|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On November 07 2024 04:53 Introvert wrote:
I have a bit of anecdata... at work taking to a 30 yr old, devout Catholic Mexican-American woman. She didn't vote, but when I brought it up she said after asking me who I wanted to win, before I even finished volunteered that Kamala was "terrible, like really bad." Said her brother voted Trump because of the economy, one sister and brother in law voted Trump also, and another sister and brother in law were also (?) Dems but undecided. "I asked why were they thinking about voting for her, she is against everything you believe."
Atm, Trump is doing far, far better with Hispanics and Catholics ever before. Sure, much of that is the economy (her brother's vote).
But...
Devout Christians knew she wasn't on their side, knew she'd use the power of the state to coerce their schools and hospitals. It might be why Trump is getting 40% in CA rn.
This actually gives me hope, nit only might we finally witness the end of the "coalition of the ascendant" thst dems have been trying to make happen for two decades now, but it seems like the categorical rejection of Harris really is a blow against Dems lurch to the left on so many social and cultural issues. Some dem senate candidates will win or almost win where Trump won, but they stayed away from Harris like the plague (Rosen in NV and Baldwin in WI). They have to at least appear more moderate. Iirc Casey in PA was running ads about working with Trump. There is no silver lining in the presidential race, she and what people thought she stood for was rejected by the most diverse Republican vote in modern history.
And finally, Trump outran the rest of the GOP everywhere. This again is giving vibes to the last century, the FDR coalition didn't crack all at once (you could argue it's still cracking) but Republicans started winning the South with the presidency before it trickled down. There is a change happening here, and it's fascinating to watch. He is not an anchor, at least not this year.
Of course we have to remember thet much of this is because Kamala Harris sucks, too.
Not to take away from your 'Kamala sucks' point, but the irony of christian communities preferring a white male sex offender over literally any female is not lost on me.
|
On November 07 2024 06:23 Dan HH wrote:Show nested quote +On November 07 2024 05:25 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 07 2024 05:20 Dan HH wrote:On November 07 2024 04:46 Zambrah wrote:On November 07 2024 04:28 Gorsameth wrote:On November 07 2024 04:05 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 07 2024 02:59 WombaT wrote:On November 07 2024 02:38 GreenHorizons wrote:This should end Democrats insistence on trying to appeal to Republicans rather than motivating/engaging the 10's of millions of people that mostly agree with them (at least their ostensible views) but don't typically vote for a variety of reasons. For all their appeals to Republicans, supporting a immigration crackdown, backing genocide, and palling around with Cheney on stage, they made negative progress https://twitter.com/LeftieStats/status/1854089215585239376 Oooooof I wonder what the numbers for self-described independents are? + Show Spoiler +On November 07 2024 02:44 NewSunshine wrote:Show nested quote +On November 07 2024 02:38 GreenHorizons wrote:
This should end Democrats insistence on trying to appeal to Republicans rather than motivating/engaging the 10's of millions of people that mostly agree with them (at least their ostensible views) but don't typically vote for a variety of reasons.
For all their appeals to Republicans, supporting a immigration crackdown, backing genocide, and palling around with Cheney on stage, they made negative progress
I think this is a too-hard-learned lesson. While I don't think there was anything wrong with building a coalition that incidentally includes prominent Republicans as a show of how repugnant the other side is, going out of your way to court a base that has been highly radicalized and insulated from reality is a fools errand... Who’s doing this strategising? I don’t understand how you can have smart, savvy political strategists poring over all the numbers going, funded to the teeth and you do this again. Something some hobbyist discussors on a StarCraft forum largely (from memory) agreed was a fucking daft strategy? Certainly GH and I I remember, I’m pretty sure quite a few more The mind fucking boggles, it really does. It was pretty damn clear from almost the off that this was going to be an election about galvanising your bases and driving out turnout. Argh WORSE! *sigh* SOOooo much worse... This is net 2020 vs 2024Independents (or something else): +8 R Conservatives: +9 R Moderates: + 11 R I can't emphasise enough how much the "we need to be more centrist" Democrats need to just be driven out of the party entirely if they can't shut the fuck up and fall in line behind the people that were shouted down by the people that backed Hillary and Biden to appeal to these mythical people that struggle choosing between Democrats and Trump. This implies there are people to the left to pick up who are willing to vote. Which might be right, but boy do they do a good job of hiding because I don't think we ever see them. How can you expect to see them when Democrats exclusively try to pull Republicans, the people who are diametrically opposed to leftists in basically all ways? If those 10s of millions of hidden American leftists existed, the 2016 and 2020 primaries would have been the time to come out. They did in 2016 and 2020 and right-wing Democrats conspired to snuff them out. A lot of the people that generally agree with Democrat's ostensible left oriented values aren't Democrats, especially those that don't typically vote. The US primary system isn't for them anyway. They were outnumbered. The effort required to participate is minimal, that's exactly how Corbyn was voted in charge of Labour. A lot of people signed up specifically to elect him, membership increased by 50% leading up to the vote. Though we're talking much smaller party membership numbers overall there. I don't think that bloc is as large as you want to believe it is, but I do think Bernie would have done better nationally. Not because of any left-right calculus, rather because he doesn't make stupid people feel stupid.
They weren't/aren't outnumbered though. The bloc, whatever size, was the "lesser evil" and one Democrats should have lined up behind.
Instead the leaders and most influential among them demanded everyone line up behind what would ultimately be a strategy to elect Donald Trump. Rank and file Democrats then fell in line behind them and shamed, blamed, scolded, threatened, etc anyone that didn't want to line up behind them.
|
Northern Ireland22636 Posts
On November 07 2024 06:07 Vindicare605 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 07 2024 05:58 WombaT wrote:On November 07 2024 05:12 Timebon3s wrote:On November 07 2024 02:39 WombaT wrote:On November 07 2024 02:11 Timebon3s wrote:On November 07 2024 02:04 r00ty wrote:On November 07 2024 01:49 Timebon3s wrote:On November 07 2024 01:47 r00ty wrote:On November 07 2024 01:37 Timebon3s wrote:
Now that the dust has settled and Trump won by a landslide, why wasn’t there more voters in favor of him here on this forum? Is this a very left-leaning forum, or are people simply afraid of saying they support Trump?
Mabye it won’t be as bad as people think.
As far as Europe is concerned, he actually made NATO stronger, which is good for my country at least.
He’s also said he will try to stop the war between Ukraine and Russia. If that means Ukraine need to give up territory to Russia, and then get membership in NATO, that sounds like a good long term solution.
And he also managed to get a dialogue going with North Korea.
Let’s hope for a positive future instead of only focusing on the negative. How is Trump in any way responsible for Norway joining NATO? He gets credited for so much stuff he doesn't have anything to do with or even counteracted against. If he would be have been at the helm when Putin invaded we would be in a very different world. He basically wants to abolish NATO to get better deals i guess? Dialogue with North Korea? Are you kidding? He isn’t responsible for Norway joining nato. But he made the members of NATO pay more money to NATO. Peace begins with dialogue. At least he’s trying. Making my point. That wasn't him. It was Russia attacking Ukraine causing this. It was him. He did this before the war. Hey I can’t remember the timeline, I’ll trust your recollection Any credit there will be immediately wiped out, and then some if his administration completely cut off support to Ukraine. Like great, Americans feel a bit better that some of the European members are pumping more in to NATO. It’s not even entirely unreasonable, hey fair enough If Trump then fucks off US support for NATO at one of those rare occasions where it’s actually needed to do what it was created to do, all of that is moot and it’s an abject foreign policy failure. Unless there’s some other scenario where he can drag Putin to heel somehow, and negotiate an acceptable peace. I.e. not having Russia incorporate Ukraine. That would be an impressive foreign policy achievement. My prediction is Trump’s weaknesses will bite him in the ass now he’s got some genuinely complicated foreign policy waters to negotiate. But, I may be wrong. I like being smug and correct, but I’d much rather be wrong here! The problem with his foreign policy is pretty much his general approach to anything. Everything is transactional, and because he doesn’t really believe in genuine cooperation, he’s immediately distrustful and disdainful of those who do. We’re one punch away from a reasonable foreign policy one-two punch. For me. Step 1 - The US stops trying to be the world’s policeman. I think it’s fair to say he ticks this box. Step 2 - The US maintains alliances with historic allies, or those of aligned values, and empowers them and cooperative institutions. Those can pick up slack, so things don’t have to go to shit and harm US interests, or some greater good, but the US isn’t doing all the heavy lifting. Foreign policy requires some alacrity and a balance of cracking the whip and handing out carrots. Look I’m going into future hypotheticals but, let’s assume Trump does go all-in on his trade war with China. That’s going to have nasty knock-on effects all over the world. What’s the next biggest economic bloc in the world, full of historic American allies? Why it’s the EU/Europe. More neutral but also not gigantic fans of China and Chinese ambitions either. I doubt thrilled with the prospect of a trade war, perhaps amenable to some cooperation on China, perhaps not. They sure as fuck will be less likely to play ball if in the rough same timespan Trump pulls US support from the biggest national security crisis in mainland Europe in quite some time. That’s a lot of information and I’ll be honest in saying I don’t know as much as you do about this. I just remember he made the other countries pay up and make NATO stronger, which in my eyes is a good thing. He also said he wanted to end the war and stop people from dying. We are now at the point of Ukraine running out of young men to send into the meat grinder.. this 3 day operation has been going on for way too long now. IF he actually can do something to stop this madness, that will make up for a lot of the crazy shit he’s said and done in my eyes. And perhaps people will think twice before calling him Hitler :-) I’m in a wall of text mood, so apologies for that but I would give it a re-read. To summarise a little quicker. Getting NATO’s other members to pay a bit more, I can’t really disagree with that. But (if) you pull out of helping the Ukrainian conflict, it’s pointless because you have power that even with a giant European commitment they can’t easily compensate for. Let’s say I’ve been drinking with my buddies for 30 years every week. I’m a little more flush than them, so I’m picking up the majority of the tab. This is maybe a bit unfair and annoys me, so eventually I persuade them to chip in a bit more. But then I just stop going to the bar and hanging out with them, so I’ve pissed money away for 30 years anyway, but I reap none of the benefits from my buddies finally throwing in a bit more cash. The real central problem with Trump’s foreign policy is that it purports to be isolationist, but isn’t really. It’s a have your cake and eat it too scenario. It still wants to be King of the Castle, but without paying for the upkeep. And it offers simple solutions, to rather complex problems. Why it appeals to some, entirely understandable. War is bad, people don’t like funding wars, especially foreign ones. I can totally empathise with the appeal, but there are consequences. Peace and Ukrainians and Russians no longer going home in body bags is a rather desirous outcome. But at what tradeoff? A reasonable negotiated peace, or Russia controlling Ukraine and edging ever further in Europe? Many Americans don’t like the prospect of China outstripping them. OK but talk of a trade war isn’t isolationist foreign policy. And not good economic policy. It’s effectively motivated by the US starting to experience what the rest of the world has had 70 years to adjust to, in terms of the status of the US Hey I’m only going off Trump’s stated platforms, it remains to be seen what actually is done. There's a factor here you're not accounting for. Pettiness. Americans, especially American Conservatives are REALLY sick and tired of hearing about how wonderful Europe's social programs are. How everyone gets to go to college for free, and everyone gets amazing health care for free. It is a serious point of annoyance among more conservative American voters that Europe basically gets to live smug and happy under the protective blanket of the American Military. So when Trump goes and destabilzes all of that, he's doing to the Europeans exactly what he's doing to the American left. He's just going in and making a mess of everything and that makes the American Conservative happy who is happy to see the smug Europeans take a big cold shower. The fact that it helps out Russia and that Russia IS our geopolitical enemy isn't as important to them.
Sure but it’s a pettiness borne of complete idiocy. To caveat this rant, I know these aren’t your positions and you’re not advocating them
In a hypothetical world where that sentiment was actually true, it’s 100% understandable and I’d agree with it
It wasn’t Europeans that made the call to have a military budget bigger than what, the next 10 combined?
It wasn’t Europeans who decided that they didn’t want to tax fund universal healthcare programs
It was American conservatives who called the French ‘cheese eating surrender monkeys’ because they weren’t enthusiastic about pissing money away invading Iraq.
Incidentally you don’t really have free tertiary education in the UK anymore. Not sure when that came in, but fee loans were in place when I did my first degree some 17 years ago. Indeed those Communists in Labour just raised the fees in their latest budget.
They’re not trivial, but they’re still a fraction of US fees. I’m self-funding degree number 2 right now and it’s a struggle, but it’s possible. In the UK you get one degree as a loan, if you want to do another, pay upfront. I’m not sure how the US system works though
US fees? Fuck off I, indeed nobody I know personally (bar one chick whose dad is like 200th richest in the UK) could afford to study at US prices.
I heard Oxford and Cambridge are pretty good universities, I mean there’s lots of others but they kinda have the name recognition. International students don’t have their fees capped, so UK universities kinda milk them, but even then it’s like, maybe half, or less to go to an elite UK university than a mediocre American one.
If you’re a UK native you can go study in one of these elite universities (at a global level) for the sake of a loan for ballpark 10K GBP a year.
It’s not Europeans that have the US spend about 2x between the private and state sector on healthcare per capital.
|
On November 06 2024 07:21 micronesia wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2024 07:13 Mohdoo wrote:On November 06 2024 07:10 GreenHorizons wrote:
Don't remember if I posted my thoughts or not but this is one example of something that's in the gray zone of "free and fair election".
Signature matching being used to disqualify high numbers of younger voters because the signature on their ballot doesn't match the digital one they made at the DMV on one of those shitty pads.
If it somehow came down to Nevada and we could definitively say the ballots disqualified this way would have swung the election in Harris' favor, would we still call it a "free and fair" election? Add this to my long list of evidence why cursive should be abolished. It’s time to move on. We don’t need any of this shit What will replace wet signatures in your view? They are still useful in some applications. To be clear, I don't use cursive for anything aside from signatures.
digital signatures signature is replacing it a lot. Banks, insurance companies, other financial institutions, even some government documents. They also work in contracts. My signature is awful so whenever I use it I just one of their fonts, but you can make your own.
https://www.docusign.com/en-ca/how-it-works/electronic-signature/digital-signature/digital-signature-faq
|
Bernie Sanders is problematic for several reasons, but leave it to him to still/immediately have the most salient and unflinching analysis we'll probably get out of anyone that stumped for Harris.
|
The EU wasn't not paying its part in NATO, the US didn't even want the EU to be doing their part. Because while the EU is completely reliant on the US military the US has complete control over where the West can cause and engage in conflicts.
If France for example were to decide they wanted to start a war they would need the US to back them because with a small military they cannot do so on their own. The stronger the EU is the more they can decide their own agenda and stir up trouble where the US doesn't want it.
Ofc present day Republicans seem to have decided that the US should no longer be the sole super power on the planet and that the immense preeminent position this has given the US is overrated.
|
Does anyone know how much something has to change to be declared "Made in Country x". Because parts can all be from for example China and others, but be assembled in the US and it is "Made in the US". I'm wondering if there will be legal Tariff avoiding by ordering the highly tariffed in America products to say Canada (in this example Canada wouldn't be tariffed) have them make some changes and then export it to the US.
|
On November 07 2024 06:51 GreenHorizons wrote:Bernie Sanders is problematic for several reasons, but leave it to him to still/immediately have the most salient and unflinching analysis we'll probably get out of anyone that stumped for Harris. https://twitter.com/BernieSanders/status/1854271157135941698
I partially agree. One of the responses to that status is this:
"-Unions are the strongest they've been in decades.
-Wages among the lowest earners grew the fastest.
-The child tax credit was expanded.
-A minimum corporate tax was enacted.
-A tax on stock buybacks was added.
-High inflation was brought down to normal levels without a recession.
-Millions of jobs were created.
-Unemployment has remained low.
-Manufacturing returned to the US.
-Prescription prices were lowered.
-More Americans have healthcare than ever before.
-Billions were given to student debt relief.
-The American Rescue Plan got Americans back to work, covered Cobra payments, and even directly gave Americans money.
Let's stop pretending that nothing was done by this administration when it inherited a pandemic, a migrant crisis, and high inflation and managed not only to address all of those issues through Republican obstruction but accomplished much more as well.
There's always more to do, and mistakes happen, but to act like Democrats abandoned the working class is ridiculous.
Tell me how you're going to get Universal healthcare through a Republican Congress, Mr. Sanders."
I think this response raises good points - that progress was indeed made, including progress that helped the working class. There's always a lot more to be done... and Harris did promise a lot more... but it likely wasn't seen or heard or understood by people for various reasons. Biden had plenty of accomplishments and Harris had plenty of policy proposals that would have benefitted the working and middle classes. Unfortunately, those accomplishments and proposals weren't enough. It's hard to imagine Biden/Harris/Congress moving to the left to accomplish even more though, as they'd begin to lose some moderate Congressional Democratic support (and, of course, would never have Republican support).
|
One of the scariest things is what is RFK Jr going to do to heath care. The US system is already super flawed but I'm sure there is a long way down left to go.
|
On November 07 2024 06:59 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:I partially agree. One of the responses to that status is this: + Show Spoiler +"-Unions are the strongest they've been in decades.
-Wages among the lowest earners grew the fastest.
-The child tax credit was expanded.
-A minimum corporate tax was enacted.
-A tax on stock buybacks was added.
-High inflation was brought down to normal levels without a recession.
-Millions of jobs were created.
-Unemployment has remained low.
-Manufacturing returned to the US.
-Prescription prices were lowered.
-More Americans have healthcare than ever before.
-Billions were given to student debt relief.
-The American Rescue Plan got Americans back to work, covered Cobra payments, and even directly gave Americans money.
Let's stop pretending that nothing was done by this administration when it inherited a pandemic, a migrant crisis, and high inflation and managed not only to address all of those issues through Republican obstruction but accomplished much more as well.
There's always more to do, and mistakes happen, but to act like Democrats abandoned the working class is ridiculous.
Tell me how you're going to get Universal healthcare through a Republican Congress, Mr. Sanders." I think this response raises good points + Show Spoiler +- that progress was indeed made, including progress that helped the working class. There's always a lot more to be done... and Harris did promise a lot more... but it likely wasn't seen or heard or understood by people for various reasons. Biden had plenty of accomplishments and Harris had plenty of policy proposals that would have benefitted the working and middle classes. Unfortunately, those accomplishments and proposals weren't enough. It's hard to imagine Biden/Harris/Congress moving to the left to accomplish even more though, as they'd begin to lose some moderate Congressional Democratic support (and, of course, would never have Republican support) .
It's exactly people like those in the post you're quoting I'm saying have to STFU and fall in line behind people like Sanders if Democrats want any credibility going forward.
|
On November 07 2024 06:36 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On November 07 2024 06:23 Dan HH wrote:On November 07 2024 05:25 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 07 2024 05:20 Dan HH wrote:On November 07 2024 04:46 Zambrah wrote:On November 07 2024 04:28 Gorsameth wrote:On November 07 2024 04:05 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 07 2024 02:59 WombaT wrote:On November 07 2024 02:38 GreenHorizons wrote:This should end Democrats insistence on trying to appeal to Republicans rather than motivating/engaging the 10's of millions of people that mostly agree with them (at least their ostensible views) but don't typically vote for a variety of reasons. For all their appeals to Republicans, supporting a immigration crackdown, backing genocide, and palling around with Cheney on stage, they made negative progress https://twitter.com/LeftieStats/status/1854089215585239376 Oooooof I wonder what the numbers for self-described independents are? + Show Spoiler +On November 07 2024 02:44 NewSunshine wrote:Show nested quote +On November 07 2024 02:38 GreenHorizons wrote:This should end Democrats insistence on trying to appeal to Republicans rather than motivating/engaging the 10's of millions of people that mostly agree with them (at least their ostensible views) but don't typically vote for a variety of reasons. For all their appeals to Republicans, supporting a immigration crackdown, backing genocide, and palling around with Cheney on stage, they made negative progress https://twitter.com/LeftieStats/status/1854089215585239376 I think this is a too-hard-learned lesson. While I don't think there was anything wrong with building a coalition that incidentally includes prominent Republicans as a show of how repugnant the other side is, going out of your way to court a base that has been highly radicalized and insulated from reality is a fools errand... Who’s doing this strategising? I don’t understand how you can have smart, savvy political strategists poring over all the numbers going, funded to the teeth and you do this again. Something some hobbyist discussors on a StarCraft forum largely (from memory) agreed was a fucking daft strategy? Certainly GH and I I remember, I’m pretty sure quite a few more The mind fucking boggles, it really does. It was pretty damn clear from almost the off that this was going to be an election about galvanising your bases and driving out turnout. Argh WORSE! *sigh* SOOooo much worse... This is net 2020 vs 2024Independents (or something else): +8 R Conservatives: +9 R Moderates: + 11 R I can't emphasise enough how much the "we need to be more centrist" Democrats need to just be driven out of the party entirely if they can't shut the fuck up and fall in line behind the people that were shouted down by the people that backed Hillary and Biden to appeal to these mythical people that struggle choosing between Democrats and Trump. This implies there are people to the left to pick up who are willing to vote. Which might be right, but boy do they do a good job of hiding because I don't think we ever see them. How can you expect to see them when Democrats exclusively try to pull Republicans, the people who are diametrically opposed to leftists in basically all ways? If those 10s of millions of hidden American leftists existed, the 2016 and 2020 primaries would have been the time to come out. They did in 2016 and 2020 and right-wing Democrats conspired to snuff them out. A lot of the people that generally agree with Democrat's ostensible left oriented values aren't Democrats, especially those that don't typically vote. The US primary system isn't for them anyway. They were outnumbered. The effort required to participate is minimal, that's exactly how Corbyn was voted in charge of Labour. A lot of people signed up specifically to elect him, membership increased by 50% leading up to the vote. Though we're talking much smaller party membership numbers overall there. I don't think that bloc is as large as you want to believe it is, but I do think Bernie would have done better nationally. Not because of any left-right calculus, rather because he doesn't make stupid people feel stupid. They weren't/aren't outnumbered though. The bloc, whatever size, was the "lesser evil" and one Democrats should have lined up behind. Instead the leaders and most influential among them demanded everyone line up behind what would ultimately be a strategy to elect Donald Trump. Rank and file Democrats then fell in line behind them and shamed, blamed, scolded, threatened, etc anyone that didn't want to line up behind them.
That sounds plausible until we recall that he ran again in 2020 against another moderate establishment Democrat and lost harder.
If a couple million people that preferred Bernie over Hillary were duped by the narrative that Bernie would do worse against Trump and tactically voted for Hillary in the primary out of fear, that narrative went straight to the trash bin as soon as she lost, and there would have been no tactical calculus holding them back the next time.
|
Northern Ireland22636 Posts
On November 07 2024 06:23 Dan HH wrote:Show nested quote +On November 07 2024 05:25 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 07 2024 05:20 Dan HH wrote:On November 07 2024 04:46 Zambrah wrote:On November 07 2024 04:28 Gorsameth wrote:On November 07 2024 04:05 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 07 2024 02:59 WombaT wrote:On November 07 2024 02:38 GreenHorizons wrote:This should end Democrats insistence on trying to appeal to Republicans rather than motivating/engaging the 10's of millions of people that mostly agree with them (at least their ostensible views) but don't typically vote for a variety of reasons. For all their appeals to Republicans, supporting a immigration crackdown, backing genocide, and palling around with Cheney on stage, they made negative progress https://twitter.com/LeftieStats/status/1854089215585239376 Oooooof I wonder what the numbers for self-described independents are? + Show Spoiler +On November 07 2024 02:44 NewSunshine wrote:Show nested quote +On November 07 2024 02:38 GreenHorizons wrote:This should end Democrats insistence on trying to appeal to Republicans rather than motivating/engaging the 10's of millions of people that mostly agree with them (at least their ostensible views) but don't typically vote for a variety of reasons. For all their appeals to Republicans, supporting a immigration crackdown, backing genocide, and palling around with Cheney on stage, they made negative progress https://twitter.com/LeftieStats/status/1854089215585239376 I think this is a too-hard-learned lesson. While I don't think there was anything wrong with building a coalition that incidentally includes prominent Republicans as a show of how repugnant the other side is, going out of your way to court a base that has been highly radicalized and insulated from reality is a fools errand... Who’s doing this strategising? I don’t understand how you can have smart, savvy political strategists poring over all the numbers going, funded to the teeth and you do this again. Something some hobbyist discussors on a StarCraft forum largely (from memory) agreed was a fucking daft strategy? Certainly GH and I I remember, I’m pretty sure quite a few more The mind fucking boggles, it really does. It was pretty damn clear from almost the off that this was going to be an election about galvanising your bases and driving out turnout. Argh WORSE! *sigh* SOOooo much worse... This is net 2020 vs 2024Independents (or something else): +8 R Conservatives: +9 R Moderates: + 11 R I can't emphasise enough how much the "we need to be more centrist" Democrats need to just be driven out of the party entirely if they can't shut the fuck up and fall in line behind the people that were shouted down by the people that backed Hillary and Biden to appeal to these mythical people that struggle choosing between Democrats and Trump. This implies there are people to the left to pick up who are willing to vote. Which might be right, but boy do they do a good job of hiding because I don't think we ever see them. How can you expect to see them when Democrats exclusively try to pull Republicans, the people who are diametrically opposed to leftists in basically all ways? If those 10s of millions of hidden American leftists existed, the 2016 and 2020 primaries would have been the time to come out. They did in 2016 and 2020 and right-wing Democrats conspired to snuff them out. A lot of the people that generally agree with Democrat's ostensible left oriented values aren't Democrats, especially those that don't typically vote. The US primary system isn't for them anyway. They were outnumbered. The effort required to participate is minimal, that's exactly how Corbyn was voted in charge of Labour. A lot of people signed up specifically to elect him, membership increased by 50% leading up to the vote. Though we're talking much smaller party membership numbers overall there. I don't think that bloc is as large as you want to believe it is, but I do think Bernie would have done better nationally. Not because of any left-right calculus, rather because he doesn't make stupid people feel stupid.
Bolded, as per my ‘analysis’ of why I think there’s a lot to learn from that campaign.
I think you relatively underestimate the significance of Corbyn’s pull.
It’s not difficult to become a Labour member, but it’s an extra step, and it takes a little effort. I did it despite Labour not running candidates in Northern Ireland. I’m not anymore for reasons one can perhaps guess.
Many people can’t even be arsed to vote, for whatever reason.
Now, you don’t want to overestimate either, the most motivated people are the ones you’ll see making the extra effort, and they may not be reflective of overall sentiment. Be it a big Labour membership influx, or the kind of crowdfunding Sanders pulled off.
You don’t necessarily have to go all-in on a Corbyn, or a Sanders. As a singular candidate they may not be able to carry the day, on that I agree
But, they’ve got some appeal. Can you harness part of what that is? Can you build a meaningful coalition that doesn’t alienate that cohort?
It’s not always simple either, it’s a complex domain. You can’t always mash things with different appeals together.
But, if I’m going simplistic. Clinton-Sanders 2016 ticket versus Trump. Let’s go.
Who in the name of fuck did sticking Tim Kaine on that ticket convince? I remembered who it was but I misspelled when I went to refresh my memory the wrong Tim Kaine
I had a brief second where I was like ‘man, the Dems have flaws but did they really run an avowed fan of Milton Friedman as VP?
Like, it wasn’t too long a period. I’d say 10 seconds before I felt, Hm I’m not a big fan of the Dems but surely not? And re-Googled
Even for 10 seconds but that Tim Kaine was such a non-entity and made no lasting impression on me at the time so I mistakenly thought he was a Friedman acolyte and that the Dems might actually consider him as a running mate I think is somewhat instructive as to their problems.
And I’m quite a skeptical fellow
|
On November 07 2024 07:08 Dan HH wrote:Show nested quote +On November 07 2024 06:36 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 07 2024 06:23 Dan HH wrote:On November 07 2024 05:25 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 07 2024 05:20 Dan HH wrote:On November 07 2024 04:46 Zambrah wrote:On November 07 2024 04:28 Gorsameth wrote:On November 07 2024 04:05 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 07 2024 02:59 WombaT wrote:On November 07 2024 02:38 GreenHorizons wrote:This should end Democrats insistence on trying to appeal to Republicans rather than motivating/engaging the 10's of millions of people that mostly agree with them (at least their ostensible views) but don't typically vote for a variety of reasons. For all their appeals to Republicans, supporting a immigration crackdown, backing genocide, and palling around with Cheney on stage, they made negative progress https://twitter.com/LeftieStats/status/1854089215585239376 Oooooof I wonder what the numbers for self-described independents are? + Show Spoiler +On November 07 2024 02:44 NewSunshine wrote:Show nested quote +On November 07 2024 02:38 GreenHorizons wrote:This should end Democrats insistence on trying to appeal to Republicans rather than motivating/engaging the 10's of millions of people that mostly agree with them (at least their ostensible views) but don't typically vote for a variety of reasons. For all their appeals to Republicans, supporting a immigration crackdown, backing genocide, and palling around with Cheney on stage, they made negative progress https://twitter.com/LeftieStats/status/1854089215585239376 I think this is a too-hard-learned lesson. While I don't think there was anything wrong with building a coalition that incidentally includes prominent Republicans as a show of how repugnant the other side is, going out of your way to court a base that has been highly radicalized and insulated from reality is a fools errand... Who’s doing this strategising? I don’t understand how you can have smart, savvy political strategists poring over all the numbers going, funded to the teeth and you do this again. Something some hobbyist discussors on a StarCraft forum largely (from memory) agreed was a fucking daft strategy? Certainly GH and I I remember, I’m pretty sure quite a few more The mind fucking boggles, it really does. It was pretty damn clear from almost the off that this was going to be an election about galvanising your bases and driving out turnout. Argh WORSE! *sigh* SOOooo much worse... This is net 2020 vs 2024Independents (or something else): +8 R Conservatives: +9 R Moderates: + 11 R I can't emphasise enough how much the "we need to be more centrist" Democrats need to just be driven out of the party entirely if they can't shut the fuck up and fall in line behind the people that were shouted down by the people that backed Hillary and Biden to appeal to these mythical people that struggle choosing between Democrats and Trump. This implies there are people to the left to pick up who are willing to vote. Which might be right, but boy do they do a good job of hiding because I don't think we ever see them. How can you expect to see them when Democrats exclusively try to pull Republicans, the people who are diametrically opposed to leftists in basically all ways? If those 10s of millions of hidden American leftists existed, the 2016 and 2020 primaries would have been the time to come out. They did in 2016 and 2020 and right-wing Democrats conspired to snuff them out. A lot of the people that generally agree with Democrat's ostensible left oriented values aren't Democrats, especially those that don't typically vote. The US primary system isn't for them anyway. They were outnumbered. The effort required to participate is minimal, that's exactly how Corbyn was voted in charge of Labour. A lot of people signed up specifically to elect him, membership increased by 50% leading up to the vote. Though we're talking much smaller party membership numbers overall there. I don't think that bloc is as large as you want to believe it is, but I do think Bernie would have done better nationally. Not because of any left-right calculus, rather because he doesn't make stupid people feel stupid. They weren't/aren't outnumbered though. The bloc, whatever size, was the "lesser evil" and one Democrats should have lined up behind. Instead the leaders and most influential among them demanded everyone line up behind what would ultimately be a strategy to elect Donald Trump. Rank and file Democrats then fell in line behind them and shamed, blamed, scolded, threatened, etc anyone that didn't want to line up behind them. That sounds plausible until we recall that he ran again in 2020 against another moderate establishment Democrat and lost harder. If a couple million people that preferred Bernie over Hillary were duped by the narrative that Bernie would do worse against Trump and tactically voted for Hillary in the primary out of fear, that narrative went straight to the trash bin as soon as she lost, and there would have been no tactical calculus holding them back the next time.
Like I said, right-wing Democrats conspired to snuff them out (Remember who won Iowa?)
No, that narrative went right back to the top of their list of reasons to support Biden despite disagreeing with wide swaths of his policy prescriptions and record.
|
Northern Ireland22636 Posts
On November 07 2024 07:08 Dan HH wrote:Show nested quote +On November 07 2024 06:36 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 07 2024 06:23 Dan HH wrote:On November 07 2024 05:25 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 07 2024 05:20 Dan HH wrote:On November 07 2024 04:46 Zambrah wrote:On November 07 2024 04:28 Gorsameth wrote:On November 07 2024 04:05 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 07 2024 02:59 WombaT wrote:On November 07 2024 02:38 GreenHorizons wrote:This should end Democrats insistence on trying to appeal to Republicans rather than motivating/engaging the 10's of millions of people that mostly agree with them (at least their ostensible views) but don't typically vote for a variety of reasons. For all their appeals to Republicans, supporting a immigration crackdown, backing genocide, and palling around with Cheney on stage, they made negative progress https://twitter.com/LeftieStats/status/1854089215585239376 Oooooof I wonder what the numbers for self-described independents are? + Show Spoiler +On November 07 2024 02:44 NewSunshine wrote:Show nested quote +On November 07 2024 02:38 GreenHorizons wrote:This should end Democrats insistence on trying to appeal to Republicans rather than motivating/engaging the 10's of millions of people that mostly agree with them (at least their ostensible views) but don't typically vote for a variety of reasons. For all their appeals to Republicans, supporting a immigration crackdown, backing genocide, and palling around with Cheney on stage, they made negative progress https://twitter.com/LeftieStats/status/1854089215585239376 I think this is a too-hard-learned lesson. While I don't think there was anything wrong with building a coalition that incidentally includes prominent Republicans as a show of how repugnant the other side is, going out of your way to court a base that has been highly radicalized and insulated from reality is a fools errand... Who’s doing this strategising? I don’t understand how you can have smart, savvy political strategists poring over all the numbers going, funded to the teeth and you do this again. Something some hobbyist discussors on a StarCraft forum largely (from memory) agreed was a fucking daft strategy? Certainly GH and I I remember, I’m pretty sure quite a few more The mind fucking boggles, it really does. It was pretty damn clear from almost the off that this was going to be an election about galvanising your bases and driving out turnout. Argh WORSE! *sigh* SOOooo much worse... This is net 2020 vs 2024Independents (or something else): +8 R Conservatives: +9 R Moderates: + 11 R I can't emphasise enough how much the "we need to be more centrist" Democrats need to just be driven out of the party entirely if they can't shut the fuck up and fall in line behind the people that were shouted down by the people that backed Hillary and Biden to appeal to these mythical people that struggle choosing between Democrats and Trump. This implies there are people to the left to pick up who are willing to vote. Which might be right, but boy do they do a good job of hiding because I don't think we ever see them. How can you expect to see them when Democrats exclusively try to pull Republicans, the people who are diametrically opposed to leftists in basically all ways? If those 10s of millions of hidden American leftists existed, the 2016 and 2020 primaries would have been the time to come out. They did in 2016 and 2020 and right-wing Democrats conspired to snuff them out. A lot of the people that generally agree with Democrat's ostensible left oriented values aren't Democrats, especially those that don't typically vote. The US primary system isn't for them anyway. They were outnumbered. The effort required to participate is minimal, that's exactly how Corbyn was voted in charge of Labour. A lot of people signed up specifically to elect him, membership increased by 50% leading up to the vote. Though we're talking much smaller party membership numbers overall there. I don't think that bloc is as large as you want to believe it is, but I do think Bernie would have done better nationally. Not because of any left-right calculus, rather because he doesn't make stupid people feel stupid. They weren't/aren't outnumbered though. The bloc, whatever size, was the "lesser evil" and one Democrats should have lined up behind. Instead the leaders and most influential among them demanded everyone line up behind what would ultimately be a strategy to elect Donald Trump. Rank and file Democrats then fell in line behind them and shamed, blamed, scolded, threatened, etc anyone that didn't want to line up behind them. That sounds plausible until we recall that he ran again in 2020 against another moderate establishment Democrat and lost harder. If a couple million people that preferred Bernie over Hillary were duped by the narrative that Bernie would do worse against Trump and tactically voted for Hillary in the primary out of fear, that narrative went straight to the trash bin as soon as she lost, and there would have been no tactical calculus holding them back the next time.
It’s very difficult to quantify, I’d argue almost impossible. I think authoritative claims are ridiculous to make in this domain, and assessing their subsequent potential impact also.
I think it’s plausible that you had a ton of really enthused, in many cases new potential voters, folks putting a lot of themselves and their energy into Bernie’s first run, ending up disenchanted and saying fuck it and disengaging.
It’s also plausible that folks went back to the centre for reasons of pragmatism after being burned for their idealism last time.
Ultimately I think it’s asking the wrong questions.
Based on US sensibilities, hey I’d love it but I don’t think someone like Sanders can carry a general.
It’s less Clinton versus Sanders and more, if Clinton wins the primary, how does she keep the Sanders crowd on board.
The Democrats have to do this if their political opposition covers everything from respectable, principled centrists thru to cunts talking about Jewish space lazers, but somehow kinda all pull in the same direction.
If you can’t bring the left wing of the country along, you will lose that numbers game
|
On November 07 2024 04:55 GreenHorizons wrote:
Yeah, I'm working a line to Norway to live in Drone's closet but also I'm still kind of idealistic enough to want to fight the good fight rather than flee and hope to save myself (most likely only temporarily anyway).
Pretty sure Zam and others (like myself years ago lol) are right that global war is the way we're getting past this global fascist uprising and the factions aren't going to divide nicely along national lines.
living and working in more than 1 country is a good life time strat. NAFTA makes it possible to live any where in NA where you have a job. its even better to know multiple languages. guys like David Kim and Dan Stemkoski are doing it right.
my family moved around a lot.
From 1 great grandparent branch they went Egypt/Germany/France/French Canada/ English Canada/Florida.
From another it was Russia/Germany/ France / French Canada / English Canada / New York
People who try to live in only one country are leaving themselves wide open to getting fucked over.
I am optimistic for the future of the USA. Things are pretty good right now and I think they will get better. However, if things go bad I am leaving.
|
Northern Ireland22636 Posts
On November 07 2024 07:44 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Show nested quote +On November 07 2024 04:55 GreenHorizons wrote:
Yeah, I'm working a line to Norway to live in Drone's closet but also I'm still kind of idealistic enough to want to fight the good fight rather than flee and hope to save myself (most likely only temporarily anyway).
Pretty sure Zam and others (like myself years ago lol) are right that global war is the way we're getting past this global fascist uprising and the factions aren't going to divide nicely along national lines.
living and working in more than 1 country is a good life time strat. NAFTA makes it possible to live any where in NA where you have a job. its even better to know multiple languages. guys like David Kim and Dan Stemkoski are doing it right. my family moved around a lot. From 1 great grandparent branch they went Egypt/Germany/France/French Canada/ English Canada/Florida. From another it was Russia/Germany/ France / French Canada / English Canada / New York People who try to live in only one country are leaving themselves wide open to getting fucked over. I am optimistic for the future of the USA. Things are pretty good right now and I think they will get better. However, if things go bad I am leaving.
What are you optimistic about? Specifically
I’m not saying you’re necessarily wrong to be optimistic, but what is it about the current state of affairs that you’re optimistic about?
As someone who was making plans to emigrate for a change of scene, learn another language, live in another culture, it’s an appealing option until it isn’t viable.
As a separated parent with very cordial relations with my ex and Minibat I can fuck off to wherever for whatever my reasons are, but I can’t bring my kid along
It’s not a sacrifice I’m willing to make, it’s not a sacrifice folks with say a sick parent with caring needs are willing to make
‘Just move’ isn’t really a viable option for rather a lot of people
|
On November 07 2024 07:18 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On November 07 2024 07:08 Dan HH wrote:On November 07 2024 06:36 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 07 2024 06:23 Dan HH wrote:On November 07 2024 05:25 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 07 2024 05:20 Dan HH wrote:On November 07 2024 04:46 Zambrah wrote:On November 07 2024 04:28 Gorsameth wrote:On November 07 2024 04:05 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 07 2024 02:59 WombaT wrote:[quote] Oooooof I wonder what the numbers for self-described independents are? + Show Spoiler +On November 07 2024 02:44 NewSunshine wrote:Show nested quote +On November 07 2024 02:38 GreenHorizons wrote:This should end Democrats insistence on trying to appeal to Republicans rather than motivating/engaging the 10's of millions of people that mostly agree with them (at least their ostensible views) but don't typically vote for a variety of reasons. For all their appeals to Republicans, supporting a immigration crackdown, backing genocide, and palling around with Cheney on stage, they made negative progress https://twitter.com/LeftieStats/status/1854089215585239376 I think this is a too-hard-learned lesson. While I don't think there was anything wrong with building a coalition that incidentally includes prominent Republicans as a show of how repugnant the other side is, going out of your way to court a base that has been highly radicalized and insulated from reality is a fools errand... Who’s doing this strategising? I don’t understand how you can have smart, savvy political strategists poring over all the numbers going, funded to the teeth and you do this again. Something some hobbyist discussors on a StarCraft forum largely (from memory) agreed was a fucking daft strategy? Certainly GH and I I remember, I’m pretty sure quite a few more The mind fucking boggles, it really does. It was pretty damn clear from almost the off that this was going to be an election about galvanising your bases and driving out turnout. Argh WORSE! *sigh* SOOooo much worse... This is net 2020 vs 2024Independents (or something else): +8 R Conservatives: +9 R Moderates: + 11 R I can't emphasise enough how much the "we need to be more centrist" Democrats need to just be driven out of the party entirely if they can't shut the fuck up and fall in line behind the people that were shouted down by the people that backed Hillary and Biden to appeal to these mythical people that struggle choosing between Democrats and Trump. This implies there are people to the left to pick up who are willing to vote. Which might be right, but boy do they do a good job of hiding because I don't think we ever see them. How can you expect to see them when Democrats exclusively try to pull Republicans, the people who are diametrically opposed to leftists in basically all ways? If those 10s of millions of hidden American leftists existed, the 2016 and 2020 primaries would have been the time to come out. They did in 2016 and 2020 and right-wing Democrats conspired to snuff them out. A lot of the people that generally agree with Democrat's ostensible left oriented values aren't Democrats, especially those that don't typically vote. The US primary system isn't for them anyway. They were outnumbered. The effort required to participate is minimal, that's exactly how Corbyn was voted in charge of Labour. A lot of people signed up specifically to elect him, membership increased by 50% leading up to the vote. Though we're talking much smaller party membership numbers overall there. I don't think that bloc is as large as you want to believe it is, but I do think Bernie would have done better nationally. Not because of any left-right calculus, rather because he doesn't make stupid people feel stupid. They weren't/aren't outnumbered though. The bloc, whatever size, was the "lesser evil" and one Democrats should have lined up behind. Instead the leaders and most influential among them demanded everyone line up behind what would ultimately be a strategy to elect Donald Trump. Rank and file Democrats then fell in line behind them and shamed, blamed, scolded, threatened, etc anyone that didn't want to line up behind them. That sounds plausible until we recall that he ran again in 2020 against another moderate establishment Democrat and lost harder. If a couple million people that preferred Bernie over Hillary were duped by the narrative that Bernie would do worse against Trump and tactically voted for Hillary in the primary out of fear, that narrative went straight to the trash bin as soon as she lost, and there would have been no tactical calculus holding them back the next time. Like I said, right-wing Democrats conspired to snuff them out (Remember who won Iowa?) No, that narrative went right back to the top of their list of reasons to support Biden despite disagreeing with wide swaths of his policy prescriptions and record.
To quote Bush: "Fool me once, shame on.. shame on you. Fool me- you can't get fooled again".
2016 turned that argument from a difficult to predict hypothetical that I can understand being persuasive to some, to demonstrably wrong. I know it's not difficult to find excuses, but if the supposedly gargantuan American left wing crumbles to the lightest touch and weakest of arguments that would be on them. I think the simpler explanation is that they're fewer than we'd like.
On November 07 2024 07:30 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On November 07 2024 07:08 Dan HH wrote:On November 07 2024 06:36 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 07 2024 06:23 Dan HH wrote:On November 07 2024 05:25 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 07 2024 05:20 Dan HH wrote:On November 07 2024 04:46 Zambrah wrote:On November 07 2024 04:28 Gorsameth wrote:On November 07 2024 04:05 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 07 2024 02:59 WombaT wrote:[quote] Oooooof I wonder what the numbers for self-described independents are? + Show Spoiler +On November 07 2024 02:44 NewSunshine wrote:Show nested quote +On November 07 2024 02:38 GreenHorizons wrote:This should end Democrats insistence on trying to appeal to Republicans rather than motivating/engaging the 10's of millions of people that mostly agree with them (at least their ostensible views) but don't typically vote for a variety of reasons. For all their appeals to Republicans, supporting a immigration crackdown, backing genocide, and palling around with Cheney on stage, they made negative progress https://twitter.com/LeftieStats/status/1854089215585239376 I think this is a too-hard-learned lesson. While I don't think there was anything wrong with building a coalition that incidentally includes prominent Republicans as a show of how repugnant the other side is, going out of your way to court a base that has been highly radicalized and insulated from reality is a fools errand... Who’s doing this strategising? I don’t understand how you can have smart, savvy political strategists poring over all the numbers going, funded to the teeth and you do this again. Something some hobbyist discussors on a StarCraft forum largely (from memory) agreed was a fucking daft strategy? Certainly GH and I I remember, I’m pretty sure quite a few more The mind fucking boggles, it really does. It was pretty damn clear from almost the off that this was going to be an election about galvanising your bases and driving out turnout. Argh WORSE! *sigh* SOOooo much worse... This is net 2020 vs 2024Independents (or something else): +8 R Conservatives: +9 R Moderates: + 11 R I can't emphasise enough how much the "we need to be more centrist" Democrats need to just be driven out of the party entirely if they can't shut the fuck up and fall in line behind the people that were shouted down by the people that backed Hillary and Biden to appeal to these mythical people that struggle choosing between Democrats and Trump. This implies there are people to the left to pick up who are willing to vote. Which might be right, but boy do they do a good job of hiding because I don't think we ever see them. How can you expect to see them when Democrats exclusively try to pull Republicans, the people who are diametrically opposed to leftists in basically all ways? If those 10s of millions of hidden American leftists existed, the 2016 and 2020 primaries would have been the time to come out. They did in 2016 and 2020 and right-wing Democrats conspired to snuff them out. A lot of the people that generally agree with Democrat's ostensible left oriented values aren't Democrats, especially those that don't typically vote. The US primary system isn't for them anyway. They were outnumbered. The effort required to participate is minimal, that's exactly how Corbyn was voted in charge of Labour. A lot of people signed up specifically to elect him, membership increased by 50% leading up to the vote. Though we're talking much smaller party membership numbers overall there. I don't think that bloc is as large as you want to believe it is, but I do think Bernie would have done better nationally. Not because of any left-right calculus, rather because he doesn't make stupid people feel stupid. They weren't/aren't outnumbered though. The bloc, whatever size, was the "lesser evil" and one Democrats should have lined up behind. Instead the leaders and most influential among them demanded everyone line up behind what would ultimately be a strategy to elect Donald Trump. Rank and file Democrats then fell in line behind them and shamed, blamed, scolded, threatened, etc anyone that didn't want to line up behind them. That sounds plausible until we recall that he ran again in 2020 against another moderate establishment Democrat and lost harder. If a couple million people that preferred Bernie over Hillary were duped by the narrative that Bernie would do worse against Trump and tactically voted for Hillary in the primary out of fear, that narrative went straight to the trash bin as soon as she lost, and there would have been no tactical calculus holding them back the next time. It’s very difficult to quantify, I’d argue almost impossible. I think authoritative claims are ridiculous to make in this domain, and assessing their subsequent potential impact also. I think it’s plausible that you had a ton of really enthused, in many cases new potential voters, folks putting a lot of themselves and their energy into Bernie’s first run, ending up disenchanted and saying fuck it and disengaging. It’s also plausible that folks went back to the centre for reasons of pragmatism after being burned for their idealism last time. Ultimately I think it’s asking the wrong questions. Based on US sensibilities, hey I’d love it but I don’t think someone like Sanders can carry a general. It’s less Clinton versus Sanders and more, if Clinton wins the primary, how does she keep the Sanders crowd on board. The Democrats have to do this if their political opposition covers everything from respectable, principled centrists thru to cunts talking about Jewish space lazers, but somehow kinda all pull in the same direction. If you can’t bring the left wing of the country along, you will lose that numbers game
In regards to someone like Bernie being able to pull of a general there's an interesting parallel here:
Turning Trump's racism/sexism against him was innefective largely because it was used so heavily against someone much more mild-mannered like Romney beforehand.
Similarly, Trump leaned heavily on radical left lunatics/communists against Kamala and Biden with AI pictures of her as Stalin and whatnot so if they exhaust all the anti-commie rhetoric on moderates they've got nothing extra in the tank against actual socialists.
|
On November 07 2024 02:59 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On November 07 2024 01:39 Razyda wrote:On November 07 2024 00:01 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 06 2024 23:59 Salazarz wrote:On November 06 2024 23:39 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 06 2024 23:38 oBlade wrote:
They didn't vote against their interests. You don't know what their interests are. There is not an objective "interest." They voted for their interests because voting is fundamentally not a masochistic act. The number one issue for Republicans was the economy. Trump is objectively worse for the economy than Biden/Harris. Therefore, yes, a large number of Trump voters voted against their primary interest. For most people, when they talk about 'economy' they don't care about GDP, CPI, or inflation numbers that government presents to them. What they care about is whether their expenses go up or down in relation to their earnings; so when Democrats talk about how Biden totally navigated the inflation so well and how GDP is growing and economy is doing oh so well, I'd imagine that feels like a huge spit in the face to all the people who are, simply put, worse off than they were a year or two ago -- of which there are very, very many. And for that reason, Democrats need to be able to better communicate the context and voters need to be willing to listen and/or learn. Democrats failed at communication, and voters failed at understanding how this works. As was cited before, all of the ideal policies in the world unfortunately don't matter if the optics are inferior. (Also, Harris didn't run on GDP growth; she ran on reducing the costs of groceries and medicine and childcare and housing, etc. oBlade brought up GDP growth.) bolded - This is partially right, I think they failed at more things Italic - this perspective always amuses me, it is pure superiority complex. (unless you mean Kamala voters because objectively they are the ones that failed, as Kamala lost) That topic is the economy. If people voted for Trump because they thought Trump was better for the economy, then (besides a communication failure from Harris/Democrats), the Trump voters were the ones who were mistaken (because they're wrong about Trump being better for the economy). Harris losing does not mean that Trump voters were correct (if they thought that Trump was better for the economy). Here's an easier scenario: Suppose someone voted for Harris because they thought she was older than Trump. That voter would be mistaken, because she's not older than Trump (and this is independent of whether or not Harris wins or loses). Show nested quote +On November 07 2024 00:33 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 07 2024 00:29 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On November 07 2024 00:06 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 07 2024 00:02 Uldridge wrote:
It's bad if he votes in spite of you, yeah. Look at where it's getting you.
Build bridges. Try to understand them. I think that's important. Democrats should start surveying people as early as today to find out what the biggest reasons were for Harris's loss. And keep doing it for four years, so that they have some robust information on how best to appeal to voters and effectively communicate that appeal. This is not right. The dems literally did this already. Harris and Walz talked about ways to fix the grievances these people supposedly had. Still got washed. So trying to understand them doesn't make any fucking difference. Harris and Walz lost because this country is fucking stupid. Yes, a lot of voters are fucking stupid. But they still vote. And they'll vote next time, and the time after that. I don't want Republicans to win forever, so I think it's important for Democrats to figure out what the best strategies are for 2028. Again superiority complex, if you "don't want Republicans to win forever" (for what is worth I think next election goes to Democrats by default almost) then maybe dont refer to voters as stupid? Crazy idea, but maybe treat them (or at least pretend to) as your equals (you know all that DEI stuff)? In general for "I think x is better for me": argument "no you are wrong here is why..." is less effective than " but dont you think that x may result in y which will affect you negatively?" Socratic questioning can indeed be effective. Recognizing that someone isn't educated on a topic doesn't mean you need to call them stupid to their face and then assume that they'll be persuaded by you lol.
Bolded -thats not what I implied. First example in my post is less effective because it is speaking from position of authority (as in it will work if person you speaking with accepts your authority) and is more of a lecture than discussion. Second implies equal status of both and is a discussion. It is also more likely to create friendly atmosphere. Thats why second is more effective.
On November 07 2024 04:05 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On November 07 2024 02:59 WombaT wrote:On November 07 2024 02:38 GreenHorizons wrote:This should end Democrats insistence on trying to appeal to Republicans rather than motivating/engaging the 10's of millions of people that mostly agree with them (at least their ostensible views) but don't typically vote for a variety of reasons. For all their appeals to Republicans, supporting a immigration crackdown, backing genocide, and palling around with Cheney on stage, they made negative progress https://twitter.com/LeftieStats/status/1854089215585239376 Oooooof I wonder what the numbers for self-described independents are? + Show Spoiler +On November 07 2024 02:44 NewSunshine wrote:Show nested quote +On November 07 2024 02:38 GreenHorizons wrote:This should end Democrats insistence on trying to appeal to Republicans rather than motivating/engaging the 10's of millions of people that mostly agree with them (at least their ostensible views) but don't typically vote for a variety of reasons. For all their appeals to Republicans, supporting a immigration crackdown, backing genocide, and palling around with Cheney on stage, they made negative progress https://twitter.com/LeftieStats/status/1854089215585239376 I think this is a too-hard-learned lesson. While I don't think there was anything wrong with building a coalition that incidentally includes prominent Republicans as a show of how repugnant the other side is, going out of your way to court a base that has been highly radicalized and insulated from reality is a fools errand... Who’s doing this strategising? I don’t understand how you can have smart, savvy political strategists poring over all the numbers going, funded to the teeth and you do this again. Something some hobbyist discussors on a StarCraft forum largely (from memory) agreed was a fucking daft strategy? Certainly GH and I I remember, I’m pretty sure quite a few more The mind fucking boggles, it really does. It was pretty damn clear from almost the off that this was going to be an election about galvanising your bases and driving out turnout. Argh WORSE! *sigh* SOOooo much worse... This is net 2020 vs 2024Independents (or something else): +8 R Conservatives: +9 R Moderates: + 11 R I can't emphasise enough how much the "we need to be more centrist" Democrats need to just be driven out of the party entirely if they can't shut the fuck up and fall in line behind the people that were shouted down by the people that backed Hillary and Biden to appeal to these mythical people that struggle choosing between Democrats and Trump.
Bolded - Democrats going more to the left instead of centre is about the only way (maybe not only, but for sure the most guaranteed) they can loose next election. I am as confident in that, as I was in Trump victory (and I stated it few times on this forum), the moment Kamala took over from Bidden.
On November 07 2024 05:35 GreenHorizons wrote:
We'll never know exactly what caused Harris to lose (or at least how to distribute credit among various items on the long list of obvious reasons) but there are certainly indications that Democrat's support for Israel's genocidal campaign was NOT for the votes. Here we see several times more people would have been more likely to vote Democrat had they to vowed to cut off weapons to Israel than less.
Italic - agree, I kinda found it baffling. Whenever you watched some debate of conservatives with liberals, the moment J6 was mentioned liberals lost any calm and debate was going into shouting match till the topic changed and you could literally see conservatives smirking. However once Israel was mentioned tables turned. I think Democrats could have made some gains on this, not the least because it was pissing of Republicans and pissed off people are prone to mistakes.
Edit:
On November 07 2024 07:08 Dan HH wrote:Show nested quote +On November 07 2024 06:36 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 07 2024 06:23 Dan HH wrote:On November 07 2024 05:25 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 07 2024 05:20 Dan HH wrote:On November 07 2024 04:46 Zambrah wrote:On November 07 2024 04:28 Gorsameth wrote:On November 07 2024 04:05 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 07 2024 02:59 WombaT wrote:On November 07 2024 02:38 GreenHorizons wrote:This should end Democrats insistence on trying to appeal to Republicans rather than motivating/engaging the 10's of millions of people that mostly agree with them (at least their ostensible views) but don't typically vote for a variety of reasons. For all their appeals to Republicans, supporting a immigration crackdown, backing genocide, and palling around with Cheney on stage, they made negative progress https://twitter.com/LeftieStats/status/1854089215585239376 Oooooof I wonder what the numbers for self-described independents are? + Show Spoiler +On November 07 2024 02:44 NewSunshine wrote:Show nested quote +On November 07 2024 02:38 GreenHorizons wrote:This should end Democrats insistence on trying to appeal to Republicans rather than motivating/engaging the 10's of millions of people that mostly agree with them (at least their ostensible views) but don't typically vote for a variety of reasons. For all their appeals to Republicans, supporting a immigration crackdown, backing genocide, and palling around with Cheney on stage, they made negative progress https://twitter.com/LeftieStats/status/1854089215585239376 I think this is a too-hard-learned lesson. While I don't think there was anything wrong with building a coalition that incidentally includes prominent Republicans as a show of how repugnant the other side is, going out of your way to court a base that has been highly radicalized and insulated from reality is a fools errand... Who’s doing this strategising? I don’t understand how you can have smart, savvy political strategists poring over all the numbers going, funded to the teeth and you do this again. Something some hobbyist discussors on a StarCraft forum largely (from memory) agreed was a fucking daft strategy? Certainly GH and I I remember, I’m pretty sure quite a few more The mind fucking boggles, it really does. It was pretty damn clear from almost the off that this was going to be an election about galvanising your bases and driving out turnout. Argh WORSE! *sigh* SOOooo much worse... This is net 2020 vs 2024Independents (or something else): +8 R Conservatives: +9 R Moderates: + 11 R I can't emphasise enough how much the "we need to be more centrist" Democrats need to just be driven out of the party entirely if they can't shut the fuck up and fall in line behind the people that were shouted down by the people that backed Hillary and Biden to appeal to these mythical people that struggle choosing between Democrats and Trump. This implies there are people to the left to pick up who are willing to vote. Which might be right, but boy do they do a good job of hiding because I don't think we ever see them. How can you expect to see them when Democrats exclusively try to pull Republicans, the people who are diametrically opposed to leftists in basically all ways? If those 10s of millions of hidden American leftists existed, the 2016 and 2020 primaries would have been the time to come out. They did in 2016 and 2020 and right-wing Democrats conspired to snuff them out. A lot of the people that generally agree with Democrat's ostensible left oriented values aren't Democrats, especially those that don't typically vote. The US primary system isn't for them anyway. They were outnumbered. The effort required to participate is minimal, that's exactly how Corbyn was voted in charge of Labour. A lot of people signed up specifically to elect him, membership increased by 50% leading up to the vote. Though we're talking much smaller party membership numbers overall there. I don't think that bloc is as large as you want to believe it is, but I do think Bernie would have done better nationally. Not because of any left-right calculus, rather because he doesn't make stupid people feel stupid. They weren't/aren't outnumbered though. The bloc, whatever size, was the "lesser evil" and one Democrats should have lined up behind. Instead the leaders and most influential among them demanded everyone line up behind what would ultimately be a strategy to elect Donald Trump. Rank and file Democrats then fell in line behind them and shamed, blamed, scolded, threatened, etc anyone that didn't want to line up behind them. That sounds plausible until we recall that he ran again in 2020 against another moderate establishment Democrat and lost harder.If a couple million people that preferred Bernie over Hillary were duped by the narrative that Bernie would do worse against Trump and tactically voted for Hillary in the primary out of fear, that narrative went straight to the trash bin as soon as she lost, and there would have been no tactical calculus holding them back the next time.
Bolded - I think the reason for that is that his base and Trump was pretty much the same people. Once they got shafted in primaries they went to Trump. Came 2020 they couldn't care less about Democrats
|
On November 07 2024 07:44 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Show nested quote +On November 07 2024 04:55 GreenHorizons wrote:
Yeah, I'm working a line to Norway to live in Drone's closet but also I'm still kind of idealistic enough to want to fight the good fight rather than flee and hope to save myself (most likely only temporarily anyway).
Pretty sure Zam and others (like myself years ago lol) are right that global war is the way we're getting past this global fascist uprising and the factions aren't going to divide nicely along national lines.
living and working in more than 1 country is a good life time strat. NAFTA makes it possible to live any where in NA where you have a job. its even better to know multiple languages. guys like David Kim and Dan Stemkoski are doing it right. my family moved around a lot. From 1 great grandparent branch they went Egypt/Germany/France/French Canada/ English Canada/Florida. From another it was Russia/Germany/ France / French Canada / English Canada / New York People who try to live in only one country are leaving themselves wide open to getting fucked over. I am optimistic for the future of the USA. Things are pretty good right now and I think they will get better. However, if things go bad I am leaving.
"People who don't have the most privileged lives in the world sure are leaving themselves wide open to getting fucked over."
Thank you, I'm so glad someone finally mentioned this fact. And in the same post as Manchild Stemkoski, no less?! What a hero in these unwashed forums!
I'm optimistic that people who seriously think like this will go extinct or lose the rest of their ability to think logically in the next couple generations.
|
On November 07 2024 08:00 Dan HH wrote:Show nested quote +On November 07 2024 07:18 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 07 2024 07:08 Dan HH wrote:On November 07 2024 06:36 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 07 2024 06:23 Dan HH wrote:On November 07 2024 05:25 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 07 2024 05:20 Dan HH wrote:On November 07 2024 04:46 Zambrah wrote:On November 07 2024 04:28 Gorsameth wrote:On November 07 2024 04:05 GreenHorizons wrote:[quote] WORSE! *sigh* SOOooo much worse... This is net 2020 vs 2024Independents (or something else): +8 R Conservatives: +9 R Moderates: + 11 R I can't emphasise enough how much the "we need to be more centrist" Democrats need to just be driven out of the party entirely if they can't shut the fuck up and fall in line behind the people that were shouted down by the people that backed Hillary and Biden to appeal to these mythical people that struggle choosing between Democrats and Trump. This implies there are people to the left to pick up who are willing to vote. Which might be right, but boy do they do a good job of hiding because I don't think we ever see them. How can you expect to see them when Democrats exclusively try to pull Republicans, the people who are diametrically opposed to leftists in basically all ways? If those 10s of millions of hidden American leftists existed, the 2016 and 2020 primaries would have been the time to come out. They did in 2016 and 2020 and right-wing Democrats conspired to snuff them out. A lot of the people that generally agree with Democrat's ostensible left oriented values aren't Democrats, especially those that don't typically vote. The US primary system isn't for them anyway. They were outnumbered. The effort required to participate is minimal, that's exactly how Corbyn was voted in charge of Labour. A lot of people signed up specifically to elect him, membership increased by 50% leading up to the vote. Though we're talking much smaller party membership numbers overall there. I don't think that bloc is as large as you want to believe it is, but I do think Bernie would have done better nationally. Not because of any left-right calculus, rather because he doesn't make stupid people feel stupid. They weren't/aren't outnumbered though. The bloc, whatever size, was the "lesser evil" and one Democrats should have lined up behind. Instead the leaders and most influential among them demanded everyone line up behind what would ultimately be a strategy to elect Donald Trump. Rank and file Democrats then fell in line behind them and shamed, blamed, scolded, threatened, etc anyone that didn't want to line up behind them. That sounds plausible until we recall that he ran again in 2020 against another moderate establishment Democrat and lost harder. If a couple million people that preferred Bernie over Hillary were duped by the narrative that Bernie would do worse against Trump and tactically voted for Hillary in the primary out of fear, that narrative went straight to the trash bin as soon as she lost, and there would have been no tactical calculus holding them back the next time. Like I said, right-wing Democrats conspired to snuff them out (Remember who won Iowa?) No, that narrative went right back to the top of their list of reasons to support Biden despite disagreeing with wide swaths of his policy prescriptions and record. To quote Bush: "Fool me once, shame on.. shame on you. Fool me- you can't get fooled again". 2016 turned that argument from a difficult to predict hypothetical that I can understand being persuasive to some, to demonstrably wrong. I know it's not difficult to find excuses, but if the supposedly gargantuan American left wing crumbles to the lightest touch and weakest of arguments that would be on them. I think the simpler explanation is that they're fewer than we'd like.
There's a few things at play here causing some misunderstanding. "The left" and "people that generally agree with Democrats ostensibly progressive values, particularly as articulated by Bernie" outnumber the people that even participate in Democrat primaries. Because they aren't meant for them, and if they participated, Democrats were under no legal obligation to honor their votes anyway because they aren't real elections.
The larger point was that Bernie appealed outside of the party like Democrats desperately wanted to with Hillary, Biden, and Harris. His problem was the people inside the party preferred to lose to Trump over Bernie and were willing to do whatever it took to make sure that happened.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
