Your 2024 Presidential Election Thread

So you folks have a suspicion that the DNC is trying to tank so they can get an up and comer to swing in next election cycle and gain another eight more years in the WH?

What if their current team of cvnt stains win by accident?
 
The Quartermaster said:
So you folks have a suspicion that the DNC is trying to tank so they can get an up and comer to swing in next election cycle and gain another eight more years in the WH?

What if their current team of cvnt stains win by accident?
Click to expand...
I thought that for a while, but now I don't think that's the case at all. They want to win--all the time, every election. Both parties do. But the Democrats allowed President Biden to fester and flounder for so long, and they chose potentially the worst person they could have as his VP, that they're saddled to this decision. There wasn't enough runway to get another viable candidate on the ballot, and if they pulled VP Harris, there would have been HUGE and long lasting backlash from important elements of the left's constituency. Pres. Trump would have won by an even larger margin than he's going to (?) now.

Sure they'll try to get an up and comer in the next election cycle, they'll have to since much of the old guard are demonstrated failures. But I'm sure they would have been fine with having 8 years of a (D) in the White House under the Harris/Walz administration and then 4-8 years with a (D) up and comer.

It just seems to me that they're already coming up with excuses (well, other than sexism + racism) why they're going to lose this election.
 
Marauder06 said:
I thought that for a while, but now I don't think that's the case at all. They want to win--all the time, every election. Both parties do. But the Democrats allowed President Biden to fester and flounder for so long, and they chose potentially the worst person they could have as his VP, that they're saddled to this decision. There wasn't enough runway to get another viable candidate on the ballot, and if they pulled VP Harris, there would have been HUGE and long lasting backlash from important elements of the left's constituency. Pres. Trump would have won by an even larger margin than he's going to (?) now.

Sure they'll try to get an up and comer in the next election cycle, they'll have to since much of the old guard are demonstrated failures. But I'm sure they would have been fine with having 8 years of a (D) in the White House under the Harris/Walz administration and then 4-8 years with a (D) up and comer.

It just seems to me that they're already coming up with excuses (well, other than sexism + racism) why they're going to lose this election.
Click to expand...

I think they backed themselves into a corner in 2020. Great, Biden won, and he has Harris as a VP. 4 years later and they have to force Biden out because Trump would beat him like Mike Tyson in his prime. They didn't have a plan for Kamala to run, so they are making it up as they go along.

I think they know Kamala has no business running, but they don't have other options. Biden was a clear L, so the Dems are are in full damage control mode with Harris. Picking Walz still baffles me. They pulled out a 20-sided, rolled for initiative, and I think they regret that one too.

I'm with you. I think they royally screwed up, know it, and are in Bill O'Reilly "we'll do it live" territory.
 
AWP said:
They didn't have a plan for Kamala to run, so they are making it up as they go along.
Click to expand...
Mostly agree with your post, but I think they probably thought Kamala would be the diversity candidate for president in 2024 or 2028. But, they overestimated her potentential and her weak showing as VP over the last four years has left them in a pickle.
 
Never underestimate the ability of the republican party to trip over their own shadow and fuck themselves in their own asses...

Democrats will lie cheat and steal to keep democrats in power - republicans eat their young.
 
Marauder06 said:
I still think it would be smart for them to remove Pres Biden and let VP Harris take over so that they can take credit for first female and first black female pres. then they have that W (to them) regardless of what happens in November.
Click to expand...

I thought this would be their play about 2 years ago. I missed that one.
---
Y'all notice how we hardly hear about Biden these days? He's disappeared off the face of the earth.
 
AWP said:
I thought this would be their play about 2 years ago. I missed that one.
---
Y'all notice how we hardly hear about Biden these days? He's disappeared off the face of the earth.
Click to expand...
I wonder if maybe they're holding onto that option until after the election. They would still have time before the inauguration for him to step down and her to step up.
 
Theatrics are FAR more important than national security - or doing what is best for aMErikan citizens - folks need to be prepared to witness some of the most unbelievable shit in modern politics in the coming months.




I'm standing by to say "I told you so" when someone says. "Wow, didn't see THAT coming"
 
Reference policy change implemented in DoDD 5240.01, September 27, 2024

Interesting, Secretary of Defense approval mentioned a video posted on U-tube 22 hours ago, nor the policy guidance in the DOD publication concerning the potential use of lethal force support to civilian law enforcement officials in situations where a confrontation between civilian law enforcement and civilian individuals or groups is reasonably anticipated. Has ambiguity of not mentioning the military combat forces chain of the command is the president of the United States to the Secretary of Defense to the combatant command commanders. The top two military command authorities below the president are all filled by political appointments.

What is troubling is the policy language change happened under the current administration, not past or future president administrations.

Coincidence it happens this close to the imminent election this November or is an organized armed dissident problem being anticipated?
 
Last edited:
Johca said:
Reference policy change implemented in DoDD 5240.01, September 27, 2024

Interesting, Secretary of Defense approval mentioned a video posted on U-tube 22 hours ago, nor the policy guidance in the DOD publication concerning the potential use of lethal force support to civilian law enforcement officials in situations where a confrontation between civilian law enforcement and civilian individuals or groups is reasonably anticipated. Has ambiguity of not mentioning the military combat forces chain of the command is the president of the United States to the Secretary of Defense to the combatant command commanders. The top two military command authorities below the president are all filled by political appointments.

What is troubling is the policy language change happened under the current administration, not past or future president administrations.

Coincidence it happens this close to the imminent election this November or is an organized armed dissident problem being anticipated?
Click to expand...
When I saw that on some YT channel suggestions, I was like wait...wat.

Some folks are are going to get really excited about this and not the good kind either.
 
Johca said:
Reference policy change implemented in DoDD 5240.01, September 27, 2024

Interesting, Secretary of Defense approval mentioned a video posted on U-tube 22 hours ago, nor the policy guidance in the DOD publication concerning the potential use of lethal force support to civilian law enforcement officials in situations where a confrontation between civilian law enforcement and civilian individuals or groups is reasonably anticipated. Has ambiguity of not mentioning the military combat forces chain of the command is the president of the United States to the Secretary of Defense to the combatant command commanders. The top two military command authorities below the president are all filled by political appointments.

What is troubling is the policy language change happened under the current administration, not past or future president administrations.

Coincidence it happens this close to the imminent election this November or is an organized armed dissident problem being anticipated?
Click to expand...

Democrats Deployed BFVs on American Civilians outside of Waco, Texas. Also, what video? If it was on the DoD youtube page it went poof.
 

Similar threads

AWP
Your Weekend Safety Brief
Replies
7
Views
1K
Mad boomer
Mad boomer
Marauder06
Combined/Joint SOF Panel at West Point--Your Thoughts?
Replies
5
Views
3K
Gunz
Gunz
Ooh-Rah
Enlistment to SOF - The ShadowSpear Way
Replies
1
Views
3K
Ooh-Rah
Ooh-Rah
Failure404
Moral Autonomy and the Ethics of War
2
Replies
21
Views
3K
TYW27
TYW27
Haldex
MOS Choice - Setting up to Prepare
Replies
17
Views
10K
Arrowhead_FS85
A
Back
Top