Patterico's Pontifications

Hello.

Dana (875641) — 11/4/2024 @ 11:11 am

I believe our status as the strongest, richest and most vibrant country is a direct result of our freedom. I believe in voting. I believe in your right to live in ways I may not want to, to make choices I don’t like, to pursue goals I disagree with. I believe our differences make us stronger, smarter and better.

That there is only one candidate who agrees with me is appalling, and I strongly believe she needs to get the sort of numbers that make it clear to wannabe-fascists that this country doesn’t play that.

Elect a public servant, not a weird, broken, crazy authoritarian.

john (aff6cb) — 11/4/2024 @ 11:39 am

We can survive bad policy, we cannot survive a president who torches the Constitution.

What about someone who evinces contempt for important, basic provinces of the constitution, but cannot successfully torch it?

That said, I more or less agree with someone who said those who say: “Whoever wins, America loses” (BTW Kamala Harris should be slightly worse than Biden) or, as an anonymous Democrat, who is veteran of politics whom Peggy Noonan quoted: “They don’t want him in there and can’t see her there”

The way I see it, Donald Trump would be trouble sooner if he wins (from about one month after his inauguration to two years) and Kamala Harris would mainly be trouble later, but might cement in what she does. But the immediate aftermath of 4the election would be better if Donald Trump won, or was ahead.

Some of the things other people worry about, I don’t, or think they don’t matter in the scheme
of things, and other things that many people don’t rate high, I do.

I cannot vote, or don’t want to vote, even just in principle, to vote to throw people under the bus. even just in principle because a vote anyway is only in principle – it won’t decide things.

Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 11/4/2024 @ 11:52 am

Because, whether you’re for Trump or for Harris, you must have what you believe to be solid reasons for why you are voting that way. Additionally, let us know if there is anything that could change your mind about voting for your selected candidate.

There are say, 3 things, but important things, that could affect my vote, and an ability to see the future could change my mind.

I don’t care about the economy because either other things will affect it, or what the candidates say now won’t matter much. Every things they say affects my judgement about them, though.

By the way, I have serious qualms about JD Vance. He sounds genuinely ignorant (not just lying) and could turn out to be a super isolationist who might dissolve U.S. alliances – and then again, he might not.

Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 11/4/2024 @ 12:00 pm

Just so you know there is a broken link here. (“basis for my decision”).

Voted for Harris a week ago in NC, in person early voting.

Trump was here this am, in the city of my birth.

I can’t imagine anyone more grossly unfit.

NC takes a long time to count. We have laws that prohibit the counting of mail in ballots before election day. It could be a bumpy few days.

No doubt a certain someone is going to be complaining vociferously.

JRH (b05069) — 11/4/2024 @ 12:17 pm

The New York Times says that North Carolina counts fast with new rules. Early in person voting is very popular and results should be available (98% or99%oflalllvotes)by midnight Eastern time. But early voting results will no longer be reported when the polls close at 7:30 pm EST. Mail ballots must now arrive by Election Day. In 2020, they could arrive up to nine days later and still be counted.

Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 11/4/2024 @ 12:32 pm

With a debt of over 35 trillion, I don’t think we can survive bad policy either.

Joe (6208ca) — 11/4/2024 @ 12:35 pm

From David French:

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/03/opinion/trump-mcconnell-courage-leadership.html

Last week I helped host a fireside chat with Susan Eisenhower, the founder of and expert in residence at the Eisenhower Institute at Gettysburg College. She’s also Dwight D. Eisenhower’s granddaughter. During our conversation, she told a story that I’d forgotten — one with direct relevance to the present moment.

In the aftermath of World War II, there was intense interest in General Eisenhower’s potential political career. He’d never voted before he left the Army in 1948. Both parties courted him, but the Republican Party needed him.

By 1952, the G.O.P. hadn’t won a presidential election since 1928, it had just lost a campaign it was certain it would win (remember “Dewey Defeats Truman”?), and Senator Joseph McCarthy was already deep into the Red Scare.

To make matters much worse, the Republican Party’s prewar isolationism was asserting itself again. In 1951, shortly before Eisenhower took command of NATO, he met with the Republican senator Robert Taft. In her book about Eisenhower’s leadership, “How Ike Led,” Susan Eisenhower notes that Taft was a favorite for the next Republican presidential nomination, and General Eisenhower wanted to solicit Taft’s support for the Atlantic alliance.

Taft, however, indicated he was opposed to NATO. As Susan Eisenhower wrote, “Herbert Brownell, later Ike’s campaign manager, mused in his memoirs that everything would have been different if Taft had agreed to Eisenhower’s request to support NATO.”
One shouldn’t argue that Taft’s position was the only thing that influenced Ike. There was a grass-roots campaign to persuade him to run, but had Taft supported NATO, Eisenhower writes, “Ike would most likely have given no more consideration to the idea of running for president.”

But if Ike chose to run, why did he choose to run as a Republican? He was opposed to McCarthyism. He was opposed to isolationism. And both those positions were deeply embedded in the Republican Party.

The answer, Eisenhower told me in a phone call, was “sustainability.” The nation didn’t just need to prop up NATO for four more years. It needed a degree of bipartisan consensus. If American national security strategy depended on the same party winning every election, it was inherently unstable.

There ay have been other things that tied Eisenhower to the Reoublican Party.

Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 11/4/2024 @ 12:40 pm

Joe (6208ca) — 11/4/2024 @ 12:35 pm

With a debt of over 35 trillion, I don’t think we can survive bad policy either.

Trump mused the other day about paying it off with bitcoins (!?) but there’s the $1 trillion platinum coin(s).

Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 11/4/2024 @ 12:42 pm

Rachel Morin, Jocelyn Nungaray, Laken Riley, among many others, did not survive bad policy.

Those killed and abandoned in the disastrous Afghanistan pullout did not survive bad policy.

Those killed by Iranian terror proxies funded by unfrozen assets did not survive bad policy.

Those killed by abortion on demand did not survive bad policy.

Those struggling to make ends meet are barely surviving bad policy.

Bad policy is coded into Harris and Biden’s judicial appointments, and will plague us for decades.

Harris voted against prop 36, and for bad policy that has permanently harmed thousands in California and eroded our downtowns and public spaces.

She is a hard Leftist, and is therefore unfit to be president.

lloyd (ffbbcc) — 11/4/2024 @ 1:00 pm

@6 Thanks for the info. That is good news. Sammy F do you have a link for where you got that info? Thanks a lot.

JRH (b05069) — 11/4/2024 @ 1:11 pm

I would happily crawl over broken glass to vote against Harris, which I will do tomorrow in Election Day, in person, the only way that should be allowed for anyone who doesn’t have a legitimate hardship. Why? Because I was born and raised in California, have lived in it for all of my 47 years, and I can remember when our big cities weren’t filled with needles and feces, and I didn’t have to wait 20 minutes at Walmart every time I want razor blades for someone to come unlock the cabinet.

I can remember going to Stan’s Donuts in Westwood at MIDNIGHT without any fear, and how after Stan finally threw in the towel because of Covid, Primo’s didn’t even make it a year after replacing him because of the rampant crime and homelessness that overran Westwood.

I can remember being a Jewish student who went to college in Claremont and never once was blockaded from going to Hillel or classes over my beliefs.

I can remember an America that wasn’t burned down in the Summer of 2020 by the insurrectionist shock troops of the Democratic Party, using a violent criminal as pretext to loot every Target and Cheesecake Factory in sight.

Of the two choices on the ballot, Kamala Harris, and ONLY Kamala Harris, is responsible for everything I hate about what has happened to my California. And the fact she won’t even say what she thinks of Prop 36 tells me she wants it gooder and harder for me. My vote won’t matter — she’ll win 60-40 in CA, maybe more — but I stupidly voted for Sanchez in 2016 to try to stop her, only to watch the Dem-biased press pretend that 10 million more Americans wanted Democrats running the Senate, all because Rs were effectively disenfranchised in California. I won’t make that mistake again.

Eliot (4a33d7) — 11/4/2024 @ 1:12 pm

If(? When!) Trump proposes something unConstitutional, the media will go into 24/7 freakout mode and call for impeachment. We’ll hear of nothing else.

If Harris proposes something unConstitutional, the media will go into 24/7 freakout mode against anyone who speaks out and give them the “Joe the Plumber” treatment for daring to question our Dear Leaders.

I’m voting for a 4th Estate that will actually serve as a watchdog, not a guard dog.

SaveFarris (8940bf) — 11/4/2024 @ 1:23 pm

What makes you think that Harris won’t torch the Constitution? Her means may be more legalish, but the result may be the same.

The current administration wanted to take over the running of all elections and impose rules helpful to their side.

The Democrat Party advocates stacking the Supreme Court and eliminating the filibuster to allow for that and other goals.

The New Green Deal, signed on to by all Democrats, imposes federal control over many individual decisions and makes “federalism” a dead letter.

The current administration wanted to raise marginal rates well over 50%, tax capital gains at those higher rates, and treat paper profits as capital gains.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 11/4/2024 @ 1:26 pm

They’re running radio ads against Proposition 1 in New York State (a bad amendment, originally intended to drive turnout of pro-abortion people) but they’re claiming that “national origin” means people would not be able to discriminate against (noncitizens?)

I think that’s a big lie. National origin is a term long in use and it does not refer to that.

I’m still voting against it even though there’s a lying ad about it.

Does “national origin” mean anything else in California?

Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 11/4/2024 @ 1:26 pm

Floriduh and texass say federal election monitors will not be allowed to monitor election.(AP) It makes it to hard to stop democrats from voting while being watched. If biden had any guts he would send in federal marshals and troops to monitor.

asset (dab2e5) — 11/4/2024 @ 1:32 pm

I voted for Kamala. She is a person who has attained the age of 35 years and is a natural born citizen of the United States.

Trump is an unclean creature of Darkness, the embodiment in nearly human form of vice and corruption. Grossly unfit to be President as was said above.

nk (dc83c7) — 11/4/2024 @ 1:35 pm

JRG+H @11 It’s in today’s printed paper page A14 (selected states) and A15 (all repeated for NC)

This seems to be the same story. It went online on Friday, November 1

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/us/elections/results-timing-presidential-race-calls.html

Early, in-person voting is very popular, and votes are typically counted very quickly, with 98 to 99 percent of votes reported by midnight Eastern time in the last two major elections. New rules mean that early voting results will no longer be reported immediately at poll close time, but mail ballots are now due on Election Day (in 2020, ballots postmarked by Election Day had nine days to arrive).

In 25 western counties affected most by Hurricane Helene at the end of September, voters have been given special accommodations for casting their ballots, and a small number of secure tents have been erected to replace destroyed polling sites.

Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 11/4/2024 @ 1:37 pm

I think North Carolina didn’t want to create a blue mirage (by reporting early votes first)

Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 11/4/2024 @ 1:42 pm

I made my case against Trump nearly three months ago, and it still holds.

Kamala will be better on Ukraine but worse on Israel, IMO, but the Israelis can handle themselves, whereas Ukraine needs real help. Trump is worse on Taiwan, where he made noises about it being okay for Xi to conquer the island because Trump’s an idjit on chip production.
Trump will be worse on NATO specifically and on foreign policy in general because he’s an ignorant prat who’s dangerous because he thinks he knows more anyone else about anything but actually doesn’t know or understand sh-t (see Tillerson et al).
I expect Kamala would be worse on dealing with Iran, because Obama and Biden have both sucked at it.

Trump’s tariffs and tax plans are worse than Kamala’s because they’re more inflationary and more fiscally irresponsible, and tariffs have the added negative of hurting GDP growth. Trump cannot explain how he can lower grocery prices by raising prices on imported foods. He also can’t explain how could lower energy costs by 50%, because he has no plan.

Kamala may well be worse on the southern border, and border crossings only lowered when it became too politically untenable for Biden (which means Joe had the ability to get it done but dithered instead), but she stands a decent chance of getting the Lankford Compromise enacted. Also, Trump has a track record on legislation, where he never got an immigration/border deal done, despite having majorities in both houses, and I doubt he’d get any legislation done this time around, because he has a track record now.
Kamala would still face pressure on this issue as prez because she said out loud that she would secure the border, and we can take that as a pledge. If she doesn’t make notable progress, then she could be looking at a single term in office.

Kamala won’t be able to nominate staff and judges who are too left-wing, not with an adversarial GOP majority in the Senate. Similarly, Kamala won’t get any significant legislation passed, period, as long as the GOP holds their Senate majority.

Although I’m loathe to make predictions, I did say that Biden would be a muddling bumbling president, or something like that, and I nailed it. I expect similar bumbling and squishiness in a Kamala administration, and she’ll could be like the dog that finally caught the tire, as in, what does she do now.

Speaking of appointments, any person who thinks RFK Jr. should have any governmental leadership position is unqualified to our nation’s chief executive, and who knows how many yahoos and nutters and poor-credentialed bootlickers could be in a Trump administration. Anyone want to see the return of Michael Flynn? Or Bannon? Or Manafort? Or Patel? Or Nunes?

Trump also needs to lose because (1) so his three criminal cases can work through the system; justice needs to be served, and (2) his being a two-time loser can give the GOP time to heal with him out of the political picture. At least, he should be out of the political picture after losing yet again.

Paul Montagu (f97d41) — 11/4/2024 @ 1:56 pm

I voted. Mostly for republican and libertarian candidates with a single notable exception.

Time123 (6b6d51) — 11/4/2024 @ 2:04 pm

Link in post fixed.

Dana (a35d29) — 11/4/2024 @ 2:12 pm

We can survive bad policy, we cannot survive a president who torches the Constitution.

Glib but unconvincing, in either clause.

1. Why do you think that Trump will be successful even if he tries to “torch” the Constitution? He is generally unsuccessful in all his endeavors. Suddenly he’s competent? Show your work. More likely he will try something 10 times dumber than J6 and offend even Ted Cruz.

2. Why do you assume we will “survive bad policy.” FDR saddled us with a number of bad policies, such as the entire administrative state, from which we have yet to extricate ourselves. In fact it has gotten worse as FDR’s Democrats at least had the wit to allow a legislative veto of regulations; now gone. Whatever you may think of Social Security, it’s not going anywhere in your lifetime; not even to BK; taxes will just go up. And then there’s Wickard,

Kevin M (a9545f) — 11/4/2024 @ 2:21 pm

I am not arguing for voting Trump (and I didn’t), I am just royally pissed off at the whole “all you need to know” crap.

Give a positive reason for voting for Harris, or at least admit you’d be voting for Biden after a stroke.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 11/4/2024 @ 2:23 pm

Donald Trump is a dangerous high-wire act whose utter lack of self-control combined with his ignorance of Constitutional order is dangerous to the nation. The one saving grace is that he would have to operate in a political environment which is massively distrustful of him and willing to criticize his every move.

Kamala Harris is a mindless, conniving cypher, utterly devoid of principle but whose personal inclinations seem to be towards what Tom Wolfe correctly recognized as radical chic. She is fundamentally dishonest, timid, lazy, and vacuous. What’s more, she would have the support of an establishmentarian elite who would be happy to cover for her incompetence and malfeasance and blame society for her expected failures.

Clearly, neither one of them deserves to be President of the United States of America. The only truly patriotic thing to do is to refuse to vote for either. Whether that means leaving the Presidential column blank or whether you find a minor-party candidate to support is up to you, but if you continue to settle for the least worst option then that is the most you will ever be offered.

JVW (b301cc) — 11/4/2024 @ 2:29 pm

With a debt of over 35 trillion, I don’t think we can survive bad policy either.

Both Trump and Biden added $8 trillion to the debt.

Biden can make the claim that 1) it was a lower percentage increase and 2) the base debt was effectively reduced by 3-4 billion by inflation.

Trump can point out that more than half his increase happened during the first year of COVID.

The debt numbers are pretty bad in both cases, but there’s not a lot here to pick sides with.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 11/4/2024 @ 2:29 pm

Again: Wrong Direction – 63.1%

Kevin M (a9545f) — 11/4/2024 @ 2:32 pm

There is not a single measurable quality of life issue that is better under Biden/Harris than it was under Trump except “feelings”. We’ve been continually lied to about illegal immigrants, inflation, crime, foreign policy, Biden’s obvious mental decline – and the list goes on and on. I see little counter-argument except name calling here.
Trump has a despicable personality, but under his presidency, we all had it far better off.
Oh I forgot the two wars and a disastrous Afghanistan withdrawal under Biden’s watch.

David Longfellow (6af64e) — 11/4/2024 @ 2:36 pm

Does “national origin” mean anything else in California?

No, it just means “where your ancestors came from.” All citizens to be treated alike. In many cases non-citizens cannot be discriminated against (assuming they are here legally) but not all: federal employment, voting, some benefits, gun ownership, etc.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 11/4/2024 @ 2:37 pm

By the way, I like Yuval Levine’s take. I raised some eyebrows among my friends when I told them that this is the least consequential election of our lives (and I really wish I would have turned that into a post, but alas), but Yuval echos my sentiments:

There is a kind of visceral logic to the notion that the stakes are higher when elections are closer, and when the parties are more bitterly divided and polarized. But there is not a constitutional logic to that view. In fact, closer elections tend to have lower stakes in our system of government, very much by design.

The American regime is built to restrain narrow majorities. Unlike the consolidated parliamentary systems of most of the world’s democracies, where assembling a majority coalition gives you all the power of the state for as long as your majority holds, the American system pits multiple power centers against one another. Advancing meaningful policy objectives requires relatively broad majorities that endure for an extended period — long enough to craft legislation, see it through the series of complex obstacles that must be overcome in our bicameral Congress, and secure a presidential signature. Narrow majorities can rarely do this effectively, which means that close elections generally do not yield transformative governance.

[. . .]

Presidents win all the power of the presidency even if their margin of electoral victory is thin. But narrow victories nonetheless narrow their political freedom of action and tend to leave them without the kinds of congressional majorities they would need in order to make durable, transformative change. [. . .]

Of course, a singularly disruptive black-swan event is always possible. And if Donald Trump really does send the military after his political enemies, or Kamala Harris declares that her administration will refuse to abide by Supreme Court decisions, then the constraints of our constitutional system would themselves be under assault and might not serve as guards against rabid narrow majorities.

That is not to say that the system fails to offer such protections, but that it does — and that among the few ways to really overcome those protections and advance partisan priorities with a slim majority is to attack the Constitution. That’s why candidates trying to rev up their supporters’ fears often end up insisting their opponents will do just that. Such scenarios are easily imaginable, yet they remain unlikely to succeed even when presidential contenders exhibit brazen contempt for the Constitution. Our institutions have proven resilient under pressure in recent years, and an election that pits the sitting vice president against a man who already served a full term as president is not the most obvious moment to expect the utterly unprecedented.

[. . .]

Presidential elections always matter, but close ones tend to matter less. If we are in for another tight election, then we are also likely to be in for another presidency characterized by lots of aggressive talk, little durable action, and much partisan frustration. That’s not great news if your party wins and you want to see dramatic change. But it does suggest that if your party loses, it will have another shot soon enough, and the country won’t be lost in the meantime.

My disposition is far more bitter: I believe that whoever wins tomorrow’s election is likely to further sow division within the country, accelerate the process of piling up unconscionable amounts of public debt which will eventually wreck our prosperity, and diminish the standing of our country in international affairs, especially among our allies.

JVW (b301cc) — 11/4/2024 @ 2:51 pm

My plan is to vote against this:

The influx of millions of migrants has shifted political power in the nation to Democrats, even though they are not allowed to vote, according to a new analysis of the Electoral College and constitutional representation.

While they may be considered noncitizens, illegal and legal migrants are counted by the census, and those numbers are used to shift congressional districts, which affect electoral votes, according to two new studies from the Center for Immigration Studies.

“Immigration shifts political power in the United States — without a single immigrant having to vote. Seats in the U.S. House of Representatives and thus votes in the Electoral College are apportioned among the states based on each one’s total population — not by the number of citizens or legal residents,” CIS said.

In two reports just issued, CIS said the 2020 census shifted 17 House seats and led to a gain for Democrats of 14 seats and electoral votes, which are based on House seats.

Since that census and during the Biden-Harris administration, 10 million more legal and illegal migrants have come into the U.S., a number that alone could shift 13 more electoral votes.

“If the total legal and illegal immigrant population continues to grow at the current rapid pace, immigrants would redistribute approximately 22 seats in the 2030 census,” said Steven Camarota, the center’s director of research.

“Illegal immigrants captured in the 2020 census redistributed two seats. If the illegal immigrant population continues to grow at the current pace, it will redistribute seven seats by 2030,” he said

BuDuh (90dd0b) — 11/4/2024 @ 3:41 pm

I’m voting for Harris. I know people who know her and their consensus is that she’s a normal human being who has held a job and driven a car and done her own shopping. I also like that she isn’t an ivy league bubble person. She doesn’t have enough personal pull to make anything crazy happen, which pushes power back to Congress. Her foreign policy is generally sound.

Trump is a crazy nutbag racist wannabe dictator who doesn’t believe laws apply to him, doesn’t have a clue what it’s like to be a normal person and who can control the rise and fall of congressional careers, so he can make crazy things happen. He gives classified information to foreign nationals over lunch at his club. His foreign policy sucks, his ability to solve complex political situations is on par with the ability of a bull’s ability to drink tea out of a delicate china tea-cup, and he did zero of the things he claimed to do for the economy in his 1st administration. But more importantly than any of that, he fomented an insurrection and sent some very misguided people off to violently attack the legislative branch of the US government.

Nic (120c94) — 11/4/2024 @ 4:59 pm

Can we all have a round of “WTF” regarding the GOP’s choice of candidates? Nikki Haley would be winning in a landslide. So would DeSantis.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 11/4/2024 @ 5:24 pm

I remember when LGF was Republican.

NJRob (eb56c3) — 11/4/2024 @ 5:31 pm

Nikki Haley endorsed Trump and said he is the only choice this election.

NJRob (eb56c3) — 11/4/2024 @ 5:32 pm

@Kevin@33 Nikki Haley would’ve been a much better choice. I dislike DeSantis a lot but he also would’ve been a better choice.

Nic (120c94) — 11/4/2024 @ 5:52 pm

@Kevin@33 Nikki Haley would’ve been a much better choice. I dislike DeSantis a lot but he also would’ve been a better choice.

Nic (120c94) — 11/4/2024 @ 5:52 pm

Both were obviously better than Trump or Kamala.

But one of them would have won over a larger coalition and also had successful leadership experience. The problem is it requires compromising between social conservatism and fiscal conservatism, which really aren’t highly compatible. But that’s a winning combination in politics, even if no one specific person really loves it.

At any rate, Kamala is obviously winning and it’s amusing all the people who make money in this industry are pretending this race is close.

Dustin (4b502c) — 11/4/2024 @ 6:39 pm

Catoggio’s assessment on election eve…

My Election Day thought for you is this: We deserve every bit of it. The frogs have boiled.

Just deserts.
I’ve written before about Kevin Williamson’s warning to National Review readers on the day Trump locked down his party’s nomination in 2016. “Americans and Republicans, remember: You asked for this,” he said. “Given the choice between a dozen solid conservatives and one Clinton-supporting con artist and game-show host, you chose the con artist. You chose him freely. Nobody made you do it.”

Kevin meant that as an admonishment but I’m offering it as a consolation. Doesn’t it make you feel a little better to realize that we asked for this?

Everyone knows the misery of learning that misfortune has befallen an innocent acquaintance. A neighbor’s child is diagnosed with cancer; a friend’s spouse dies in an accident. You could tear your hair out in anguish when you hear of it. The grief is one thing, but the injustice of it is unbearable. Bad things happening to good people will shake your faith in the moral order of the universe.

But bad things happening to people who make immoral choices? There’s always some satisfaction in that. You might feel a twinge of compassion for a bank robber who’s shot during a heist or for a wife-beater who’s roughed up in prison, but there’s no sense of moral outrage. The order of the universe is affirmed: If you behave maliciously, you will—and should—suffer. And your suffering will be a lesson to others not to follow the path you chose.

We’ve made an immoral choice by delivering Donald Trump to the brink of victory. What kind of universe would this be if we didn’t pay for it?

The singular fact of this campaign is that, for the first time in his three runs for president, we have hard proof of how dangerous he’s capable of being as president. In 2016 and 2020, his authoritarian pretensions were mostly the stuff of Never Trump speculation; then, day by day for two months after he lost to Joe Biden, he went about proving that we’d actually underestimated him. He’s now a convicted criminal with dozens of felony charges still pending against him. And he makes no bones about his intentions in a second term, talking openly about “retribution” against “the enemy from within” and promising supporters that his next administration will be “nasty.”

You don’t need to write a newsletter for The Dispatch to predict that he’ll try to overturn this election if he loses or will misuse his powers as president to persecute his opponents if he wins. You need only to have been alive since November 2020 and had access to a television set.

Yet despite the fact that we all know he’ll put the country through hell, win or lose, he’s polling better than he ever has and is viewed more favorably than he’s ever been. Republicans could have dispensed with him after January 6 or in this year’s presidential primary, and general election voters could have handed Kamala Harris a polling lead sizable enough that even Trump fans would have trouble believing the inevitable claims of cheating after a defeat. They didn’t.

Every opportunity to mitigate the damage he continues to cause has been squandered. We chose this disaster, knowingly and deliberately.

Sustaining the political leadership of a man who’s been described as a fascist by even his most eminent former advisers is the most despicable abdication of civic duty by the electorate in the history of the United States. We’ve chosen unfit presidents before, and a few sinister ones, and once chose a man whose victory forced Americans to question their basic moral compatibility—the right choice under the circumstances. Never have we been this close to choosing someone who meets all three criteria, though. With malice toward all, with charity for none: That’s what we’re on the brink of electing.

The name of this newsletter comes from the old saw about how frogs supposedly react to heat. If you drop a frog into a pot of boiling water it’ll hop right out, the theory goes, but if you drop it into a pot of lukewarm water and gradually turn up the flame it’ll acclimate incrementally and boil to death. It’s not true, incidentally, but as a metaphor for desensitization it’s irresistible. I don’t know what other conclusion to reach about Americans on the eve of this election than that tens of millions of frogs who’ve been stewing in Trump’s sludge since 2015 have finally boiled.

And they’re not going to hop out of the pot in a second term, no matter how hot it gets. The political significance of Trump battling Kamala Harris to a dead heat is that half the country has now committed itself to the proposition that a squalid, menacing, incoherent caudillo selling magic beans is a more responsible choice to govern America than any Democrat. Anyone who’s sufficiently far gone to believe that is also too far gone to experience buyer’s remorse when, not if, Trump executes his next coup attempt or behaves corruptly as president.

In fact, unlike in 2016, you rarely hear members of the American right scoff anymore when doomsayers like me predict civic catastrophe if Trump takes office. How could they? They were watching TV on January 6 like everyone else. They know the risk of calamity is real; they’ve either embraced it, as the more feral populists have, or they’ve made peace with it as an acceptable trade-off for lower taxes or more Border Patrol or granting Israel a slightly freer hand or whatever. Trump’s partnership with the right will now truly have no limits, for either side of the bargain.

If, in spite of all that, you want to believe there’s some moral red line he might approach in a second term that his voters won’t permit him to cross, I’d ask you this: Who will be policing that line, supposedly? There’s hardly any resistance left to Trump and Trumpism among right-wing institutions, including and especially among right-wing media. Even within Bill Buckley’s magazine, one of America’s most thoughtful platforms for conservatism and historically the scourge of the John Birch Society, I struggle to think of more than one or two writers (God bless Jay Nordlinger) who plainly prefer to see Trump’s freakishly Bircherite campaign defeated tomorrow.

Nearly all the frogs on the right have boiled and maybe just enough in the center for him to win. Anyone who can rationalize supporting him after January 6 can and will rationalize whatever he stoops to next. As you and I suffer through it, let’s resolve to accept no excuses later from those who support him for the perfectly foreseeable results of the immoral choice they’ve made.

That’s the best I can do for a consoling thought on Election Day eve—we deserve what we get now. And I do mean “we.” I deserve it too.

I’ve worked in right-wing media for a long time. Even in the early days, people who read me would have told you I was nine parts RINO to one part populist. But that’s still one part too many.

I regret, and will always regret, that I didn’t recognize until very late what the conservative movement was becoming. I plead stupidity, not malice: Not until Trumpmania exploded in 2015 did it dawn on me that adherents of populist conservatism were happy to jettison the conservatism so long as the populist demagoguery got turned up to 10.

Whatever minuscule contribution I may have made toward us arriving at this moment, I’m sorry for it. All I can do to atone is make another minuscule contribution toward trying to lead us away and accept that, whatever Trump has planned, I’m part of the “we” that has it coming.

As for the future, a few foolishly optimistic Never Trump types have told me they believe a Trump defeat on Tuesday might be the end politically not just for him but for Trumpist populism writ large. I’m skeptical.

For Trump, it really might be the end. He’ll want to run again in 2028, if only to preserve the monarchy he’s built atop the GOP, but he’ll be 82 and he’s already slowing down. And the end of Trump probably means the end of the very particular coalition he’s built. Other Republicans who’ve embraced the Bircherite elements of his program but who lack his charisma, celebrity patina, and comic timing have fared terribly down ballot, by and large. Trump is larger than life. Kari Lake and Doug Mastriano are not.

So, no, the Trump coalition isn’t sustainable. But it’s easy to imagine Republicans processing another narrow defeat this week by convincing themselves that the problem, ultimately, was the messenger rather than the message and that a new, bigger coalition can be built by carrying Trumpism forward.

A couple fewer jokes about Puerto Rico in the home stretch and another year or two of distance from the Dobbs decision that overturned Roe v. Wade, and who knows? Maybe Trump wins this race after all. The seminal lesson of this election will be that proto-fascism is not per se disqualifying in a right-wing candidate; many voters who don’t support it in principle will at least overlook it in the name of electing a candidate whom they prefer to the alternative on immigration or inflation or what have you. Authoritarianism is just another policy issue to be weighed against all the others, it seems.

In that sense, this election will almost certainly be a disastrous defeat for classical liberals and a triumph for postliberals regardless of the outcome. Unless Kamala Harris wins by a landslide, there will be no way to claim credibly that the electorate repudiated Trump’s brand of politics. And no one foresees a Harris landslide.

Paul Montagu (f97d41) — 11/4/2024 @ 6:43 pm

LOL

Dustin (4b502c) — 11/4/2024 @ 6:45 pm

@Kevin@33 Nikki Haley would’ve been a much better choice. I dislike DeSantis a lot but he also would’ve been a better choice.
Nic (120c94) — 11/4/2024 @ 5:52 pm

You wouldn’t have voted for either, so what is the point?

lloyd (f21710) — 11/4/2024 @ 7:06 pm

Obama called us Clingers.
Hillary called us Deplorables.
Kamala called us Fascists.
Walz called us Nazis.
Biden called us Garbage.
Mark Cuban called us Weak & Stupid.

Now Kathy Hochul says we’re Un-American.

They want division.
We want unity.
And tomorrow we will UNITE AMERICA. pic.twitter.com/TVL0F1KgLn

— Byron Donalds (@ByronDonalds) November 4, 2024

NJRob (eb56c3) — 11/4/2024 @ 7:22 pm

@lloyd@40 I might’ve voted for Haley, but no, not for Desantis. The point is that no one wins 100% of the time, so it’s better to have a non-crazy person on both sides of the equation because then, even if you get someone you don’t like, at least they aren’t crazy.

Nic (120c94) — 11/4/2024 @ 7:38 pm

@42 LOL Nic, you might’ve voted for Haley like I might’ve voted for Buttigieg. I mean, I could try to peddle that sort of nonsense, but why? What do you get out of it?

lloyd (f21710) — 11/4/2024 @ 8:16 pm

Joe Rogan endorses Trump. Hopefully that gets out the vote.

NJRob (eb56c3) — 11/4/2024 @ 8:18 pm

If Trump does lose, Tim Alberta’s piece explains why, and it starts at the top.

Paul Montagu (f97d41) — 11/4/2024 @ 8:40 pm

@lloyd@43 I am not an ideologue. I have voted for Republicans in the past and, depending on where the various parties go, I might in the future. There are definitely circumstances under which I would’ve voted for Haley. There are few I would’ve voted for DeSantis. There are no circumstances that I would vote for Trump.

Nic (120c94) — 11/4/2024 @ 8:54 pm

The question, lloyd, is whether you wold have voted for Haley or DeSantis, not whether every centrist would have.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 11/4/2024 @ 8:54 pm

If Trump does lose, Tim Alberta’s piece explains why, and it starts at the top.

If Trump wins, it’s because Harris lost. The moment Biden dropped out, it was her race to lose. And she started by picking a VP from the far Left, beginning the spurning of the center. Later she tried to say she was really a centrist, but that didn’t pass the laugh test with many.

In the end she had two arguments:

“I’m not Trump” and
“Trust me”

Maybe it was enough, maybe it wasn’t.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 11/4/2024 @ 8:58 pm

If Trump loses, it’s because he’s a flaming asshat, an insurrectionist, and insane. Really not much more than that.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 11/4/2024 @ 8:59 pm

Kevin, the person most to blame for Kamala losing (if she loses) is Biden and his bad judgment, because he picked Kamala as his VP and because he broke his pledge that he’d be a one-term president.
He never gave his party a chance to have a real primary with real contenders. Kamala didn’t run a bad campaign, but I agree she didn’t help herself with Walz; she’d have been better off picking the astronaut or the PA governor.

Paul Montagu (f97d41) — 11/4/2024 @ 9:09 pm

The question, lloyd, is whether you wold have voted for Haley or DeSantis, not whether every centrist would have.
Kevin M (a9545f) — 11/4/2024 @ 8:54 pm

I always vote for the candidate with the more conservative policies. Were you expecting something different? DeSantis supporter from day one, as I’ve only made clear here a gazillion times.

lloyd (f21710) — 11/4/2024 @ 9:13 pm

@23 FDR is the reason kevin you don’t have to call someone comrade. FDR prevented a communist revolution after hoover had the army fire upon the bonus army. In 1932 the communist/socialists got a million votes for president. People in Iowa and kansas were storing food in their cellars awaiting a communist revolution. Mother jones shoved aside a machine gun aimed at the general strikers. J.edgar hoover made a deal with lucky luchiano and the mafia to take over the unions along with the ruether brother to take over the auto unions. You better hope kamala wins or the left will take over the democrat party from the corporatists and donor class.

asset (f07e2d) — 11/4/2024 @ 9:14 pm

@41 Both sides loathe each other. Its like when hitler attacked stalin you didn’t know who to BOO for!

asset (f07e2d) — 11/4/2024 @ 9:19 pm

Desatan is worse then trump just a loathe some opportunist who as lincoln said could not fool the people all of the time.

asset (f07e2d) — 11/4/2024 @ 9:22 pm

Dixville Notch…
Trump 3
Kamala 3

Involving 4 Republicans and 2 independents.

Paul Montagu (f97d41) — 11/4/2024 @ 10:13 pm

Hey guys, just a reminder — but a super-important one — please respect copyright issues and fair use, especially for those sources who ask for payment to keep the ball rolling. If you are going to extensively quote from a source, please do one of the following:

* Heavily edit sections of the narrative and be willing to truncate others, assuming you don’t undermine the point you are willing to make.

* Don’t do extensive quoting at all, unless you are breaking it up with commentary.

Thanks.

JVW (b301cc) — 11/4/2024 @ 10:34 pm

Dixville Notch…

I was hoping for 6 blank

Kevin M (a9545f) — 11/4/2024 @ 11:00 pm

Urban vote down especially woman. Rural vote up slightly. (faux news)

asset (f07e2d) — 11/4/2024 @ 11:04 pm

Kevin, the person most to blame for Kamala losing (if she loses) is Biden and his bad judgment, because he picked Kamala as his VP and because he broke his pledge that he’d be a one-term president.

And because he … oh wait …

He never gave his party a chance to have a real primary with real contenders.

So we had Hobson’s Choice.

Kamala didn’t run a bad campaign, but I agree she didn’t help herself with Walz; she’d have been better off picking the astronaut or the PA governor.

She didn’t run a good one either. She was competitive because she had incredible help from the media and from Donald “Own Goal” Trump. I chastise her for her “I’m not Trump” platform, but it was really her best posture.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 11/4/2024 @ 11:05 pm

This is easily the worst election I’ve ever experienced. BOB DOLE would have a better candidate than Trump, even now.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 11/4/2024 @ 11:06 pm

Remember: Right wing extremists look to Trump as their leader. Left wing extremists consider Harris their enemy.

lurker (c23034) — 11/5/2024 @ 12:24 am

@ Kevin M (a9545f) — 11/4/2024 @ 11:06 pm

But do you remember when Bob Dole was called horrible names in the election?

This is the problem, when every political candidate is called Hitler, then none are Hitler.

Joe (584b3d) — 11/5/2024 @ 4:09 am

Dixville Notch…
Trump 3
Kamala 3

Involving 4 Republicans and 2 independents.

Dixville Notch Trump history:

2016:

Hillary Clinton – 4
Donald Trump – 2
Gary Johnson – 1
Mitt Romney – 1

2020:

Joe Biden – 5
Donald Trump – 0

Nice improvement!

BuDuh (4214e4) — 11/5/2024 @ 5:34 am

Lines around the block at all early voting locations in Chicago these past couple of weeks.

First glance? Young people!

My guess is that it’s the Chicago Public Schools Board elections which are bringing them out.

What do you guys think?

nk (bb1548) — 11/5/2024 @ 6:12 am

All six Dixville Notch voters picked Nikki in the primary.

Paul Montagu (f97d41) — 11/5/2024 @ 6:27 am

Thing to beware of, and I mean BEWARE!

The Trump camp puffing up questionable polls and statistics to bolster a claim of cheating when Trump loses.

nk (bb1548) — 11/5/2024 @ 6:33 am

All six Dixville Notch voters picked Nikki in the primary.

Paul Montagu (f97d41) — 11/5/2024 @ 6:27 am

And?

BuDuh (4214e4) — 11/5/2024 @ 6:50 am

@66 If Trump is somehow declared the winner, check back here to see nk call the results into question.

lloyd (68d949) — 11/5/2024 @ 7:11 am

“Somehow”? What “somehow” do you have in mind, lloyd?

There is no “somehow”. There is only one “how”. And that is when the votes in each State are counted and the people who count the votes in that State say Trump got more votes than Kamala in that State and Trump should get the Electoral votes of that State.

nk (bb1548) — 11/5/2024 @ 7:26 am

Yeah nk, it’s like “If Trump somehow survives an assassination attempt.” You know, the one you questioned was real. Somehow.

lloyd (68d949) — 11/5/2024 @ 7:35 am

Here’s my one prediction.
Before midnight, Trump will declare himself the winner, regardless of the results.

Paul Montagu (f97d41) — 11/5/2024 @ 7:42 am

Waste of bandwidth.

nk (bb1548) — 11/5/2024 @ 7:44 am

There’s good reason for hope. Yesterday, I told the “cabbage” joke six times — and got good laughs each time.

Jim Miller (98d28d) — 11/5/2024 @ 7:45 am

Nation Anxiously Waits To See Which Side Will Be Denying Election Results.

lloyd (68d949) — 11/5/2024 @ 7:46 am

Not your comment @71, Paul, the exchange before that.

nk (bb1548) — 11/5/2024 @ 7:46 am

Trump also needs to lose because (1) so his three criminal cases can work through the system;

Interesting.

This means every Republican AG in the country should indict every Democratic candidate in February 2028 so that none of them will be eligible since “all the cases can work through the system.”

Those are the new rules, right? Right?!?

If you don’t think the future of this country should be “Who can exhibit the most effective lawfare?”, there’s only one choice. And it isn’t Harris.

SaveFarris (2ab502) — 11/5/2024 @ 7:47 am

WATCH: Kamala Harris Gets Caught Faking Door-Knocking in Laughable Final Blow to Her Authenticity

BuDuh (d4ff83) — 11/5/2024 @ 7:49 am

eats in the U.S. House of Representatives and thus votes in the Electoral College are apportioned among the states based on each one’s total population — not by the number of citizens or legal residents,” CIS said

After the 29020 Census, the states carried by Biden lost a net 3 Electoral votes to the states carried by Trump.

It would have been more without immigration.

Sammy Finkelman (c2c77e) — 11/5/2024 @ 7:52 am

They attempted to weigh poll results by previous presidential vote, but that has problems.

Sammy Finkelman (c2c77e) — 11/5/2024 @ 7:55 am

Heavy turnout – and also in early in person voting a week ago Sunday but not in the middle of the week.

I saw more than half a dozen people lined up outside the official main entrance of the polling place at 6 am

Sammy Finkelman (c2c77e) — 11/5/2024 @ 7:59 am

This is the problem, when every political candidate is called Hitler, then none are Hitler.

That doesn’t mean you should go nominate Hitler.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 11/5/2024 @ 8:00 am

My guess is that it’s the Chicago Public Schools Board elections which are bringing them out.

What do you guys think?

Free “L” tickets?

Kevin M (a9545f) — 11/5/2024 @ 8:02 am

The Trump camp puffing up questionable polls and statistics to bolster a claim of cheating when Trump loses.

Drudge has been doing the same poll-puffing for Kamala.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 11/5/2024 @ 8:03 am

With that, let’s hear your closing arguments for either candidate. Because, whether you’re for Trump or for Harris, you must have what you believe to be solid reasons for why you are voting that way.

I’m voting for Trump/Vance.

My reason is simple.

I’m radicalized by the death of my son’s best friend who od’ed on weed fatally laced with fentanyl. I found out afterwards that the investigator believes the dealer got it from Mexico (they did get the dealer).

So, believe me when I say that my mind went to dark places in those following days/weeks, I’m an absolute radical. I place blame at the feet of Democrats and any other voters who cast a vote for them. I. Blame. You.

Additionally, let us know if there is anything that could change your mind about voting for your selected candidate.

I can’t think of anything… that a) has already happened in Trump’s 1st term or b) some reasonable hypothetical (not the BS sending Seals to his enemies hysterics).

I truly believe Harris, and most Democrats, are far more a danger than Trump could ever be.

whembly (477db6) — 11/5/2024 @ 8:09 am

This means every Republican AG in the country should indict every Democratic candidate in February 2028 so that none of them will be eligible since “all the cases can work through the system.”

That’s the “logic” of a Trump U grad.

Paul Montagu (f97d41) — 11/5/2024 @ 8:09 am

@85

That’s the “logic” of a Trump U grad.

Paul Montagu (f97d41) — 11/5/2024 @ 8:09 am

Do you want to have one standard or no?

whembly (477db6) — 11/5/2024 @ 8:18 am

Do you want to have one standard or no?

Indeed. There are three pending criminal indictments on Trump, yet he’s still eligible to run again if he loses.

Paul Montagu (f97d41) — 11/5/2024 @ 8:57 am

Heck, Biden can run again in 2028.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 11/5/2024 @ 9:03 am

Judges deny requests to block DOJ from monitoring polls
…………
Both Missouri and Texas asked federal courts to keep DOJ lawyers away from their polls. Missouri’s attorney general and secretary of state said any monitoring would “displace state election authorities,” and Texas’s attorney general contended that “Texas law alone determines who can monitor voting in Texas.”
…………
U.S. District Judge Sarah Pitlyk found that Missouri did not reach its burden of showing that the state would face irreparable harm if the Justice Department’s monitors watched over (the city of St. Louis’s) polls.

“In practical terms, the expected harm is monitoring by two individuals at one polling place to ensure compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, as contemplated by an agreement that has been in place for several years, and as already done at least twice without incident,” Pitlyk wrote in a late Monday ruling.
………..
In Texas, U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk early Tuesday ordered the DOJ to verify that the agency would not send “observers” to poll locations in Texas while also denying issuing the restraining order.

“The Court cannot issue a temporary restraining order without further clarification on the distinction between ‘monitoring’ and ‘observing’ on the eve of a consequential election,” Kacsmaryk, a Trump appointee, said in the ruling.

Texas and the DOJ appeared reached an agreement on the matter before Kacsmaryk’s ruling.
………..
DOJ will monitor compliance with federal voting rights laws in several other states, including several jurisdictions in the battleground states of Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, North Carolina, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.
………..

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 11/5/2024 @ 9:15 am

And let’s be civil.

According to this thread, Trump is…

” a weird, broken, crazy authoritarian.”
“grossly unfit.”
“an unclean creature of Darkness, the embodiment in nearly human form of vice and corruption.”
” a dangerous high-wire act whose utter lack of self-control combined with his ignorance of Constitutional order is dangerous to the nation.”
” a crazy nutbag racist wannabe dictator ”
“a flaming asshat, an insurrectionist, and insane.”

Glad everyone is staying civil!!!

SaveFarris (2ab502) — 11/5/2024 @ 9:19 am

We should be civil to each other, but to politicians are a different matter.

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 11/5/2024 @ 9:20 am

Being civil to each other is something that has been sorely lacking over the past several days.

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 11/5/2024 @ 9:24 am

@92 Indeed.

We have a regular here to keeps Godwin’ing threads.

whembly (477db6) — 11/5/2024 @ 9:44 am

https://www.nationalreview.com/2024/11/my-first-vote-for-trump/

…
I didn’t choose these fights, and I preferred a different champion in the primary. But it is my responsibility to recognize the fight I’m in and acknowledge the man taking shots for me. I think it is morally reprehensible to free-ride on the rest of the country’s votes for Trump, and then to preen that I’m too pure to pull a lever for the outcome I prefer.
…

Absolutely this.

whembly (477db6) — 11/5/2024 @ 9:51 am

@92 Indeed.

We have a regular here to keeps Godwin’ing threads.

whembly (477db6) — 11/5/2024 @ 9:44 am

The baiting has occurred on both sides.

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 11/5/2024 @ 11:29 am

A simple twist of fate:

Elections are riddled with what-ifs. Some are immediate: What if we had spent more on television? What if we’d made more visits to Wisconsin? What if we’d focused more heavily on turnout? Others litter history books: What if Richard M. Nixon had asked for a recount in Chicago in 1960? What if, 40 years later, the ballots in Palm Beach County had been different?

……….What if Vice President Kamala Harris had picked Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro as her running mate? What if there had been no comedian at Madison Square Garden? And, of course: What if President Joe Biden had never run for reelection in the first place?
……….
We can answer one question that might otherwise have lingered, however. Polling conducted by YouGov over the weekend included a question centered on the alternate universe in which Biden never dropped out at all. And in that universe, Donald Trump has a national lead of seven points. Landslide territory.
……….
The YouGov survey consisted of two questions, one evaluating support in a Trump-Harris contest and the second in a Trump-Biden matchup. Overall, Harris did eight points better than Biden, and Trump did two points worse against the vice president than the president. The margin goes from a seven-point lead for Trump against Biden to a three-point deficit.

Across demographic groups, the movement is uniformly the same. ………..
……….
Some of the biggest shifts were among independents, Hispanic voters and younger voters. But even among Democrats, there was a large difference.

……….What we see is that 82 percent of Harris voters prefer Biden in the Biden-Trump matchup — but 4 percent prefer Trump. …….

But those who pick Biden in the Biden-Trump matchup overwhelmingly back Harris against the former president. Of those who are undecided or prefer a third party in Biden-Trump, most pick the Democrat in Harris-Trump. And 4 percent of those who prefer Trump when he’s running against Biden choose Harris when he’s running against her.
………..
Again, we can’t know for sure how the presidential contest would look if Biden had stuck with his candidacy all along (assuming, in the face of another what-if, that he survived a rebellion at the Democratic convention). The YouGov results, though, suggest that swapping him out for his vice president was, in fact, beneficial to his party’s chances of retaining the White House.
###########

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 11/5/2024 @ 11:50 am

Democrats Remind Everyone A Winner May Not Be Declared Until 110% Of The Vote Is Counted.

lloyd (604ca7) — 11/5/2024 @ 12:30 pm

We tend to forget President William Howard Taft, because he came between two much more famous ones, Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson. But he once got off a pretty good line. He was giving a speech to a crowd, when a man in the crowd threw a head of cabbage at him.

The man missed, which was not easy because Taft was a big man.

Taft looked at the head of cabbage for a bit, turned to the crowd, and said: “Ladies and gentlemen, I see one of my opponents has lost his head.”

I like the story for two reasons; it’s funny — and it probably changed the situation from “let’s fight” to “let’s laugh”, which we should do at least nine times out of ten, if we can.

(I found that story in Bob Dole’s Great-Political-Wit.)

Jim Miller (be7b9f) — 11/5/2024 @ 12:51 pm

#90 feels saying mean things about Trump isn’t civil. I don’t get that. Trump isn’t reading these threads and getting his feelings hurt.

Civility is civility to each other. You can call a candidate a pedophile and not violate civility rules. Call a fellow commentator that? Seems a violation.

Appalled (c115f8) — 11/5/2024 @ 1:26 pm

Pool: When will Trump declare his landslide victory? (Eastern Time)

I’ll take 11/5, 7:30 pm

Kevin M (a9545f) — 11/5/2024 @ 1:51 pm

It’s Gunpowder Treason Day in the UK, commemorating the arrest of those attempting to overthrow the English Crown. Somehow this seems fitting.

Remember, remember!
The fifth of November,
The Gunpowder treason and plot;
I know of no reason
Why the Gunpowder treason
Should ever be forgot!

Kevin M (a9545f) — 11/5/2024 @ 1:56 pm

#90 feels saying mean things about Trump isn’t civil. I don’t get that. Trump isn’t reading these threads and getting his feelings hurt.

If only Trump deserved civility. He hasn’t shown it during the campaign.

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 11/5/2024 @ 2:00 pm

Follow up: In his latest TV commercials, Nick Brown (who is running for Washington state’s attorney general) no longer uses his kids.

I had wondered why his wife was never mentioned in them. A sharp commenter here found that his wife is suing for divorce. (My apologies for forgetting his name; my memory isn’t even as good as it was when I was a youthful 70.)

Jim Miller (aeae37) — 11/5/2024 @ 2:18 pm

Kids shouldn’t be props.

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 11/5/2024 @ 2:39 pm

A revenge campaign to the very end:

Journalists from multiple news organizations have been denied credentials to former President Donald Trump’s election night watch event in West Palm Beach, Florida, in retaliation for their coverage of Trump’s campaign.

Reporters at Politico, Axios, Puck, Voice of America and Mother Jones were among those denied credentials. Some, like Politico, had been previously granted access to the Tuesday night event only to have the decision reversed.

Politico’s team of reporters and a photographer were initially approved to attend the event, but on Tuesday morning were surprised to find they had been denied credentials, a person familiar with the matter told CNN. The person suggested the decision was made in response to an article in Politico magazine, which reported that a Trump campaign field director was fired for being a White nationalist.

Puck’s political correspondent Tara Palmeri was also set to broadcast from the event as part of Amazon’s election night special hosted by Brian Williams. But around the time Palmeri published a piece about “anxiety” within the Trump campaign, her credential was denied.
………..
A person familiar with the campaign’s decisions acknowledged that the reporters had been denied access because of their coverage, but pushed back on the notion it was because of “critical” coverage, claiming the reporting was “inaccurate.” The person said other reporters from the outlets would be able to attend the event.

……….(C)ampaign co-chair Chris LaCivita wrote on X last week that Palmeri “was DENIED credentials to enter Mar-a-largo [sic] to cover election night due to her ‘proclivity’ to write bullsh!t. well well well.”
……….

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 11/5/2024 @ 2:44 pm

Here’s one of the earlier Nick Brown ads: https://www.instagram.com/nickbrownnow/reel/C9fS394CviW/

Jim Miller (a60a4b) — 11/5/2024 @ 2:48 pm

For your entertainment, while you are waiting: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jy6AOGRsR80

Jim Miller (a60a4b) — 11/5/2024 @ 2:49 pm

The person suggested the decision was made in response to an article in Politico magazine, which reported that a Trump campaign field director was fired for being a White nationalist.

You think the Trump campaign would congratulate themselves for firing such a person, but apparently they wanted to keep it quiet.

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 11/5/2024 @ 2:50 pm

There is no upside to that, Rip

Kevin M (a9545f) — 11/5/2024 @ 2:59 pm

Pool: When will Trump declare his landslide victory? (Eastern Time)

I’ll take 11/5, 7:30 pm

Kevin M (a9545f) — 11/5/2024 @ 1:51 pm

(Assuming you are serious) I doubt that early; most of polls in the South and Midwest close between 8 and 9 pm. I would say 11 pm just when the polls close in the Left Coast (with apologies to Idaho.)

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 11/5/2024 @ 3:27 pm

Schrödinger’s election. Harris and Trump have both won. And lost.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 11/5/2024 @ 3:29 pm

#111 Chuckle!

Jim Miller (f99434) — 11/5/2024 @ 3:35 pm

If you want to see what the British bettors are saying, go here.

Jim Miller (f99434) — 11/5/2024 @ 3:42 pm

I can firmly say I have no idea who is going to win!

asset (8ccba0) — 11/5/2024 @ 3:44 pm

#113 They just out up a new post — with an interesting title.

Jim Miller (6fd340) — 11/5/2024 @ 4:09 pm

I don’t know why they’re not calling FL yet.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 11/5/2024 @ 4:48 pm

They called FL now (panhandle). Note that Trump won Miami-Dade by 10%

Kevin M (a9545f) — 11/5/2024 @ 5:09 pm

If you want to see what the British bettors are saying, go here.

Jim Miller (f99434) — 11/5/2024 @ 3:42 pm

Americans haven’t cared what the Brits think of our elections since 1776.

NJRob (b3679e) — 11/5/2024 @ 5:20 pm

I can speak for one American. It must be nice to be able to speak for more than 330 million of us.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_States

(I am particularly interested in what Brits who gamble on our elections think, since they can provide interesting predictions. But that’s just me.)

Jim Miller (8db8d3) — 11/5/2024 @ 5:58 pm

11/4/2024

The Day Before. . .

119 Responses to “The Day Before. . .”

Favorite Sites

Links

Patterico Sells Out