2024, an election for the ages, or aged!

In a much to early review of the 2024 election, I provide my totally uneducated, possibly biased, sarcastic, and pragmatic predictions. 

Listed below are the potential candidates for each parties nomination, according to a variety of sources.

I have them listed in reverse order of age, which is age on January 20, 2025, as well as end of 2nd term.

I'll start with the democrats, and quickly eliminate some. An example would be Michelle Obama, as she has very much made it clear... she is not interested. When I look down the list, I quickly realize some of these names have some traction, but not enough to unseat Biden, imho. 

The intrigue within the democrat ranks, would be the VP choice. Replacing Harris might be considered, but is fraught with peril, regarding demographics. I'll be frank... someone that is not old, not male, and not white. That only leaves a couple of choices... so it will be Harris, imho.

DEMOCRATS...

• Joseph Biden  82.2 ~ 86.2
• Bernie Sanders 83.4 ~ 91.4
• Hillary Clinton 77.3 ~ 85.3
• Elizabeth Warren 75.6 ~ 83.6
• Phil Murphy 67.4 ~ 75.4
• Amy Klobuchar 64.7 ~ 72.7
• Michelle Obama 61 ~ 69
• Kamala Harris 60.3 ~ 68.3
• JB Pritzker 60 ~ 68
• Gavin Newsom 57.3 ~ 65.3
• Cory Booker 55.8 ~ 63.8
• Gretchen Whitmer 53.4 ~ 61.4
• Jared Polis 49.7 ~ 57.7
• Ro Khanna 48.4 ~ 56.4
• Pete Buttigieg 43 ~ 51
• Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez 35.3 ~ 43.3

The actual fun, going into 2024, would be the republican race. Trump clouds up everything for the republicans. For all the talk of someone else, at this point, that does not seem likely. Whether you love him or hate him, he is likely the nominee.

The VP choice, is filled with intrigue. There are many that would not make the grade, for a variety of reasons. With the biggest reason, being Trump himself. You would also have to consider 2028, and who might wish to avoid the VP position in 2024, and focus on that 2028 election.

It matters, as in my lifetime... 

• V.P. Barkley was deemed to old and lost the democratic nomination in 1952.
• V.P. Nixon left office in 1961, and made it to the Presidency, in 1969
• V.P. Johnson, assumed office on death of Kennedy (1963), and was elected in 1964.
• V.P. Gerald Ford assumed the Presidency in 1974, following Nixon's resignation, and lost in 1976.
• V.P. GHW Bush became President in 1989.
• V.P. Biden left office in 2017, becoming President in 2021. 

Other than deaths or resignations, the number is four, across 14 different Presidents. So the odds are not so good, imho.

Then you have the potential candidates for V.P., although Pence seemingly came from nowhere and likely based on donor connections. Then there is the toxic relations with many of the other candidates on this list. Seriously, can you imagine Liz Cheney as a Trump V.P. nominee?

Then there is the potential benefit to the ticket. Most are in republican safe states. Could Youngkin deliver Virginia's 13 electoral votes to the Republicans? Would he influence any other states?

So the V.P. nominee is a crap shoot, imho. 

REPUBLICANS...

• Donald Trump  78.6 ~ 82.6
• John Bolton 76.2 ~ 84.2
• Asa Hutchinson 74.1 ~ 82.1
• Larry Hogan 68.7 ~ 76.7
• Greg Abbott 67.2 ~ 75.2
• Mike Pence 65.6 ~ 73.6
• Chris Christie 62.4 ~ 70.4
• Mike Pompeo 61.1 ~ 69.1
• Tim Scott 59.4 ~ 67.4
• Liz Cheney 58.5 ~ 66.5
• Glenn Youngkin 58.1 ~ 66.1
• Ted Cruz 54.1 ~ 62.1
• Kristi Noem 53.2 ~ 61.2
• Nikki Haley 53 ~ 61
• Chris Sununu 50.2 ~ 58.2
• Will Hurd 47.4 ~ 55.4
• Ron DeSantis 46.4 ~ 54.4
• Vivek Ramaswamy 39.5 ~ 47.5

Now onto the general election. My long history suggests that Democrats will vote Democrat, and Republicans will vote Republican. I cannot believe that many people cross party lines to vote. I will acknowledge that most registrations are based on local politics. 

There are many local races, that are predominately one party locations. Which means the people register to that party, to influence the local primaries. Generally speaking, there are many instances when the winner of the local primary, runs unopposed in the general election.

Nationally, the breakdown of registration is this...

Click image to enlarge

In the last election, the independent vote was split almost evenly. BUT the elections are not based on majority votes, but rather majority Electoral College votes. Please do not start whining about whether it is fair or not... it is constitutional. It's not going to change in the next two years.

So, a look back to 2016... IF about 39,000 votes in a handful of close state races, that went to Trump had voted for Clinton, Clinton would have won that election, with 273 EVs. (Pennsylvania - 22.2k; Michigan - 5.4k; Wisconsin - 11.4k). (Margins were higher, but IF 50.1% had switched votes.)

In 2020, if about 63,000 votes in a handful of close state races, that went to Biden had gone to Trump... Trump would have won the election. (About 21.6k votes in Georgia (5.9k), Arizona (5.3k), and Wisconsin (10.4k) would have tied it, at 269 each. Pennsylvania's 41.4k, would have been over the top, for Trump, at 289.)

Scary ain't it! 

In 2024, pay attention to the "toss-up" states. Arizona, Georgia, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and yes... possibly "hanging chads" Florida. 

Whatever you may think, several factors will weigh heavily on the 2024 election and it should come as no surprise... the hysteria surrounding those several factors. The 2024 election is not a slam dunk for either party. 

The economy will play an enormous factor. At this point, who really knows what will take place, although lies will be the order of the day, from both parties. 

Remember, 2024 will likely hinge on a couple of hundred thousand "independents" in those "toss-up states."

It should be fun to watch. By that, I am hoping to be around to watch it!!

Works of Fiction

From Deutsche Welle

Ran across this in Deutsche Welle... 

The fiction debut of the former US presidential candidate with mystery author Louise Penny has again stirred a discussion on what prompts politicians to write fiction.

How can I resist? Clinton and works of fiction. Politicians and works of fiction. I can find no satire tags in the article, but how can it be anything other than satire. 

So yes, I frequently observe foreign news websites, as everyone tends to favor their own government/ideology and what we see in the U.S. is not what others see. The truth generally "lies"  somewhere in the middle.

Many of those European papers are lamenting the U.S. shift to the Pacific and the need to possibly come together and form a European Union military alliance... in place of NATO.

Apparently this is due to the U.S. not seeking European consultation over Afghanistan, but rather seeking to further U.S. interests. The E.U. seemed to think that they could tell the U.S. what to do and somehow are deeply concerned the U.S. hasn't done what they are told.

Not sure how the EU arrived at their former illusion or should it be delusion. At what point did the U.S. indicate the EU held any sway over U.S. policies?

Good, bad or whatever, the U.S. under Trump stated the U.S. was leaving Afghanistan. Biden was in agreement, although attempting to blame it all on Trump. In any case, Biden made it clear the U.S. was leaving and gave hard dates. 

Granted the final exit was terrible and poorly planned, but for the EU to attempt to blame the entirety of the mess on the U.S. is ludicrous at best. These complainers had ample time to gather forces to secure a better outcome... but didn't. 

It's because they couldn't or wouldn't. Simply easier to blame someone else and say the U.S. has failed some obligation to the EU that never existed. The EU has had its weakness exposed and does not like it. There is a lot of talk, but nothing will ever come of it, imo. 

Until then, I will consider the discussion of a EU military as a work of fiction.