General Election 2024 Harris vs Trump (8 Viewers)

[SamAndreas]

Today it begins, Kamala has reached the point that she's the Democratic Party nominee:

There's video from today. this link has video from her first public appearance since Biden endorsed her:

https://www.cnbc.com/2024/07/22/live-updates-harris-democrats-biden-drops-out-trump-campaign.html

She spent yesterday on the telephone for most of the day. I read that yesterday that she called the party leaders in all 50 states. That would take me three days.

She's renamed her YouTube channel, that's the where to go for video: https://www.youtube.com/@kamalaharris

This is her video on her channel from two hours ago:



To play it, start it, and then move it up to 5:47. This was one of those live videos which don't start at zero.

I've named this thread General Election 2024 Harris vs Trump

Trump needs an introduction post as well, a MAGA suporter ought to write it: @Farb, @SaintForLife , @Others, calling for someone to please introduce your GOP candidate for this 2024 general election thread.

 

[J-DONK]

Putting this here because Polymarket was mentioned earlier as proof that Trump is going to win this election. I have suspected this about Polymarket ever since I first found out about it.

I don't think they have to try, and manipulate or skew it.

My first thought is the majority of gamblers are male, and white. That demographic skews heavily Republican. It makes sense that they are going after conserative influncers to promote the site.

I don't know why anyone would view it as anything other then a Rasmussen type of poll. You know it has a heavy conserative bias baked in.

 

[coldseat]

I don't think they have to try, and manipulate or skew it.

My first thought is the majority of gamblers are male, and white. That demographic skews heavily Republican. It makes sense that they are going after conserative influncers to promote the site.

I don't know why anyone would view it as anything other then a Rasmussen type of poll. You know it has a heavy conserative bias baked in.

Americans can't even bet in those polymarkets. That's all foreign money (obviously, sense it's Trump). It makes no sense to have influencers here in the US, so that's why it's purely right wing propaganda. The questions that needs to be asked of the media and these influences is why they're promoting obvious propaganda.

 

[DJ1BigTymer]

Harris is in WI today holding a rally following last nights butt kicking and she is still feeling froggy!

 

[MT15]

I don't think they have to try, and manipulate or skew it.

My first thought is the majority of gamblers are male, and white. That demographic skews heavily Republican. It makes sense that they are going after conserative influncers to promote the site.

I don't know why anyone would view it as anything other then a Rasmussen type of poll. You know it has a heavy conserative bias baked in.

The person who said they had contacted them is definitely not a conservative influencer.

It is supposed to accurately assess odds - and it’s not doing that, and it’s not disclosing that it is attempting to skew the odds. It seems more like it’s trying to create a perception, sort of trying to set up a narrative that something is screwy with the election when Trump doesn’t win.

 

[efil4]

I don't think they have to try, and manipulate or skew it.

My first thought is the majority of gamblers are male, and white. That demographic skews heavily Republican. It makes sense that they are going after conserative influncers to promote the site.

I don't know why anyone would view it as anything other then a Rasmussen type of poll. You know it has a heavy conserative bias baked in.

its not even a "poll"

its betting odds lol

and its odds based on who the bettor favors- thats it. There is no "science" or "historical data" - its literally all a hunch AND its all in crypto - not dollars. ( altho you see payout in "dollar equivalent" )

if 100 ppl bet and 70 bet Trump- the odds will show Trump at 70% - where the money is going. Except, unlike gambling, there is no "line to move" so they just show % of who betting on who.
And its not even US folks. LOL

its a cryptobro site to play games with 1/100th of a coin.

thats it. There is literally no value to it whatsoever. There is no "vig/juice" so its not even real betting

if you go to a real betting site- Trump is -143 and Harris +150- meaning - toss up

 

[efil4]

 

[Optimus Prime]

Bret Baier started off his Wednesday evening interview with Kamala Harriswith a barrage of combative questions about immigration, designed less to elicit substantive answers than to prove what a tough guy the Fox host could be.

His aggressive approach was understandable, in a way, since Baier had been under pressure for days from the Donald Trump faithful; they were convinced he was going to go easy on the Democratic nominee for president, and maybe even allow her campaign to edit the interview or see the questions in advance.

So, Baier came out guns blazing, barely allowing the vice-president to finish a sentence before jumping in with objections and arguments.


After 10 minutes of playing immigration “gotcha”, Baier pivoted to the obvious next subject, airing a video clip in which Harris expressed support for transgender people in prisons.

Immigrant hatred. Transphobia. And later, Joe Biden’s age. Baier was running through the Fox News greatest hits playlist.

This was grievance theater, not political journalism.

But Harris got in her licks. She had her moments.

Chiming in afterwards in what some saw as corporate damage control, Baier’s colleagues on Fox News gushed their approval. Martha MacCallum termed Baier’s performance “masterful”, while Dana Perino analyzed the interview as “super good”.

I can’t imagine that too many viewers agreed. If they came to it expecting to learn more about Harris’s policies or get a true sense of her character, they would have been disappointed. That wasn’t the gameplan, and it wasn’t the result.


But Harris accomplished something anyway.

Merely by sitting down with a Fox host, she made a few statements.

First, that she is unafraid and is willing to speak to all voters. It’s hard to imagine Donald Trump, these days, submitting to an interview with, say, Rachel Maddow of MSNBC; just this week, he turned away from a CNBC interview, and earlier canceled a CBS News 60 Minutes agreement.

Second, Harris did manage to introduce a few snippets of reality to dedicated Fox viewers who probably haven’t been exposed to some of the most troubling criticisms of Trump.

“That he’s unfit to serve. That he’s unstable. That’s he’s dangerous,” was how she characterized what millions of Americans are feeling. “And that people are exhausted.”

She even was able to mention, at some length, the harsh view of the former commander-in-chief from Mark Milley, who served in two top military roles – including chair of the joint chiefs of staff – during the Trump administration.…….

Fox News’s interview of Kamala Harris was grievance theater, not political journalism | Margaret Sullivan

Bret Baier interrupted Harris so much she could barely finish a sentence. She still injected some reality into Fox News’s worldKey takeaways from Harris’s Fox News interview

www.theguardian.com

 

[MT15]

This was an incredible moment, when Trump said “we” speaking of the Jan 6 rioters, and “the others” when talking about the police. Also-he is lying about the insurrectionists not having guns, some of them did.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

Here's the fuller clip of Harris dunking on Faux and trump:

Kamala has a unique ability to say "with all due respect" in a manner that is both polite and clearly implies that the amount of respect due is absolutely zero.

 

[MT15]

Also, notice that the hecklers were handled with a smile, a wave and a clever quip. She didn’t snarl at them, call them names, insult their families or tell people she would pay their legal bills if they hit them.

 

[coldseat]

This was an incredible moment, when Trump said “we” speaking of the Jan 6 rioters, and “the others” when talking about the police. Also-he is lying about the insurrectionists not having guns, some of them did.

I caught that right away in post #4591 on the last page.

 

[MT15]

I caught that right away in post #4591 on the last page.

Yes, you did. Don’t know how I missed that post. Pretty incredible for a former POTUS to talk that way.

 

[MT15]

I love this clap back:

 

[J-DONK]

The person who said they had contacted them is definitely not a conservative influencer.

It is supposed to accurately assess odds - and it’s not doing that, and it’s not disclosing that it is attempting to skew the odds. It seems more like it’s trying to create a perception, sort of trying to set up a narrative that something is screwy with the election when Trump doesn’t win.

I've always thought betting worked by on who was betting the most on each side essentially. The line was always swayed by how much action each side of the bet had.

If it's just polymarkets opinion on the race, who cares.

 

[DJ1BigTymer]

This was an incredible moment, when Trump said “we” speaking of the Jan 6 rioters, and “the others” when talking about the police. Also-he is lying about the insurrectionists not having guns, some of them did.

The "WAIT, WHAT???" reaction from the audience was priceless!

 

[Optimus Prime]

Donald Trump has tried to strike yet another hush money deal with adult film star Stormy Daniels in exchange for her silence ahead of the 2024 presidential election, according to a report.

The former president’s attorneys allegedly sent Daniels an offer where the amount she owed him over a defamation suit would be lowered if she agreed not to make “defamatory or disparaging statements” about him.

The details were revealed in a special report by MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow, who obtained calls, documents and emails about the deal.

“Twenty days before this election, we can report that he is once again trying to pay Stormy Daniels to be quiet,” she said in a special broadcast on Wednesday evening…….

Trump accused of trying to cut another hush money deal with Stormy Daniels

Former president’s attorneys allegedly sent adult film star an offer where the amount she owed him over a defamation suit would be lowered if she agreed not to make ‘defamatory or disparaging statements’ about him

www.independent.co.uk

 

[MT15]

Brett Baier apologized on air today for playing a clip of Trump lying about what he said instead of the clip that showed what he actually said about using the military on “the enemy within”. He said it was a “mistake”. Funny, he didn’t say it was the wrong clip or anything like that at the time. When she objected he started trying to explain why they showed that clip, but she cut him off. It clearly wasn’t a mistake (okay it was, but it was intentional - he just didn’t think it would backfire on him like it has).

 

[Maxp]

I'm really not buying any so called upswing in moment for the Trump campaign. He hasn't made a coherent statement in months, I barely see any Trump signs or bumper stickers compared to the last two elections, his rallies keep getting canceled or barely have any energy. I think this push is all manufactured online by bots and the likes of Moosk.