Donald Trump becomes betting favourite to win 2024 US presidential election

Like Hillary would win in 2016?

hahahahahahaha

I wouldn't trust an au site that spells favorite with a u.

Trolling nonsense.

Only if the Rethugs succeed in rigging it for him.

Let's hope he won't be around in 2024

I thought his little butt nugget Ron Deathsantis was the alleged fave repug candidate.

A lot rides on how well this current administration handles some really weighty issues. Covid, immigration, abortion and women’s reproductive rights, climate change and the environment, National security in a crazy time. The Afghanistan stuff hurt Biden a lot.

If he can solve Covid and deal with a lot of the economic issues around it that would help shush the Crazy republicans up.

Even with Afghanistan, I think the only thing that's truly hurting Biden right now is the behavior of Manchin and Sinema. If those two assholes would stop getting in the way, Biden would have accomplished so much more by now than he has, particularly with regard to infrastructure and voting rights. COVID could be damn near solved by now, too, were it not for the actions of Republicans actively campaigning against the vaccines for the sole purpose of slowing down Biden's progress against the pandemic (an objective so important to them that they're willing to kill their own base to achieve it).

"Some" HAhahahahahahahhhahahahahha... LOLOLOLOLLlOlololololol... catches breath... LOLOLOLOLOL

What a howl! I'm a Canadian and Donald Trump and his ilk/family will never see the light of day in the White House again. He's not a politician, he's a mess, and deep in debt. If only the Republicans could realize that he is a millstone around their neck!!

FavOURite? With a U? Aahahahahahahahahaahaa

Also, OMGGGGGGG I am so worried about something that won’t happen for 3 fucking years.

Hey, GHW Bush had a 91% approval rating a little less than a year before getting his ass kicked by Bill Clinton. So, yeah.

I think I have a bigger chance of winning the lottery than Donald Trump does at being the president ever again.

The OP publication may be run by Rupert Murdoch.

Bite me, motherfucker.

If the Dems throw this away with their stupid shit I will take a baseball bat to each and everyone of them.

r6, I'd argue that if the Democrats in Congress manage to actually PASS any significant "green" legislation, it will lose them 5-10 voters for every voter it wins for them.

Like it or not, "real" environmentalism is a losing campaign issue. A plurality of Democrats are passionate about it... but an equal plurality of Democrats are arguably somewhere between indifferent and privately opposed to it... and pretty much ALL Republicans are vehemently opposed to green legislation. Hell, I'd argue that being anti-green is just about the only thing LEFT that still unites Republicans across the board. If the Democrats campaign heavily on "green" issues in 2022 and 2024, it will ABSOLUTELY hurt them, and possibly cost even "centrist" Democrats the election.

In 1984, Ronald Reagan asked voters, "Are you better off today than you were four years ago?" The answer was overwhelmingly "Yes", and he won by the biggest landslide in American history. It's IMPERATIVE that WHOMEVER runs for President in 2024 (Biden, or someone else) be able to ask the same question, and get the same answer that Reagan did. At the end of the day, that's the only thing American voters genuinely care about. Make Americans feel wealthier, and all alleged sins and shortcomings will be washed away and forgiven.

Small businesses owners might blame Democrats for "the Great Resignation", but if the Democrats manage to leverage it into Americans having the first palpable gains in disposable income in two generations (augmented by Obamacare, which makes losing your employer's health insurance no longer the devastating crisis it used to be, and arguably has empowered millions of Americans to strike it out on their own without fear of losing medical coverage), it could be their winning deathblow.

On the other hand... if the Democrats crash into early 2023 babbling about carbon-neutrality, banning gas engines, and making people pay "the full cost" of meat, they'll go down in flames, and play right into the Republican Party's strategy for beating them.

I know it's a bit ghoulish to feel giddy over but the covid death toll in the US has increased by over 300,000 since vaccines became widely available and it's no mystery as to which political party the majority of those people supported. In elections where several swing states are won by razor thin margins I wonder if that will be a factor.

Oh no, the betting agencies are saying this, are they?

What the fuck do any of those assholes know.

Look at this shit. People are fed up and that can cause a huge back lash. Don't we have any middle left Dems who can get this right.

So... are there any centrist Democrats who are "campaigning for 2024, without openly campaigning for 2024?" Basically, doing the circuit tour, pressing flesh, and making a name for themselves nationally? You know, like Kamala SHOULD be out there doing every goddamn fucking day for the next 3 years... but inexplicably, isn't?

Eat more burgers!

R14 What laughable bullshit.

R17 WTF are you going on about? Middle/left Dems? You are NOT American. The question is, why are there no center/right republicans? There are zero moderate republicans.

After his win in 2016 I wouldn't take anything for granted.

Whilst he has a pulse he remains a threat. Don't underestimate him, his people and his followers. I know it just seems insane to think that he could win in 2024 but never rule anything out in this fucked up world.

Him winning is always possible. No one doubts that. I’m not worried about something that is 3 fucking years away.

I don't think America could survive another four years of The Lardfather.

It absolutely couldn't, R23. The question is still whether it can survive the damage wrought in the first four years.

There's an Australian TV show (on the ABC) called Planet America, which is a pretty serious take on the week in the US. They said tonight they believe Trump has a lock on the next Republican nomination.

Winning the election is a further step, of course, but assuming Dump is still alive and can put two words together, are the psychopaths who run the GOP really going to let anyone else run, do you think? I mean, to do otherwise would require that they display imagination, and that they stop thinking about a fascist coup. Can't see either of those things happening.

R24 Well Planet America calls it as they see it and back it up with facts. I suppose being on the other side of the planet they are able to examine things that they themselves aren't directly involved in or affected by.

r20, if you think r14 is "laughable bullshit", then go look in the mirror if Democrats lose seats in 2022 & lose the presidency in 2024, because that attitude is the main reason Democrats win enclaves, but keep getting slaughtered in state/national offices.

You don't have to deny the existence of climate change, or think it's not a problem, to nevertheless recognize that going overboard in ways voters will see as petty is going to hurt you on election day.

Case in point: California's Democrats banning gas chainsaws. If they'd banned their COMMERCIAL use, few people would have cared. But now, even people who MIGHT have bought a 'throw-away' cheap chainsaw at Harbor Freight to use once per ~30-50 years after some disaster will be forced to spend HUNDREDS on an electric one... AND deal with charging at a point when the local power grid is likely to be dysfunctional.

Oh, and they banned gas & diesel GENERATORS, too, so you can forget about having any emergency power source capable of running a refrigerator, much less air conditioners, an electric burner (they banned grills, too, so I hope you like room-temperature food as long as the power's out). Shit like this is what makes Republicans HATE Democrats. It's one thing to regulate businesses that use something DAILY, and another matter ENTIRELY to clamp down on meaningless pollution sources that only get used for a few days at a time when Bad Things Happened™.

R27 Dems aren’t doing that in purple states genius. Also, why is it Dems always have to walk a tight rope but republicans can do batshit crazy insane shit and “win”? Also, Dems have won 7 of the last 8 popular votes for President, control Congress, and have half the Govs in the US so they’re doing something right.

The talking point about losing in 2022 is BULLSHIT because, aside from two times, the party in power LOSES in the midterms. The GQP never changes when they lose the midterms so why should Dems? It is NATURAL to lose the midterms being the party in power you fuckwits.

The party in power tends to lose the midterms because they go off the deep end & totally piss off everyone in the middle. Republicans are no better than Democrats in this regard. The thing is, the Democrats can't afford to lose a single seat in the Senate. Their ONLY viable winning strategy for 2022 is to simultaneously run against Trump AND Progressives, by presenting candidates who are far enough to the right to let voters feel like they're defeating the excesses of the left, without going overboard in the OTHER direction and electing fascists who don't *care* if they destroy America in the process.

Also, it might just be nutty California Democrats banning things like affordable generators big enough to power anything more power-hungry than a cell phone, but you can bet your ASS every Republican in the other 49 states is going to accuse THEIR Democratic opponent of supporting it. And they'll get away with it, because the Democrat they're running against will be too much of a pussy to dare to admit that THEY think it's a stupid law, too.

The Republican Party gets away with being increasingly crazy because the Democrats are hellbent on snatching defeat from the jaws of victory every time they get a chance to become the majority party.

This upcoming election is likely to result in some OPENLY crazy & scary Republicans winning the Party's nomination. The ball is in the Democrats' court... they can nominate candidates who'll look sane, reasonable, and appealing next to MTG-like loonies, or they can gamble it all on Progressives & risk losing EVERYTHING to a rabid GOP'er.

It's the fundamental flaw of American politics... candidates get chosen by both parties' craziest extremists, but it's the semi-ambivalent middle that ultimately picks the winner.

R29/30 you try too hard. No, it is just the voters, no matter what, prefer to have divided govt. It is that simple. It’s republicans who have gone completely batshit insane, don’t even have a fucking policy to run on, has no plans to make anything better except blame immigrants, yet you bitch about some random policies in CA which you try hard to paint as nutty yet is a juggernaut economically. Fuck off, Boris.

I don't entirely disagree about the preference for a divided government. In fact, that's why I think the Republican Party's drive to impose British-style party discipline starting in the 1990s was the most corrosive & destructive thing that's happened to Congress.

A healthy two-party system depends partly upon the willingness/ability of officials to work with the other party to further the agenda of their own constituents, even when it doesn't neatly align with their Party. The more hamstrung representatives become by their Party's leaders, the more dysfunctional the government becomes.

That's partly why I think the next step towards normalcy would be a Democratic Party that's an even bigger tent... conceivably spanning from Bernie Sanders to somewhere around Kinzinger, Romney, Jeb Bush, or (at the extreme, absoulute outer limit) Dan Crenshaw. Nominally, an overwhelming single-party supermajority... but really, a daily-shifting loose coalition spanning mainstream center-left to center-right American ideology whose uniting ideology is a commitment to democracy over fascism. A party that would be as "disciplined" as a herd of cats (and occasionally, fight like cats on the chamber floor), but still capable of mustering enough coherence to fend off authoritarian extremists on both the right and left.

In effect, multiple de-facto shadow parties within a big tent.

I don't think such a coalition would last longer than 8-12 years. Basically, it would coalesce after a midterm election, peak during the presidency of a single charismatic president who embodied its theme, then fall apart into 3 or 4 parties during the next president's administration that eventually reshuffle into 2 dominant ones. Hopefully, along the way, it would break the ability of parties like the present-day GOP to hold everyone hostage, and bring back the bipartisan cooperation a healthy government depends on.

IMHO, the Democrats need to treat the problem with Sinema & Manchin as a practice run for governing without an absolute majority. Schumer needs to find a Republican or two who'll neutralize Sinema in a way that enables the passage of a bill with more spending than Sinema would have approved, but also more spending on things REPUBLICAN would support.

Example: cut most of the "green" initiatives to slash a trillion or so, then allocate a hundred billion or so to freeway widening (making the greens howl, but making even deficit-hawk Republicans grudgingly smile). Maybe include language declaring nuclear power to be "green" by definition (and thus eligible for the same subsidies as wind, solar, etc).

If the Democrats managed to pass the bill by gaining 2 of Romney, Collins, or Murkowski, with Sinema & Manchin falling in line, over the protests (and lost votes) of 2 Progressive/Green Democrats, it would lay the foundation for a de-facto centrist coalition in the Senate in 2022 even IF 1 or 2 seats trade parties.

With a little luck, if the Democrats gave those two Republicans powerful roles, we could imagine a scenario where the "Republicans" had a 1 or 2 seat majority, but the Democrats could still muster the votes to back Romney/Collins/etc as Speaker over the Republicans' infuriated protests (giving leadership to the Senate's remaining non-Trumpian Republicans, and filling the remaining roles with centrist Democrats).

With Republicans like Romney in the top spots, they'd be relatively insulated from a backlash at home. The Democrats would back primary opponents who knew they'd get zero support from the Party if the incumbent Republican won the primary, but would get "100%" party support on the 1% chance Republicans broke with tradition, allowed challengers to an incumbent Republican, and the challenger won the primary.

The strategy's key is to break the automatic backing of Republican Senators for the "party's" choice of Speaker, to allow Centrists like R/C/M to hijack it with the Democrats' cooperation and make THEM the Speaker instead. Such a move would DEVASTATE the GOP's ability to bully Senators into voting on party lines.

[quote] Their ONLY viable winning strategy for 2022 is to simultaneously run against Trump AND Progressives, by presenting candidates who are far enough to the right to let voters feel like they're defeating the excesses of the left, without going overboard in the OTHER direction and electing fascists who don't *care* if they destroy America in the process.

You mean MODERATES. Not "far enough to the right". Say the word. Moderates. Centrists. Whether they be left leaning (my preference) or right leaning, these are the people who try to find some common ground and work toward a goal. These people used to be called liberals and conservatives. Those words should still be used. Somehow we have allowed the extremists to take those words away.

R29/R30, gets it. R31 does not get it. Doesn't even understand the use of a California law that goes OTT negatively unnecessarily affecting the needs of the regular citizen as an example. Really, R31, must it all be spelled out to you like a 6 year old?

He'll get the nomination and pick DeSantis as his running mate.

r34, good point about the terminology. The fundamental thing is, the Democratic Party's leadership has to be willing to simultaneously tone down the "football team" partisan rivalry AND find ways to both tempt Republicans into "having an affair" with like-minded (mostly) allies across the aisle.

Attempting to bargain with the Republican PARTY is futile. The Democrats should concede NOTHING to the Republican PARTY. The entire goal needs to be finding ways to drive subtle wedges between the few-remaining Centrist Republicans and the GOP's radical-right leadership AND clearing a path for them to find a viable political future outside of it... possibly within the Democratic Party, possibly as an Independent ally.

The Democrats don't need to flip a LOT of Republicans, just enough to have a safe majority if a few Democrats balk. In a sense, it would be kind of like having 5 shadow parties:

* an authoritarian, uncompromising hard-left "green"/Progressive shadow party that would be mostly useless to everyone including themselves, regardless of nominal party affiliation, because they'd refuse to support ANYTHING that didn't ram environmentalism down everyone else's throats. They'd be mostly ignored, and might eventually leave to start their own party... and most of the Democrats would privately celebrate and say, "Don't let the door hit you on the way out!"

* The "Bernie" group... definitely to the left of center, and highly sympathetic to Green causes... but pragmatic enough to take the victories it can, and cooperate with centrist Democrats to pass Progressive laws that don't go as far as they'd like, but go further than they could hope to achieve without centrist support (and semi-ambivalence by the center-right).

* The "center-left" group -- the "mainstream" Democrats. They're happier to cooperate with the Bernie group than the "center-right" group, but are equally willing to reach in the other direction when the Bernie group acts like a bossy, high-maintenance bottom.

* The "center-right" group -- conservative Democrats like Sinema, moderate Republicans willing to cross the aisle to pass laws that are more acceptable to their constituents than the Democrats would pass with Bernie-mandated compromises, formerly-Republican "independents" who've decided (along with many of their constituents) the GOP has just become too "deplorable", but aren't quite ready to get into a relationship with a new party just yet, and former Republicans who've officially joined the Democratic Party.

The center-right group wouldn't necessarily be besties with the Democratic Party's leadership, but they'd recognize that they have more common goals with center-left Democrats than they've EVER had with Trump, MTG, and Desantis... and regardless of whether they disagree with Mitch McConnell's ideology, their relationship with him (and the rest of the GOP's senior leadership) would be kind of like former battered spouses of an abusive ex.

Day to day, the center-left group is dominant, but the actual coalitions oscillate between the BernieDemocrats and CenterRight... partly, because the Democrats' leadership would actively go out of its way to cultivate and maintain working relationships with both, just to keep either side from becoming completely dominant. Meanwhile, the authoritarians at both ends of the spectrum (mostly Greens at the left, and Trumpians at the right) would throw noisy tantrums, but be mostly neutralized and politically harmless.

Over the long run, the Democrats' "big tent" philosophy will probably be its biggest strength and source of appeal to disaffected former Republicans. After years of heavy-handed abuse and bullying by the GOP's senior leadership, they're going to have ZERO tolerance for ANY attempt by the Democrats (or anyone else) to treat them the same way. I think that alone will limit their interest in trying to caucus with each other... the moment they feel like any organizer MIGHT twist their arm (like Mitch used to), they'll be more inclined to angrily head for the door than say, "Thank you, Sir, May I have another?"

Put another way, organizing the Democrats will be like herding cats... and the former Republicans will be like cats that were either born feral, or escaped from an abusive situation.

There is no tempting a few republicans. They’re all in. If they don’t vote the way leadership wants, they will be primaried and lose. The GQP won’t tolerate any dissent. Even their saner ones are voting against good stuff. Let’s face it, even Murkowski is too far right. She just is.

Cutting climate policy is a loser not only for the party but Earth. How many more epic weather events need to fill up a single calendar year for us all to start shitting our pants? It gets worse every year. Epic weather events happen almost every week or are on-going like droughts. We are close to seeing major food chain disruptions, habitat disruptions, which will lead to massive migration and devastating upheaval.

Barring a miracle, Rubio will probably be re-elected in 2022... which buys him the luxury of a few years to flip parties if the political winds change enough after 2022 or 2024.

Due to his conservatism, I think he'd have a very hard time fitting in with the Democrats. I think even mainstream centrist Democrats would chafe. On the other hand... Florida. If Rubio flipped, the Democrats would have to suck and fuck him on demand every time he dropped his pants, because Florida is too important to ignore. If the Democrats held their noses and warmly welcomed him (and took a few steps to the right to shake his hand), it could potentially unleash an avalanche of switches from other Florida officials, and turn Florida (nominally) blue almost overnight.

Once again, the question for Democrats is, "How badly do you want a durable, robust legislative majority, and how far are you willing to go in order to get it?" Most Americans are now at least slightly leftward of the GOP, but still solidly to the right of Bernie. Trump is going to drag the GOP into the fires of hell, and the Democratic Party will have a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to catapult itself into majority-party status for a generation IF it can manage to avoid cutting its own throat and scaring everybody off.