Active Member
If nothing else, the spectacle he made at the NABJ event appears to have worked.
All it was really designed to do was to get everyone to stop focusing on how much momentum Harris's campaign had, and it's done that. We've moved from Harris is great back to Trump being racist. and now his insane demands for the debates.
On a positive note, I believe that her running mate will be announced soon, which will hopefully shift the focus back to something positive.
Active Member
I’m ok with the discussion moving to the debate. The more people talk about it the better… the closer people are watching, the harder it will be for him to scurry off and hide
The worst thing Trump could do right now to sink his campaign is meet Kamala on a debate stage. She’ll move on him like a bitch, grab him by the pussy, and Mexico will pay for it
EDIT: I'm going to pull out my crystal ball here... I think the Harris camp is probably doing the smart thing. They know he's trying to skip the debate and save face. They have to know that if they argue with his terms, he'll run and claim he acted in good faith.
So... if I was on Kamala's team of advisors, I would say "Take the debate, but don't agree to anything privately. Don't talk to Trump or his team. Make a public announcement in front of a televised audience agreeing to do a debate at Fox, and say "the arena audience is unusual, but it could be accommodated, if we simply ensure that half of the audience is registered republican, and the other half democrat. That would ensure that things are equal and balanced for you Donald; we wouldn't want the entire audience to be overwhelmed with my supporters. It wouldn't be fair to you."
Boom. Checkmate. The audience will probably go insane and fights will erupt, chaos will ensue, and when the dust clears, all of that insanity is going to be Trump's fault for insisting on this dumb arena audience thing. That, and he'll be obliterated in the debate. Win win.
Last edited by Jinsai; 08-03-2024 at 01:49 PM.
Active Member
He is a WWE Hall of Famer, after all.
"What is “cheap heat”? It’s when a wrestling heel says or does something in an obvious attempt to antagonize the audience and make them hate him."
https://www.thebulwark.com/p/donald-trumps-cheap-heat
Active Member
Arrrrrrrrrrrrgggg, the Harris camp is walking straight into a trap here. Kamala’s team responded to Trump’s debate renegotiation with a rejection.
Trump will probably respond by the end of the day, suggesting that it’s Kamala who is chickening out of the debate. At the very least, accept the debate but reject the arena crowd audience stipulation. The only reason Trump offered the Fox debate is because he wants you to reject it!!!!!
Ugh… I hope I’m wrong, but this is looking like there’s going to be no debate… And it’s really frustrating, because I’ve got this feeling that if the debate actually happens, Kamala has this in the bag. The whole election. And Trump suspects that’s true… he’s too much of a narcissist to really process that she’s a better debater than him, but deep down he knows it’s a bad idea, and I’m sure everyone around him is telling him that too.
You need to do everything you can to force him into the debate. Challenge him every day… to wherever he wants. Don’t stick to this ABC date. It’s not going to happen.
Last edited by Jinsai; 08-03-2024 at 03:57 PM.
Active Member
agreed- a debate will work in Harris's favor. no debate will work in Trump's.
Throbbing Member
I agree with you guys that in theory Harris greatly benefits from any debate and the end goal should be to get it done. However, from a strategic standpoint I think I understand why they shot this thing down.Originally Posted by Jinsai
A debate was already agreed on for ABC with specific rules and everyone knows it. Trump isn't just running from a debate here, he's running from the agreed upon format. One of the biggest reasons Biden looked so bad in that first debate is because of how the muted mics and quiet format brought their words, ideas, and thought processes to the forefront. Only now, the tables will be turned and Trump KNOWS he'll be spanked so he's running away and crying like a little child "wah wah, change the rules for me just how I like it."
But a debate hosted by FOX news with a stadium sized crowd is a potential disaster for Harris, even if her performance is an all time great one. There's no reason her team should agree to such obvious bullshit.
I say this as a person who constantly watches debates on wide variety of topics. I do this for fun and have done so for years. One thing I've learned over the years is that the BEST debates that break the most ground and expose arguments are the ones that are done in podcast style format. The less crowd/noise the better when it comes to ideas. But with a crowd? You're at the mercy of showmanship then. I've seen many excellent debaters absolutely annihilate their opponents rhetorically and intellectually only for large crowds to be taken in by cheap jokes, one liners, begging the question, ad hominem attacks, and appeals to base human instincts.
To make matters worse. Even if the crowd is 50/50, this is still not going to work in Harris' favor. Why? Because dems are clearly more likely to be good listeners who are going to want to hear all this while the other side are (and I mean this quite literally after the abomination that was the RNC) a bunch of pro wrestling fan types who are just waiting to make some noise every time trump vomits up one liners or makes racist remarks.
Sure, we'd all like to think humans are better than this. We are not. We are still very much primates who never left the wild and risking the fate of the election on a WWE stadium sized crowd is a huge pass in my eyes. Crowd noise moves the national audience more than most know. It works on most people on a subconscious level. This is why the sitcom laugh track became a thing after all.
If I were Harris' team I would hammer it the fuck home that you are going to debate me on ABC the same way you already agreed to or there isn't going to be one. She is continually gaining momentum and may not need this as much as we initially thought. The message is simple. Original debate rules or you're a bitch and everyone knows it Donny. Let the least senile candidate win.
Just like the NCAA tournament, this HAS to be done on neutral ground. That's just my 2 cents anyways.
edit: Oh, and just to add to the discussion of momentum Harris has on her side right now, check Vegas odds. They tend to fluctuate on speculation and atmosphere much more than polls, similar to the day to day stock market. In the last two weeks I've watched Trump's odds go from everybody and their mom betting on him to now just about dead even. This means people are actually putting money on Harris to win in these last couple weeks. It certainly doesn't set anything in stone. But unlike political pundits, it actually is a more unbiased insight into the feeling in the room. Vegas doesn't fuck around with their money like that so if they move odds it's because they're willing to throw the cash down. Last week if you bet $100 on Harris to win you'd have a potential return of $220 if you won. Today? A $100 bet gets you $100. Dead heat. Could be entirely different 2 days from now but right now momentum seems to be clearly on her side.
Last edited by burnmotherfucker!; 08-03-2024 at 05:28 PM.
Active Member
It doesn't even matter. The previous discussion was Harris has momentum.
The new discussions are "Should Harris agree to Trumps terms on the debate?" and "Is Trump backing out, or is Harris backing out?".
The first question, is meant to divide Democrats. The second is meant to divide the country.
Don't let him dictate the narrative and the news cycle. He stole the attention back with his racism, then used that attention to create division.
Pick a VP, have the VP show up to the debate that Trump wants, and have Kamala wait at the one that was already arranged. All the VP has to say is "she's waiting for you, you coward". After that (s)he can just walk off stage and it won't matter.
EDIT: Let's have some fucking fun with this bullshit. Calling them weird was fun. A unified front calling them cowards to their face could be fun too.
Last edited by M1ke; 08-03-2024 at 07:33 PM.
Active Member
Oh I LIKE this energy.
Active Member
I think my favorite take on this racist craziness: “Donald Trump would definitely know Kamala Harris was black if he was renting her an apartment”
Active Member
Less than 100 days to go.
How can people still support this guy?"VOTERS HAVE A CHOICE — TRUMP PROSPERITY, OR THE KAMALA CRASH & GREAT DEPRESSION OF 2024, NOT TO MENTION THE PROBABILITY OF WORLD WAR lll IF THESE VERY STUPID PEOPLE REMAIN IN OFFICE,"
Active Member
seems it's down to Shapiro and Walz
I think it's going to be Shapiro, and they're just throwing Walz's name out there to keep progressives happy that he came in 2nd place
BADGERS
Had to wonder how they'd screw it up. It's a pick that would unite the party or one that would divide the party... And it's going to be the latter
Active Member
sadly that's exactly my thoughts as well, and everyone else I've talked to about it.
Active Member
The Democrats are the kings of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory so this isn't that surprising. I just hope the right choice is made.
Active Member
Harris needs PA. Shapiro is a good choice.
Active Member
His association brings his stances on Israel into focus. Kamala has been able to avoid the backlash that was lobbied at Biden for his handling of the Gaza situation, but that will rise up as an issue if Shapiro is chosen to be VP.
Harris is recapturing the youth vote, and Gaza is one of the central issues cited by younger voters. It's a risky move, and I'm not sure how the Trump camp will pounce on it to exploit it, but they will.
Walz is the safer choice.
Active Member
the youth in swing states (and Michigan, if you want to call that a swing state or not. I'm thinking of the youth and Muslim population there) can be a determing factor. the youth tend to get their news/views from TikTok, not traditional news. Gaza is at the top of their alogirthims, and Shapiro is not looked at positively in their algorithms. it's a tricky situation on who she should pick.
I do think Walz is the safer choice, but on the other hand, some may say he's TOO progressive (I disagree with that) and he's TOO old (I disagree with that as well)
Active Member
Shapiro also has the sexual harassment stuff. Tim Walz has the poor response in Minneapolis for the BLM protest. I think the Walz stuff is easier to deal with.
Active Member
good breakdown...
BADGERS
From what I've read the home state advantage thing isn't real, from a data perspective. If it was, Shapiro would be a pill I could swallow.
As it stands if Harris goes with Shapiro, we are talking about him and his bullshit til November. It will be a disaster of infighting, another finger in the eye of our famously resentful progressive wing. Or we can go with someone that at least a small part of those people will accept and has endorsed, and we can maintain our momentum.
Active Member
For a bunch of reasons, I’m pretty certain it’s going to be Walz
Active Member
hope you're right
I saw something recently that every VP pick since the early 80's has been introduced in their home state...with Harris being in PA today..she'd have to break that tradition
Active Member
I think there are no *terrible* choices, but I think all of the Democrats' momentum would be lost with Shapiro.
We'll see in a few hours.
Active Member
Boom.
Active Member
alright!
I think it's a win-win. he can help with midwest states, and the youth vote too.
Administrator
With all the recent consternation about Shapiro, I'm glad he's keeping his current job. He's been a very visible PA governor; Tom Wolf was solid, and got a lot done, but Shapiro is so fiercely Pennsylvania-forward right now from a marketing standpoint, it's fun to see. And to that point, he'll be able to raise awareness in the state in his current role, just as well as, if not better than, if he had become the VP pick.
Administrator
lmfao
Throbbing Member
Very pleasantly surprised that Walz landed it. Feels so weird to not be disappointed by the Democrats but it's a nice feeling!
BADGERS
What can I say I'm losing bets left and right this year. Happy to be wrong
Active Member
HAHAHAHAHA... oh, JD Vance, you tool. So now Bob's Big Boy is saying that Shapiro was passed over because of antisemitism. They had this prepped...
Oh, were you assholes desperately hoping they'd pick Shapiro so you could make Gaza a wedge issue for liberals, and now that didn't pan out, so accusations of antisemitism are the best thing you've got? How about that, you dolphin-fucking shapeshifter?
Posting Permissions
Likes: 
Faceplams: 
Reply With Quote