'm never going to fault someone for refusing to support a génocidaire.
Weldon:
I gave you the numbers for Kamala Harris - Trump election. People did not vote or avoided her by voting for others. We ended up with the worst there could be a second time and that is ok? That is not decisive?
You would have to go a long way to equal Trump's actions with regard to Harris for sure.
Of course, Clinton had her issues. Even so, Trump had decades of past history revealing his beliefs and actions with regard to people, minorities, and women. Turnout for Clinton and Trump was 137 million (55%). Well below the almost 60% turnout during Trump and Harris.
I disagree Weldon. In each case, the nation chose the worst there could be by not voting or voting for others,
I never have and never would argue that racism and misogyny don't play a role in elections, but Clinton did win the popular vote despite her manifest flaws, and Harris did come close to winning despite supporting genocide and running a campaign which wasn't significantly better than her 2020 one—where you may recall she bested Biden in an early debate before flaming out—and was additionally saddled with Biden's refusal to keep his promise and bow out. I'm also never going to regard backing a genocide as an acceptable policy position for any candidate, let alone a presidential one.
Weldon:
Was Clinton more flawed than Trump? Far less than 60% turned out for 2016 election than the 2024 election. The key for the 2016 election was the state votes. And yes, the electorate does care about gender.
As well as Harris stuck it to Trump in their debate. In neither case when it came to the election, gender did count in both cases either by national or state voting. A greater percentage of the vote went to Harris than did Clinton. But again, Dems lost the Electoral Vote (227 for Clinton and 226 for Haris).
It does not matter if you have more votes and you lose the electoral vote.
!37 million turned out for the Clinton-Trump Election (57$) and 155 million turned out for the Harris Election (60%). The difference here is more people (2024) voted for others than for either candidate.
More people turned out for the Harris Election with 3 million for others. In the Clinton Election 10 million voted for others. I would not call either race close as each \candidate lost in the states giving Trump the Electoral Vote.
And what is Trump doing today in the US? Hmmmm? Targeting minorities and different nationalities. Genocide exists in the United States. Send "us" off to war and what do you think happens? You are talking to an old XMarine Sergeant.
Great talk Weldon. I hope you are doing well . . .
The numeric comes from Dave Leips Atlas of US Elections.
I remember, in the 80s, asking rhetorically why we were always on the side of the guys murdering nuns.
It's hard for me to understand why, fifty years later, there are still "Vietnam war apologists." I knew people who were there, not a single person that I knew who spent actual time in Vietnam ever thought that there was a good reason for it. Now, of course, they're allies and trading partners, I mean, insofar as we have any allies and trading partners left.
As far as understanding that we're the Genocide Country--I find that liquor helps me quash that understanding. Also, I watch a lot of birds, and also, read books and magazines about said birds. All better than thinking about the truth.
We still have "let them fight/don't tie their hands" dead-enders, two of whom are directly in charge of the military at the moment. Our noble warfighters/warriors/heroes only did what they were told to do and they woulda won if they'd been allowed to do what they needed to do.
Birds are good. Fucking mongooses.
Did you like today's music? Mostly new to me but pretty good if it's me as says so.
I did enjoy the music, except for the last one which was a little too "Girl from Ipanema" for me.
She covered a bunch of standards for her most recent album. I'm a sucker for a songstress.
I’m always reminded of Camus in questions such as these:
“The task of every thinking person is to not be on the side of the executioners.”
And therein lies the crux of the biscuit. We don’t have thinking people in positions of power with the imagination to conceive of different outcomes, different policies.
Hey, Lee, thanks for stopping by. I wish I had a head for quotes; that's a sterling one.
It seems as though some of our elected officials can think of alternatives, but find them threatening in one sense or another. I think that makes it worse—knowing what's the right thing to do and not doing it because the political consequences might be personally unpalatable.