Won’t Have To Vote

[Moksha]

"You won’t have to do it anymore. Four more years, you know what? It’ll be fixed, it’ll be fine. You won’t have to vote anymore, my beautiful Christians," he said.[/color]
https://www.npr.org/2024/07/27/nx-s1-50 ... ore-speech

I suspect "my beautiful Christians" roughly translates as Herrenvolk.

[Moksha]

Trying to explain the crazy and destructive things Trump rants about seems more insidious than origami.

[Gunnar]

Its beginning to look like Biden and Harri made a wise move by Biden's resigning from the campaign.

Fox STABS Trump in the BACK, Airs HUMILIATING Polling!

Even Fox News polls can't hide the fact. Trump got a small boost in the polls immediately after the RNC convention, as usual soon after their convention, but since Biden dropped out of the race, Kamala Harris has surged ahead. And the Democrats have not even had their convention yet, after which they will certainly get their own post-convention boost. For example, Harris is now leading Trump 49%/47% in Wisconsin, 49%/46% in Pennsylvania, 51%/43% in Minnesota, 57%/47% in Michigan, and the other swing states, and even rising in some red states, rising as much as 8 points in a single week. Meanwhile, Trump's disapproval ratings have risen to an all-time high, and Vance's approval ratings are only at 24%.

Not only that, Kamala's ratings seem to be surging at an accelerating rate. I am more optimistic than ever before that the Democrats will win in Nov, and hopefully even in the Senate and the House!

[Moksha]

For example, Harris is now leading Trump 49%/47% in Wisconsin, 49%/46% in Pennsylvania, 51%/43% in Minnesota, 57%/47% in Michigan, and the other swing states, and even rising in some red states, rising as much as 8 points in a single week. Meanwhile, Trump's disapproval ratings have risen to an all-time high, and Vance's approval ratings are only at 24%.

What about Arizona, Nevada, and Colorado? I think Utah will probably go for Trump 80/20 because of similar values.

I thought Vance's approval rating was listed in negative numbers. Maybe he will cost Trump the Republican women's vote. Disparaging race and gender will be the Republican strategy and disparaging gender is always problematic even for Republican women voters.

Donald Trump's Al Capone/Sauron appeal will be the strongest selling point among his base and likely Republican voters.

[Kishkumen]

This seems to be one of those bad statements being turned into a CODE RED!!!! that is a CODE RED!!! but for different reasons.

In context, he seems to be begging Christians to show up at the polls and vote in 2024 after which they can wash their hands of politics. I 100% believe he means that the effects of his presidency would codify Christian Nationalist aims that motivate Christians to engage in national politics. But I don't think he meant it as it is being portrayed: That there will be no more elections after 2024 if he wins. It could be true. But I don't think he cares about anything further than winning in 2024 so he can pardon himself and get revenge. He just needs their votes this one last time.

So, thing is, any guy who is either too dumb/irresponsible to communicate effectively or actually sincerely means this garbage does not deserve the benefit of any doubts. His stupidity leaves him open to manipulation by the effective fascists. And, frankly, his message, whatever he actually means, encourages those extremists who really do want a dictator or king. They are out there in MAGAland. I would not put it past the Donald to shrewdly message to these people. No one should take chances with this.

[honorentheos]

Trump gives a speech acknowledging he intends to do everything from supporting a national abortion ban to codifying Evangelical views as the law of the land. That's pretty concerning. He tells his Christian audience they historically don't turn out for elections in numbers proportionate to their population percentage. He needs them to vote this one time and after that things will be fixed and they can go back to not voting.

It's weird to me that some of the most explicitly troubling admissions he's made are being overlooked by an interpretation of the call to vote as an open admission he plans to end elections, period. Anyway.

[Kishkumen]

Trump gives a speech acknowledging he intends to do everything from supporting a national abortion ban to codifying Evangelical views as the law of the land. That's pretty concerning. He tells his Christian audience they historically don't turn out for elections in numbers proportionate to their population percentage. He needs them to vote this one time and after that things will be fixed and they can go back to not voting.

It's weird to me that some of the most explicitly troubling admissions he's made are being overlooked by an interpretation of the call to vote as an open admission he plans to end elections, period. Anyway.

OK. Fair enough. Weird? I don’t know. Looks like some author made a choice to emphasize this, and I shared the article here. Is that weird? I think my basic point stands. His ineffectiveness as a thinker and communicator is disqualifying in itself, and his history of disrespect or outright violation of the principles of democracy is frightening.

Indeed, if Evangelical Christianity is the law of the land, the outcome is pretty much the same.

[Xenophon]

Honor, you read his statements much the way I did. I think a lot of the misunderstanding comes from how painful it is to make it through a Trump speech without wanting to drive a pencil through your ear. Because of that most folks resort to the headline, click-bait snippet, which doesn't look great standing out on its own, not that it is much better in context.

This next bit is going to sound pretty cynical but I'm going to put it on paper(screen) anyway. I'm starting to wonder how much accurately representing the opposition's position is meaningfully important for politics. I held pretty firmly to the idea that you had to actually understand what they were saying before you could combat it. I'm starting to wonder if that may be a fool's errand. We can argue over if he meant stopping all future elections or just implementing a Christian Nationalist agenda but I don't know if I'm seeing enough nuance from voters for that to be a critical distinction.

Perhaps I'm just getting weary of wielding a scalpel when my opposite has a sledge hammer. May be time for a little more Olympics and a little less news.

[Kishkumen]

Honor, you read his statements much the way I did. I think a lot of the misunderstanding comes from how painful it is to make it through a Trump speech without wanting to drive a pencil through your ear. Because of that most folks resort to the headline, click-bait snippet, which doesn't look great standing out on its own, not that it is much better in context.

This next bit is going to sound pretty cynical but I'm going to put it on paper(screen) anyway. I'm starting to wonder how much accurately representing the opposition's position is meaningfully important for politics. I held pretty firmly to the idea that you had to actually understand what they were saying before you could combat it. I'm starting to wonder if that may be a fool's errand. We can argue over if he meant stopping all future elections or just implementing a Christian Nationalist agenda but I don't know if I'm seeing enough nuance from voters for that to be a critical distinction.

Perhaps I'm just getting weary of wielding a scalpel when my opposite has a sledge hammer. May be time for a little more Olympics and a little less news.

To that I would add the strong possibility of a kind of authoritarian dog whistle. "Stand back and stand by." "There were good people on both sides." We can make excuses for this kind of stuff, or, as you say, wield a scalpel and carefully dissect it, and yet, it is possible that the language is actually signaling people who are hoping Trump does exactly what his detractors fear he might be saying. I don't think the guy is intelligent, but I do credit him with being sly. His whole life has been a practice of managing and promoting his brand. Even if he fails and is untalented in most every other way, I give him props for being skilled at manipulating a whole lot of people.

[Gadianton]

So, thing is, any guy who is either too dumb/irresponsible to communicate effectively or actually sincerely means this garbage does not deserve the benefit of any doubts.

If only it were that. It's the guy who put more time into stealing the next election for himself than he did anything else but golf. A hitman released from prison for murder ought to be careful about saying he's going to "whack" people even if with more context, he could have meant something besides killing some of the time.

Trump gives a speech acknowledging he intends to do everything from supporting a national abortion ban to codifying Evangelical views as the law of the land. That's pretty concerning. He tells his Christian audience they historically don't turn out for elections in numbers proportionate to their population percentage.

Also concerning, but not necessarily news. What should a YouTuber be concerned about? Take your pick I guess.