The USA Presidential election 2024

[RF]

As an outsider from Great Britain looking in on the state of American politics I find what looks like to me to be a duopoly choice between two elderly, cerebally challenged men to be somewhat perplexing.

Both Biden and Trump are in my view too old and cerebally challenged to be put in charge of the USA'S nuclear launch codes, either of them could die of old age whilst in office. Whilst my preference is for Trump I feel that he is becoming more and more erratic and abrasive, I put that down to the effects of old age. Another alarming aspect is the pattern of selecting political non-entities as vice presidential candidates.
The contest is determined at the start of the primary season, I thought that the purpose of the primaries and caucuses was to determine candidates during their course leading up to the party conventions. I recall the 1976 presidential primaries, on the Democrat side the early emergence of Jimmy Carter as a fresh choice from the South, emerging out of the shadow of George Wallace who had dominated southern politics nationally for the preceding 12 or so years, with late challenges to Carter in the primaries. On the Republican side the incumbent non-elected Gerald Ford had a good early start, then Ronald Reagan started winning the southern primaries, leading to a neck and neck primary contest right up to the Republican convention, where until the delegate count was done with the roll call of each state, no-one was sure who would win.

Why can't we have a 1976 type primary season to really test the candidates? We would have a better chance of picking two contenders better able to do the job without embarrassing blunders that emphasise unfitness for office.

Whilst I disagree with her political views I had hoped that Nikki Haley would stay in the contest up to the Republican convention, to give a degree of choice for voters.

So what happens if either Biden and/or Trump die of old age before or after the party conventions?

[OpanaPointer]

What would happen would depend on the Party's rules. I don't think it's ever happened but as lawyers are involved I'm sure there a clause in there somewhere. Anybody have a Lawyer-English/English-Lawyer dictionary?

[northcape]

Well, since the US is run by the CIA and the Pentagon on behalf of the military-industrial complex, the Israel lobby, and a few big cooperations anyway, it makes no difference at all if a senile war-monger or a senile pathological narcissist is sleeping in the White House. Like all presidents in the last 30 years or so, they have nothing to say or to decide.

[Byron Angel]

Well, since the US is run by the CIA and the Pentagon on behalf of the military-industrial complex, the Israel lobby, and a few big cooperations anyway, it makes no difference at all if a senile war-monger or a senile pathological narcissist is sleeping in the White House. Like all presidents in the last 30 years or so, they have nothing to say or to decide.

Hi Northcape,
Congrats. Stay home on Election Day. Everyone in the 2024 campaign HQ of the Deep State-Dem-RINO Uniparty is taking a round of high-fives.

Why take a chance?

Byron

[northcape]

Hi Byron,

Well I have to stay home at Election Day because I am not an US citizen (but if I would be, I guess my sentiment would be the same; I honestly think from all fake-democracies the US is the most phony one).
But we resettled back to Europe. And in all the elections here for the first time I have to chose the oh so evil right-wing party because they are, unfortunately, the only ones here who are less inclined to take orders from Washington and NATO and have a realistic and humanist view on war and world order. And this is me, who was and still is a supporter and admirer of Sanders.

[Byron Angel]

Hi Byron,

Well I have to stay home at Election Day because I am not an US citizen (but if I would be, I guess my sentiment would be the same; I honestly think from all fake-democracies the US is the most phony one).

>>>>> Frankly, I wholeheartedly agree with your assessment.

But we resettled back to Europe. And in all the elections here for the first time I have to chose the oh so evil right-wing party because they are, unfortunately, the only ones here who are less inclined to take orders from Washington and NATO and have a realistic and humanist view on war and world order. And this is me, who was and still is a supporter and admirer of Sanders.

>>>>> Keep in mind that our entire western media serve as homonculi of the US/EU/NATO cabal. Cast your vote wisely and say a quiet prayer for our civilization and its honest values.

Byron

[northcape]

Hi Byron,

" Keep in mind that our entire western media serve as homonculi of the US/EU/NATO cabal. "

Frankly, I wholeheartedly agree with your assessment.

For example, those are the official "values" of Axel-Springer-Verlag, one of the largest news publishing cooperations in Europe:

https://www.axelspringer.com/en/values

I mean, how can any newspaper be taken seriously which proudly boasts its attachment to (any) ideology? This is as crazy brainwash as attaching any label to the word democracy, such as "liberal democracy". "Democracy" is a governing form for a society, where (largely) the majority of the members of the society define about the rules. "Liberal" is an adjective, and the majority may subscribe to that or to less liberal rules. But in any way, it does not devalue the quality of democracy. However, US-led western and NATO propaganda sees liberal democracy as a goal which justifies regime topplings, illegal wars, and creation of conflicts bringing us to the brink of WW3.

[paul.mercer]

Here in the UK we are looking at a General Election sometime this year with the main contest being between two dysfunctional parties as usual, with all the other smaller parties being also-rans.
What many people in the UK do not understand is how on earth a great country like the USA cannot find two people in the Republican and Democrat parties that are not 80 or approaching 80, one of which does not seem to know whether it is Christmas day or Easter and was deemed to fragile to go to court and the other who spends most of his time shouting his mouth off or being in a court. The scary part is whoever does eventually win be running the most powerful country in the world and will have their finger on the nuclear button!
Tin hats on chaps!

[RF]

Paul, don't you mean NASA spacesuits.... The tin hat is rather useless against a mushroom cloud.

[Byron Angel]

People desiring to identify an antidote to the threat of Deep State Globalist dominion only need to identify whom they are trying hardest to destroy.

Work it out from there.

B

[Herr Nilsson]

Hi Byron,

" Keep in mind that our entire western media serve as homonculi of the US/EU/NATO cabal. "

Frankly, I wholeheartedly agree with your assessment.

For example, those are the official "values" of Axel-Springer-Verlag, one of the largest news publishing cooperations in Europe:

https://www.axelspringer.com/en/values

I mean, how can any newspaper be taken seriously which proudly boasts its attachment to (any) ideology? This is as crazy brainwash as attaching any label to the word democracy, such as "liberal democracy". "Democracy" is a governing form for a society, where (largely) the majority of the members of the society define about the rules. "Liberal" is an adjective, and the majority may subscribe to that or to less liberal rules. But in any way, it does not devalue the quality of democracy. However, US-led western and NATO propaganda sees liberal democracy as a goal which justifies regime topplings, illegal wars, and creation of conflicts bringing us to the brink of WW3.

May I ask which country you come from?

[northcape]

Hello Marc,

If your location is correct, you can cross the border in Bavaria to visit me - Kamerad Schnürschuh steht hab-Acht!

Coming back to the topic of the complicity of the mass media in demanrling democracy, I just stumbled across the following:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/ ... ean-agenda

This article describes a poll among European citizens on different topics. One question is "Do you think the EU generally played a positive or negative role in the following crises? [Gaza, Ukraine, Covid, Financial crisis]". To all four topics, the poll showed that the majority response is "negative role".

Now here is how the Guradian describes this outcome:

"Many voters do not recognise the bloc’s success in addressing these challenges, the polling showed: on the pandemic, for example, only in Portugal (56%) and Spain (42%) did large numbers of voters see the EU as having played a positive role."

So, a poll is conducted to measure if a response is seen as negative or positive. Since there obviously is no objective answer to any of these questions. "seen as negative or positive" is equivalent to "is it positive or negative". It is not about if an undisputed fact is recognized by the people, it literally is aksing "do you think it is negative or positive?".

Nonetheless, the article states it as an undisputed fact that the actions of the EU were positive, and that the answer of the people is incorrect: "Many voters do not recognise the bloc’s success in addressing these challenges, the polling showed."

The correct sentence would be "The polling showed that the majority of the voters see the actions of the EU in these topics as negative.", as we have absoulutely no proof or even slightest evidence that the actions of the EU were a "success" (we also don't have a proof/evidence showing it was a failure; it is simply a topic were no objective measures are defined, and you can just have an opinion; and an opinion is never right or wrong).

So it is an outright lie, disguised as a fact. It is beyond Orwellian.

[Herr Nilsson]

@northcape

Ah, danke. Bei einer Einordnung von Springer tue ich mir persönlich immer etwas schwer. Deswegen war ich etwas erstaunt, dass ausgerechnet Springer als Beispiel aufgeführt wird.

The correct sentence would be "The polling showed that the majority of the voters see the actions of the EU in these topics as negative.", as we have absoulutely no proof or even slightest evidence that the actions of the EU were a "success" (we also don't have a proof/evidence showing it was a failure; it is simply a topic were no objective measures are defined, and you can just have an opinion; and an opinion is never right or wrong).

That's not true. The negative view is a minority like the positive view. The negative view is a plurality or relative majority in only two topics.

The correct sentence would be: "Many voters do not recognize (any) success of the bloc in addressing these challenges, the polling showed."

[northcape]

Hello Marc,

you are correct with the details, thanks for pointing out. However, regarding my arguments, it does not make a difference. The point is that the article indirectly, but nonetheless clearly states that the EU's actions were a "success", and that the polling shows that the voters falsely do not recognize this "success". This statement, represented as fact, has however no relation to the actual facts (the survey and its result) shown in the article. The article does so by actually counting the "negative" vs. the "positive" views, disregarding the "don't know" votes. My argument to show their lie uses their classification as well, just counting "negatives" vs. "positives" - where we always have a majority of "negatives" over the "positives".

[RF]

The Guardian is a British newspaper with its own political and social agenda. It isn't impartial and isn't ''free press.''

It has its own agenda which includes promoting the European Union and the banning of ''far right'' political parties it doesn't agree with.

Recognising that I would never ever waste my money on buying their propaganda sheets. If everybody had my view the Guardian would very quickly go out of business. That's the key - if you don't like it then don't buy it.