|
Post by timmullen on Sept 6, 2024 22:20:04 GMT
Cheney backing Harris doesn’t actually come as that much of a surprise. He was Bush’s vice president. The Bushes don’t like Trump after the way he treated Jeb in the 2016 GOP debates. Bush senior backed Clinton in 2016 IIRC. Cheney was always seen as being to the right of Bush however, and he had major differences with GHW Bush whilst SecDef, probably most notably when Bush ignored his advice to keep going right up to Baghdad and be done with Saddam after the liberation of Kuwait. I don’t think he moves the dial all that much but shores up support amongst those Republicans struggling to support (or have already abandoned) Trump. He also retains close ties with the oil industry, some of whom may still be thinking about if and where to spend their dollars in campaign contributions, and Trump’s financial situation is said to be precarious (and one of the reasons they’ve already surrendered New Hampshire).
|
|
sanders
Green
Posts: 1,177
Member is Online
|
Post by sanders on Sept 7, 2024 0:07:54 GMT
Cheney backing Harris doesn’t actually come as that much of a surprise. He was Bush’s vice president. The Bushes don’t like Trump after the way he treated Jeb in the 2016 GOP debates. Bush senior backed Clinton in 2016 IIRC. The Bushes also are mainstream Republicans who respect the rule of law. Mainstream Republicans are still godawful people. Trump enabled Bush to be rehabilitated. He still did the Iraq War. I don't see any redeeming features. All these people are just hawks. Neocons who loved wars to support. The late John McCain was similar. I don't recall wars he opposed. He saved Obamacare - that was good. He also gave us McCain-Feingold 2002. Biden thankfully ended the Afghanistan misadventure.
|
|
|
Post by riccimarsh on Sept 7, 2024 2:03:25 GMT
|
|
|
Post by riccimarsh on Sept 7, 2024 2:20:16 GMT
Btw; do we all prefer “Crooked Joe”, or “Sleepy Joe”. Cos ya know, it’s important now.
|
|
sanders
Green
Posts: 1,177
Member is Online
|
Post by sanders on Sept 7, 2024 5:04:02 GMT
Albert A. Gore Jr. (D-TN) - nostalgic. He wouldn't win a primary today. There's a reason Beshear isn't VP. The Democratic coalition is very different. As for Cheney, cynical ploy methinks. Trying to become politically relevant again. He might help Harris in Texas. Lots of boomer neocons living there. The same is true for Arizona.
|
|
|
Post by mrpastelito on Sept 7, 2024 7:29:26 GMT
Dick Cheney is endorsing Kamala Harris. That's a welcome boost for Trump.
|
|
sanders
Green
Posts: 1,177
Member is Online
|
Post by sanders on Sept 7, 2024 7:41:32 GMT
319 Electoral Votes at a minimum. Describe a Bush - Cheney Harris - Walz voter.
Said voter works for Raytheon, Haliburton or Lockheed Martin, living in Northern Virginia. They have a nice big family home in Fairfax or Loudoun County or Manassas and voted for Youngkin. I am describing Stan Smith, the protagonist of 'American Dad', works for the CIA, in Langley, VA.
|
|
batman
Labour
Posts: 11,545
Member is Online
|
Post by batman on Sept 7, 2024 8:14:44 GMT
Much though I deplore most of Dick Cheney's political views, I fail to see an obvious cynical motive for him endorsing Kamala Harris. Surely he has no intention of serving in a Harris presidency.
|
|
r34t
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,114
|
Post by r34t on Sept 7, 2024 8:34:07 GMT
Much though I deplore most of Dick Cheney's political views, I fail to see an obvious cynical motive for him endorsing Kamala Harris. Surely he has no intention of serving in a Harris presidency. Dick Cheyney is 83. Probably a bit old for a comeback even in the US !
|
|
sanders
Green
Posts: 1,177
Member is Online
|
Post by sanders on Sept 7, 2024 8:44:05 GMT
Much though I deplore most of Dick Cheney's political views, I fail to see an obvious cynical motive for him endorsing Kamala Harris. Surely he has no intention of serving in a Harris presidency. Dick Cheyney is 83. Probably a bit old for a comeback even in the US ! I am 83 tomorrow don't y'know? On a serious note, might George W. Bush endorse Kamala Harris? I know George H.W. Bush didn't vote for Trump in 2016. What about Mitt Romney? I also know that Peter Plimpton Smith, Vermont's last Republican congressman, voted for Hilary Clinton. What's next? Karl Rove to manage Kamala's campaign? All these Republican backers are why Republicans winning the Senate doesn't worry me - I believe Lisa Murkowski would vote for Harris's SCOTUS picks if she gets to nominate a successor to Clarence Thomas. Alaska is something of a blue-trending state. Lisa Murkowski probably runs again in 2028.
|
|
batman
Labour
Posts: 11,545
Member is Online
|
Post by batman on Sept 7, 2024 9:21:50 GMT
George W.Bush has not voted for Trump but has not voted Democrat either. It's generally thought he voted for the Libertarian Party. It's not impossible he might decide to follow Dick Cheney.
|
|
sanders
Green
Posts: 1,177
Member is Online
|
Post by sanders on Sept 7, 2024 9:33:57 GMT
George W.Bush has not voted for Trump but has not voted Democrat either. It's generally thought he voted for the Libertarian Party. It's not impossible he might decide to follow Dick Cheney.This would be some October surprise. Dubya always followed Cheney's neocon agenda. Cheney headed up Halliburton before 2000. They did well from certain wars.
|
|
WJ
Non-Aligned
Posts: 3,196
|
Post by WJ on Sept 7, 2024 10:27:09 GMT
Dick Cheney is endorsing Kamala Harris. That's a welcome boost for Trump. I have to agree with you here. Does this sort of thing not rile up both "drain-the-swamp" MAGAs as well as independents who might be suspicious of "the establishment"?
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,274
|
Post by The Bishop on Sept 7, 2024 10:31:11 GMT
Though the MAGA's are all voting for Trump in any case, surely. I'm not totally convinced by this gambit but can see the rationale behind it.
|
|
sanders
Green
Posts: 1,177
Member is Online
|
Post by sanders on Sept 7, 2024 10:31:58 GMT
That's a welcome boost for Trump. I have to agree with you here. Does this sort of thing not rile up both "drain-the-swamp" MAGAs as well as independents who might be suspicious of "the establishment"? Trump tore Jeb! a new one. Kamala Harris is a career politician. She ain't a swamp creature like Cheney or Bush. I'm still supporting her wholeheartedly however. I think Harris counteracts swamp creature allegations with having Minnesota Governor Tim Walz as VP. He is not a swamp creature, and his policies are quite progressive for the Beltway-based commentariat. There's a reason many Republicans are seeking to besmirch and smear Gov. Walz - they fear him and his progressive, FDR-style agenda.
|
|
|
Post by stb12 on Sept 9, 2024 13:03:53 GMT
Nate Silver seems to be standing out from the other organisations when it comes to chance of winning forecasts with him having Trump at over 60%. Is there a particular different type of modelling he’s trying?
|
|
|
Post by timmullen on Sept 9, 2024 13:05:41 GMT
Nate Silver seems to be standing out from the other organisations when it comes to chance of winning forecasts with him having Trump at over 60%. Is there a particular different type of modelling he’s trying? Yes, but he won’t reveal the methodology and he’s paid for by Mike Lindell, the largest single donor to Trump…
|
|
|
Post by stb12 on Sept 9, 2024 13:09:06 GMT
Nate Silver seems to be standing out from the other organisations when it comes to chance of winning forecasts with him having Trump at over 60%. Is there a particular different type of modelling he’s trying? Yes, but he won’t reveal the methodology and he’s paid for by Mike Lindell, the largest single donor to Trump… I mean bias accusations will be inevitable but I guess if he turns out to be right (assuming the others don’t shift before the election comes) then it’ll make him look like a genius, even if it’s by chance
|
|
iain
Lib Dem
Posts: 11,256
|
Post by iain on Sept 9, 2024 13:58:50 GMT
Nate Silver seems to be standing out from the other organisations when it comes to chance of winning forecasts with him having Trump at over 60%. Is there a particular different type of modelling he’s trying? He has some weird thing to 'counteract' convention bounces which has led to Harris's chances falling post-DNC. It seems rather needless but should be a temporary blip (unless polling moves in Trump's favour) which will correct soon. Edit: he also has some odd poll choices in there at the minute. For instance he is missing the Harris +6 ABC/Ipsos poll from a week or so ago which is very highly rated, but has in trash from Rasmussen who were dropped from 538's analysis because they were so bad.
|
|
|
Post by stb12 on Sept 9, 2024 16:32:33 GMT
Nate Silver seems to be standing out from the other organisations when it comes to chance of winning forecasts with him having Trump at over 60%. Is there a particular different type of modelling he’s trying? He has some weird thing to 'counteract' convention bounces which has led to Harris's chances falling post-DNC. It seems rather needless but should be a temporary blip (unless polling moves in Trump's favour) which will correct soon. Edit: he also has some odd poll choices in there at the minute. For instance he is missing the Harris +6 ABC/Ipsos poll from a week or so ago which is very highly rated, but has in trash from Rasmussen who were dropped from 538's analysis because they were so bad. I do remember reading an article written by him fairly recently where he was clearly objecting to the dropping of Rasmussen. Certainly it seems like it could be make or break for his credibility that he seems to be heading in such a different direction
|
|