Open main menu

Draft talk:2024 United States presidential election


This is obviously going to become an article at some point, so to encourage collaborative editing and avoid duplication of drafts I've moved it to Draft space. Legacypac (talk) 08:53, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

User:DGG can you lift the protection and move this back to mainspace? Legacypac (talk) 01:27, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

done. I would suggest the next steps would be including some information for each of the candidate, to show that their is wide discussion about the factors involved in their possible campaign in the 2024 election. I would assume there will be another AfD, and the stronger the article before that happens the better. Legacypac, I'd advise doing this immediately; I would do it myself except I do not want to edit in US politics.
I don't have a strong interest in the article, I was only responding to the discussion amd decision at MfD. if someone AfDs this they better explain why they are smarter than the people who just weighed in at MfD. taking a page to XfD right after it survived XfD is not right. Legacypac (talk) 18:36, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

Potential candidatesEdit

The 2020 article doesn't have potential candidates listed, so shouldn't we remove them from this article..? Prcc27 (talk) 06:04, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Donald TrumpEdit

If, somehow, Trump were to lose the 2020 election, would he not be a perfectly acceptable candidate for 2024? I was going to simply add him to the "potential candidates" section myself, but I felt the need to have permission first. If so, do I need a source? I'm 95% sure that he'd try to run if he lost next year. IceKey8297 is awesome.[citation needed] 16:55, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

I see where you're coming from, but I think we should hold back on including Trump as a potential candidate in 2024. While he would be eligible to run in 2024 if he lost (or didn't run at all) in 2020, including him strikes me as being a bit too eager to include things that might not even come to pass. Remember that Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, so speculating about the possibility of Trump winning or losing in 2020 might not be good to include. There's also the fact that there is no deadline, so even if Trump winning or losing in 2020 wasn't speculative, Wikipedia shouldn't be in any rush unless we have a compelling reason to. (When that is said, I personally think it unlikely that he will lose reelection in 2020 simply because incumbent US presidents rarely lose. According to List of Presidents who didn't win reelection, the last US president to lose reelection was Bush the Elder in 1992). To summarize, I would advise against including Trump unless and until he loses in 2020. - (talk) 02:10, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
I'm going to be completely honest with you, I came to this self-same conclusion just a few days ago. Thanks, though! IceKey8297 is awesome.[citation needed] 13:15, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
Okay, then. And you're welcome. - (talk) 23:22, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

At what point do we move this to article space?Edit

Now? After the 2020 primaries? After the 2020 election? After a major candidate declares? Some other time? Squeeps10 00:54, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

The 2020 article was created on October 30, 2015, if that matters. Axedel (talk) 01:34, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
Which means that, logically, 2 or so months is good. I'll wait for further discussion. Squeeps10 02:15, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
After the 2020 election! This has been discussed thoroughly and the page is protected from creation until November 2020...disappointing that this draft has even been found. Utterly absurd to think we can know anything of use before the incumbent is known. Leave all this premature speculation alone until we have a smidgeon of reality to base it on, with more substantive content rather than people tossing out names without an actual point. I'd be happy to wait until major candidates declare, which would be late 2022. Reywas92Talk 06:06, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
Agree, as noted below. The content of sources for many listed potential candidates are very weak, and numerous sources are already dead links. I am deleting those candidates who cannot be supported by content of RS.Parkwells (talk) 14:06, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Potential candidatesEdit

Deleted Dwayne Johnson - his paraphrased 'I might have to learn something to run in 2024' hardly seems a strong enough indication of interest. Deleted Greitens, forced to resign in disgrace as MO governor over a sexual harassment case. Other persons in the list seem a catch-all of some political commentator or another thinking might want to run, or might be a decent candidate, since the commentator's work is keeping up political chatter. We should not be documenting all their chatter; it hardly seems worth it to list these individuals when the sources are so weak. It looks as if every elected official of a certain age who has not yet disgraced themselves has been listed, which hardly seems useful. I've deleted Rand Paul and other "candidates" who are cited only on the source TopTenLists. Have deleted names and photos of additional candidates for whom the content of cited sources did not support this ID, and/or whose potential candidacy cannot be verified, as the links are already dead. Parkwells (talk) 13:28, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

It wasn't just "sexual harassment." Per the Greitens WP article: On April 11, 2018, a Special Investigative Committee (SIC) of the Missouri House of Representatives released an initial 24-page report detailing allegations against Greitens by the hairstylist with whom he had had an affair.[207] The stylist accused him of unwanted kissing and sexual touching, violently slapping and spanking her, coercing her into performing oral sex on him, and threatening to blackmail her.[208][209] In a four-page report issued on April 30, 2018 the SIC chair, Republican Representative Jay Barnes, said it found that the Greitens defense claims, that the woman's testimony was inconsistent, were groundless.[193] Activist (talk) 12:12, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

RfC on when to move to article spaceEdit

I'd like to begin by saying that I don't know If I've categorized this correctly. Second, roughly a day ago I asked on this talk page when we should move this to article space. I received only a single opinion. So my question is...When do we make this an article? Now? After the 2020 primaries? After the 2020 election? After a major candidate declares? Some other time? Squeeps10 01:28, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

I doubt there'll be much reason to do so until after the 2020 election. Axedel (talk) 11:50, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
Immediately, after Fox News calls it for one of the 2020 candidates. I am joking a bit there, but I think it is fine anytime after the 2020 election.--Darryl Kerrigan (talk) 01:19, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
  • I would say November 4th, 2020. Cosmic Sans (talk) 20:10, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
  • I agree. Sometime in early November 2020; the exact date should be either November 3, 2020, or November 4th. But after the 2020 election is best. Javert2113 (Siarad.|¤) 12:32, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
  • As far as I know, the 2020 election might/must be the most appropriate time for that. Ali Ahwazi (talk) 18:34, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
  • I think a few months from now would be a good time. A few people have already started talking about 2024. And as Axedel mentioned, "The 2020 article was created on October 30, 2015". In my opinion it would be good to move some time around late October this year, or maybe if we want to wait a little then around February 3 next year when the 2020 primary season begins. - (talk) 18:29, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
  • Not until well after the 2020 election at the earliest. Just because people are talking about 2024 (because they have to talk about politics all the time) doesn't mean there should be this advance action to document their endless chatter. Everything that is published does not have to be repeated here. This appears to be a very weakly sourced list of candidates - just as an example, the source for Condoleeza Rice was something called "TopTen Lists", and I could find no list at that website that included her as a potential candidate for 2024. TopTen Lists cannot be considered a Reliable Source for Wikipedia; it is not mainstream journalism, there are not authors, no sources, and no discussion. This is supposed to be an encyclopedia, not speculative journalism. Editors who want to engage in political forecasting should be writing their own blogs. As noted by my deletions, another problem with this early article is that already a number of links are dead, and content of cited sources cannot be verified. Parkwells (talk) 13:14, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
Return to "2024 United States presidential election" page.