Guy Incognito
Full Member
Wonderful post.Are we judging Trump by different metrics to everyone else, because whilst you level those accusations at Harris, the same can be said ten fold about Trump. Even worse, there are serious questions about whether Trump has been compromised by Putin and the Russian Intelligence services. In fact, we can almost say that’s a given at this point. So we’ve got all this vitriol aimed at an “unpresidential” candidate in Harris, but if she’s unpresidential, then what does that make Trump? The Dems are constantly held to a much higher standard than the Reps, and it’s not a standard that even helps them. People clearly don’t care if a President is “unpresidential”, that word has no meaning anymore. They’ve just elected a serial sex offender to the highest office. A guy that can barely string a coherent sentence together.
The biggest movement the Dems got in the polls was after the first appearances of Harris and specifically Walz. When he made those quips about Vance not getting off his couch etc., brief 30 second viral sound bites that had no political meaning whatsoever, but resonated in the theatre of a flame war….Harris surged in the polls. Then the political machine kicked in and the Harris campaign started talking about policies, abortion rights, geopolitics….you know, actual important issues….and people switched off. Meanwhile Donald did the usual….”China, China, Me, Me, election fraud, smartest guy ever, electric boat or a shark, immigrants are bad, China….you like my hat?”, and people voted for him in droves. He never said a single thing of any political, real world significance. Never presented anything resembling a plan. Insulted nearly everyone. He was chaos personified. And in people’s mind that’s what he came to encapsulate. A departure from politics as usual, chaos, and entertainment. No one elected the guy because they thought he was presidential or displayed good judgement.
Realistically, how does an intelligent, capable person compete in that arena? Presidents are no longer elected (and I’m not sure how much they ever were) on the basis of their policies or messaging, they are elected on the basis of personality. It’s the ultimate reality show, the business of entertainment. I bet half the people who voted for him, don’t even like him. But Kamala was a suit. Even worse, she was a woman in a suit. Scratch that, she was a woman of colour in a suit. But Trump, he was the Donald. A force of nature. Whether for good or bad. He was entertainment, he was simple, he was a person, not a political figure.
If the Dems learn anything from this, it’s that good policies don’t make good politics. Dignity and qualifications don’t make a good candidate. Men don’t want a woman telling them what to do. And the only basis on which to compete, is on personality. People don’t like Trump, but they think they understand him, and that he understands them. They see him flawed, fallible, and often incompetent, and in that they see themselves.
I’m never going to attack Harris for being an intelligent, highly capable woman, or say she was a terrible candidate, when in reality - viewed through the lens of logic and intelligence - she was ten times the candidate Trump ever was. I think the outpouring of vitriol towards her is appalling. But what is abundantly clear, is that no candidate can ever be viewed through the lens of logic and intelligence ever again. This is no longer the criteria by which Presidents are elected. It’s just really hard for intelligent people to be purposefully thick. But it’s only by understanding that the lens of judgement for all future candidates has to be the strength of their cult of personality, that the Democratic Party can be successful again.
This election was fought and won in 10-30 second sound bites on social media. There was zero communication of any meaningful content. People don’t even know where the new President really stands on any given subject. Just vague impressions of being tough on immigrants, China, and putting more money in your pockets. There is no actual plan for how to accomplish or tackle any of those things. He’s a walking infomercial.
The Dems have two choices moving forwards. The first is to find a candidate that is the living embodiment of hope. Hope beats fear 90% of the time. Obama was exactly that guy. “Yes we can”. Simple, hopeful, powerful, he made people believe and was a brilliant orator. I don’t see an obvious candidate with that platform. It would’ve been Bernie, but that ship has sailed.
The second choice is to go full cult of personality mode. You find your own Trump. A larger than life character, who produces viral soundbites and captures the imagination. Outspoken, and at times controversial. America fecking loves an anti-hero more than anything. Somebody who isn’t afraid to say whatever the feck they want, and be scant on policy around it. They take this approach, and in the right circles, they can still dig deep on strong policy platforms through their VP pick, to keep the college educated crowd on board. But their bombastic Potus pick is there to win the hearts and minds of the “average Joe”, who we have to remember is simple, pretty thick, and won’t engage in politics for more than the regulation 10-30 second sound bites.
People have been searching for deeper meaning. Examining polls. Trawling data for clues. Turning on each other. Attacking their own candidate. But the truth is incredibly fecking simple (just like the electorate):
- Policy details don’t matter in an election.
- The entire campaign has be able to be boiled down to repeatable 30 second sound bites.
- Practicality > idealism. People just want to know if they’ll have more or less money in their pocket.
- Every general issue, whether is foreign affairs, immigration, climate change etc etc., all boils down to how it will affect people financially. Again, will I have more or less money in my pocket.
- Americans generally don’t want a woman telling them what to do.
- It’s not WHAT you say, it’s HOW you look and sound when you say it.
- Personality >>>>>> Policy. Policies are almost irrelevant. It’s all about personality.
People don’t want Trump, not on the whole, I am largely convinced of this. But they know him and are entertained by him. To the average person, he isn’t a threat. The fact he’s a rambling simpleton makes him even less threatening. Harris is an intelligent, capable woman of colour, who has operated in every branch of government. She’s “thinky”, you can see the wheels turning, you don’t know what’s going on in there….whats she really up to? What’s she really like behind closed doors? Trump, is what you see is what you get. You can trust his untrustworthiness. But Harris, she comes across all smart and caring and shit, but behind closed doors, oooh I bet she’s a devious bitch with Machiavellian plans that I don’t understand. But that’s all the thought I can put into that, because NCIS re-runs are on, and I need to put the kids to bed.
That’s the mindset we are dealing with, that’s the level of thought and engagement most people are committing to this.
Give me a decent social media budget, an outspoken, gregarious, celebrity male between 49 and 69, and a quiet intellectual VP pick, and I’ll win ten elections out of ten for the Dems against a Trump led Republican Party. Give me an intelligent, policy driven man who’s an average speaker, and I’ll win you 8/10 vs Trump. Give me an intelligent, policy driven woman, who’s an average speaker and I’ll win you 3/10 vs Trump. Now make her black, and I’ll get you 0/10.
Dwayne Johnson could have done nothing for three months, if he’d taken over at the same time as Harris, just lifted weights and done whatever the feck The Rock does - and then come out at some point in the middle of the “campaign”, called Trump a pussy, said America needs a real man, made a couple of jokes about his probably tiny penis, taken a whole bunch of media appearances in diners and “regular Joe hangouts” with regular people, and he’d have won by a fecking landslide.
American politics is literally that simple.
I remember reading on Reddit where they broke down why Clinton lost in 2016, and how she understood the science of elections but not the art. Obama was adept at both, and Trump is probably stronger with the latter. Which translates votes.
?