![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | → | Archive 10 |
I was kinda suprised to not seem him on the list of potential Republican candidates given 1, there has been significant speculation about his candidacy, 2, he's done well in polling, usually polling third behind DeSantis and Pence in polls excluding Trump, and 3, runners up in GOP primaries often run again (McCain placed second in 2000 to Bush and ran in 2008, Romney placed second in 2008 and ran in 2012, Santorum placed second in 2012 and ran in 2016. Cruz placed second in 2016.) I'm gonna proceed to include Ted Cruz is the potential candidates under Republican primaries. Just to provide a source that Cruz is a potential candidate: https://www.politico.com/news/2021/05/30/gop-house-races-2024-trump-491349 American20062020 ( talk) 4:04, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
Thank you, @ Lostfan333: for removing this section added by noob @ DaBabyindahouse: which improperly tried to make a Democrat conspiracy theory sound like a legitimate election issue by WP:OVERCITE of sources which WP:RSP list as of dubious reliability for objective news: Vice News, Business Insider, The Atlantic, The Guardian ( Robert Reich), and NPR (opinion piece, not news). And none of these sources support the claim "Many organizations and individuals have raised fears". And funny thing, all the organizations and individuals happen to be Democrats.
When and if anything comes of this issue, I believe it could instead belong as a subsection of Potential campaign issues, with higher quality sources not wedded to Democrat opinion. JustinTime55 ( talk) 20:47, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
Luttig is a Republican. DaBabyindahouse ( talk) 22:28, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
I have removed the section that says Many individuals and organizations are concerned the 2024 election will become compromised through another attempt to overturn the results. as it's completely unsourced and rather vague as it doesn't specify who is concerned and who will allegedly attempt to overturn the results. C. 22468 Talk to me 01:39, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
2024 United States presidential election has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Potential campaign issues: National Debt. 47.140.162.213 ( talk) 12:54, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
Why is Liz Cheneys date predicting the future and putting 2023 but Larry Hogan, for example, still says present. 2600:8807:6400:1260:A5CF:843E:1685:64A9 ( talk) 03:39, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
The trendlines in the primary polling diagrams are, in my view, next to useless right now. The moving averages aren’t really averages: they snap to the most recent poll, giving it 100 percent of the weight. Could someone more qualified than me make a local regression, like those used on other pages on this site? Encyclopedia Lu ( talk) 06:29, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
I've deleted the additions of info concerning Veep speculation in the Democratic & Republican parties. Would be best, if we wait until we see who the Democratic & Republican presidential nominees will be, first. Also, we do have separate pages for Veep speculations, which includes the 2024 Republican Party vice presidential candidate selection page, concerning the 2024 campaign. PS - We won't be needing one for the Democrats, as Biden has already clarified that Harris will be his 2024 running-mate. GoodDay ( talk) 01:45, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
@ Przemysl15: Having sub-sections on who might be the Democratic & Republican vice presidential nominees in 2024, before the presidential nominees are chosen, is crystalballing. -- GoodDay ( talk) 02:43, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 20:23, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
Every time a YouTube video or celebrity website mentions a name, or every time a z lister says 'I'd make a good president,' doesn't mean we add them here. We need a reliable news source saying there is serious speculation that they might run. Bkatcher ( talk) 01:43, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
I think Miles Taylor should be a potential independent candidate because in his wiki page it says that he would run. Researchrealfacts ( talk) 16:50, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
Maybe it's time to add Gavin Newsom to potential Democratic candidates? ( https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/gavin-newsom-unequivocally-running-president-130000010.html) I don't want to add to the page myself, just because I don't necessarily want to start an edit battle. Thanks! conman33 ( . . .talk) 23:54, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
Based on what the president said in here https://www.cnn.com/2022/09/18/politics/biden-too-early-to-decide-about-2024/index.html it seems that he should be moved to a "publicly expressed interest" category. Cookiegator ( talk) 21:26, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
Harris appears in the "Democratic Party" intro text alongside Pete Buttigieg as a potential candidate but does not appear on the list of potential candidates. PB does. This implies Harris should be on that list too, or Buttigieg should be removed having been referenced in the intro. 212.250.188.197 ( talk) 09:42, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
Maybe immigration can be added to join abortion and crime as potential campaign issues? Lostfan333 ( talk) 18:39, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
Someone keeps removing Segal as a Democratic contender as 'non notable.' Considering some of the yahoos who have shown up in the independent section, I don't see how Segal is less notable than a rapper, actor, or radio host. Bkatcher ( talk) 20:12, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
The last polls were from August. Anyone feel like adding a newer one? Bkatcher ( talk) 03:34, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
2024 United States presidential election has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
IN: REPULBLICAN HEADER
AFTER: POTENTIAL CANDIDATES
ADD AS A HEADER: Declared intent to run
ADD AS A PARAGRAPH: As of October 2022, the following individuals have declared their intent to run for president.
ADD AS A BULLETED LIST: Eric Jon Boerner, Executive Producer
ADD AS A LINK: Link to /info/en/?search=B%C3%B6rner Socialmakeover ( talk) 16:08, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
It's only 2022, and polls have increasingly shown that traditional political issues have overtaken covid as a top concern for the vast majority of voters. Nate Silver of 538 wrote a featured article about this. [1] Per WP:CRYSTAL I think it's premature to speculate & should be removed from the article. 2001:558:6045:B5:447C:5612:CFC0:8BF5 ( talk) 03:06, 10 October 2022 (UTC) 2001:558:6045:B5:447C:5612:CFC0:8BF5 ( talk) 03:06, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
Should MGT's official portrait be used in this article like the other candidates? The picture used on her infobox is in public domain. 38.106.246.199 ( talk) 18:35, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
With Tulsi Gabbard's announcement this morning that she is leaving the Democratic Party; I think we can safely remove her from the Democratic candidates list; though her plans for 2024 now that she has left the Democratic Party is uncertain as of this edit. WAVY 10 Fan ( talk) 15:44, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
Donald Trump hasn’t announced that he’s running, so can he please be taken off of the list of Republicans who expressed interest in running for President in 2024? 2601:85:4680:B0A0:3186:B66B:77DD:6F3D ( talk) 20:52, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
Shouldn't the economy be added as a potential campaign issue? SSR07 ( talk) 17:44, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
Discusses Section 1 of Article Two of Constitution, and 22nd Amendment which is good.
Should also include 14th Amendment, Section 3.
No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.
So far the 14th Amendment has not excluded anybody from running for president in recent history. However, challenges against Representative Madison Cawthorn had mixed results prior to him losing the primary. Keelec ( talk) 21:15, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
I removed the phrase (referring to Donald Trump) "... and his running mate may not be Mike Pence" from the lead. We already have a section in the article ( 2024 United States presidential election#Vice presidential speculation 2) that deals with speculation about the Republican VP candidate, but it doesn't need to go in the lead. Saying that Trump's running mate "may not" be Pence seems to be a fairly weak statement anyway, as Trump and Pence's relationship appears to have significantly deteriorated (see [4], for example). I don't think we can say that Trump not wanting Pence as his 2024 running mate is one of the most essential things to say about the 2024 election that it has to be in the article lead; it should go in the section about VP speculation where readers who are interested will find it. -- Metropolitan90 (talk) 20:08, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
Whoever changed the subsection titles to say "Democratic primary", "Republican primary", and "Libertarian primary" deserves a wet trout slap for calling them "primaries", for several reasons:
I'm going to go ahead and change the section titles to say "... candidates" instead of "... primary", and remove the duplicate text from the "Democratic primary" section. JustinTime55 ( talk) 01:19, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
Reminder that Draft:Donald Trump 2024 presidential campaign is roughly ready to go as soon as an announcement is made. BD2412 T 04:30, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
I shall be adding a new section to this article. it will show odds and betting market chances of victory, which are inarguably useful now in addition to polls Godofwarfan69420 ( talk) 05:59, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
2024 United States presidential election has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Former United States President Jimmy Carter is eligible to run as a candidate in 2024, as he only served one term. He would be 100 at the time of the election. 2403:5804:4999:0:343C:FE23:EA16:A512 ( talk) 14:50, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
Include the candidates on the “2024 United States Presidential Election” page. There is no reason to only include them on the primaries page. Futureelectionsandcurrentevents ( talk) 17:13, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
It seems likely that the attempts to overturn the 2020 United States presidential election will be a notable issue in the 2024 election, and it might be worth including among the other issues. A quick search found this AP article and this NPR podcast saying as much. And depending on the results of the upcoming 2022 elections, I also wonder if it would be worth mentioning in this article that several prominent Republican politicians and political candidates have said they will not accept the results of the 2024 election if their party's candidate loses, as explained in this Reuters article and this Business Insider article. Thebiguglyalien ( talk) 00:13, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
Please add to lead at end of section on Trump running: “Trump is currently the object of no less than 7 different criminal investigations.” Reference: https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2022/11/15/politics/donald-trump-investigations-lawsuits/index.html
thank you for your assistance in this matter. 2600:4040:90C5:8000:282F:9DCA:44A2:1F35 ( talk) 01:55, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
Kanye West now seems to be listed as a declared candidate for the republicans. Is he actually running for the nomination of the republican party? If so what are the guidelines for listing declared candidates (or is it just anybody and everybody who declares)? BogLogs ( talk) 12:31, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
2020 Green Party Candidate Howie Hawkins has filed to run for president in 2024. He probably ought to be listed as a candidate. https://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/823/202011099336973823/202011099336973823.pdf 64.223.208.230 ( talk) 19:04, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
Corey Stapleton should be listed as an officially declared candidate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Taftfan44 ( talk • contribs) 16:14, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
Hi all - Howard Stern stated on his 9/19/22 show that he was not actually running for President. Not sure if his section/Bradley Cooper’s should be taken out, moved, or updated, hence my post here.
Stern on 9/19: “Did anyone think I really was? I mean, I’m not gonna run for President. You make me President I don’t even know if I’d accept it.”
Baba Booey to you all. Boomerthebobcat ( talk) — Preceding undated comment added 23:34, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
Afroman has said he plans to run, most likely as an independent. [5] 2604:2D80:6984:3800:0:0:0:7F3C ( talk) 12:25, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
Where is Mike Pence? He is not listed as a potential candidate or one who has publicly expressed interest. Also important to note, rumors of him filing paperwork to run are not true. Jgtrevor ( talk) 23:55, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
2024 United States presidential election has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Add Aaron Patrick Avouris to the Libertarian Candidates. Avouris has only raised 1.25$ USD, but is one of the three candidates along with Lars Mapstead and Mike ter Maat to raise ANY amount of money. Source: https://www.fec.gov/data/candidate/P00015297/?cycle=2024&election_full=true 70.53.5.59 ( talk) 19:27, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
2024 United States presidential election has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Jesse Ventura is speculating at running for President on the Forward Party in 2024. Source 70.53.5.59 ( talk) 04:42, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
How long do we keep polls in the article? There hasn't been a poll about Matthew McConaughey in six months, and he's shown no interest in running. Bkatcher ( talk) 15:30, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
In the section on possible election issues, that's a pretty questionable source. [6] The statement it supports is probably true, but it is sourced only to a Politico article from early April 2020. The entire course of the pandemic has gone in wildly different directions from the predictions made during its infancy, so I think the article isn't really sufficient to support that content. For now I've added {{ Better source needed}} to it. If we can find a better (and more recent) source I'd have no objections. The Wordsmith Talk to me 20:18, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
Under election issues, it says something about Roe v. Wade being nearly 50 years ago, but now it’s been more than 50 years. It also cited a poll that said voters intend to vote for a party in the 2022 elections, but it should say intended. It just the wording that needs updated. Maddoxmckay ( talk) 02:41, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
I feel that decision pending is a section worth adding here. I don't see the point in not having a publicly expressed interest section either, it worked well back in the day for 2016 and 2020. 38.106.246.205 ( talk) 15:29, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
It says Howie Hawkins is running 2024, but no sections about a Green party, which is the 4th biggest political party in the US. 71.9.141.71 ( talk) 01:32, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
Jacob Hornberger (Libertarian) and Vivek Ramaswamy (Republican) have announced their candidacy. 24.237.31.239 ( talk) 16:37, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 04:53, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
Wasn’t joe exotics libertarian membership revoked? Asking because he was in the parties candidate box on this wiki. Also this is unprofessional but I laughed hard seeing of all pictures his PRESIDENTIAL picture is a mugshot. 2600:8801:1187:7F00:B130:84F2:D4EA:2A49 ( talk) 05:03, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
Robby Wells will be running for president as an independent. He served as a candidate in several primaries and was a football coach in South Carolina
Sources are found here 65.26.234.93 ( talk) 01:49, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
2024 United States presidential election has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Moderate Republican and former Governor of Maryland Larry Hogan has told the media that he while he has ruled out running as a Republican in the presidential election, he might run as an independent but only if the election is a rematch between Trump and Biden. No Labels, a bi-partisan political organization that has Hogan as a national co-chair, has raised funds to allow an independent candidate to run in all 50 states. ABC News speculates that Hogan might be at least one of the choices for a independent candidate backed by No Labels. Please add Larry Hogan's name into the list of "Potential candidates" in the part of the page about "Independents, other third parties, or party unknown". Here are some sources for everything in this message https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/15/us/larry-hogan-no-labels.html https://www.boston25news.com/news/politics/ex-maryland-gov/H36AP7YMBPP2OIW6VUKCSRYVPA/ https://www.npr.org/2023/03/07/1161570053/larry-hogan-republican-party https://www.npr.org/2020/12/15/946819531/maryland-gov-larry-hogan-named-co-chair-of-bipartisan-group-no-labels https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/01/opinion/third-presidential-candidate-2024.html https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/larry-hogan-close-door-party-presidential-bid-2024/story?id=97691294. Thanks in advance! 109.76.97.207 ( talk) 18:01, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
Maybe you can put back Hogan into the "Potential candidates" list? If he has indeed declined, just add the source to the page and let that be done. Thanks. -- 109.76.97.207 ( talk) 19:02, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for speedy deletion:
You can see the reasons for deletion at the file description pages linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 23:53, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
A footage which went viral, led the viewers cast doubt over Biden's ability to be a president. Not sure if it can be used. -- Mhhossein talk 07:03, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
I really think someone should add a paragraph or two on this. A lot has been made of Biden's age and Trump's to a lesser extent, Nikki Haley calling for mental capacity tests for over 75's. There are definitely similarities to Reagan's re-election in 1984 in which age was a big campaign issue, the 1984 election Wikipedia page has a lengthy segment on it. 79.78.91.188 ( talk) 21:32, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
Manchin is not ruling out a third party bid Maybe add him? 2001:1C00:A16:7F00:0:0:0:83FF ( talk) 18:01, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
The section Biden viability was merged into other sections with the user saying we don't know for sure if Biden is going to run in 2024. I don't think the section should be merged since he announced on 2 April (two days ago) he will run for the reelection. -- Mhhossein talk 05:41, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
I dont think this needs to be added as an issue as nobody cares about it. 2600:8805:C980:9400:C5A3:B01F:AAAA:51E7 ( talk) 19:51, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
2024 United States presidential election has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
is same-sex marriage specifically an issue in this election because i don't think it is 2.102.42.98 ( talk) 17:56, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
{{
Edit semi-protected}}
template.
Actualcpscm (
talk)
16:36, 27 March 2023 (UTC)"No state is trying to ban it"That's not true. The Republican platform explicitly opposes same-sex marriage, Republican legislatives have passed/blocked measures surrounding it, and many have talked about their desire to repeal recongition of same-sex marriages. Presently, a majority of states have constitutions/legislation forbidding same-sex marriage. (Inactive due to Obergefell)
"Congress just decisively voted it into federal law"Predominately upon the votes of Democrats. Just 20% of Republicans supported the Respect for Marriage Act in the Senate. Even then, states will be free to deny marriage licenses to same-sex couples if Obergefell is overturned. To this day, it is very much a present issue.
And "democratic backsliding" is just code for Democrats not winning every electionV-Dem Democracy indices, Freedom House, and The Economist's Democracy Index all report substantial democratic backsliding within the United States since the early 2010s.
there is no evidence it will be a top issue for 2024Polling shows it is an important issue for voters. The most recent poll ranked it 2nd. KlayCax ( talk) 01:06, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
A couple of think tanks claiming something is a problem doesn’t make it so (2020 had record turnout across the board). Gallup has “democracy” and abortion at 2% a piece as the #1 issue. 2607:FEA8:1E5D:B700:2C62:9ED2:870:7254 ( talk) 19:09, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
https://news.gallup.com/poll/1675/most-important-problem.aspx
Like, I could say that I'm not running for president, and according to whatever idiot made that edit, I deserve to be included on the page. Georger0171 ( talk) 18:34, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
[14] SmashingThreePlates ( talk) 04:12, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
The banner {{
Content}}
should be placed at the top of the article. The majority of the article is a mismatch of history unrelated or speculative to the current election.
204.237.51.192 (
talk)
15:14, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
I've been thinking that there could be more issues that could be major factors in 2024, here are three issues that I think should be added.
- Ukraine could be a big issue with there being no end in sight for the war, and the worldwide impacts of the conflict.
- Climate Change is always a big button issue in elections, and with more disasters being seen since 2020 (Hurricanes Ida and Ian, Western Wildfires, Tornado Outbreaks, and the Feb. 2021 Winter Storms in Texas) could be a factor that causes people to vote.
- Gun Violence has been a huge topic since, forever, but more talk around it has been seen since Buffalo and Uvalde, and many young Americans will be voting due to shootings.
HurricaneKappa (
talk)
02:07, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
I am not sure what the 'history' sub-section is serving in the 'Abortion' section. It's making the page unnecessarily long. -- Mhhossein talk 06:37, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
All the contents used in this section should have something to do with the 2024 US presidential elections, otherwise the content is an original research. Will remove the WP:coatracky portions.-- Mhhossein talk 07:12, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
All the contents used in this section should have something to do with the 2024 US presidential elections, otherwise the content is an original research.:
Andrew Yang and Liz Cheney should all be listed as potential candidates. All three have shown some level of interest in the idea
Jon Stewart and Howard Stern should also be moved to Declined,
as shown here
Even Chris Christie has been floated as a potential candidate,
shown through this essay
65.26.234.93 (
talk)
01:48, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
Hello!
I am adding this here as advice for a small modification in Joe Biden's section known as "Experience" in the Democratic Declared Candidates subject.
So far, as of now, the experience section for Joe Biden only contains the "46th President of the United States (2021-present) incumbent" as experience. However, more is to be added to show the full political experience he has done.
The edit is similar to what is shown in the experience sections of Nikki Haley and Asa Hutchinson, (which located in the Republican Party Declared Candidates Experience sections [15]).
What I am suggesting to be added is directly sourced from Joe Biden's Wikipedia Article [16]:
"Experience:
46th President of the United States (2021-present) incumbent [17] ((<- Remains as is))
47th Vice President of the United States (2009 - 2017) [18]
United States Senator from Delaware (1973 - 2009) [19]
Member of the New Castle County Council from the 4th district (1971 - 1973) [20]"
By the possibility that the text may be slightly too much, it can possibly be formatted and adjusted accordingly for the article's design, or other.
The purpose of this edit is simply to explain in further detail the correct yet full political experience of President Biden for both the past and present.
Thank you for reading this post, and thank you in advance if the edit is made.
Wang Dynasty (
talk)
11:46, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
(For polling articles and other sub-articles with lists of polls)
Many outlets noted that in 2022, "junk" polls by unestablished pollsters were published in many races that skewed polling averages and perceptions to create a false impression of stronger support for Republican candidates than was actually existent.
Individuals favorable to either party could influence polling averages in nationwide and statewide polls in 2024 by using this as a tactic.
In the article on the 2023 Chicago mayoral election, I made an effort to combat a skewed perception caused by potential "junk" polls by including in poll tables two additional columns.
If there is a better yardstick than FiveThirtyEight, I'm open to hearing it, because I would understand apprehension in trusting one outlet's assessment of pollsters. However, FiveThirtyEight is rather open about their methodology (see here and here), so it's not like we'd be blindly elevating mysterious kingmakers. I'd argue that their ratings are relatively akin to the Cook PVI's we include in articles on elections, since both have open methodologies. FiveThirtyEight also shares their datasets.
Any thoughts on adopting this? SecretName101 ( talk) 03:04, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
Isn't this part a bit WP: Crystal for Wikipedia? We don't know who the nominees are yet. KlayCax ( talk) 15:16, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
I have no idea what the second sentence of the lead is talking about. For something in the lead, it seems very unclear. Is it talking about Electoral College votes? Can it please be made clearer? HiLo48 ( talk) 00:32, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
How should we manage this page on election day? Should we update it in real-time as the election night progresses, or should we wait until all the votes have been counted? I'm unfamiliar with the process of updating pages during events like an election, and we should make sure to we handle it appropriately. I know the election is still one year away but I wanted to ask.
LuxembourgLover ( talk) 15:40, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
Armando "Mando" Perez-Serrato is a new, younger, more aggressive, solutions driven Democratic Candidate for President of the United States of America 2024. He was a Candidate for California Governor in 2022. His Campaign Website is PresidentMando.com and his official FEC Presidential Candidate ID is P40010514. [24] https://PresidentMando.com Here is the link for his Candidate Profile on the Federal Election Commission website [25] https://www.fec.gov/data/candidate/P40010514/ Here is a link for his FEC Principal Campaign Committee Armando Perez-Serrato for President and his Campaign Committee ID is C00831677 [26] https://www.fec.gov/data/committee/C00831677/ Mando2024 ( talk) 00:45, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
This section reads like something the Whitehouse has written. It's not true that serious challenges are rare, Truman (1952) and Johnson (1968) both dropped out of the race after being challenged, Ford (1976) and Carter (1980) both endured serious challenges. This campaign is the first time an incumbent has faced a challenger with name recognition since 1992, so it is misleading to cite recent presidents that were easily renominated. The section should be removed. 80.41.164.55 ( talk) 01:27, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
I'm utterly undecided on what I think, personally.
I remember a while back someone argued we "shouldn't" because of the weak performance in the previous election.
However, if we are to display the Libertarian nominating process, I think it's worth discussing if we also display the Green. These are the two largest third-parties in the United States in regards to membership (from what is understood) as well as in regards to regular ballot access.
I think last time there was a decision to completely relegate third parties primary processes to a separate article, though this appears not to be the consensus this election, at least not at this stage.
The Libertarian Party did score over 1% last time, while the Greens did not. However, neither party scored over 1% in 2012, yet went on to in the next election (and proved visible notable factors in the 2016 campaign). Greens outperformed their 2004 and 2008 performances in 2020, and did significantly better than the next-best-performing third-party ticket.
That said, should we be displaying these two third parties on equal footing with the two major ones at all right now? At a time where no consistent polls indicate they could even reach the 5% threshold to appear in the infobox after the election if Americans were to vote today or anytime soon? I am of two minds.
In terms of serving an American audience: yes I think we should so as not to bias ourselves in favor of promoting the two major parties. Do we really want to possibly be mis-portraying America as a de-juror two party system rather than simply a de-facto one?
In terms of informing an international audience: I think not. Unlike Americans, foreign audiences are not all familiar as to what the major parties are in the United States. They may not know our de-facto two-party system dynamic, and not appreciate that we seem to indicate we are something different. Seeing four parties equally displayed may mis-communicate to them that were have a multi-party electorate rather than (generally) a two-party electorate in a system open to multiple parties. They may mis-understand that it is displayed as such because the four parties have remotely comparable stature/support among the electorate when that is not established to be the case in actuality.
So who do I think do we want to better serve? Foreign or domestic readers? Americans are the ones voting, but the world has interest as well and America is not the center of it.
Again, I'm utterly undecided on all this, is anyone of a strong opinion on this? SecretName101 ( talk) 01:56, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
I would like to pose the question of whether or not the Libertarian candidate table on this page is giving WP:UNDUE weight. The Libertarian candidates certainly don't have the same amount of press coverage as the two major parties. I'm sure the table is fine for the Libertarian primaries page, but I'm not sure it's needed here on the 2024 election overview. Bullet point list formatting similar to the "Other third parties/independents" section may suffice. Kafoxe ( talk) 19:34, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 22:53, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
In "Potential campaign issues" section, we should add "Immigration (or Border Security)" too, because without any doubt it will be an important issue. Here are sources - [27], [28], [29]. Regards. M.Karelin ( talk) 01:32, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
Eric Jon Boerner is not listed in the other declared candidates for the Republicans.
Declared on 11 November 2022
Here are the sources to reference from:
https://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/111/202211119546754111/202211119546754111.pdf
https://cbs2iowa.com/news/local/another-presidential-candidate-rolls-through-cedar-rapids
https://www.wvik.org/2023-03-21/presidential-candidate-visits-iowa-for-the-first-time
https://cbs2iowa.com/news/local/2024-presidential-candidate-eric-jon-boerner-in-eastern-iowa
https://twitter.com/EricJonBoerner1
https://facebook.com/BoernerTheUSA 168.103.154.41 ( talk) 01:14, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
Is “Meanwhile, states like Colorado, Michigan, and Virginia have moved noticeably towards Democrats” WP:SYNTH if we are using one source for Colorado and Michigan, and another source for Virginia? If so, how should we fix this? Prcc27 ( talk) 22:39, 2 June 2023 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Lists lack bullet points making them hard to read SecretName101 ( talk) 03:47, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
This is a requested change, not a forum
In the lead paragraph the following should be changed LGBT rights, ..... are expected to be leading campaign issues. to Trans Rights ..... are expected to be leading campaign issues. for the following reasons:
I suspect Trans Rights will be a bigger issue than just LGBT rights.I don't suspect Lesbian or Gay rights will be center-stage (like in say, 2012) compared to just Trans rights. I would recommend changing LGBT rights to Trans Rights. I know LGBT covers Trans Rights but Trans Rights are a particular hot topic among both conservatives and liberals, and their wouldn't be a better way to differentiate the times, (Say, the 2020's), (To say the early 2010s) than to differentiate the social justice and civil rights issue of the current political day or era.
This is for many reasons, from Ron DeSantis' culture war/war on books, to the potential release of Hale's manifesto to Gender Affirming healthcare being denied in Tennessee, to J.K Rowling's transphobic statements, it seems like Trans Rights are going much more of a political issue than LGBT rights in general.
It's also interesting to note that Biden was the first president to mention Trans as part of a boarder political coalition. Unlike the 2010s, Biden also incorporates the Trans flag into his political apparel. I think Trans Rights will define a much broader debate for the rest of the decade (2020s) in a way that the just the LGBT movement won't, which is why Biden made a point to mention them seperately. 71.9.141.71 ( talk) 14:37, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
LGBT rights, especially trans rights? Because you're right that trans rights are a particular issue of contention, but also stuff like the sudden increase in prominence of the LGBT grooming conspiracy theory says to me it's not just trans rights. Loki ( talk) 00:28, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
GOP has been behind anti-trans bills- this is verifiable
Conservative pundits have become transphobic- this could be true, but it is not verifiable
Isn’t it WP:UNDUE to include the “potential candidates” and “declined to be candidates” sections in the article for the independent/third party section, but not for the Democratic and Republican sections? I assume the only reason it is in our article, is because there is no article for independent candidates for this information to be listed, whereas the potential and declined to be candidates information is accessible at the Democratic and Republican primaries subarticles. Nevertheless, we should at least collapse the sections, so we are not giving undue weight to independent/third party potential/declined candidates. Prcc27 ( talk) 03:33, 4 June 2023 (UTC)
I just created a draft for the Cornel West 2024 presidential campaign. Any help with expansion would be appreciated. Thriley ( talk) 05:32, 6 June 2023 (UTC)
Why are candidates who are currently not in office have their last office in bold? For example, Chris Christie is not current governor of New Jersey but that title is listed in bold. I suggest that we only use bold for offices that are currently held.
user:mnw2000 21:26, 7 June 2023 (UTC) user:mnw2000 21:26, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
Can we please keep empty sections hidden, until information is added to those sections? For now, users can access the relevant links in the see also section. Prcc27 ( talk) 04:58, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
Hello,
In the section of "Abortion Access" [30] , the Wikipedia entry in the said section simply mentions regarding Trump: "[. . .] Donald Trump has mostly avoided the topic since Roe v. Wade was overturned."
However, by sources about a month ago; on May 17th 2023, as well as by my recollection, Trump on the website TruthSocial had stated that he was able to "kill Roe v. Wade" (pictured here on Twitter
[31] ).
On the conservative news netwark "Newsmax" presumably around or at May 17th, Trump had also apparently mentioned in a phone interview with them that he "was the one that got rid of Roe v. Wade". (Clip authenticity is seemingly true. This clip was found only on a Twitter post, referenced by a main source: source number six: [32] )
Other mentions of this event happening can be found looking it up. Sources such as The Hill
[33] , BusinessInsider
[34] , and Newsweek
[35] .
Other various sources from the same time seem to report, or imply this "Roe v. Wade" statement made from Fmr Pres. Trump.
Another fact to mention, and despite it being implied now, is it should also be noted and typed into the section that Trump, in line with his Republican Party's common 'principle' of being Pro-Life, has mentioned before in a 2016 debate during the election that he is indeed, pro-life. [36]
These are quite a rather small note of addition to the Wikipedia Article here, and if added can very well possibly give some more accuracy to readers regarding possible 2024 Republican Candidates-for-President stances on Abortion, more specifically: Accuracy on Donald Trump's stance on Abortion, as well as Roe v. Wade.
Thanks for reading this, and thank you in advance for making the additions mentioned in my suggestion here.
Wang Dynasty (
talk)
03:28, 4 June 2023 (UTC)
I removed most of the information about Trump’s indictments and investigations in the Republican primary section, because most of those sources did not even say anything about the 2024 presidential election. I found a source that does mention his criminal trials in the context of the the election. Should this information be re-added with an updated source? If so, is the Republican primary section the appropriate place for this information? Prcc27 ( talk) 16:13, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
Hello,
It has been a month-and-a-half now since my initial suggestion on this same subject of President Biden's political experience, and I am typing another request/question on this, same subject again:
As referenced by the title of this card, I was wondering if Biden's experience of being a:
New Castle County Councilman (4th District; 1970 - 1973)" can remain Permanent in the article section here for his past political experience
[38] (as well as for the Wikipedia Article "2024 Democratic Party Presidential Primaries"
[39])
It could be Somewhat similar to the past political experiences of current-Republican Candidates Fmr. Governor Nikki Haley ( South Carolina State Representative (87th District; 2005–2011)), and Senator Tim Scott (South Carolina State Representative (117th District; 2009 - 2011)). (Both sourced here:) [40]
If this suggestion is accepted, then perhaps one way the addition can be added into the section can be:
President of the United States (2021–present)
Vice President of the United States (2009–2017)
U.S. Senator from
Delaware (1973–2009) <- (Section Here and Above is left as is, due to it being the current display.)
Member of the
New Castle County Council (1971 - 1973) (This has been noted even in Biden's Wikipedia Article as Political Experience.)
[41].
(Additional Source:)
[42]
This addition is suggested, due to it most likely being still considered as "political experience", as well as the County Council addressing itself as a "legislative branch of New Castle County government"
[43].
Thanks for your time reading this, and Thank You in advance if these changes are applied to the requested places.
Wang Dynasty (
talk)
06:02, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Please add that attacks on voting, trans, and civil rights are coming from Republicans and conservatives.
They are the main reason this so-called "culture war" is occurring, and not adding this detail creates a false narrative that liberals also hate minorities. Western Progressivist ( talk) 23:22, 3 June 2023 (UTC)
Maybe I am just a socially illiterate nerd but I had never even heard of the People's Party before, and now they have a single candidate running and that some how gets its own category list over the Libertarian Party, the third largest party in the country? Los Pobre ( talk) 03:52, 6 June 2023 (UTC)
I believe that the potential candidates section should be on here, for many reasons.
For clarification, I would likely have them as a separate section, due to the possibility of a candidate like Sen. Joe Manchin (no section has been made for No Labels).
More reasons are valid but those are just two. Hope that we can make this article better, as this could likely be one of the most important elections in U.S history, and we need informed voters on who might be there.
IEditPolitics ( talk) 20:08, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
Afroman has an FEC filing, Kanye and Marshall do not, should we separate Afroman from them or keep him in 'Declared intent to run' HurricaneKappa ( talk) 17:21, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
Why and what criteria is there for separating some candidates out of the boxes and simply putting them into a short sentence along with others so handled? 2600:6C67:1C00:5F7E:895A:A8F6:1262:AD4 ( talk) 14:56, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
Now! YangGang2024 ( talk) 02:24, 19 June 2023 (UTC) — YangGang2024 ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
Was this addition fair? Personally, I'm confused as to why we added this when no other election page ever had a Lib or green party section, to my knowledge. IEditPolitics ( talk) 14:41, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
Since No Labels is likely to have Larry Hogan or Joe Manchin if ballot access is gained, would those candidates be major enough to be listed, as this is the first time in a considerable time that a party has gained ballot access with such a major nominee compared to others (see Lib and Green party regular nominees. Also, count their media coverage and polling from third parties on their likely performance. IEditPolitics ( talk) 23:28, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
Due to the restrictions, for some reason, Perry Johnson is still on here. He also had no picture. Mistakes like these are regularly left untouched. Having the template restricted means users like me who are trying to make a difference on the article are stopped from making those changes. Either remove the restriction or make the right changes. It's a repetitive mistake this article makes. IEditPolitics ( talk) 21:08, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
An excessive number of stub-articles have been created for campaigns. At this stage, most campaigns can be appropriately covered as mere sub-sections of the candidate's own biographical article.
Some of these articles are artificially lengthened with the addition of sections summarizing the candidates' stances, which largely duplicate (or which can be merged with) similar sections on the candidate's main article.
I think we should seriously consider merging the following campaign articles into the respective candidates' main article for at least the time being:
SecretName101 ( talk) 15:58, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
Guys! You can't just cite the constitution when explaining the requirements to run for president. According to the wise man @ David O. Johnson that wouldn't be an independent source. David, please explain to them we need a random website to back up the United States Constitution or the page will be biased. I have attached a better source needed tag. Veganoregano ( talk) 16:38, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
Like my god it shouldn't be this hard YangGang2024 ( talk) 20:30, 25 June 2023 (UTC) — YangGang2024 ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
Everyone, Marianne Williamson has updated her logo. It is no longer what is seen on the dem primaries table. This new logo is being used on her website, social media, etc. I'm not sure how to link it here but please look at her website in the top left hand side and somebody please update it. YangGang2024 ( talk) 02:03, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
Given that the election is still over a year away, there's naturally going to be some amount of guesswork & speculation. But this section reads like it was written mostly from a left-wing perspective, without regard to both sides of the political debate.
2001:558:6045:B5:1134:9219:8250:87F3 ( talk) 15:37, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
Do you all think Ukraine should be added to: Crime,[4] education,[5] immigration,[6] gun control,[7][8] healthcare, abortion access,[9] LGBT rights (especially transgender rights), the state of the economy,[10] and election integrity[11] are expected to be leading campaign issues.
I personally think it is worth talking about — Preceding unsigned comment added by NotQualified ( talk • contribs) 23:09, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
What do they indicate and can someone add what they indicate into the Wiki for everyone - it is confusing — Preceding unsigned comment added by NotQualified ( talk • contribs) 23:19, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
I don't recall this being included in past election articles. It seems overtly WP:CRYSTALBALL, am I correct in saying that? It's extremely presumptive and we can't predict ANY of this. conman33 ( . . .talk) 04:07, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
Both 2020_United_States_presidential_election#Predictions and 2016_United_States_presidential_election#Comparison_to_polls_and_other_forecasts exist. There's nothing wrong with including reliably sourced predictions made by notable organizations.-- JasonMacker ( talk) 15:59, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
As per the relevant page, both the Prohibition Party and the American Solidarity Party have nominated their candidates. Strategos' Risk ( talk) 06:27, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
Hello all! I was taking a look at the article and saw the forecast section and was wondering if it was worth adding a margin section to the Forecasts section, e.g. what you see at 2020 United States presidential election#Close states. I took a cursory look at the sources presented and didn't see the winning percentage listed, so I can see how including a margin in the table might be more helpful than simply stating the winning percentage. Thoughts? Or would that be considered WP:SYNTH? Jay eyem ( talk) 20:51, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | → | Archive 10 |
I was kinda suprised to not seem him on the list of potential Republican candidates given 1, there has been significant speculation about his candidacy, 2, he's done well in polling, usually polling third behind DeSantis and Pence in polls excluding Trump, and 3, runners up in GOP primaries often run again (McCain placed second in 2000 to Bush and ran in 2008, Romney placed second in 2008 and ran in 2012, Santorum placed second in 2012 and ran in 2016. Cruz placed second in 2016.) I'm gonna proceed to include Ted Cruz is the potential candidates under Republican primaries. Just to provide a source that Cruz is a potential candidate: https://www.politico.com/news/2021/05/30/gop-house-races-2024-trump-491349 American20062020 ( talk) 4:04, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
Thank you, @ Lostfan333: for removing this section added by noob @ DaBabyindahouse: which improperly tried to make a Democrat conspiracy theory sound like a legitimate election issue by WP:OVERCITE of sources which WP:RSP list as of dubious reliability for objective news: Vice News, Business Insider, The Atlantic, The Guardian ( Robert Reich), and NPR (opinion piece, not news). And none of these sources support the claim "Many organizations and individuals have raised fears". And funny thing, all the organizations and individuals happen to be Democrats.
When and if anything comes of this issue, I believe it could instead belong as a subsection of Potential campaign issues, with higher quality sources not wedded to Democrat opinion. JustinTime55 ( talk) 20:47, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
Luttig is a Republican. DaBabyindahouse ( talk) 22:28, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
I have removed the section that says Many individuals and organizations are concerned the 2024 election will become compromised through another attempt to overturn the results. as it's completely unsourced and rather vague as it doesn't specify who is concerned and who will allegedly attempt to overturn the results. C. 22468 Talk to me 01:39, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
2024 United States presidential election has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Potential campaign issues: National Debt. 47.140.162.213 ( talk) 12:54, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
Why is Liz Cheneys date predicting the future and putting 2023 but Larry Hogan, for example, still says present. 2600:8807:6400:1260:A5CF:843E:1685:64A9 ( talk) 03:39, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
The trendlines in the primary polling diagrams are, in my view, next to useless right now. The moving averages aren’t really averages: they snap to the most recent poll, giving it 100 percent of the weight. Could someone more qualified than me make a local regression, like those used on other pages on this site? Encyclopedia Lu ( talk) 06:29, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
I've deleted the additions of info concerning Veep speculation in the Democratic & Republican parties. Would be best, if we wait until we see who the Democratic & Republican presidential nominees will be, first. Also, we do have separate pages for Veep speculations, which includes the 2024 Republican Party vice presidential candidate selection page, concerning the 2024 campaign. PS - We won't be needing one for the Democrats, as Biden has already clarified that Harris will be his 2024 running-mate. GoodDay ( talk) 01:45, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
@ Przemysl15: Having sub-sections on who might be the Democratic & Republican vice presidential nominees in 2024, before the presidential nominees are chosen, is crystalballing. -- GoodDay ( talk) 02:43, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 20:23, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
Every time a YouTube video or celebrity website mentions a name, or every time a z lister says 'I'd make a good president,' doesn't mean we add them here. We need a reliable news source saying there is serious speculation that they might run. Bkatcher ( talk) 01:43, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
I think Miles Taylor should be a potential independent candidate because in his wiki page it says that he would run. Researchrealfacts ( talk) 16:50, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
Maybe it's time to add Gavin Newsom to potential Democratic candidates? ( https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/gavin-newsom-unequivocally-running-president-130000010.html) I don't want to add to the page myself, just because I don't necessarily want to start an edit battle. Thanks! conman33 ( . . .talk) 23:54, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
Based on what the president said in here https://www.cnn.com/2022/09/18/politics/biden-too-early-to-decide-about-2024/index.html it seems that he should be moved to a "publicly expressed interest" category. Cookiegator ( talk) 21:26, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
Harris appears in the "Democratic Party" intro text alongside Pete Buttigieg as a potential candidate but does not appear on the list of potential candidates. PB does. This implies Harris should be on that list too, or Buttigieg should be removed having been referenced in the intro. 212.250.188.197 ( talk) 09:42, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
Maybe immigration can be added to join abortion and crime as potential campaign issues? Lostfan333 ( talk) 18:39, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
Someone keeps removing Segal as a Democratic contender as 'non notable.' Considering some of the yahoos who have shown up in the independent section, I don't see how Segal is less notable than a rapper, actor, or radio host. Bkatcher ( talk) 20:12, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
The last polls were from August. Anyone feel like adding a newer one? Bkatcher ( talk) 03:34, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
2024 United States presidential election has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
IN: REPULBLICAN HEADER
AFTER: POTENTIAL CANDIDATES
ADD AS A HEADER: Declared intent to run
ADD AS A PARAGRAPH: As of October 2022, the following individuals have declared their intent to run for president.
ADD AS A BULLETED LIST: Eric Jon Boerner, Executive Producer
ADD AS A LINK: Link to /info/en/?search=B%C3%B6rner Socialmakeover ( talk) 16:08, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
It's only 2022, and polls have increasingly shown that traditional political issues have overtaken covid as a top concern for the vast majority of voters. Nate Silver of 538 wrote a featured article about this. [1] Per WP:CRYSTAL I think it's premature to speculate & should be removed from the article. 2001:558:6045:B5:447C:5612:CFC0:8BF5 ( talk) 03:06, 10 October 2022 (UTC) 2001:558:6045:B5:447C:5612:CFC0:8BF5 ( talk) 03:06, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
Should MGT's official portrait be used in this article like the other candidates? The picture used on her infobox is in public domain. 38.106.246.199 ( talk) 18:35, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
With Tulsi Gabbard's announcement this morning that she is leaving the Democratic Party; I think we can safely remove her from the Democratic candidates list; though her plans for 2024 now that she has left the Democratic Party is uncertain as of this edit. WAVY 10 Fan ( talk) 15:44, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
Donald Trump hasn’t announced that he’s running, so can he please be taken off of the list of Republicans who expressed interest in running for President in 2024? 2601:85:4680:B0A0:3186:B66B:77DD:6F3D ( talk) 20:52, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
Shouldn't the economy be added as a potential campaign issue? SSR07 ( talk) 17:44, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
Discusses Section 1 of Article Two of Constitution, and 22nd Amendment which is good.
Should also include 14th Amendment, Section 3.
No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.
So far the 14th Amendment has not excluded anybody from running for president in recent history. However, challenges against Representative Madison Cawthorn had mixed results prior to him losing the primary. Keelec ( talk) 21:15, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
I removed the phrase (referring to Donald Trump) "... and his running mate may not be Mike Pence" from the lead. We already have a section in the article ( 2024 United States presidential election#Vice presidential speculation 2) that deals with speculation about the Republican VP candidate, but it doesn't need to go in the lead. Saying that Trump's running mate "may not" be Pence seems to be a fairly weak statement anyway, as Trump and Pence's relationship appears to have significantly deteriorated (see [4], for example). I don't think we can say that Trump not wanting Pence as his 2024 running mate is one of the most essential things to say about the 2024 election that it has to be in the article lead; it should go in the section about VP speculation where readers who are interested will find it. -- Metropolitan90 (talk) 20:08, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
Whoever changed the subsection titles to say "Democratic primary", "Republican primary", and "Libertarian primary" deserves a wet trout slap for calling them "primaries", for several reasons:
I'm going to go ahead and change the section titles to say "... candidates" instead of "... primary", and remove the duplicate text from the "Democratic primary" section. JustinTime55 ( talk) 01:19, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
Reminder that Draft:Donald Trump 2024 presidential campaign is roughly ready to go as soon as an announcement is made. BD2412 T 04:30, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
I shall be adding a new section to this article. it will show odds and betting market chances of victory, which are inarguably useful now in addition to polls Godofwarfan69420 ( talk) 05:59, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
2024 United States presidential election has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Former United States President Jimmy Carter is eligible to run as a candidate in 2024, as he only served one term. He would be 100 at the time of the election. 2403:5804:4999:0:343C:FE23:EA16:A512 ( talk) 14:50, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
Include the candidates on the “2024 United States Presidential Election” page. There is no reason to only include them on the primaries page. Futureelectionsandcurrentevents ( talk) 17:13, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
It seems likely that the attempts to overturn the 2020 United States presidential election will be a notable issue in the 2024 election, and it might be worth including among the other issues. A quick search found this AP article and this NPR podcast saying as much. And depending on the results of the upcoming 2022 elections, I also wonder if it would be worth mentioning in this article that several prominent Republican politicians and political candidates have said they will not accept the results of the 2024 election if their party's candidate loses, as explained in this Reuters article and this Business Insider article. Thebiguglyalien ( talk) 00:13, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
Please add to lead at end of section on Trump running: “Trump is currently the object of no less than 7 different criminal investigations.” Reference: https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2022/11/15/politics/donald-trump-investigations-lawsuits/index.html
thank you for your assistance in this matter. 2600:4040:90C5:8000:282F:9DCA:44A2:1F35 ( talk) 01:55, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
Kanye West now seems to be listed as a declared candidate for the republicans. Is he actually running for the nomination of the republican party? If so what are the guidelines for listing declared candidates (or is it just anybody and everybody who declares)? BogLogs ( talk) 12:31, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
2020 Green Party Candidate Howie Hawkins has filed to run for president in 2024. He probably ought to be listed as a candidate. https://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/823/202011099336973823/202011099336973823.pdf 64.223.208.230 ( talk) 19:04, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
Corey Stapleton should be listed as an officially declared candidate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Taftfan44 ( talk • contribs) 16:14, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
Hi all - Howard Stern stated on his 9/19/22 show that he was not actually running for President. Not sure if his section/Bradley Cooper’s should be taken out, moved, or updated, hence my post here.
Stern on 9/19: “Did anyone think I really was? I mean, I’m not gonna run for President. You make me President I don’t even know if I’d accept it.”
Baba Booey to you all. Boomerthebobcat ( talk) — Preceding undated comment added 23:34, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
Afroman has said he plans to run, most likely as an independent. [5] 2604:2D80:6984:3800:0:0:0:7F3C ( talk) 12:25, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
Where is Mike Pence? He is not listed as a potential candidate or one who has publicly expressed interest. Also important to note, rumors of him filing paperwork to run are not true. Jgtrevor ( talk) 23:55, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
2024 United States presidential election has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Add Aaron Patrick Avouris to the Libertarian Candidates. Avouris has only raised 1.25$ USD, but is one of the three candidates along with Lars Mapstead and Mike ter Maat to raise ANY amount of money. Source: https://www.fec.gov/data/candidate/P00015297/?cycle=2024&election_full=true 70.53.5.59 ( talk) 19:27, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
2024 United States presidential election has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Jesse Ventura is speculating at running for President on the Forward Party in 2024. Source 70.53.5.59 ( talk) 04:42, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
How long do we keep polls in the article? There hasn't been a poll about Matthew McConaughey in six months, and he's shown no interest in running. Bkatcher ( talk) 15:30, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
In the section on possible election issues, that's a pretty questionable source. [6] The statement it supports is probably true, but it is sourced only to a Politico article from early April 2020. The entire course of the pandemic has gone in wildly different directions from the predictions made during its infancy, so I think the article isn't really sufficient to support that content. For now I've added {{ Better source needed}} to it. If we can find a better (and more recent) source I'd have no objections. The Wordsmith Talk to me 20:18, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
Under election issues, it says something about Roe v. Wade being nearly 50 years ago, but now it’s been more than 50 years. It also cited a poll that said voters intend to vote for a party in the 2022 elections, but it should say intended. It just the wording that needs updated. Maddoxmckay ( talk) 02:41, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
I feel that decision pending is a section worth adding here. I don't see the point in not having a publicly expressed interest section either, it worked well back in the day for 2016 and 2020. 38.106.246.205 ( talk) 15:29, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
It says Howie Hawkins is running 2024, but no sections about a Green party, which is the 4th biggest political party in the US. 71.9.141.71 ( talk) 01:32, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
Jacob Hornberger (Libertarian) and Vivek Ramaswamy (Republican) have announced their candidacy. 24.237.31.239 ( talk) 16:37, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 04:53, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
Wasn’t joe exotics libertarian membership revoked? Asking because he was in the parties candidate box on this wiki. Also this is unprofessional but I laughed hard seeing of all pictures his PRESIDENTIAL picture is a mugshot. 2600:8801:1187:7F00:B130:84F2:D4EA:2A49 ( talk) 05:03, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
Robby Wells will be running for president as an independent. He served as a candidate in several primaries and was a football coach in South Carolina
Sources are found here 65.26.234.93 ( talk) 01:49, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
2024 United States presidential election has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Moderate Republican and former Governor of Maryland Larry Hogan has told the media that he while he has ruled out running as a Republican in the presidential election, he might run as an independent but only if the election is a rematch between Trump and Biden. No Labels, a bi-partisan political organization that has Hogan as a national co-chair, has raised funds to allow an independent candidate to run in all 50 states. ABC News speculates that Hogan might be at least one of the choices for a independent candidate backed by No Labels. Please add Larry Hogan's name into the list of "Potential candidates" in the part of the page about "Independents, other third parties, or party unknown". Here are some sources for everything in this message https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/15/us/larry-hogan-no-labels.html https://www.boston25news.com/news/politics/ex-maryland-gov/H36AP7YMBPP2OIW6VUKCSRYVPA/ https://www.npr.org/2023/03/07/1161570053/larry-hogan-republican-party https://www.npr.org/2020/12/15/946819531/maryland-gov-larry-hogan-named-co-chair-of-bipartisan-group-no-labels https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/01/opinion/third-presidential-candidate-2024.html https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/larry-hogan-close-door-party-presidential-bid-2024/story?id=97691294. Thanks in advance! 109.76.97.207 ( talk) 18:01, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
Maybe you can put back Hogan into the "Potential candidates" list? If he has indeed declined, just add the source to the page and let that be done. Thanks. -- 109.76.97.207 ( talk) 19:02, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for speedy deletion:
You can see the reasons for deletion at the file description pages linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 23:53, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
A footage which went viral, led the viewers cast doubt over Biden's ability to be a president. Not sure if it can be used. -- Mhhossein talk 07:03, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
I really think someone should add a paragraph or two on this. A lot has been made of Biden's age and Trump's to a lesser extent, Nikki Haley calling for mental capacity tests for over 75's. There are definitely similarities to Reagan's re-election in 1984 in which age was a big campaign issue, the 1984 election Wikipedia page has a lengthy segment on it. 79.78.91.188 ( talk) 21:32, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
Manchin is not ruling out a third party bid Maybe add him? 2001:1C00:A16:7F00:0:0:0:83FF ( talk) 18:01, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
The section Biden viability was merged into other sections with the user saying we don't know for sure if Biden is going to run in 2024. I don't think the section should be merged since he announced on 2 April (two days ago) he will run for the reelection. -- Mhhossein talk 05:41, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
I dont think this needs to be added as an issue as nobody cares about it. 2600:8805:C980:9400:C5A3:B01F:AAAA:51E7 ( talk) 19:51, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
2024 United States presidential election has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
is same-sex marriage specifically an issue in this election because i don't think it is 2.102.42.98 ( talk) 17:56, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
{{
Edit semi-protected}}
template.
Actualcpscm (
talk)
16:36, 27 March 2023 (UTC)"No state is trying to ban it"That's not true. The Republican platform explicitly opposes same-sex marriage, Republican legislatives have passed/blocked measures surrounding it, and many have talked about their desire to repeal recongition of same-sex marriages. Presently, a majority of states have constitutions/legislation forbidding same-sex marriage. (Inactive due to Obergefell)
"Congress just decisively voted it into federal law"Predominately upon the votes of Democrats. Just 20% of Republicans supported the Respect for Marriage Act in the Senate. Even then, states will be free to deny marriage licenses to same-sex couples if Obergefell is overturned. To this day, it is very much a present issue.
And "democratic backsliding" is just code for Democrats not winning every electionV-Dem Democracy indices, Freedom House, and The Economist's Democracy Index all report substantial democratic backsliding within the United States since the early 2010s.
there is no evidence it will be a top issue for 2024Polling shows it is an important issue for voters. The most recent poll ranked it 2nd. KlayCax ( talk) 01:06, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
A couple of think tanks claiming something is a problem doesn’t make it so (2020 had record turnout across the board). Gallup has “democracy” and abortion at 2% a piece as the #1 issue. 2607:FEA8:1E5D:B700:2C62:9ED2:870:7254 ( talk) 19:09, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
https://news.gallup.com/poll/1675/most-important-problem.aspx
Like, I could say that I'm not running for president, and according to whatever idiot made that edit, I deserve to be included on the page. Georger0171 ( talk) 18:34, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
[14] SmashingThreePlates ( talk) 04:12, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
The banner {{
Content}}
should be placed at the top of the article. The majority of the article is a mismatch of history unrelated or speculative to the current election.
204.237.51.192 (
talk)
15:14, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
I've been thinking that there could be more issues that could be major factors in 2024, here are three issues that I think should be added.
- Ukraine could be a big issue with there being no end in sight for the war, and the worldwide impacts of the conflict.
- Climate Change is always a big button issue in elections, and with more disasters being seen since 2020 (Hurricanes Ida and Ian, Western Wildfires, Tornado Outbreaks, and the Feb. 2021 Winter Storms in Texas) could be a factor that causes people to vote.
- Gun Violence has been a huge topic since, forever, but more talk around it has been seen since Buffalo and Uvalde, and many young Americans will be voting due to shootings.
HurricaneKappa (
talk)
02:07, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
I am not sure what the 'history' sub-section is serving in the 'Abortion' section. It's making the page unnecessarily long. -- Mhhossein talk 06:37, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
All the contents used in this section should have something to do with the 2024 US presidential elections, otherwise the content is an original research. Will remove the WP:coatracky portions.-- Mhhossein talk 07:12, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
All the contents used in this section should have something to do with the 2024 US presidential elections, otherwise the content is an original research.:
Andrew Yang and Liz Cheney should all be listed as potential candidates. All three have shown some level of interest in the idea
Jon Stewart and Howard Stern should also be moved to Declined,
as shown here
Even Chris Christie has been floated as a potential candidate,
shown through this essay
65.26.234.93 (
talk)
01:48, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
Hello!
I am adding this here as advice for a small modification in Joe Biden's section known as "Experience" in the Democratic Declared Candidates subject.
So far, as of now, the experience section for Joe Biden only contains the "46th President of the United States (2021-present) incumbent" as experience. However, more is to be added to show the full political experience he has done.
The edit is similar to what is shown in the experience sections of Nikki Haley and Asa Hutchinson, (which located in the Republican Party Declared Candidates Experience sections [15]).
What I am suggesting to be added is directly sourced from Joe Biden's Wikipedia Article [16]:
"Experience:
46th President of the United States (2021-present) incumbent [17] ((<- Remains as is))
47th Vice President of the United States (2009 - 2017) [18]
United States Senator from Delaware (1973 - 2009) [19]
Member of the New Castle County Council from the 4th district (1971 - 1973) [20]"
By the possibility that the text may be slightly too much, it can possibly be formatted and adjusted accordingly for the article's design, or other.
The purpose of this edit is simply to explain in further detail the correct yet full political experience of President Biden for both the past and present.
Thank you for reading this post, and thank you in advance if the edit is made.
Wang Dynasty (
talk)
11:46, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
(For polling articles and other sub-articles with lists of polls)
Many outlets noted that in 2022, "junk" polls by unestablished pollsters were published in many races that skewed polling averages and perceptions to create a false impression of stronger support for Republican candidates than was actually existent.
Individuals favorable to either party could influence polling averages in nationwide and statewide polls in 2024 by using this as a tactic.
In the article on the 2023 Chicago mayoral election, I made an effort to combat a skewed perception caused by potential "junk" polls by including in poll tables two additional columns.
If there is a better yardstick than FiveThirtyEight, I'm open to hearing it, because I would understand apprehension in trusting one outlet's assessment of pollsters. However, FiveThirtyEight is rather open about their methodology (see here and here), so it's not like we'd be blindly elevating mysterious kingmakers. I'd argue that their ratings are relatively akin to the Cook PVI's we include in articles on elections, since both have open methodologies. FiveThirtyEight also shares their datasets.
Any thoughts on adopting this? SecretName101 ( talk) 03:04, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
Isn't this part a bit WP: Crystal for Wikipedia? We don't know who the nominees are yet. KlayCax ( talk) 15:16, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
I have no idea what the second sentence of the lead is talking about. For something in the lead, it seems very unclear. Is it talking about Electoral College votes? Can it please be made clearer? HiLo48 ( talk) 00:32, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
How should we manage this page on election day? Should we update it in real-time as the election night progresses, or should we wait until all the votes have been counted? I'm unfamiliar with the process of updating pages during events like an election, and we should make sure to we handle it appropriately. I know the election is still one year away but I wanted to ask.
LuxembourgLover ( talk) 15:40, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
Armando "Mando" Perez-Serrato is a new, younger, more aggressive, solutions driven Democratic Candidate for President of the United States of America 2024. He was a Candidate for California Governor in 2022. His Campaign Website is PresidentMando.com and his official FEC Presidential Candidate ID is P40010514. [24] https://PresidentMando.com Here is the link for his Candidate Profile on the Federal Election Commission website [25] https://www.fec.gov/data/candidate/P40010514/ Here is a link for his FEC Principal Campaign Committee Armando Perez-Serrato for President and his Campaign Committee ID is C00831677 [26] https://www.fec.gov/data/committee/C00831677/ Mando2024 ( talk) 00:45, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
This section reads like something the Whitehouse has written. It's not true that serious challenges are rare, Truman (1952) and Johnson (1968) both dropped out of the race after being challenged, Ford (1976) and Carter (1980) both endured serious challenges. This campaign is the first time an incumbent has faced a challenger with name recognition since 1992, so it is misleading to cite recent presidents that were easily renominated. The section should be removed. 80.41.164.55 ( talk) 01:27, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
I'm utterly undecided on what I think, personally.
I remember a while back someone argued we "shouldn't" because of the weak performance in the previous election.
However, if we are to display the Libertarian nominating process, I think it's worth discussing if we also display the Green. These are the two largest third-parties in the United States in regards to membership (from what is understood) as well as in regards to regular ballot access.
I think last time there was a decision to completely relegate third parties primary processes to a separate article, though this appears not to be the consensus this election, at least not at this stage.
The Libertarian Party did score over 1% last time, while the Greens did not. However, neither party scored over 1% in 2012, yet went on to in the next election (and proved visible notable factors in the 2016 campaign). Greens outperformed their 2004 and 2008 performances in 2020, and did significantly better than the next-best-performing third-party ticket.
That said, should we be displaying these two third parties on equal footing with the two major ones at all right now? At a time where no consistent polls indicate they could even reach the 5% threshold to appear in the infobox after the election if Americans were to vote today or anytime soon? I am of two minds.
In terms of serving an American audience: yes I think we should so as not to bias ourselves in favor of promoting the two major parties. Do we really want to possibly be mis-portraying America as a de-juror two party system rather than simply a de-facto one?
In terms of informing an international audience: I think not. Unlike Americans, foreign audiences are not all familiar as to what the major parties are in the United States. They may not know our de-facto two-party system dynamic, and not appreciate that we seem to indicate we are something different. Seeing four parties equally displayed may mis-communicate to them that were have a multi-party electorate rather than (generally) a two-party electorate in a system open to multiple parties. They may mis-understand that it is displayed as such because the four parties have remotely comparable stature/support among the electorate when that is not established to be the case in actuality.
So who do I think do we want to better serve? Foreign or domestic readers? Americans are the ones voting, but the world has interest as well and America is not the center of it.
Again, I'm utterly undecided on all this, is anyone of a strong opinion on this? SecretName101 ( talk) 01:56, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
I would like to pose the question of whether or not the Libertarian candidate table on this page is giving WP:UNDUE weight. The Libertarian candidates certainly don't have the same amount of press coverage as the two major parties. I'm sure the table is fine for the Libertarian primaries page, but I'm not sure it's needed here on the 2024 election overview. Bullet point list formatting similar to the "Other third parties/independents" section may suffice. Kafoxe ( talk) 19:34, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 22:53, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
In "Potential campaign issues" section, we should add "Immigration (or Border Security)" too, because without any doubt it will be an important issue. Here are sources - [27], [28], [29]. Regards. M.Karelin ( talk) 01:32, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
Eric Jon Boerner is not listed in the other declared candidates for the Republicans.
Declared on 11 November 2022
Here are the sources to reference from:
https://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/111/202211119546754111/202211119546754111.pdf
https://cbs2iowa.com/news/local/another-presidential-candidate-rolls-through-cedar-rapids
https://www.wvik.org/2023-03-21/presidential-candidate-visits-iowa-for-the-first-time
https://cbs2iowa.com/news/local/2024-presidential-candidate-eric-jon-boerner-in-eastern-iowa
https://twitter.com/EricJonBoerner1
https://facebook.com/BoernerTheUSA 168.103.154.41 ( talk) 01:14, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
Is “Meanwhile, states like Colorado, Michigan, and Virginia have moved noticeably towards Democrats” WP:SYNTH if we are using one source for Colorado and Michigan, and another source for Virginia? If so, how should we fix this? Prcc27 ( talk) 22:39, 2 June 2023 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Lists lack bullet points making them hard to read SecretName101 ( talk) 03:47, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
This is a requested change, not a forum
In the lead paragraph the following should be changed LGBT rights, ..... are expected to be leading campaign issues. to Trans Rights ..... are expected to be leading campaign issues. for the following reasons:
I suspect Trans Rights will be a bigger issue than just LGBT rights.I don't suspect Lesbian or Gay rights will be center-stage (like in say, 2012) compared to just Trans rights. I would recommend changing LGBT rights to Trans Rights. I know LGBT covers Trans Rights but Trans Rights are a particular hot topic among both conservatives and liberals, and their wouldn't be a better way to differentiate the times, (Say, the 2020's), (To say the early 2010s) than to differentiate the social justice and civil rights issue of the current political day or era.
This is for many reasons, from Ron DeSantis' culture war/war on books, to the potential release of Hale's manifesto to Gender Affirming healthcare being denied in Tennessee, to J.K Rowling's transphobic statements, it seems like Trans Rights are going much more of a political issue than LGBT rights in general.
It's also interesting to note that Biden was the first president to mention Trans as part of a boarder political coalition. Unlike the 2010s, Biden also incorporates the Trans flag into his political apparel. I think Trans Rights will define a much broader debate for the rest of the decade (2020s) in a way that the just the LGBT movement won't, which is why Biden made a point to mention them seperately. 71.9.141.71 ( talk) 14:37, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
LGBT rights, especially trans rights? Because you're right that trans rights are a particular issue of contention, but also stuff like the sudden increase in prominence of the LGBT grooming conspiracy theory says to me it's not just trans rights. Loki ( talk) 00:28, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
GOP has been behind anti-trans bills- this is verifiable
Conservative pundits have become transphobic- this could be true, but it is not verifiable
Isn’t it WP:UNDUE to include the “potential candidates” and “declined to be candidates” sections in the article for the independent/third party section, but not for the Democratic and Republican sections? I assume the only reason it is in our article, is because there is no article for independent candidates for this information to be listed, whereas the potential and declined to be candidates information is accessible at the Democratic and Republican primaries subarticles. Nevertheless, we should at least collapse the sections, so we are not giving undue weight to independent/third party potential/declined candidates. Prcc27 ( talk) 03:33, 4 June 2023 (UTC)
I just created a draft for the Cornel West 2024 presidential campaign. Any help with expansion would be appreciated. Thriley ( talk) 05:32, 6 June 2023 (UTC)
Why are candidates who are currently not in office have their last office in bold? For example, Chris Christie is not current governor of New Jersey but that title is listed in bold. I suggest that we only use bold for offices that are currently held.
user:mnw2000 21:26, 7 June 2023 (UTC) user:mnw2000 21:26, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
Can we please keep empty sections hidden, until information is added to those sections? For now, users can access the relevant links in the see also section. Prcc27 ( talk) 04:58, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
Hello,
In the section of "Abortion Access" [30] , the Wikipedia entry in the said section simply mentions regarding Trump: "[. . .] Donald Trump has mostly avoided the topic since Roe v. Wade was overturned."
However, by sources about a month ago; on May 17th 2023, as well as by my recollection, Trump on the website TruthSocial had stated that he was able to "kill Roe v. Wade" (pictured here on Twitter
[31] ).
On the conservative news netwark "Newsmax" presumably around or at May 17th, Trump had also apparently mentioned in a phone interview with them that he "was the one that got rid of Roe v. Wade". (Clip authenticity is seemingly true. This clip was found only on a Twitter post, referenced by a main source: source number six: [32] )
Other mentions of this event happening can be found looking it up. Sources such as The Hill
[33] , BusinessInsider
[34] , and Newsweek
[35] .
Other various sources from the same time seem to report, or imply this "Roe v. Wade" statement made from Fmr Pres. Trump.
Another fact to mention, and despite it being implied now, is it should also be noted and typed into the section that Trump, in line with his Republican Party's common 'principle' of being Pro-Life, has mentioned before in a 2016 debate during the election that he is indeed, pro-life. [36]
These are quite a rather small note of addition to the Wikipedia Article here, and if added can very well possibly give some more accuracy to readers regarding possible 2024 Republican Candidates-for-President stances on Abortion, more specifically: Accuracy on Donald Trump's stance on Abortion, as well as Roe v. Wade.
Thanks for reading this, and thank you in advance for making the additions mentioned in my suggestion here.
Wang Dynasty (
talk)
03:28, 4 June 2023 (UTC)
I removed most of the information about Trump’s indictments and investigations in the Republican primary section, because most of those sources did not even say anything about the 2024 presidential election. I found a source that does mention his criminal trials in the context of the the election. Should this information be re-added with an updated source? If so, is the Republican primary section the appropriate place for this information? Prcc27 ( talk) 16:13, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
Hello,
It has been a month-and-a-half now since my initial suggestion on this same subject of President Biden's political experience, and I am typing another request/question on this, same subject again:
As referenced by the title of this card, I was wondering if Biden's experience of being a:
New Castle County Councilman (4th District; 1970 - 1973)" can remain Permanent in the article section here for his past political experience
[38] (as well as for the Wikipedia Article "2024 Democratic Party Presidential Primaries"
[39])
It could be Somewhat similar to the past political experiences of current-Republican Candidates Fmr. Governor Nikki Haley ( South Carolina State Representative (87th District; 2005–2011)), and Senator Tim Scott (South Carolina State Representative (117th District; 2009 - 2011)). (Both sourced here:) [40]
If this suggestion is accepted, then perhaps one way the addition can be added into the section can be:
President of the United States (2021–present)
Vice President of the United States (2009–2017)
U.S. Senator from
Delaware (1973–2009) <- (Section Here and Above is left as is, due to it being the current display.)
Member of the
New Castle County Council (1971 - 1973) (This has been noted even in Biden's Wikipedia Article as Political Experience.)
[41].
(Additional Source:)
[42]
This addition is suggested, due to it most likely being still considered as "political experience", as well as the County Council addressing itself as a "legislative branch of New Castle County government"
[43].
Thanks for your time reading this, and Thank You in advance if these changes are applied to the requested places.
Wang Dynasty (
talk)
06:02, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Please add that attacks on voting, trans, and civil rights are coming from Republicans and conservatives.
They are the main reason this so-called "culture war" is occurring, and not adding this detail creates a false narrative that liberals also hate minorities. Western Progressivist ( talk) 23:22, 3 June 2023 (UTC)
Maybe I am just a socially illiterate nerd but I had never even heard of the People's Party before, and now they have a single candidate running and that some how gets its own category list over the Libertarian Party, the third largest party in the country? Los Pobre ( talk) 03:52, 6 June 2023 (UTC)
I believe that the potential candidates section should be on here, for many reasons.
For clarification, I would likely have them as a separate section, due to the possibility of a candidate like Sen. Joe Manchin (no section has been made for No Labels).
More reasons are valid but those are just two. Hope that we can make this article better, as this could likely be one of the most important elections in U.S history, and we need informed voters on who might be there.
IEditPolitics ( talk) 20:08, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
Afroman has an FEC filing, Kanye and Marshall do not, should we separate Afroman from them or keep him in 'Declared intent to run' HurricaneKappa ( talk) 17:21, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
Why and what criteria is there for separating some candidates out of the boxes and simply putting them into a short sentence along with others so handled? 2600:6C67:1C00:5F7E:895A:A8F6:1262:AD4 ( talk) 14:56, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
Now! YangGang2024 ( talk) 02:24, 19 June 2023 (UTC) — YangGang2024 ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
Was this addition fair? Personally, I'm confused as to why we added this when no other election page ever had a Lib or green party section, to my knowledge. IEditPolitics ( talk) 14:41, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
Since No Labels is likely to have Larry Hogan or Joe Manchin if ballot access is gained, would those candidates be major enough to be listed, as this is the first time in a considerable time that a party has gained ballot access with such a major nominee compared to others (see Lib and Green party regular nominees. Also, count their media coverage and polling from third parties on their likely performance. IEditPolitics ( talk) 23:28, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
Due to the restrictions, for some reason, Perry Johnson is still on here. He also had no picture. Mistakes like these are regularly left untouched. Having the template restricted means users like me who are trying to make a difference on the article are stopped from making those changes. Either remove the restriction or make the right changes. It's a repetitive mistake this article makes. IEditPolitics ( talk) 21:08, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
An excessive number of stub-articles have been created for campaigns. At this stage, most campaigns can be appropriately covered as mere sub-sections of the candidate's own biographical article.
Some of these articles are artificially lengthened with the addition of sections summarizing the candidates' stances, which largely duplicate (or which can be merged with) similar sections on the candidate's main article.
I think we should seriously consider merging the following campaign articles into the respective candidates' main article for at least the time being:
SecretName101 ( talk) 15:58, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
Guys! You can't just cite the constitution when explaining the requirements to run for president. According to the wise man @ David O. Johnson that wouldn't be an independent source. David, please explain to them we need a random website to back up the United States Constitution or the page will be biased. I have attached a better source needed tag. Veganoregano ( talk) 16:38, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
Like my god it shouldn't be this hard YangGang2024 ( talk) 20:30, 25 June 2023 (UTC) — YangGang2024 ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
Everyone, Marianne Williamson has updated her logo. It is no longer what is seen on the dem primaries table. This new logo is being used on her website, social media, etc. I'm not sure how to link it here but please look at her website in the top left hand side and somebody please update it. YangGang2024 ( talk) 02:03, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
Given that the election is still over a year away, there's naturally going to be some amount of guesswork & speculation. But this section reads like it was written mostly from a left-wing perspective, without regard to both sides of the political debate.
2001:558:6045:B5:1134:9219:8250:87F3 ( talk) 15:37, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
Do you all think Ukraine should be added to: Crime,[4] education,[5] immigration,[6] gun control,[7][8] healthcare, abortion access,[9] LGBT rights (especially transgender rights), the state of the economy,[10] and election integrity[11] are expected to be leading campaign issues.
I personally think it is worth talking about — Preceding unsigned comment added by NotQualified ( talk • contribs) 23:09, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
What do they indicate and can someone add what they indicate into the Wiki for everyone - it is confusing — Preceding unsigned comment added by NotQualified ( talk • contribs) 23:19, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
I don't recall this being included in past election articles. It seems overtly WP:CRYSTALBALL, am I correct in saying that? It's extremely presumptive and we can't predict ANY of this. conman33 ( . . .talk) 04:07, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
Both 2020_United_States_presidential_election#Predictions and 2016_United_States_presidential_election#Comparison_to_polls_and_other_forecasts exist. There's nothing wrong with including reliably sourced predictions made by notable organizations.-- JasonMacker ( talk) 15:59, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
As per the relevant page, both the Prohibition Party and the American Solidarity Party have nominated their candidates. Strategos' Risk ( talk) 06:27, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
Hello all! I was taking a look at the article and saw the forecast section and was wondering if it was worth adding a margin section to the Forecasts section, e.g. what you see at 2020 United States presidential election#Close states. I took a cursory look at the sources presented and didn't see the winning percentage listed, so I can see how including a margin in the table might be more helpful than simply stating the winning percentage. Thoughts? Or would that be considered WP:SYNTH? Jay eyem ( talk) 20:51, 28 July 2023 (UTC)