Jump to content

Don't Miss a Beat

Join the UK's most passionate festival community. Keep up with the latest conversations, line-up rumours, and music news.

250,000+ Members

Connect with a massive network of fellow festival-goers.

Lively Discussions

Thousands of active topics on music, campsites, and tips.

Hot Rumours & News

Hear about secret sets and lineup drops before anyone else.

Create Free Account
OR
  • Sign Up!

    Join our friendly community of music lovers and be part of the fun 😎

U.S. Presidential Election


FloorFiller

Recommended Posts

43 minutes ago, FloopFiller said:

I think they just need to drag Biden across the finish line at this point. In a nicer country/world Harris would obviously be an ideal choice to step in, but ain’t no way America is voting in a black female president, especially one thrust in to the race with only four months to get people on her side, and I don’t see anybody else wanting to jump in now either.
 

Biden will probably lose, but he’s also probably their best chance at winning right now, and that’s totally on the Dems (and him) for not making him commit to being a one term president a long time ago like most people assumed he would when he won in 2020. They were foolish for thinking that a 78 year old man wouldn’t soon have health troubles, and that Trump wouldn’t continue to be the Rep nominee and avoid any consequences for his crimes that would stop him from running. 
 

Just gotta hope and pray that the same show of force that turned up to keep Trump out of office last time does the same this time. 

Kind of agree with this, I feel anybody else stepping in now just hasn't got enough time to make a difference and they are looking at defeat anyway. Unless the Dems know something we don't it's time to stop the bickering and public sniping, get behind Biden and start attacking trump and vance instead of each other. 

 

If, against the odds he does go on to win he can step down then and give it to Kamala.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, MilkyJoe said:

Kind of agree with this, I feel anybody else stepping in now just hasn't got enough time to make a difference and they are looking at defeat anyway. Unless the Dems know something we don't it's time to stop the bickering and public sniping, get behind Biden and start attacking trump and vance instead of each other. 

 

If, against the odds he does go on to win he can step down then and give it to Kamala.

ok, but there's a defeat, and then there's a landslide where MAGA crazy Republicans take everything and US goes all Handmaid's Tale.

So it can be argued that Biden has been a pretty good president, and they can get Trump because he's a dodgy muthaf**ka etc...but you can't just unsee what Biden looks and sounds like on tv, and it isn't going to get any better unless they keep pumping him full of amphetamines/steroids/botox or use some funky AI or something. It's just bloody crazy if you ask me, maybe I'm wrong and they can unite behind Biden and turn this thing around...but I don't think they will and history won't look kindly on Biden or those around him who kept this thing going.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

ok, but there's a defeat, and then there's a landslide where MAGA crazy Republicans take everything and US goes all Handmaid's Tale.

So it can be argued that Biden has been a pretty good president, and they can get Trump because he's a dodgy muthaf**ka etc...but you can't just unsee what Biden looks and sounds like on tv, and it isn't going to get any better unless they keep pumping him full of amphetamines/steroids/botox or use some funky AI or something. It's just bloody crazy if you ask me, maybe I'm wrong and they can unite behind Biden and turn this thing around...but I don't think they will and history won't look kindly on Biden or those around him who kept this thing going.

Yeah the whole thing is f**ked at the moment to be sure. There's definitely no easy answers but until they sort it one way or the other all trump has to do is look on while it happens. Biden needs to get out this week and for better or worse get a couple of speeches or interviews in with the intention of trying to get this all put to bed. It will go one way or the other. In reality (in public at least) there are 32 Dems saying he should step down. This isn't many out of 251 so at the moment he would still seem to have a majority support.

 

Privately it's probably another matter entirely and I'm sure any more serious gaffes from him would open the floodgates...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

Isn't Harris polling better than Biden? The one thing she has going for her as far as I can tell is that she can walk and talk.

Being black and a woman completely negates any walking and talking she can do, unfortunately.

 

Also gotta be noted that Trump’s RNC speech the other night went down horrendously, even with a large portion of non-MAGA republicans. Talked for like an hour and a half, kept going off topic, brought up Hannibal Lecter as if he was a real person again, lied over and over, and just didn’t seem how to end it so just.. kept talking, so whilst he may be louder, his brain isn’t any less mush than Biden’s. 
 

People have got to remember, at this point it doesn’t really matter who the Dem candidate is. You’re voting for Trump or you’re voting against him, just like 2020. Would be great to have the reassurance of a dependable candidate that people were rallying behind, but alas that ship seems to have sailed. If Biden gets annihilated then it’s just another instance of Dems being f**king idiots and not getting their sh*t together at a much earlier date.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, FloopFiller said:

Also gotta be noted that Trump’s RNC speech the other night went down horrendously, even with a large portion of non-MAGA republicans. Talked for like an hour and a half, kept going off topic, brought up Hannibal Lecter as if he was a real person again, lied over and over, and just didn’t seem how to end it so just.. kept talking, so whilst he may be louder, his brain isn’t any less mush than Biden’s. 

Apparently last nights speech in Michigan wasn't much better.🤣 There's always a chance that he will say or do something to make people realise that he's a f**king idiot but it's still unlikely to make his supporters turn away. They are blind in that respect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, FloopFiller said:

Being black and a woman completely negates any walking and talking she can do, unfortunately.

 

Also gotta be noted that Trump’s RNC speech the other night went down horrendously, even with a large portion of non-MAGA republicans. Talked for like an hour and a half, kept going off topic, brought up Hannibal Lecter as if he was a real person again, lied over and over, and just didn’t seem how to end it so just.. kept talking, so whilst he may be louder, his brain isn’t any less mush than Biden’s. 
 

People have got to remember, at this point it doesn’t really matter who the Dem candidate is. You’re voting for Trump or you’re voting against him, just like 2020. Would be great to have the reassurance of a dependable candidate that people were rallying behind, but alas that ship seems to have sailed. If Biden gets annihilated then it’s just another instance of Dems being f**king idiots and not getting their sh*t together at a much earlier date.

I get all of that...but at moment those who are for Trump are definitely going to vote, those against are not sure.

Yes maybe Harris would not do well with some voters because of who she is, but will she be able to galvanise anti Trump people to get out and vote because at least she is compos mentis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, charlierc said:

Given some polls even put the usual Democrat stronghold New York in play as a possible either-way, it's possible different people are using different data sets. It's similar to how 538 had a piece this week saying Biden still has a decent shot at winning despite poll after poll looking pretty dire at present.

 

There is a sense though that a week on from that idiot trying to assassinate Trump that there may not have been that much of a bounce securing him the Presidency as first assumed, short of some people at the RNC taking their hero worship to new strange places. Whether it needed all that much of a bounce is another matter ofc, given the Democrats have arguably been the bigger story this week as they're all still shouting at one another.

It ties in with the idea that everyone has made up their minds so there is very little scope for any event to move the polls. I've no idea how reliable Lunz  is. I've heard of him from his UK commentary but the interview referred to a recent serious illness.

I was most surprised by the wide field of potential candidates to replace Biden. I don't know anything about them and recent posts here say one is Jewish and another gay which may rule them out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

what is it with these silicon valley libertarian c**ts?

Money and power I guess.

 

I mean, I’m no Trump fan, but him immediately getting up, pumping his fist and shouting ‘Fight!’ right after getting ‘shot’ (hit by a piece of glass) was pretty damn badass. The tv personality in him immediately went in to ‘the cameras are on, let’s do this sh*t’ mode. There’s a reason why so many people immediately deflated to ‘oh sh*t, he’s gonna win’ right after, or assumed it was all staged. Looked right out of a movie. 

Edited by FloopFiller
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, FloopFiller said:

I mean, I’m no Trump fan, but him immediately getting up, pumping his fist and shouting ‘Fight!’ right after getting ‘shot’ (hit by a piece of glass) was pretty damn badass. The tv personality in him immediately went in to ‘the cameras are on, let’s do this sh*t’ mode. There’s a reason why so many people immediately deflated to ‘oh sh*t, he’s gonna win’ right after, or assumed it was all staged. Looked right out of a movie. 

yes, but no offence or anything because I agree, but you saying it and Zuckerberg saying it are very different things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

yes, but no offence or anything because I agree, but you saying it and Zuckerberg saying it are very different things.

 

Yeah I get that what he says is pretty contradictory there, but also it’s just him being honest in an interview that happened to take place immediately after a former president was nearly assassinated.

 

Also don’t think many people give a sh*t what Zuck has to say on the matter. It’s not like he’s Taylor Swift coming out and endorsing Trump causing tens of thousands of her fans swarming to the polls (although speaking of which, I wonder if she’ll repeat her endorsement of Biden this year). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Nobody Interesting said:

Now he needs to bring Harris along side and make her more prominent in the last months til November. Let the people see her and learn how good she can be.

Sadly, doubt that will happen

This is assuming she gets the nomination at the DNC in a few weeks time ofc. Think we have a 1968-style shitshow incoming ngl.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just found out. I’m a little bit sad about this to be honest as I still thought he could do it. They really need to get their nominee sorted sooner rather than later now. Preferably before the DNC starts on the 18th.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/18/2024 at 8:41 AM, charlierc said:

I only just recovered from getting it, so I can vouch for it turning up in the summer. To say nothing of a lot of people on the Glastonbury side of this forum reporting they brought covid back with them from Worthy Farm a few weeks ago.

there were reports of a lot of it around, before glasto - glasto just gave it a good opportunity to spread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Neil said:

there were reports of a lot of it around, before glasto - glasto just gave it a good opportunity to spread.

I believe I caught it from a Green Day show in Manchester or a Foo Fighters show in Cardiff, both of which were before Glastonbury. But reports cases were rising again came about two or three weeks beforehand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, MilkyJoe said:

Just found out. I’m a little bit sad about this to be honest as I still thought he could do it. They really need to get their nominee sorted sooner rather than later now. Preferably before the DNC starts on the 18th.

I think the noise just got too loud. When people like Pelosi and Obama don’t even have your back anymore it’s game over I suppose. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Neil said:

does trump win by default?

No, now it means the Democrats have to find someone else, and get that in place for the convention in Chicago next month.

 

Something of an omen given the whole point of the current primary/caucuses system came as a result of the 1968 election, which was admittedly complicated for the Democrats by a resignation and an assassination, leading to a strongly contested convention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, FloopFiller said:

I think the noise just got too loud. When people like Pelosi and Obama don’t even have your back anymore it’s game over I suppose. 

Yeah I think Pelosi was the final straw really. We also don’t know how my had expressed concerns privately. Which to be honest is what they all should have done instead of airing it all in public.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Latest Activity

    • In August 2009, in his Spectator blog he wrote about Harriet Harman, deputy leader of the Labour Party, in unflattering terms. Liddle began the article by asking: "So — Harriet Harman, then. Would you? I mean after a few beers obviously, not while you were sober."[27] Tanya Gold wrote in The Guardian that Liddle had delivered a "tissue-thin polemic." Pointing out that it was The Spectator's cover story that week.[28] Rachel Cooke in The Observer nearly two months later recalled finding Liddle's piece "disgusting"[29] Cooke went on to say: "I would still like to do something really unpleasant to the man who wrote [the article]." Liddle said two months later that the Harman column "was supposed to be a parody of guttural, base sexism", a joke he assumed readers would understand. After the negative response from Gold (and then Cooke, among other female journalists) he continued: "And then I suppose I came to the conclusion – gradually – that I must have got it wrong."[30] In June 2014, he said that of those he had offended, Harman was the one person to whom he would apologise.[31] In November 2009, again for The Spectator website, he offered "a quick update on what the Muslim savages are up to," a brief article about the stoning to death of a 20-year-old woman in Somalia after she was accused of adultery, and the similar death of a 13-year-old the year before. He made remarks, considered sarcastic, that read: "Incidentally, many Somalis have come to Britain as immigrants recently, where they are widely admired for their strong work ethic, respect for the law and keen, piercing, intelligence."[32][33] In December 2009, on his Spectator blog, Liddle referred to two black music producers, Brandon Jolie and Kingsley Ogundele, who had plotted to kill Jolie's 15-year-old pregnant girlfriend, as "human filth" and said the incident was not an anomaly. He continued: When he was accused of racism, Liddle said he was instead engaging in a debate about multiculturalism.[35][36] In March 2010 the Press Complaints Commission (PCC) upheld a complaint against Liddle, who became the first journalist to be censured over the contents of a blog, because he had not been able to prove his claim about the crime statistics.[37] After the publication of London crime figures in June 2010, The Sunday Telegraph suggested Liddle was largely right on some of his claims, but that he was probably wrong on his claims about knife crimes and violent sex crimes.[38] In October 2010, Liddle called for the abolition of the Welsh language TV channel S4C as a result of the 2010 Comprehensive Spending Review. In his article for The Spectator, he described Welsh nationalists as "miserable, seaweed munching, sheep-bothering pinch-faced hill-tribes".[39] On 23 May 2013, Liddle wrote about the murder of soldier Lee Rigby near the Royal Artillery Barracks in Woolwich, London. In the original version of a blog article for The Spectator, he referred to the perpetrators as "two black savages".[40] After many objections to his language use,[41] this phrase was modified.[42] Liddle apologised.[40][43] Giving a speech at Durham University in December 2021, Liddle said: "It is fairly easily proven that colonialism is not remotely the major cause of Africa's problems, just as it is very easy to prove that the educational underachievement of British people of Caribbean descent or African Americans is nothing to do with institutional or structural racism."[44] Independent editor rumour and Millwall supporters' website The Guardian reported on 8 January 2010 that the expected purchase of The Independent by Alexander Lebedev, a Russian billionaire, would be followed by the appointment of Liddle as editor.[45] Roy Greenslade wrote on 11 January that the reports were provoking a "major internal and external revolt" by The Independent's staff and readers.[46] The stories about Liddle's posts on Millwall Online apparently further reduced the likelihood of his being offered the job.[47] Finally, on 19 February, Stephen Brook of The Guardian reported that Liddle was no longer in the running for the post.[48] Tim Luckhurst, professor of journalism at the University of Kent, argued that Liddle's prospects of editing The Independent were nullified "by the people behind a viciously intolerant campaign of liberal bigotry".[49] In January 2010, the press drew attention to allegedly racist and misogynist comments posted under the username "monkeymfc"—a name Liddle has used—on Millwall Online, a fan club web forum with no official connection to Millwall Football Club. Liddle attributed some of the comments to opposition fans logging in under his name to embarrass him. He later said he had written some of the posts that were being criticised, including one in support of the BNP excluding Black and Asian people from the party.[50] Another post, in which he joked about not being able to smoke at Auschwitz,[51] led to his being asked to explain what he meant in The Jewish Chronicle.[47] While he said in June 2014 that his comments were taken out of context, he said that he did not regret making them. "No. Never. Absolutely not. I thought about my mates at Millwall Online, God I respect them so much more than these other people, these ghastly f**king people."[31] Stephen Lawrence, disabled and transgender people In November 2011, an article by Liddle for The Spectator suggested the trial of two men accused (and later convicted) of murdering Stephen Lawrence would not be fair.[52] It was referred to the Attorney General Dominic Grieve by the judge for possible contempt of court,[53] and he ordered the jurors not to read it. Having decided that it might have breached a court order, Grieve passed the case on to the Crown Prosecution Service and the Director of Public Prosecutions.[54] The decision that The Spectator was to be prosecuted by the CPS for breaching reporting restrictions was announced on 9 May 2012, with a court hearing scheduled for 7 June, although Liddle as the author was not himself liable for prosecution. Fraser Nelson, the magazine's editor, announced that the prosecution would not be contested,[55] and the magazine pleaded guilty at the hearing. The fine was £3,000, plus £2,000 compensation to Stephen Lawrence's parents and £625 costs.[56] In January 2012, Liddle wrote that many people in the UK were "pretending to be disabled" in his column for The Sun,[57] an opinion defended by James Delingpole.[58] Frances Ryan in The Guardian accused him of "belittling something that on a daily basis affects real people" who can be "a huge benefit to society. Maybe for a month Liddle would like to try that."[59] In May 2015, the Independent Press Standards Organisation (IPSO) upheld a complaint from Trans Media Watch that Liddle had been discriminatory towards Emily Brothers, a blind and transgender Labour candidate at the 2015 general election, in two Sun columns published in December 2014 and January 2015. In commenting in the way he had Liddle had breached two sections of the editors' code.[60][61] Column on poppers and gay sex During a parliamentary debate on the Psychoactive Substances Bill – which "makes it an offence to produce, supply, offer to supply, possess with intent to supply, possess on custodial premises, import or export psychoactive substances"[65] the Conservative politician Crispin Blunt admitted he used poppers: Liddle responded in his Spectator blog: The satirical and current affairs magazine Private Eye described this as hypocritical, pointing out Liddle's account in The Sunday Times of using Viagra in July 2004.[68][69] A spokesperson from the LGBT rights charity Stonewall said of Liddle's remarks: "Comments like this are shocking and damaging, but we wouldn't expect anything less from repeat offending bigots like Rod Liddle."[70] Column on Muslim voters In October 2019, Liddle penned a column in The Spectator commenting on the forthcoming December 2019 UK general election, which suggested that the election should be held on a Muslim holy day to reduce the Labour vote. The column was criticised by senior political figures including Chancellor of the Exchequer Sajid Javid and former Conservative Deputy Prime Minister David Lidington. Liddle defended the content as being humorous. The article also criticised the Labour MP Rosie Duffield's recent speech about her experience of trying to exit an abusive relationship; Duffield described the article as "racist and misogynistic".[74]
    • A true social democrat
    • I thought the same thing I thought when Baresi went which is there sure is a hell of alot of people who don't make the new pension age.
    • 1, The Menzingers- Everything I Ever Saw 2, Quicksand- Bring On The Psychics 3, Radkey- Bedroom Sand  
  • Featured Products

  • Hot Topics

  • Latest Tourdates

×
×
  • Create New...