Which political party is more likely to spawn WW3? (Poll)

Which party, R or D, is more likely to trigger WW3 after winning the 2024 election?

  • Republicans

    Votes: 3 9.1%
  • Democrats

    Votes: 17 51.5%
  • WW3 is very unlikely due to the economic destruction (lose-lose outcome)

    Votes: 9 27.3%
  • WW3 is probable due to a convergence of circumstances beyond control of the US

    Votes: 3 9.1%
  • Other. See my post.

    Votes: 1 3.0%

  • Total voters
    33
I know exactly what I am talking about. Split ticket voting was abnormally high in 2020. Where have you been?
Not really and when it did happen, it was hardly surprising. The data proves you wrong.

 
Yet your blob is the one with a Chinese bank account.

I’m sure they do. But how are cars being made here...you said that he was selling out the auto industry?
1. Trump may even have real estate in China. So what? Trump has a real BUSINESS, and its not selling influence like the Biden Crime Family.

2. Maybe you don't get that converting from gas cars to EVs hurts the UAW. I posted this before. Read it this time.
 
1. Trump may even have real estate in China. So what? Trump has a real BUSINESS, and its not selling influence like the Biden Crime Family.
Is this the same blob who says he’s “America first”?
2. Maybe you don't get that converting from gas cars to EVs hurts the UAW.
Probably because there is scant evidence of such an injury. Its a growing market segment. True or false? True. If American car manufacturers want to take advantage of the growth...they get into that segment. Economics 101.
I posted this before. Read it this time.
Yeah......that’s an unbiased source.
 
1. Then Biden blew it up. The EU buys their gas from the US now.

2. Obama let the ISIS Caliphate expand, Trump eliminated it.

3. Russia is no match for NATO and Putin knows it. Russia has its hands full with Ukraine.

4. Obama didn't do anything about the ISIS Caliphate except to let it expand.
View attachment 886470

It came up most recently in the vice presidential debate, when Mike Pence boasted, “We destroyed the ISIS caliphate. … You know when President Trump came into office, ISIS had captured an area of the Middle East the size of Pennsylvania. President Trump unleashed the American military, and our armed forces destroyed the ISIS caliphate and took down their leader al-Baghdadi without one American casualty.”
Similar victory claims have been made by Trump himself dating back to October 2017 and include him saying “We’ve done more against ISIS in nine months than the previous administration has done during its whole administration – by far, by far.” Other statements in March 2018 and February 2019 include Trump’s boast “on terrorism, in Iraq and Syria, we’ve taken back almost 100%, in a very short period of time, of the land that they took. And it all took place since our election.”

Wikipedia is NOT a source. Trump did NOT defeat or destroy ISIS. All of Trump's supposed "accomplishments" were continuations of Obama's strategies. Everything that Trump did himself, was an abject faillure.


 
1. Trump may even have real estate in China. So what? Trump has a real BUSINESS, and its not selling influence like the Biden Crime Family.

2. Maybe you don't get that converting from gas cars to EVs hurts the UAW. I posted this before. Read it this time.

So what??? This is a clear violation of the emoluments clause, that's what.

"Real businesses" don't lose money for 20 years and then suddenly make a profit when the owner becomes President of the United States and rakes in millions selling influence to foreign governments.

Just like Trump kept falsely claiming Hillary Clinton was conspiring with Russia throughout the 2016 campaign, when in fact TRUMP was the one getting help from Russia, Trump is now claiming that Joe Biden is being paid by China, because TRUMP is getting paid MILLIONS by China.


You clearly don't get that converting to EV's will save the economy billions in climate disasters.

 
Is this the same blob who says he’s “America first”?

Probably because there is scant evidence of such an injury. Its a growing market segment. True or false? True. If American car manufacturers want to take advantage of the growth...they get into that segment. Economics 101. Yeah......that’s an unbiased source.
1. yes.
2. Exactly right. EVs mean US car manufacturers and investors win and the UAW loses.
 
There is basically no chance at WW3. Partisan fear mongering is not a very helpful tactic for the country.
 
Catastrophic climate change is far more imminent danger than WW3, but we aren’t allowed to talk about that.
Sure you can. But its called climate change for a reason...because the climate is cooling, otherwise it would be called "Global Warming".
 
Trump destroyed manufacturing with his tariffs on steel. Close to 200,000 manufacturing jobs lost, and the manufacturing section was already in recession when the pandemic hit.



By every measure, the Biden Economy is built on solid ground. More jobs, lower deficits, infrastructure improvements.
Doesn’t matter to you, stick to Canadian matters…
 
Not really and when it did happen, it was hardly surprising. The data proves you wrong.


It only required a little manipulation in a couple/few swing states, not in every state. For example, I noticed that GA, MI and MN were all states in which Biden outperformed the Senate Democrats. Not coincidently, these were three of the more hotly debated states and without them, Biden loses. I don’t see one swing state where the Biden outperformed Senate Democrats on split ballots.
 
Its logical for supposedly massive voter fraud to take place and the party who supposedly committed the fraud loses seats in the Congress?

Biden won MI. As pointed out by your fellow comrade, MI split ballots skewed in favor of Biden over Senate Democrats. My original point stands.

Yeah...people hated your blob.

Yes, many childish people hated him for his antics. Not many of them could give a policy reason as to why. That is the typical low-info Democratic voter.


cheating
 
...a link from 2019:
Moreover, China—largely a third party during the Cold War—has emerged as the U.S.'s foremost economic challenger, and has answered Russia's calls for closer ties, including in the military realm.

So in 2019 China didn't make the list of threats to start WW3. Has China's threats to take Taiwan moved the needle closer to WW3 now?
North Korea is now making aggressive threats against South Korea. NK should have been on the list.

This thread wants to discuss the probability of WW3 based on which party is in the Whitehouse.

1. If Joe Biden wins a 2nd term: (I don't see Michele Obama or Gavin Newsome replacing Biden so late in the cycle)
Biden's WH is less likely to take action to limit aggressive moves by aggressor nations, like Russia in Ukraine, China in Taiwan, NK against SK, or Iran in the ME. The formation of the BRIC nations has limited the US as far as imposing crippling sanctions on aggressor nations, leaving limited military action as the only punishing action available. The US is NOT the world's policeman. The feckless UN is no help either.

2. If Trump, Nikki Haley, or Ron Desantis win the Whitehouse in 2024:
Would Republican foreign policies be more aggressive toward aggressor nations?
Would the Republican led US make the world safer or would they move the world closer to WW3?

Which party, R or D, is more likely to trigger WW3 after winning the 2024 election?

China is far more than an economic threat to the U.S.....they are an existential threat to the U.S. as our power grid is exposed to attack.......and our open border is allowing in 10s of thousands of military aged Chinese men into the country.......

Various podcasts I follow have had interviews with intelligence officials and officers....they have stated that Chinese defectors to the U.S. have stated that China hates us....we are not simply economic rivals to them, they hate us and the Chinese Communists want to end this country.........and they are making plans to do it...

So the democrats and their bullshit are making us more and more vulnerable to actual attack....
 
Biden won MI. As pointed out by your fellow comrade, MI split ballots skewed in favor of Biden over Senate Democrats. My original point stands.
Who was talking about the Senate?

Again, can you explain why the supposed cheaters who so wanted Biden in office didn't give him a larger majority in the House?

Because your argument makes zero sense so far.

Hint: There is no valid explanation but it's fun watching you squirm.
Yes, many childish people hated him for his antics. Not many of them could give a policy reason as to why. That is the typical low-info Democratic voter.
He botched the Covid response, ran up $8T in new debt, was basically trash, started and lost trade wars on every front... This is why he got a lower percentage of the vote in most states--not blue states--red states.
Want some cheese with your whine?
 
It only required a little manipulation in a couple/few swing states, not in every state. For example, I noticed that GA, MI and MN were all states in which Biden outperformed the Senate Democrats. Not coincidently, these were three of the more hotly debated states and without them, Biden loses. I don’t see one swing state where the Biden outperformed Senate Democrats on split ballots.
You just don't have the data to make this point.

Georgia's runoff elections had both candidates outperforming Biden. The first senate election, Biden barely outperformed the Senate Democrat, but given a third party had nearly 3% of the vote, its pretty uninterpretable. The difference is extremely slim.

In Michigan, Biden outperformed the Senate Democratic candidate by less than 1%, both of them still won. The margin of victory in Michigan wound up being almost 3%. Close, but not that close.

Minnesota wasn't a swing state. What are you smoking? Biden hammered Trump by 7%. That's a substantially larger margin of victory than Trump had in Florida and almost as big as Ohio.

Meanwhile in Arizona, Biden underperformed Kelly by a slim margin.

There were no senate elections in Wisconsin, Nevada, or Pennsylvania. Which means your sample size is really 3. Michigan where Biden overperformed the Senator, Arizona where Biden underperformed the Democratic Senator and Georgia, where he did both.

The differences here are tiny. Certainly we've seen no data that supports your contention of some historic high in split ticket voting. Furthermore, we have data that tells us the opposite.

 

Forum List

Back
Top