General Election 2024

Regardless of which side you hope wins, is there anyone on here happy with any of the two (or 3 if you count Kennedy) presidential candidates? HOW DID WE GET HERE?

not me

presidential elections in the past 2 decades are a condemnation of the 2 party system. We need to lower the requirements to get on the ballot for candidates/parties, then have runoff elections so that no one gets the electoral votes of a state with less than a majority of the votes

I thought ranked voting was a good solution, but turns out it has problems

Quote: SOOPOO

Regardless of which side you hope wins, is there anyone on here happy with any of the two (or 3 if you count Kennedy) presidential candidates? HOW DID WE GET HERE?

I don’t think the Democrats wanted to take any risks against Trump. We needed a charismatic candidate. Don’t have one. Incumbents make the most sense most of the time as the least risk.

I wish Kennedy had made more sense. His entire family thinks he’s a bad choice. That’s not a good start. He didn’t even have one family member come out for him, I think. They know him, I don’t.

Quote: Gandler

... And, my Dad said yes because a large portion of Democrats are unsophisticated, prejudice, rednecks who would have an issue with her demographics.....

I think your Dad is describing the general population of the U.S.

Quote: SOOPOO

Regardless of which side you hope wins, is there anyone on here happy with any of the two (or 3 if you count Kennedy) presidential candidates? HOW DID WE GET HERE?

That's pretty much my thoughts as an outsider.
"What sort of selection process landed us with the mightiest, possibly greatest nation on Earth having to choose between those candidates? What disqualified the best of the rest". There are a few common features and they are not admirable ones.
But more so, "How do you/we get back from here?" to a choice between decent, strong, intelligent, servants of the people. Candidates with a shared sense of duty and a smattering of ideological differences of opinion?

Our leader is a non-Christian, (Hindu), which is progress, I guess. Imagine if your candidates offered to lead without any input from Christian religious supporting groups and came out strongly for separation of state and religion. They'd be massively disadvantaged.
Maybe that's a clue to the questions?

I'm not saying that my, or any country has it better. It seems a common trait of humanity, that we get 'ruled' by leaders that got there by serving their own interests first.

Quote: OnceDear

That's pretty much my thoughts as an outsider.
"What sort of selection process landed us with the mightiest, possibly greatest nation on Earth having to choose between those candidates? What disqualified the best of the rest". There are a few common features and they are not admirable ones.
But more so, "How do you/we get back from here?" to a choice between decent, strong, intelligent, servants of the people. Candidates with a shared sense of duty and a smattering of ideological differences of opinion?

Our leader is a non-Christian, (Hindu), which is progress, I guess. Imagine if your candidates offered to lead without any input from Christian religious supporting groups and came out strongly for separation of state and religion. They'd be massively disadvantaged.
Maybe that's a clue to the questions?

I'm not saying that my, or any country has it better. It seems a common trait of humanity, that we get 'ruled' by leaders that got there by serving their own interests first.

I am reading a book now called "Surprise, Kill, Vanish: The Secret History of CIA Paramilitary Armies, Operators, and Assassins". What is interesting is that much of the book is about coups and how they progressed. Maybe just wishful thinking on my part.

Quote: rxwine

I thought about this a bit before answering. Several critics of the court on the Trump immunity case seem to think they could have already made all their various dissertations. True of not, I don't know. Let's see how complex the final rendering of the decisions will be. Will it really justify all the time taken. It has been pointed out the Nixon immunity case was done in much less time.

They heard the Trump immunity case April 25. They are due to release their opinion last week of June (next week). Getting an opinion out in 2 months is pretty quick for a SCOTUS case, all things considered. Furthermore, there's not really any urgency. This isn't a death penalty case where an execution date is set and the clock is ticking. This isn't an election law case where election day is fast approaching and the decision can impact how an election is run. It could be that all nine justices are authoring their own concurring or dissenting opinion. The court yesterday released an opinion in a case that was heard November 7 last year, and the full opinion-majority, concurrances and Thomas's dissent was 105 pages.

As infuriating as it may be, the wheels of justice grind slow.

I don’t know Geno. Waiting to see how this affects Trump’s election and trials feels a bit like capital punishment to me.

Quote: rxwine

I don’t know Geno. Waiting to see how this affects Trump’s election and trials feels a bit like capital punishment to me.

The same night awaits us all!