Isn't there enough MAGA types to start a new party instead of going back to Republicans former one of thinking, Tea Party doesn't exactly do that well but MAGA is more a established brand, could America even have a 3 party system?
2024 U.S. Elections | Trump v Harris
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
How big is the MAGA base in reality?
A return to 'centrist' conservatism would be appealing to a lot independents that don't or, won't vote for Trump, add the never Trumpers, would that be close to the number of hard line MAGA's?
The base didn’t impose Maga on Trump. Rather he imposed it on them, and they took the bait thinking he was their ticket back into power. Therefore when he goes away, a large part of Maga sentiment goes with him leaving Republicans with little recourse than to vote for whichever conservative picks up the pieces in Trump’s absence. That could be anyone from DeSantis to Haley to Rubio to Youngkin.
The US seems particularly unsuited to it happening, both as a voting system and a governing system.
I don't know but it strikes me as rather funny that the Trump-years get forgotten and that MAGA base just casually goes back to the Romney's. After all the rhetoric about "election integrity", "drain the swamp", "deepstate" and all the conspiracy theories around.
Then again, Rush Limbaugh and conservative talk radio with similar rhetoric was around decades ago so I guess the Trunp vibe isn't really new in that regard.
Yo.
MAGA in a lot of ways is a more exterme version of the Tea Party, trends shift over time, deep red southern states used to be blue not that long ago, California was once a red state as hard as that might be to imagine today!
MAGA mostly consist of people who have been failed by post-80s automation and is continuing to be failed by a system that doesn't care about them. They are angry working class people.
Historically, working class people tend to end up on the left side of politics when the left actually cares about them. The dems have changed substantially and are far more concerned with worker rights, descentralisation and domestic production than before, so it isn't impossible that MAGA, or probably more likely their children, end up voting blue.
If Republicans move centrally, drop all their far right nonsense, and have a more moderate fiscal policy, there could be a decent chunk of democrat moderates who would find that more appealing than many of the progressive ideas pushed by Democrats.
In short, a much needed rebalancing into a new definition of progressive, moderate and conservative.
Centrism is such a meaningless term when the Democratic Party of 2024 is funding a genocide and is just as right wing as the 2016 Trump campaign on issues like immigration.
Woah, woah, woah, what's with the friendly fire?
Anyway, I'll have you know I don't need to piss in the beer, I just buy it in as I sell Fosters in one and Carling in the other. Outside of Madri (Which is just stronger Carling with a posh Spanish sounding name) they are the two best sellers.
How many times did he mention Biden or Harris in the call? What about Trump Tower Gaza?
Or did they both just have a good laugh at how they have both avoided jail time and compare corruption anecdotes?
“Debbie Mucarsel-Powell says she's challenging Republican Sen. Rick Scott because Florida has become unaffordable”
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna160010
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna160010
Why are they wasting money in Ohio when Brown is running away from them?
Odds he told him to keep it going til post election day?
Trump could learn a lot from Netanyahu, the guy is a skilled, if evil, politician.
Scary to think there's a trick or two Yahu could learn from Trump.
There are many parties in the US, but the winner takes all system of voting makes it almost impossible for a third party to get a significant amount of power. At best, a strong third party can get a few representatives in the house.
A part of me thinks that had Kamala, or anyone else for that matter, been the candidate from the get go, things would not be looking this good for Democrats three months before elections. The momentum shift caused by Biden dropping off is unprecedented and has backed Trump into the corner, all his moves so far (including Musk interview) have failed spectacularly and have only pushed him further behind. And it took almost no action at all from Kamala to cause this, she started off being largely deemed an underwhelming candidate, did virtually nothing and is now being looked at in a much more positive way simply because she hasn't been able to feck things up.
Far from over but things definitely looking good. Realistically even if Kamala wins now, the nutjob will be back in 4 years trying to claim the 'stolen' elections back again.
Far from over but things definitely looking good. Realistically even if Kamala wins now, the nutjob will be back in 4 years trying to claim the 'stolen' elections back again.
@Suedesi has been quiet recently?
It's a shame you haven't
Langster on the sauce at midday again, typical landlord
This should have broad appeal to most Americans seeing the direct impact of these practices in their weekly budgets. And now that we are starting to see her independent, as opposed to Biden's, policies and proposals this is where an interview format to further explain would start being helpful after more of these policies have had time to be formulated.
Part of me says the same thing.
American elections are generally exhausting, not only for those who run for office, but also for the public. A year of primary elections, states voting in February and other in late Spring or even the summer… people lose interest at some point.
What happened here is that the interest happened deep into the summer. The wave is here and she can ride it until the election.
The GOP got nothing from Vance or their convention (which was WAY too early in my view). We have a convention much close to D-Day and we can use it to generate even more energy and excitement. I can feel that myself, particularly since picking Walz.
It's pretty impractical, trying to define what constitutes excessive prices across thousands of product categories, each with their own cost and competitive dynamics.
Agreed, I mean I don't expect that she proposes a can of Pringles need to stay whatever a reasonable price is. But when butter, milk other dairy, diapers or whatever goes up astronomically but the companies are posting record profits that is where I am thinking the "regulations" or acts like this are needed. Sure make profits but not to the point of severe corporate greed.
Its up to her and the administration etc to prove that is occurring and not just a natural price increase on inflation and cost of getting the product to market though. But it is something that everyday Americans who want something to be done with grocery prices will resonate with. She has to sell that idea though, thus why I was saying its perfect for an interview type question where you can go into detail or a back and forth maybe to flesh it out or point out the difficulties in implementation.
That's quite 2021/2022, though. Companies in the consumer staples sector mostly don't have record profit margins (=/= profit $, which can increase on sales increases) anymore in 2024.
This is one of those things that people will have to just get used to over time. The stimulus of 2020/2021 caused more inflation than the US (and the world) had experienced in a long time, and even though the federal govt has limited tools to counteract that (Federal Reserve has more), what tools they did have they didn't use because they couldn't bring themselves to admit that inflation was an issue in 21-23 ("it's transitory").
Deflation only really happens in recessions, and I don't think people actually want that. So prices are what they are, and inflation is coming down slowly (2.9% annual rate last month still isn't ideal). People will just eventually get used to these price levels. If we see lower prices across the board, it will have come along with a serving of unemployment.
The Consumer Price Index here uses a set of good and services that people typically use. They come from something called the Household Budget Survey which is conducted every 5 years.
Does the US have anything like this? You could start with controlling the prices of the most useful/common items on a list like that.
No, don't. If there's any shock to any part of the supply chain and the controlled prices don't adjust quickly enough, now producers have to sell at a loss and they might opt not to. At which point there is a shortage in the most useful/common items that people use!
Two weeks after me you old bastard. Happy birthday.
She's talking about things like the proposed takeover of Albertsons by Kroger. There's a lot of opposition to it from various quarters.
There are already other fringe parties in existence who participate in the elections, but are so small that they never get mentioned or win anything. The difference with the MAGA movement is they had the support of a popular demagogue, where each of the two sides used the other to propel one another into power by using the Republican party as their vehicle. That obviously doesn't exist with the other fringe parties, and won't with the Republicans either once Trump is gone.
Although most don't care about this sort of thing, it only adds to the media narrative of Walz exaggerating or omitting things from his past, which will be a needless annoyance to the Harris campaign.
I'm not condoning DUI, but does the Trump campaign really wanna bring up criminal records?