![](https://images.bigfootymedia.com/icons/mobile-bullets/essendon.png)
prevented from voting through various means
How so?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
LIVE: Sydney Swans vs GWS Giants - 3:20PM Sat - 1st QF
Squiggle tips Swans at 63% chance -- What's your tip? -- Team line-ups »
LIVE: Brisbane Lions vs Carlton - 7:30PM Sat - 1st EF
Squiggle tips Lions at 73% chance -- What's your tip? -- Team line-ups »
AFLW 2024 - Round 2 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
prevented from voting through various means
It's a good way of putting it Lore. It's where my line of thought is coming from, Joe managed to get millions to turn up because he'd been a brilliant politician for so long so there were a lot of "Joe" people.I don't think it's the "undecideds" that will decide it... Since America doesn't have mandatory voting, and has pockets of decided voters who are actively discouraged/prevented from voting through various means, the turnout of "decideds" matters more than what those who are undecided, particularly in swing states.
Too soon mateI made a killing on Trump
How so?
It's largely driven by the level of enthusiasm for a candidate.It's a good way of putting it Lore. It's where my line of thought is coming from, Joe managed to get millions to turn up because he'd been a brilliant politician for so long so there were a lot of "Joe" people.
I think Kamala struggles to capture those same masses, though maybe she leans heavily into "Joe anointed me."
Or maybe I'm vastly underestimating her ability to galvanise the base.
Only for those who are pro-choice. Which from memory has only climbed into a positive majority literally in the last 24 months or so.It's largely driven by the level of enthusiasm for a candidate.
The result of 2016 was driven by one of the least inspiring and widely disliked democrat candidates simultaneously with Trump galvanising a small segment of the population who hadn't really been seen as relevant to US elections previously.
This year I think the deciding factor will be the extent to which fear of a Trump presidency and the potential for things like Project 2025 motivates people to get out and vote democrat. Conservative attacks on reproductive rights have been hugely unpopular and I'm sure that will form a big part of any democrat campaign.
Only for those who are pro-choice. Which from memory has only climbed into a positive majority literally in the last 24 months or so.
It brings out the voters though, there’s been a number of pro choice wins even in pretty deep red states. In a system where voting is optional an issue that brings out otherwise apathetic voters is a big deal. It’s why Trump is doing what he can to downplay P25.Only for those who are pro-choice. Which from memory has only climbed into a positive majority literally in the last 24 months or so.
Something I was reading this morning indicated that the Republican policy platform has removed a reference to a nation-wide abortion ban. They're now saying they want to leave it to the states. It's not a complete about-face by any means, they're still ideologically anti-abortion, but it's interesting that they've weakened their stance on it a little.Only for those who are pro-choice. Which from memory has only climbed into a positive majority literally in the last 24 months or so.
Putting a woman of colour against Trump is certainly going to put people to the test. When you're asked to choose between a white xenophobe and a mixed-race child of migrants, between a pussy-grabber and a feminist.It's a good way of putting it Lore. It's where my line of thought is coming from, Joe managed to get millions to turn up because he'd been a brilliant politician for so long so there were a lot of "Joe" people.
I think Kamala struggles to capture those same masses, though maybe she leans heavily into "Joe anointed me."
Or maybe I'm vastly underestimating her ability to galvanise the base.
Putting a woman of colour against Trump is certainly going to put people to the test. When you're asked to choose between a white xenophobe and a mixed-race child of migrants, between a pussy-grabber and a feminist.
Biden or someone like him is basically the middle-ground candidate for people who like the status quo of a white man in charge that isn't loudly racist and sexist... but I don't know if that's going to inspire people to vote.
The turnout is probably higher when you have something to vote against, than when you have something to vote for, and when turnout is a deciding factor it could be to some benefit for both candidates.
I think it would test Australia too, in a different way, if we had an election between equivalent sorts of characters... but because we have mandatory voting we tend to put up two Bidens for election, instead of a Trump and a Harris.
If you find it hilarious you should be laughing. Instead it seems I'm the one laughing (at the irony of your response)...It's hilarious that you instinctively jump into this idea that the majority look at candidates based on race or gender. That isn't what is important to most people. What is important is the economy and how fit the person is for the job. You act as if Obama wasn't elected twice and that it had everything to do with his race or gender. That's beyond ridiculous.
Hence why the majority, on all sides, were wary of Biden being "fit" for the role, in the sense that his ability to fulfil the duties required of a president, regardless of what/who is, was in question. This anxiety (regarding the fitness of the role) began to play in Trump's favour in that he was seen as more capable even in the minds of people who wouldn't have initially voted for him.
To add to this, America's issues at the moment extend further abroad, with two wars currently ongoing. The anxiety over Biden's fitness for the role has created a form of fatigue in the minds of the public where they perceive even a slight improvement in cognitive/mental competence than that seen in Biden as being something that would translate into an ability to calm their fears regarding the state of the world and the state of the economy/their ability to put food on the table/keep the heat on.
As an aside you will have some people who are deep into the paranoia of the government being hell-bent on control, or corruption within it, where they will gravitate towards the "underdog" they perceive is being most negatively treated by it, which in their eyes justifies their paranoia.
There are real issues in the US and the world right now with the majority just wanting someone who will drive them out of it. In the same way that Obama was seen as most capable before. To reduce it all to just what pigment someone is or what's in their pants is both disingenuous and a form of tribalism that is of the same ilk as the one being (rightly) criticised.
Trump has definitely said the same at some stage in the past few months.Something I was reading this morning indicated that the Republican policy platform has removed a reference to a nation-wide abortion ban. They're now saying they want to leave it to the states. It's not a complete about-face by any means, they're still ideologically anti-abortion, but it's interesting that they've weakened their stance on it a little.
It's been a day and there's already heaps of racist memes on various conservative social media channels. It's a huge issue in the US and it'll absolutely sway some voters.It's hilarious that you instinctively jump into this idea that the majority look at candidates based on race or gender. That isn't what is important to most people. What is important is the economy and how fit the person is for the job. You act as if Obama wasn't elected twice and that it had everything to do with his race or gender. That's beyond ridiculous.
Hence why the majority, on all sides, were wary of Biden being "fit" for the role, in the sense that his ability to fulfil the duties required of a president, regardless of what/who is, was in question. This anxiety (regarding the fitness of the role) began to play in Trump's favour in that he was seen as more capable even in the minds of people who wouldn't have initially voted for him.
To add to this, America's issues at the moment extend further abroad, with two wars currently ongoing. The anxiety over Biden's fitness for the role has created a form of fatigue in the minds of the public where they perceive even a slight improvement in cognitive/mental competence than that seen in Biden as being something that would translate into an ability to calm their fears regarding the state of the world and the state of the economy/their ability to put food on the table/keep the heat on.
As an aside you will have some people who are deep into the paranoia of the government being hell-bent on control, or corruption within it, where they will gravitate towards the "underdog" they perceive is being most negatively treated by it, which in their eyes justifies their paranoia.
There are real issues in the US and the world right now with the majority just wanting someone who will drive them out of it. In the same way that Obama was seen as most capable before. To reduce it all to just what pigment someone is or what's in their pants is both disingenuous and a form of tribalism that is of the same ilk as the one being (rightly) criticised.
Purely out of interest what are the conservative social media channels? Trumps one which the name escapes me, which other ones?It's been a day and there's already heaps of racist memes on various conservative social media channels. It's a huge issue in the US and it'll absolutely sway some voters.
Rumble, probably X (formerly Twitter).Purely out of interest what are the conservative social media channels? Trumps one which the name escapes me, which other ones?
truth socialRumble, probably X (formerly Twitter).
It's hilarious that you instinctively jump into this idea that the majority look at candidates based on race or gender. That isn't what is important to most people. What is important is the economy and how fit the person is for the job. You act as if Obama wasn't elected twice and that it had everything to do with his race or gender. That's beyond ridiculous.
Hence why the majority, on all sides, were wary of Biden being "fit" for the role, in the sense that his ability to fulfil the duties required of a president, regardless of what/who is, was in question. This anxiety (regarding the fitness of the role) began to play in Trump's favour in that he was seen as more capable even in the minds of people who wouldn't have initially voted for him.
To add to this, America's issues at the moment extend further abroad, with two wars currently ongoing. The anxiety over Biden's fitness for the role has created a form of fatigue in the minds of the public where they perceive even a slight improvement in cognitive/mental competence than that seen in Biden as being something that would translate into an ability to calm their fears regarding the state of the world and the state of the economy/their ability to put food on the table/keep the heat on.
As an aside you will have some people who are deep into the paranoia of the government being hell-bent on control, or corruption within it, where they will gravitate towards the "underdog" they perceive is being most negatively treated by it, which in their eyes justifies their paranoia.
There are real issues in the US and the world right now with the majority just wanting someone who will drive them out of it. In the same way that Obama was seen as most capable before. To reduce it all to just what pigment someone is or what's in their pants is both disingenuous and a form of tribalism that is of the same ilk as the one being (rightly) criticised.
Yep, that’s the Trump onetruth social
Trump’s is Truth Social, but you can find it on Twitter etc as wellPurely out of interest what are the conservative social media channels? Trumps one which the name escapes me, which other ones?
Trump’s is Truth Social, but you can find it on Twitter etc as well
I thought this was kinda funny
That's pretty obviously racist and one of the things they're trying to stop their bigot cohorts saying.They'll just keep referring to 'DEI Hires' instead of being obviously racist.
That's pretty obviously racist and one of the things they're trying to stop their bigot cohorts saying.