Jump to content
View in the app

A better way to browse. Learn more.

Surly Horns

A full-screen app on your home screen with push notifications, badges and more.

To install this app on iOS and iPadOS
  1. Tap the Share icon in Safari
  2. Scroll the menu and tap Add to Home Screen.
  3. Tap Add in the top-right corner.
To install this app on Android
  1. Tap the 3-dot menu (⋮) in the top-right corner of the browser.
  2. Tap Add to Home screen or Install app.
  3. Confirm by tapping Install.
Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business & Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Advertise... Tailgate Donations

2024 Presidential Election Thread - Let's keep the party going.

Featured Replies

Anyone else sitting around today wondering what this Saturday will bring us given how different things became after last Saturday? Is Saturday the new Tuesday?

  • Replies 56.6k
  • Views 3.7m
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Most Popular Posts

  • I don't post all that often, though don't mistake that for not enjoying this board's discourse, OUsucks/Texags point and laughs, and quality original content on a frequent basis. I haven't felt t

  • Clintonaldo
    Clintonaldo

    Just had an interesting conversation with wife. Her: Hey Wednesday I need you to pick our son up Me: ok but be home by 4 because I am going to Chili’s for some internet friends. Her: You are mee

  • Old Freak Nasty
    Old Freak Nasty

    I am an American Indian, born in rural Pennsylvania while my dad attended Penn State for graduate school in the 70s.  He was accepted by all on campus, but encountered plenty of racism when outside of

Posted Images

Just now, mdmost said:

Anyone else sitting around today wondering what this Saturday will bring us given how different things became after last Saturday? Is Saturday the new Tuesday?

I’m drinking a mimosa in the Reno airport. You saying I should be eating a bird instead?

4 minutes ago, tx 3 putt said:

The grift never ends …

 

IMG_1172.jpeg

That’s an affront to The Sandlot. 

Didn't even need one stitch and now he's a martyr?

I'm sure some of those profits will go towards the firefighter's family because Trump is that generous. 

Just now, tx 3 putt said:

Welcome back my friends to the grift that never ends

 

IMG_1172.jpeg

 

2 hours ago, Dnaguy said:

The Leroy Jenkins strategy in which you take no outside input to inform your decisions. 
Bold, maybe.

Stupid, yes.

Losing strategy. We’ll see? [probably though]

Not my strategy!

  • Popular Post
13 hours ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Worth watching. 

 

In a perfect world, Mayor Pete would be the Democratic nominee because he's more than capable of dispatching a light weight moron like Trump. He could stand in a debate and annihilate Trump's lies point by point. But he's gay and we're a nation of bigoted assholes. So we instead get the feeble old man who can't debate any longer. And we'll have to like it, it seems. 

  • Popular Post
1 minute ago, mdmost said:

In a perfect world, Mayor Pete would be the Democratic nominee because he's more than capable of dispatching a light weight moron like Trump. He could stand in a debate and annihilate Trump's lies point by point. But he's gay and we're a nation of bigoted assholes. So we instead get the feeble old man who can't debate any longer. And we'll have to like it, it seems. 

People have been annihilating Trump's lies for years. It does not make a difference. For whatever reason he is allowed to lie as much as he wants. 

  • Popular Post
Just now, Hawndoh said:

People have been annihilating Trump's lies for years. It does not make a difference. For whatever reason he is allowed to lie as much as he wants. 

I do think mayor Pete has a unique ability to project calm, confidence, and plain reason in the face of the nonsense this country has become. If he were the nominee, I would bet he would win the popular vote by 10s of millions. Not that it would matter because yay electoral college. But he would be my top pick to defeat any Republican in this race, especially the dotard. 
 

But alas

Who knows how things fall out but she’s a strong possibility for future races ….

 

9 minutes ago, tx 3 putt said:

Why is Trump anti 2A ?????

 

I’m laughing at that idiots clothing choices.  Khakis.  Blue blazer fitted like a parka.  MLB cap.  I can only assume sketchers kicks…dress for sucksass.  

Edited by ChiTownDoc

  • Popular Post
11 minutes ago, Hawndoh said:

People have been annihilating Trump's lies for years. It does not make a difference. For whatever reason he is allowed to lie as much as he wants. 

At the debates? To his face? Biden's not going to do it now. He did a great job of it in 2020 and it helped him win an election. Biden couldn't refute much of anything now. Mayor Pete could sit up there, not getting angry or raising his voice, and calmly tell people every single lie and why it's a lie. That's my point. Biden can't deliver that rebuttal anymore. It should be really easy to destroy Trump in public to his face. Maybe it makes little difference. If anything, I hope they shove Pete out there as much as possible. 

  • Popular Post

Trump has successfully gaslit the vast majority of us.  It’s exhausting.  But fuck anyone giving up, have to keep fighting him and his merry band of assholes.  

3 minutes ago, mdmost said:

At the debates? To his face? Biden's not going to do it now. He did a great job of it in 2020 and it helped him win an election. Biden couldn't refute much of anything now. Mayor Pete could sit up there, not getting angry or raising his voice, and calmly tell people every single lie and why it's a lie. That's my point. Biden can't deliver that rebuttal anymore. It should be really easy to destroy Trump in public to his face. Maybe it makes little difference. If anything, I hope they shove Pete out there as much as possible. 

It’s a chance for a rebrand. People Pete’s age/Gretchen’s age. JD Vance pick (his age) also a factor in why he was selected. Parties need to go young or younger 35-60. A chance to cut some of the chaff off both parties. This age group I feel a lot more hopeful about than 60-80. I just feel like it’s time. Time for the next generation to speak and share their ideas. Not be beholden to the Boomers. The elders of the society. The ones that were that age in the 70’s and 80’s. We need this badly. I’m not suggesting throwing Pelosi and Schumer away I’m just saying it is time for others to have more power. More say. Let’s try new things and try them a different way. 

32 minutes ago, tx 3 putt said:

Who knows how things fall out but she’s a strong possibility for future races ….

 

If by "future," you mean the one in November, yes.  

She does a great job of leaning into the issues rather than tap dancing around them.  She's honestly the most talented pol I've seen since Obama.

If you retire to Michigan, we're going to have to get a restraining order put out against you to protect Gretchen. 

Any trumper, please explain this to me …..

 

26 minutes ago, Nicole44 said:

It’s a chance for a rebrand. People Pete’s age/Gretchen’s age. JD Vance pick (his age) also a factor in why he was selected. Parties need to go young or younger 35-60. A chance to cut some of the chaff off both parties. This age group I feel a lot more hopeful about than 60-80. I just feel like it’s time. Time for the next generation to speak and share their ideas. Not be beholden to the Boomers. The elders of the society. The ones that were that age in the 70’s and 80’s. We need this badly. I’m not suggesting throwing Pelosi and Schumer away I’m just saying it is time for others to have more power. More say. Let’s try new things and try them a different way. 

Lol.  It will never be ‘our time’ until we vote.  We just talk shit then go eat mushrooms and cry online.  

14 minutes ago, tx 3 putt said:

Any trumper, please explain this to me …..

 

Assuming that these numbers are accurate, net oil and petroleum exports increased under Trump by roughly 9 quadrillion Btu in the 3 years between 2017-2020 (3 quadrillion Btu per year). Under Biden, it increased by around 1.2 quadrillion Btu in the 3 years from 2020-2023 (0.4 quadrillion Btu per year). So more than 7 times the net increase annually under Trump as under Biden, which you would expect given their respective policies.

Not making a political point, just a statistical one. People need to learn how to read charts better. For a New York Times contributing writer, that is either an embarrassing misinterpretation or an egregious misrepresentation of the data.

Edited by Voluminous Banality

7 minutes ago, tx 3 putt said:

Any trumper, please explain this to me …..

 

Facts don’t matter.  I hate ‘X’ and he will persecute ‘X’ to the fullest.  Done.  

9 minutes ago, tx 3 putt said:

Any trumper, please explain this to me …..

 

Facts don’t matter anymore.

How does no one get this?

A democrat could have record oil production, reduce the deficit, reduce crime to record levels, and propose the most draconian boarder security measure ever….. and it wouldn’t make a shit.

Because yeah….. 

5 minutes ago, ChiTownDoc said:

Lol.  It will never be ‘our time’ until we vote.  We just talk shit then go eat mushrooms and cry online.  

Mushrooms make you sad I guess? I’m cool with my caramels and gummies. I have voted every election since 18. I have never voted straight ticket. It’s our time damnit! Lol. I really do think that we should moving forward (assuming there is a future) have early conventions and mini-primaries to decide our candidates. It might be awkward at first. But I think it will get more people to vote if they could see the process at a convention and not just rah rah rah shit. Gives you more skin in the game and groups would have to bargain out in the open. 
 

we are at 35 Democratic members of Congress now. It’s not a blue wave…more of a leaky faucet that floods the house. I think though Monday will be end game. Unless he signals he will be dropping out tomorrow night. 

30 minutes ago, Voluminous Banality said:

Assuming that these numbers are accurate, net oil and petroleum exports increased under Trump by roughly 9 quadrillion Btu in the 3 years between 2017-2020 (3 quadrillion Btu per year). Under Biden, it increased by around 1.2 quadrillion Btu in the 3 years from 2020-2023 (0.4 quadrillion Btu per year). So more than 7 times the net increase annually under Trump as under Biden, which you would expect given their respective policies.

Not making a political point, just a statistical one. People need to learn how to read charts better. For a New York Times contributing writer, that is either an embarrassing misinterpretation or an egregious misrepresentation of the data.

It isn't a misinterpretation at all. The US was net importer under Trump. It did not become a net exporter until Biden's term. It is also simultaneously true that trend started prior to Biden's term. And it even started before Trump's term. 

See chart below. The downward trend in net imports started in G.W.'s second term, and continued fairly consistently through Obama's terms, Trump's term, and now Biden's. The real conclusion is that Presidents don't actually have that much of direct effect on the economy. But, if others are trying to credit Trump for this, it is absolutely fair to show that the US wasn't a net exporter until Biden. Oh, and that blimp upward in Biden's term is clearly Covid related. 

Screenshot_20240720-090230.thumb.png.3869f699fb492813e47fa4e5c35e9ac1.png

https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=pet&s=mttntus2&f=a

 

Edited by Dahobbs

4 hours ago, troph said:

so are you.

half the population (plus or minus a few percentage points) doesn't vote. about 2/3 of them don't even pretend. The other 1/3 actively look for reasons not to vote. He's a nutjob, he's too old, for that reason, I'm out. that plus or minus a few percentage points is the election. motivation to GOTV is paramount. anti-trump with a net-negative biden isn't a safe bet. last time it was anti-trump and neutral biden and he won.  and before anyone assume I'm anti-biden, I'm not. I'm livid it looks like his admin isn't getting a second term whether by losing or by stepping down.

I'll vote for whomever the Democrats' nominee is. That's the same as almost everyone posting in this thread. Some of us are trying to get the point across that a lot of the youth and independents votes Biden had in 2016 aren't going to be there in 2020. It's a losing hand.

25 minutes ago, Voluminous Banality said:

Assuming that these numbers are accurate, net oil and petroleum exports increased under Trump by roughly 9 quadrillion Btu in the 3 years between 2017-2020 (3 quadrillion Btu per year). Under Biden, it increased by around 1.2 quadrillion Btu in the 3 years from 2020-2023 (0.4 quadrillion Btu per year). So more than 7 times the net increase annually under Trump as under Biden, which you would expect given their respective policies.

Not making a political point, just a statistical one. People need to learn how to read charts better. For a New York Times contributing writer, that is either an embarrassing misinterpretation or an egregious misrepresentation of the data.

For those like Steven Rattner who don't know how to read a chart, this is what the chart is really showing. I don't even care about the point he is trying to make, but the horrendous data presentation cannot be abided.

image.thumb.png.d884f39a2452553214fba3bcea0f820e.png

2 minutes ago, Voluminous Banality said:

For those like Steven Rattner who don't know how to read a chart, this is what the chart is really showing. I don't even care about the point he is trying to make, but the horrendous data presentation cannot be abided.

image.thumb.png.d884f39a2452553214fba3bcea0f820e.png

Stop with your bullshit. I already corrected you. If you're going to be pedantic about correcting data presentation, at least don't be so fucking lazy about it and actually pull the full data set. 

Edited by Dahobbs

I’ve been trying to keep up with this thread while traveling for the last week and the biggest recurring conflict appears to be @troph’s refusal to admit that Biden needs to step down.  @troph, have you come around?

1 minute ago, Dahobbs said:

Stop with your bullshit. I already corrected you. 

It's not bullshit. Your'e not understanding the chart. Net exports between 2017-2020 rose by approximately 9 quadrillion Btu. Between 2020-2023, they rose by approximately 1.2 quadrillion Btu. I'm not even making a political point. I'm just responding to a statistical pet peeve. It's literally statistics 101.

  • Popular Post

Go, Bob, go! 

 

Just now, Voluminous Banality said:

It's not bullshit. Your'e not understanding the chart. Net exports between 2017-2020 rose by approximately 9 quadrillion Btu. Between 2020-2023, they rose by approximately 1.2 quadrillion Btu. I'm not even making a political point. I'm just responding to a statistical pet peeve. It's literally statistics 101.

I don't understand if? Look at my prior post with the full data. You have no idea what the actual data says because you havent fucking looked at it. Net exports have been increasing at a consistent rate since 2005. It has fuck all to do with Trump. The only reason Biden's numbers look worse is because of a slight blimp upward during covid followed by an immediate return to the same multi decade trend. 

Here, @Voluminous Banality, I'll post it for you again:

image.png.0b883e0df2509102739b2cad338f4152.png

Again, I think you missed the point of the original tweet. People are trying to credit Trump for something that has fuck all to do with him. The tweet merely makes the point that the US wasn't a net exporter until Biden's term. Because it wasn't. That's a fact. Not a misrepresentation. Of course, the general trend really has nothing to do with Biden and nothing to do with Trump. It just part of a long term change brought about largely by the fracking revolution. 

 

49 minutes ago, Voluminous Banality said:

Assuming that these numbers are accurate, net oil and petroleum exports increased under Trump by roughly 9 quadrillion Btu in the 3 years between 2017-2020 (3 quadrillion Btu per year). Under Biden, it increased by around 1.2 quadrillion Btu in the 3 years from 2020-2023 (0.4 quadrillion Btu per year). So more than 7 times the net increase annually under Trump as under Biden, which you would expect given their respective policies.

Not making a political point, just a statistical one. People need to learn how to read charts better. For a New York Times contributing writer, that is either an embarrassing misinterpretation or an egregious misrepresentation of the data.

You seem to be misunderstanding the point he’s making. The point is that under Biden, production is higher than it’s ever been. So when Trump says it’s not, he’s lying. As always. 

3 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

I don't understand if? Look at my prior post with the full data. You have no idea what the actual data says because you havent fucking looked at it. Net exports have been increasing at a consistent rate since 2005. It has fuck all to do with Trump. The only reason Biden's numbers look worse is because of a slight blimp upward during covid followed by an immediate return to the same multi decade trend. 

Yes, you don't understand it. You posted a chart showing petroleum imports drastically decreasing between 2017-2020 and then decreasing at a slower rate after 2020:

image.thumb.png.c16cd0aa68a2ba96175270d66d0e2578.png

That corresponds to a rapid INCREASE in net exports or DECREASE in net export deficit from 2017 followed by a much SLOWER increase in net exports from 2020-2023:

image.thumb.png.40e75332133246ea0b8e4b0104f3d510.png

In other words, the chart you posted perfectly supports the statistical (non-political) point I was making. If you still don't understand it, that's okay. Have a good day.

3 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Here, @Voluminous Banality, I'll post it for you again:

image.png.0b883e0df2509102739b2cad338f4152.png

Again, I think you missed the point of the original tweet. People are trying to credit Trump for something that has fuck all to do with him. The tweet merely makes the point that the US wasn't a net exporter until Biden's term. Because it wasn't. That's a fact. Not a misrepresentation. Of course, the general trend really has nothing to do with Biden and nothing to do with Trump. It just part of a long term change brought about largely by the fracking revolution. 

 

I didn't miss the point of the tweet. To answer in the terms that you are using, in 3 years, Trump got us 90% of the way to becoming a net exporter of petroleum. In the next 3 years, Biden pushed us the final 10% across the line. You are right, of course, that it's not all about Trump and Biden, but this data hardly supports chest-beating over Biden's over-performance in this regard.

10 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

I don't understand if? Look at my prior post with the full data. You have no idea what the actual data says because you havent fucking looked at it. Net exports have been increasing at a consistent rate since 2005. It has fuck all to do with Trump. The only reason Biden's numbers look worse is because of a slight blimp upward during covid followed by an immediate return to the same multi decade trend. 

You are either being disingenuous or are truly missing the point. Someone pointing out that the US became a net exporter under Biden is a meaningless stat because he didn’t increase production much compared to the previous four years. As you yourself said, that’s just been the trend. Biden hasn’t done anything. And he shouldn’t get any credit for doing anything special, other than continuing the trend. But in fact, his trend has been worse than the previous four years, not better. 

That’s the critical point. It’s a completely misleading conclusion by the guy tweeting. You said “it’s fair to point out….”   But, it’s not fair to point that out. It’s completely misleading. 

Just now, Voluminous Banality said:

Yes, you don't understand it. You posted a chart showing petroleum imports drastically decreasing between 2017-2020 and then decreasing at a slower rate after 2020:

image.thumb.png.c16cd0aa68a2ba96175270d66d0e2578.png

That corresponds to a rapid INCREASE in net exports or DECREASE in net export deficit from 2017 followed by a much SLOWER increase in net exports from 2020-2023:

image.thumb.png.40e75332133246ea0b8e4b0104f3d510.png

In other words, the chart you posted perfectly supports the statistical (non-political) point I was making. If you still don't understand it, that's okay. Have a good day.

The chart I posted is net imports, not total imports. It is literally just the flip side of your graph. Stop focusing on 2017 and look at the full trend. It is a multi decade trend. Taking one small portion of a multi decade trend is going to distort the analysis with randomness. The larger sample size makes clear what is happening. Anyone with the barest familiarity with statistics would understand this. 

Just now, Dbeasy said:

You are either being disingenuous or are truly missing the point. Someone pointing out that the US became a net exporter under Biden is a meaningless stat because he didn’t increase production much compared to the previous four years. As you yourself said, that’s just been the trend. Biden hasn’t done anything. And he shouldn’t get any credit for doing anything special, other than continuing the trend. But in fact, his trend has been worse than the previous four years, not better. 

That’s the critical point. It’s a completely misleading conclusion by the guy tweeting. You said “it’s fair to point out….”   But, it’s not fair to point that out. It’s completely misleading. 

The point of the tweet is that Trump shouldn't get credit for it if Biden doesn't get credit for the US actually becoming a net exporter. The tweet is factually accurate. Misleading is saying that Trump increased net exports by 9 quadrillion barrels when it had fuck all to do with him. That's what's fucking misleading. 

1 minute ago, Dahobbs said:

The chart I posted is net imports, not total imports. It is literally just the flip side of your graph. Stop focusing on 2017 and look at the full trend. It is a multi decade trend. Taking one small portion of a multi decade trend is going to distort the analysis with randomness. The larger sample size makes clear what is happening. Anyone with the barest familiarity with statistics would understand this. 

Correct, it's literally the flip side which I literally just said. It's evident that you neither understand the original tweet nor anything I've posted, so this is a good place to end the exchange.

22 minutes ago, Underdog said:

Go, Bob, go! 

 

'he is a bubbling cauldron of loathsome traits'

that's fantastic. im using that.

1 minute ago, Voluminous Banality said:

Correct, it's literally the flip side which I literally just said. It's evident that you neither understand the original tweet nor anything I've posted, so this is a good place to end the exchange.

I understand the pedantic point you've made. I've just provided fuller context. I don't get why you cant engage with that honestly. 

  • Popular Post

Go fight it out in the oil barons thread you jamokes. 

Checking in on this thread for the first time in a month. Decided around the time of the debate (didn’t watch) to tune out of election news. It’s not like I’m going to change my vote so I made the decision to not give a fuck about the daily barrage of shitty news. It’s been quite a nice break. I suggest others do it. It’s not like any of us can influence a cult member who is pushing for the project 2025 agenda. Those people are too far gone.

7 minutes ago, Dbeasy said:

You are either being disingenuous or are truly missing the point. Someone pointing out that the US became a net exporter under Biden is a meaningless stat because he didn’t increase production much compared to the previous four years. As you yourself said, that’s just been the trend. Biden hasn’t done anything. And he shouldn’t get any credit for doing anything special, other than continuing the trend. But in fact, his trend has been worse than the previous four years, not better. 

That’s the critical point. It’s a completely misleading conclusion by the guy tweeting. You said “it’s fair to point out….”   But, it’s not fair to point that out. It’s completely misleading. 

Correct. The dude has now shifted to, "Well, Trump doesn't get credit for the increase in net exports during his term because he did fuck all." 🤦‍♂️ The original tweet was stupid and misleading, period. That's all I'm responding to, since someone asked.

Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business & Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Advertise... Tailgate Donations

Configure browser push notifications

Chrome (Android)
  1. Tap the lock icon next to the address bar.
  2. Tap Permissions → Notifications.
  3. Adjust your preference.
Chrome (Desktop)
  1. Click the padlock icon in the address bar.
  2. Select Site settings.
  3. Find Notifications and adjust your preference.