How's it really going Americans?

[HaggisShuu]

I'm an intrigued outsider when it comes to the US election. I am just a filthy Englishman afterall, and I haven't looked into the major events. I know that Trump nearly died and that it's Joever for Biden. The general impression I get from the reporting is increasing support and likely win for Kamala Harris. 
 

What's the scene feeling like for those who have "boots on the ground" so to speak? 

[Carborendum]

38 minutes ago, HaggisShuu said:

What's the scene feeling like for those who have "boots on the ground" so to speak? 

There is a significant favor towards Trump.  But it is not insurmountable with the right campaigning.  Kamala, however, is not the candidate to overcome such an obstacle. 

• Trump actually has more of the Black and White vote. 
• Harris has the media and celebrity endorsements on her side.
• There have been political actions that have been made to provide election subversion in favor of Democrats. 
  • Trump is being accused of election interference because he pointed out some of the following items.
  • Blue states are using every trick in the book to allow illegal immigrants a way to vote in this election.  This is in violation of Federal law.  But if the mechanics of the state elections lean toward state autonomy (as most states are) that won't mean a thing.
  • Detroit has hired a lop-sided group of poll-workers to count the votes in favor of Democrats.
  • While each of these don't matter if a blue state gets more people to vote Democrat, it will matter if a swing state is guaranteed to vote blue this election.

I'm of the opinion that none of this matters.  It's all smoke and mirrors.  Trump will lose regardless of the votes.  It has been foreordained.

If by some miracle, Trump wins, there will be so many riots in major cities that Trump may not make it to the inauguration.  We're looking at the end.

[LDSGator]

3 hours ago, HaggisShuu said:

The general impression I get from the reporting is increasing support and likely win for Kamala Harris. 

Correct. It looks Harris will win. Nothing is certain till election day, but I think it’ll be like Labour in 97 or the Tories in 83. A complete landslide. 

[NeuroTypical]

I think you'll find that if you ask any three Americans, you'll get four different opinions.  Here's mine:

- Biden demonstrated he was in serious cognitive decline during the Biden/Trump debate, and the calls for him to get out of the race grew and spread and eventually won.   The Dem's best pick to run is Veep Kamala Harris.   She's gone like 35+ days without giving a single interview.  I hear they finally scheduled one, pre-recorded, with the always-left-leaning CNN.  She won't be alone, she'll be with her Veep pick.  It's like they're afraid to let her just be interviewed and show it live.

- Yes, Trump survived an assassination attempt, with the bullet coming within a few centimeters of making his head explode.  He's energized much of his base with his immediate show of strength.  We don't know how to react to such things, as the last time this happened was with Reagan in the 1980's.  The shooter is something of a question mark, but with more left/democrat-leaning stuff on his social media.  It's hard to figure out why he did it.  No manifesto, not much more history of yelling about politics than a lot of normal people.

- Trump was convicted of multiple felonies, brought by a New York district attorney who got elected by promising to find something, anything upon which he could charge Trump.  An awful lot more legal and criminal cases are all reaching nexus, as folks have carefully timed the charges and suits to coincide with the presidential campaign.  We're seeing the dawning of a new word: "Lawfare".  Trump ran on draining the swamp, the swamp is certainly fighting back hard.   Another one got filed a day or two ago, I'm not seeing it make much news, I think we're all on news overload. 

- Harris is facing an uphill battle.  Millions of illegal immigrants entered the US on her watch.  Democrat run sanctuary cities like Denver having problems, like the Venezuelan Tren de Aragua gang setting up shop in a Denver suburb.  And Boston is using so many resources to bus illegal children to school, that American children go without bussing.  She once called Trump's border wall "un-American", now she's showing some of his wall in some of her campaign ads, promising to get tough on immigration.   The left got hysterical when Trump's immigration policies had 545 illegal immigrant children slip through the cracks.  We now learn in her 4 years, 290,000 illegal immigrant children have slipped through the cracks.   Her administration is also flipping from years of no-fracking to yes-fracking, hoping to win some swing states that drill a lot. 

- The US culture is recovering from several years of being coerced into believing men can be women and vice versa.  We were told "if you don't affirm your child's gender identity they'll kill themselves.  You can either have an alive son or a dead daughter".  The horrible consequences are slowly dawning on us as sex offender prisoners identifying as female get put into female prisons and assault female prisoners.   Every day there's a new story of a young person trying to detransition back to their biological sex, and discovering they're now lifelong medical patients who may be permanently infertile. Every day a new story about minors put on puberty blockers, sometimes without parent's knowledge.  Sometimes with only a 1 hour doctor's consultation.    Also, more and more of us are dumping the marxist-inspired DEI nonsense.

- Related to DEI and culture is the disturbingly large amount of antisemitism on college campuses.  The student protests are bad enough, but there's also several disturbing instances of antisemitism in the school leadership. Colleges and universities are one thing, but it's also cropping up in public grade schools. 

Anyway, I blame the left for all the bad, and I hope to see a resurgence of principled constitutional conservatives, usually homed somewhere on the right.  I'm voting Trump.

[Manners Matter]

Here's some TRUTH that too many don't understand and won't hear/read about from usual sources:

Brian Fallon is managing and hiding Kamala Harris, because Fallon and the rest of her handlers know there is very solid reasoning for why Kamala Harris was never considered a viable alternative to Biden before.  A few short weeks ago, the professional left were riddled with anxiety over Joe Biden’s mental and cognitive status, while simultaneously those same people did not want Harris as a candidate because they knew she had no skills.

You don’t have to argue with them, just ask any Democrat/Leftists to name the greatest accomplishment of Kamala Harris and you will see them melt in front of you.  Nothing about that has changed, and that’s why the DNC/Brian Fallon must hide Harris in order to maintain her ¹polling position.  If they let Kamala campaign and talk to the media, she will tank just like Ron DeSantis did (for the same reason).

 

¹Polling Position – I cannot emphasize this enough.  The DNC (Obama/Clyburn) goal with Kamala Harris is polling position.  They need her to have the biggest appearance of support possible.  It is polling they need – REMEMBER THAT!

The problem democrats had was not that Biden lost his marbles or was losing the election, the problem was that Biden was losing by a scale that was too big for them to cover.

Democrats didn’t need a switch-out candidate who could beat Donald Trump; they needed a candidate who can give plausibility to the Clyburn ballot counting results that will say Trump lost.

The issue they had with Biden was that he made the fraud too easy to see. The Democrats do not need a candidate who can win votes, the Democrats needed a candidate who can make fraudulent ballot results seem plausible.

The need to retain ballot plausibility is why the most important political narrative for the people who control Kamala Harris, is polling!

If her handlers think she will hurt her current polling by being visible, they will keep her hidden.  If her handlers think she will hurt her polling by speaking, they will keep her quiet.

Everything Obama/Clyburn and the team will do is to manage the illusion of Kamala Harris in order to preserve the media polling narrative and thereby facilitate the determining factor of Ballot Harvesting (Obama) and Ballot Scanning (Clyburn).

[HaggisShuu]

10 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

- Harris is facing an uphill battle.  Millions of illegal immigrants entered the US on her watch.  Democrat run sanctuary cities like Denver having problems, like the Venezuelan Tren de Aragua gang setting up shop in a Denver suburb.  And Boston is using so many resources to bus illegal children to school, that American children go without bussing.  She once called Trump's border wall "un-American", now she's showing some of his wall in some of her campaign ads, promising to get tough on immigration.   The left got hysterical when Trump's immigration policies had 545 illegal immigrant children slip through the cracks.  We now learn in her 4 years, 290,000 illegal immigrant children have slipped through the cracks.   Her administration is also flipping from years of no-fracking to yes-fracking, hoping to win some swing states that drill a lot. 

- The US culture is recovering from several years of being coerced into believing men can be women and vice versa.  We were told "if you don't affirm your child's gender identity they'll kill themselves.  You can either have an alive son or a dead daughter".  The horrible consequences are slowly dawning on us as sex offender prisoners identifying as female get put into female prisons and assault female prisoners.   Every day there's a new story of a young person trying to detransition back to their biological sex, and discovering they're now lifelong medical patients who may be permanently infertile. Every day a new story about minors put on puberty blockers, sometimes without parent's knowledge.  Sometimes with only a 1 hour doctor's consultation.    Also, more and more of us are dumping the marxist-inspired DEI nonsense.

Just a few questions. 
 

Is all the illegal migration concentrated mostly along the Southern Border? I only ask as America is so ridiculously massive that if migrants were well spread out the effects may well be less visible. 
 

I read a book on fracking a while ago, I seem to remember the gist of it being that as long as the fluids are properly cleared up, the impact it has is minimal. I've always had the impression that US environmental protection laws are lax (that is based off of zero research though so feel free to correct me) which I assume is where the fracking outrage comes from. 
 

The DEI stuff has had some traction in the UK, I have seen some eyebrow raising choices being made due to DEI bur I haven't noticed many negative effects of it around me though to be honest. Maybe it has not reached its peak yet. 

[Manners Matter]

56 minutes ago, HaggisShuu said:

Is all the illegal migration concentrated mostly along the Southern Border? I only ask as America is so ridiculously massive that if migrants were well spread out the effects may well be less visible. 

The illegals have been flown and bussed to all parts of the US for free (scratch that - using taxpayer money). At times, this has occurred in the dark of night so people won't know about it. Oh, scratch the 'all parts' - not Martha's Vineyard, Bel Air or other places the liberals (ie hypocrites) don't want them. 

[Carborendum]

5 hours ago, HaggisShuu said:

Is all the illegal migration concentrated mostly along the Southern Border? I only ask as America is so ridiculously massive that if migrants were well spread out the effects may well be less visible. 

Historically, it has been.  But there is a shift going on now.  Human smugglers and coyotes are transporting them to Canada and sneaking into the Northern US.  It is a small but noticeable increase in crossings at the Canadian border.  So far, no measures have been made by the Biden Admin to curb this.

5 hours ago, HaggisShuu said:

I read a book on fracking a while ago, I seem to remember the gist of it being that as long as the fluids are properly cleared up, the impact it has is minimal. I've always had the impression that US environmental protection laws are lax (that is based off of zero research though so feel free to correct me) which I assume is where the fracking outrage comes from. 

There are two parts: 

• The fracking fluids themselves (which is what cleanup is about).
• The escape of fluids (both liquid and gas) that are released during the fracking process.  This is a lot tougher.

Edited August 29 by Carborendum

[HaggisShuu]

14 minutes ago, Manners Matter said:

The illegals have been flown and bussed to all parts of the US for free (scratch that - using taxpayer money). At times, this has occurred in the dark of night so people won't know about it. Oh, scratch the 'all parts' - not Martha's Vineyard, Bel Air or other places the liberals (ie hypocrites) don't want them. 

Yes I can understand why that would raise some eye brows among the public. There has been a similar issue in the UK where illegal migrants are put up in hotels with tax payer funds while they wait for processing. The previous governments attempts to deport these illegals failed miserably as well. 
 

That has caused absolute public outrage. 

[HaggisShuu]

9 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

There are two parts: 

• The fracking fluids themselves (which is what cleanup is about).
• The escape of fluids (both liquid and gas) that are released during the fracking process.  This is a lot tougher.

Yes this makes sense - so presumably areas with lots of fracking, have a higher amount of fluids escape leading to worse effects for environment and water systems. 
 

I think the book I read was an apologetic "Actually fracking is good" retort to the antis, so was probably a bit biased and wanting to gloss over that part. 

[Ironhold]

4 hours ago, HaggisShuu said:

Just a few questions. 
 

Is all the illegal migration concentrated mostly along the Southern Border? I only ask as America is so ridiculously massive that if migrants were well spread out the effects may well be less visible. 
 

I read a book on fracking a while ago, I seem to remember the gist of it being that as long as the fluids are properly cleared up, the impact it has is minimal. I've always had the impression that US environmental protection laws are lax (that is based off of zero research though so feel free to correct me) which I assume is where the fracking outrage comes from. 
 

The DEI stuff has had some traction in the UK, I have seen some eyebrow raising choices being made due to DEI bur I haven't noticed many negative effects of it around me though to be honest. Maybe it has not reached its peak yet. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Del_Rio,_Texas

Del Rio, Texas, population 35,000

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eagle_Pass,_Texas

Eagle Pass, Texas, population 28,000

These two cities, and several others, are smaller border towns that are opposite *massive* Mexican metropolitan areas. As a result, the number of people trying to enter these cities are far beyond what the cities themselves can ever hope to support, let alone absorb. 

These cities are being overwhelmed, which is why Texas' Governor Greg Abbott made the decision to begin transporting migrants to cities elsewhere in the United States that had declared themselves "Sanctuary Cities" for people who entered the country illegally. 

His goal was to bring attention to the plight of these border cities. 

It worked. 

New York City received so many immigrants that it collapsed *their* intake systems, leaving city officials attempting to intercept future bus transit and begging the federal government for help.

The residents of Martha's Vineyard made horrifically racist and classist social media posts demanding to know why they were having to associate with these individuals. 

Chicago is on the brink. 

Et cetra. 

Now that hardcore leftist pro-immigration cities are feeling the pain, their residents and leaders are starting to do a 180. In the process, people have more than enough evidence of them being hypocrites who only supported mass immigration when they thought it was someone else's problem. 

[LDSGator]

Just to be clear, there are Americans out there, yes, even in big cities, who are living happy and fun lives without being in mortal terror every day. It’s hardly as doom and gloom as some are saying. Total rubbish.
 

I’m sorry some people feel that way and live that life, but that’s not reality for many, many, many of us.
 

In fact, a lot depends on perspective. If you subscribe to the Chicken Little philosophy, you’ll find misery everywhere. 

And no, no matter who wins the election, the world isn’t ending. No, cities aren’t on the verge of collapse. Alarmist nonsense spread by irresponsible people.  

Edited August 29 by LDSGator

[Carborendum]

4 hours ago, HaggisShuu said:

Yes this makes sense - so presumably areas with lots of fracking, have a higher amount of fluids escape leading to worse effects for environment and water systems. 
 

I think the book I read was an apologetic "Actually fracking is good" retort to the antis, so was probably a bit biased and wanting to gloss over that part. 

Don't get me wrong.  I think fracking is a net positive.  But nothing comes without a price.

The common practice now is that they will only frac where they are far from population centers or agricultural areas.  So, if there is some leaking, the theory is that the natural bacterial action in the soil will clean it up before it migrates to areas where groundwater is a consideration.

There's a lot more to it that I'm not privy to.  So, while I admit that there are negatives, it isn't nearly as bad as the environmentalists claim.

[The Folk Prophet]

19 hours ago, LDSGator said:

It looks Harris will win.

I'm legitimately confused by this comment. The polls, all together, are showing pretty much a dead heat. It's impossible to say who it looks like will win.

[LDSGator]

17 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

I'm legitimately confused by this comment. The polls, all together, are showing pretty much a dead heat. It's impossible to say who it looks like will win.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2024/08/29/kamala-harris-donald-trump-suffolk-usa-today-poll-results/74984967007/

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4852957-harris-cuts-trumps-lead-sun-belt-states/amp/

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/harris-widens-lead-over-trump-with-boost-women-hispanics-reutersipsos-poll-finds-2024-08-29/

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/10/us/politics/harris-trump-battleground-polls.html

https://www.google.com/amp/story/s/thehill.com/homenews/media/4853449-donald-trump-campaign-slams-fox-news-poll/amp/

https://www.google.com/amp/story/s/thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4853367-kamala-harris-donald-trump-usa-today-suffolk-2024-poll/amp/

https://www.foxnews.com/official-polls/fox-news-poll-harris-closes-gap-trump-sun-belt-states

https://floridapolitics.com/archives/692772-trump-harris-poll/

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4846433-harris-leading-trump-by-7-points-poll/amp/

https://www.fau.edu/newsdesk/articles/aug24electionpoll

Hope this helps. If the polls are accurate and Trump loses Florida and other key states (PA, GA, NC, MI, WI) he’s in serious trouble, and it’ll be an electoral college landslide.  

Edited August 29 by LDSGator

[LDSGator]

I do think RFK jr dropping out will help Trump more than Harris-I don’t know how much. More than I originally thought though. 

[The Folk Prophet]

50 minutes ago, LDSGator said:

Hope this helps.

Not really. The averages of polling data have Harris and Trump within the margin of error too close to say.

Anyone claiming that either candidate is likely to win is guessing at this point.

[Manners Matter]

Polls are skewed in a number of ways. Anyone who uses them as a reference leaves me shaking my head.

[Traveler]

8 hours ago, HaggisShuu said:

Yes this makes sense - so presumably areas with lots of fracking, have a higher amount of fluids escape leading to worse effects for environment and water systems. 
 

I think the book I read was an apologetic "Actually fracking is good" retort to the antis, so was probably a bit biased and wanting to gloss over that part. 

Information about fracking (hydraulically fractured and horizontal drilling).  I have a brother that is an engineer that worked in upper management of a natural gas provider (he is now retired) that is an expert in fracking.  Drilling is a mining process and everything humans utilize that is not grown is mined.  Even water is basically provided via mining technology that relies heavily on drilling and transportation techniques.

Petroleum products (including natural gas) come primarily from deep pockets of hydrocarbon deposits.  Generally, most think of these deposits as some kind of underground reservoir resembling an underground swimming pool.  In reality the deposits are more like a thin giant potato chip often stretching for many miles and winding through several layers of earth's crust.  Hydrocarbons are one of the most plentiful elements of the universe but here on earth the reservoirs are deep in the earth’s crust.

There are two important technical elements to fracking.  The first is high pressure hydraulics that separate layers no more than the diameter of a grain of sand (sand silica) which maintains small area openings for the high-pressure petroleum to escape under controlled circumstances.  The second is horizontal drilling.  This technique allows drillers to extract the petroleum through a single pump that can replace fields of hundreds of pumps and drill holes using previous methods.  This fracking process is more environmentally friendly than nature’s natural movements.  The only problem are legal problems because the oil from many miles away (on someone else’s property) can easily be extracted.

All of the argued points by uninformed environmentalists are without merit and it can even be argued that fracking is better for the environment than doing nothing and letting nature take its course. Worse that uninformed environmentalists are power crazy politicians with an agenda that is incapable of extending their intent beyond their personalized shellfish bubble.  

I believe that some day in the future that historians will look back on our era as a time of deliberate political unrest stumbling over false claims of pseudo-science and utter nonsense believed by an uninformed populous.   Obviously, the age of enlightenment is over and has been replaced by an age of gullibility.

 

The Traveler

[Traveler]

1 hour ago, Manners Matter said:

Polls are skewed in a number of ways. Anyone who uses them as a reference leaves me shaking my head.

You realize that the ultimate poll is what we call the voting poll.  You are correct that there is a great deal of intent to skew polls (especially political polls) for all kinds of reasons.  This is why it is critical to ensure that registered voters are constantly validated to insure that individuals that have previously registered have not moved their residence from the district or died or for some other reason such that they are not controlling their ballot to insure it is a legal poll.

It is sad that any effort to authenticate voter registration is labeled racists – I believe for no other reason than control and skew the official poll.  The argument that there is not enough tampering to change results is also a divergent claim.  Because politicians want to claim that the skewed vote is an overwhelming mandate.

 

The Traveler 

[JohnsonJones]

6 hours ago, The Folk Prophet said:

I'm legitimately confused by this comment. The polls, all together, are showing pretty much a dead heat. It's impossible to say who it looks like will win.

I see a LOT of news saying this.

However, many don't give a good analysis of the situation.

The truth is that she will need to beat Trump by (probably) 5 or 6% points in order to actually WIN the election.

(Edit: and some news reports have her getting close to this or exceeding this in polls currently).

More importantly, this is due to where the voters are concentrated and how many votes the areas get (for example, votes in California will have a lot more votes for an electoral blue vote, then the votes in idaho for an electoral red vote).

However, the bigger things I am not seeing as much is the analysis of the swing states.  I've seen one that postulated that the numbers now appear that Harris may win that state, but I haven't seen many others saying the same thing.

It's the swing states which will determine how this will go.  Harris could win every vote in California and New York State and others and have a vast majority of the population vote for her (even in excess of 60%), but it doesn't matter if she doesn't win enough electoral votes to actually win the election.

As it is more of a representative election (done so that large populous states cannot rule by tyranny of the majority, as a wise move by the founders of our Constitution), what really matters is winning the majority of the electoral college. 

I haven't seen a good analysis yet that shows her decisively winning this...yet.

Even if she DOES win though (and as I've pointed out elsewhere on these forums) Trump will still have a Trump card to play (see what I did there) that may nullify the election and let him become President anyways.

Edited August 30 by JohnsonJones

[LDSGator]

3 minutes ago, JohnsonJones said:

Trump will still have a Trump card to play (see what I did there) that may nullify the election and let him become President anyways.

How? 

[JohnsonJones]

4 minutes ago, LDSGator said:

How? 

Read my predictions thread in another post (on these forums).  It's too long to really post in this thread, and there will be those that would be bothered enough where it is already.  Plus, the chance for it to derail this thread into something else (not that it doesn't already happen on a regular basis in our posts on the forums) would be excessive.

Edited August 30 by JohnsonJones

[LDSGator]

8 minutes ago, JohnsonJones said:

It's too long to really post in this thread

First time I ever heard you say a post was “too long” for you bro! 

(Just playing JJ)

 

Edited August 30 by LDSGator

[The Folk Prophet]

2 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

It's the swing states which will determine how this will go. 

This. 

And these are the polls that matter. And they are all within the margin of error.

2 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

Even if she DOES win though (and as I've pointed out elsewhere on these forums) Trump will still have a Trump card to play (see what I did there) that may nullify the election and let him become President anyways.

T.D.S. much?