One of my older friends revealed this to me

I was there and voted in that election. it really DID matter then who the "undecided" voted for. BUT, Ross perot cut a VERY big chunk out of the electorate. Also, HW Bush was effective, and incumbent but reneged on his "no more taxes" thing and that seriously cost him.

so, yes and no

Gurl, I don't know, we'll see. These post-convention polls are lowkey disappointing.

Not a fair comparison.

I have seen Melania's titties, I want to see Doug's.

Does anyone have a bare chested picture of Doug at the beach?

There is a group of people who persists in holding on to a ruse-colored memory of the Trump Administration. They think he has some magic power to lower prices and make all the bad things go away.

[quote]These post-convention polls are lowkey disappointing.

No they aren't. They are doing what pollsters need them to do, keep attention focused on the race.

They are adjusting their numbers so that they do not look like the 2016 losers they are, by only moving the needle a micro-amount each week.

They are actually having the public conform to THEIR numbers.

Pollsters have put the cart before the horse. Pollsters know that THEY are the ones who have to win.

That's why we need to ignore them.

Nah. This is its own thing. Sociopathic Trump and old-school GHW Bush couldn’t be more different as GOP nominees, we’d had 12 long unbroken years of Reagan-Bush, and Bush was an incumbent Prez. Plus the Ross Perot factor.

Hope you're right, r5. I'm already fully in the mindset of Kamala winning and so I'm mostly focused on the Senate races. At this point, it would actually kill me if we got a repeat of 2016.

No, younger idiot. It was a completely different dynamic: a significant and material third-party candidate, which had not been seen since 1968.

R8 Why disrespect me?

Because of your patronizing reference to an older person…as transparent as “dear eldergay” threads. Try to be more original next time, without cribbing.

[quote] There is a group of people who persists in holding on to a ruse-colored memory of the Trump Administration. They think he has some magic power to lower prices and make all the bad things go away.

They're stupid, R4.

R10 That wasn’t my intention. He is older with a great bod and successful career. He works out every day.

They fit in well on DL political threads, don’t they^^ 🫨

Just stop… r12

R9, r8 is our resident rightwing troll.

As someone who met and campaigned for a young charismatic Clinton in college it was sad to see the feeble decrepit relic he has become. Makes one concious of one's own mortality

I realize it was a typo, but

[quote]a ruse-colored memory of the Trump Administration

is probably the best description of that farce that I have heard to date.

Indeed R16. I felt the same. The blessed and healthy among us can claim that 70 is the new 60, but 80 is not the new 50. Elderly is elderly and we all slide down into it if death doesn’t get us sooner.

On a less depressing return to OP’s topic, Kamala is tapping into women’s enthusiasm like Hillary did and tapping into young people’s enthusiasm like Bill and Barack did. And she’s facing some racism and some misogyny as serious headwinds. This is all uncharted territory for all kinds of reasons. I’m optimistic though! We’ve never had a candidate lose before when they are slightly ahead in the polls and their favorability rating is better and their campaign crowds are bigger.

We were so doomed with Biden. Feels (to me) like a 75% chance Harris will prevail and we will finally see the last of Trump as leader of the GOP.

R16, Bill Clinton looked neither feeble nor decrepit. His hands shook a tad and his voice has grown weaker with age, but he stood tall and spoke well. He didn't shuffle and whisper as Biden, nor did he become incoherent as Trump.

I should have his hair!

Democrats hopeful Harris can reignite the magic of Obama's 2008 run:

OP you are somehow failing to understand that Clinton was not elected by the youth; he was elected by the massive baby boomer generation. Both Trump and Harris are baby boomers.

How could you fail to realize this?

R21 you are wrong. And Harris isn’t a baby boomer, culturally.

R21 when you’re done castigating our OP, come look at the facts and eat a little crow. Clinton won based on a surge of youth votes. He and Bush were 50/50 on the Boomer votes.

This guy brilliantly explains how Harris's economy will be a big success: Because her economic plans are IDENTICAL to Bill Clinton's, who had the most successful economy of the past 50 years.

R24, Clinton did some things right economically but the #1 thing he did right was to have the good fortune of being the sitting US president while the Internet and the massive dot.com boom happened.

[quote] ruse-colored memory

Huh?

R24 Bam. Democrats should just start running vids like this as commercials. Be innovative. He is hot as fuck too.

I can kind of see the analogy of Clinton / Kamala Harris.

You've had old guys in office for a long time. Kamala Harris seems like something new and possibly relatable.

Anything deeper than that, I'll leave that to others to discuss.

R19 78 but always mistaken for 26.

How great will she look next to all the world leaders when they meet and pose for a picture? Every time Cheeto was out there, it was very embarrassing. I could laugh because he was so ridiculously out of place but the shame was awful, too.

1992 is not really comparable to 2024. First, Bush the elder was not as popular as his predecessor; second, he made the mistake of saying "read my lips: no new taxes" and then being a real politician, gave into Congress' demands and raised taxes; third, he was ambushed by Newt Gingrich who was among the first (if not the first) Republikkkan who engaged in a take-no-prisoners style of politics, and when HW backtracked on the tax pledge it gave Newt the opportunity to wreak havoc. Enter Ross Perot (and Admiral Stockdale whom I still quote to this day: "Who am I? Why am I here?") and his faux-populist propaganda, and it sealed HW's fate.

We have no third party candidate with any serious following. Clinton was 46 the day he was inaugurated, Harris will be 60. We don't have an incumbent POTUS for the Republikkkans to hammer with political missteps. There's no one voice in Congress that holds as much sway as Newt did in the early 90s. And finally, the youth vote did propel Clinton, but was not the determinative factor that the boomers were. Now that the boomers have begun dying off (with an assist from Trump's complete bungling of the pandemic) and young voters who have largely sat out the last three elections have finally come to understand that you have to make your preferences known if you expect the government to function.

George H.W. Bush said "no new taxes," not "no more taxes."

Agreed, R19. Many people can't tell the difference between aging and decrepitude. I think it's a prejudice, or maybe they're just too young to discern the difference. The body undergoes more than a few changes with aging that are more cosmetic than anything, thus they don't necessarily signify weakness or feebleness. Clinton can sound creaky and still be sharp as a tack. He's been skinny for years because of the diet he's on for his heart problems. For example.

Bill be old. Cut the shit.

Oh stop, r34. You should be so healthy at 78. The man doesn't even need a cane to get around.

Yes, r35. I hate how it's become acceptable to call an old person feeble, decrepit, a desiccated husk etc. There seems to be an implication that their life no longer has value. Shades of Aktion T4.

I’m the age at which he almost died on the operating table…they saved him with a multi-bypass.

I’ll get back to you in 20 years.

r37 and that emergency stent procedure. Bill's lucky for modern medicine.

Bill’s lucky for good health coverage. FIFY

[quote]One of my older friends revealed this to me

Like most "revelations," this is 80% hogwash.

So what.

[quote] ruse-colored memory of the Trump Administration

I know it's a typo but this is even more accurate.

He meant russian

R28, How do you measure or experience time?

Obama was President 2008-2016, being the 5th youngest (47) upon taking office. So your "old guys in office for a long time"---this century and a bit prior---actually equals only the combined 8 years of Trump and Biden. Before Obama, Dubya at 54 (8 years) was younger than KH, and prior to him, Clinton was only 46 (8 years) when inaugurated.

Kamala would be 60 at hers. But the larger picture, which you cover with the word "seems," is everything: The Democratic ticket gives off a youthful, cool, hip vibe, all about the possibilities of the future.

Trump's campaign seems like a tired old "Get off my lawn and leave my gas-guzzler and my toilet alone!" ossified routine of a paranoiac who has nothing to offer Americans but restrictions, recisions, and removals.

Taken to their extremes, it is Utopia vs Dystopia.

R[22} - “Harris isn’t a boomer culturally” - wtf does that even mean? Born in 1964 - she’s the end of the boomer generation. Why lie about it?

R44 It’s weird both Dubya and Bill do not seem younger than Kamala is now when they entered office.

Kamala looks closer to 50 than 60. Her running mate looks more like what 60 is to most people. But maybe after an 81 year old Biden, 60 looks young.!

R44, the point is that young voters don’t remember that far back. The past 8 years of old farts is a long time, for them.