If that’s the case, then fair enough. It is precisely what a lot of centrists and/or members of the Democrats are saying this morning though. Hence why it’s so annoying.
Centrists need to be able to grasp that they might finally have to compromise with an agreeable counter-acting populist to get out of this, just as much as the left needs to hone its message discipline.
Maybe, but if Trump's second term is as chaotic as his first and he hasn't delivered on the promises to make life better for workers that turned out for him and prices are still outpacing wages, then I think his successor (JC Vance who is extremly unlikable) will be easy to beat.
That is if Trump doesn't try running again. I seriously think he may look for a way.
So as someone who is late to the last few years ongoings in US politics, I just read that Trump was judged to have sexual assaulted Jean Caroll. It only fell short of rape because she wasn’t able to prove penetration.
I know he has 25-30 accusations against him and given the absolute shitbag he comes across, I have no doubt at least many of those are true. But to think that a court has judged him to have committed that crime and now he soon will be US president again is something else. Shameful.
Maybe reading your strong suit. I did and I also listened to her when she spoke.I bet you never read that either
I dont really agree with this. Rogan's spiel is part being contrarian and I'm sure he knew Bernie had no chance to make it through. I have yet to talk to a Rogan listener who thinks anything other than Bernie being a commie and say it with all the disdain they can muster. They only like to use him to show how "evil" the Dems are for putting a man aside in favor of Hillary.If that’s the case, then fair enough. It is precisely what a lot of centrists and/or members of the Democrats are saying this morning though. Hence why it’s so annoying.
Centrists need to be able to grasp that they might finally have to compromise with an agreeable counter-acting populist to get out of this, just as much as the left needs to hone its message discipline.
There’s a whole strand of liberal think pieces this morning about how Liberals need to find their own Joe Rogan if they’re ever going to win back male voters… which I feel is willfully obtuse of the fact the actual Joe Rogan literally endorsed Bernie Sanders last time around! Trump is only the inevitable “smash the system” candidate if you take all the others off the table. And if we continue to do that in this new World Order, it’s the centrists who are intransigent, not leftists against genocide
Bernie Sanders attended a rally in England about a year ago with genuine socialists. There's no way Harris is to the left of Bernie Sanders. She absolutely would not have governed that way regardless otherwise Clinton et al (dem apparatus) would not have paved the way for her.If you look at her senate voting record, you will see - she is perhaps even closer to the left than Bernie Sanders
Bitch about it all you want but the centrist dad was right about the UK.“Actually it’s all the activists and woke people that the Democrats very purposefully DIDNT align with as much as in 2020 that are at fault….because these are the people I always blame”
Despite the fact Harris & Trump both got less votes than in 2020, only Harris lost way more by running a more conservative campaign, and that Democrats in general only win when running as hopeful change candidates rather than uninspiring status quo enablers. Despite Biden winning by being pro-Trans directly after wide scale rioting and the BLM movement. Yeah, it’s the people they very obviously triangulated to win without this time who are at fault for them not winning. Never the triangulation itself.
It’s not even about left and right it’s about change and a tangible feeling the system is rigged against the ‘average joe’… running on “we will smash the system” has been an entirely reliable vote winner since 2008. She ran basically the same campaign as Hillary - a famously terrible losing campaign! - at times often WITH HILLARY ACTUALLY INVOLVED! and they’re blaming fecking activists and woke people!!?? FFS.
Nothing will change with these fecking Gen X losers dictating how much more moderate everyone has to go to claw back the dead liberal hegemony. The US, the UK and France were all given a brief reprieve from far right slide and a chance to do something with it, and so far 2 of the 3 have fecked it by trying to continue everything on as normal as if the anti-establishmentarianism was just a blip.
Completely convinced Labour are fecked in 4 years, cos they’ll be convinced they can run exactly the same campaign again. And it’ll be the woke activists fault then too.
This is folly IMO. This is a global thing that’s been building since 2008. It’s happening in every country. The Fukuyama end of history neoliberalism didn’t work. It ran out of things to deregulate and sell off, and now 2 going on 3 whole generations are going to be poorer than their parents. You can’t just keep trying to force that back onto people constantly rebelling against it without some major rejigging of how everything works. And if your argument is “well we see how bad the fascism gets, then they’ll come crawling back” then that’s exactly the kind of accelerationist attitude leftists would be crucified for FFS. Why not just wait till we have another really big war so we can do the whole reconstruction thing again?
What part of this argument makes sense to you?
Blame it on Covid or not…it’s self evident that Covid had a massive effect on the global economy. Part of that effect was directly caused by Trump’s stimulus. It was a necessary choice, you could argue around the edges of the execution of it, but it’s broadly agreed it was the right thing to do. But it was always going to come with the cost of inflation. The link between the two isn’t tenuous. Biden’s stimulus was the same, more argued against it, most argued in favour, but everyone knew it would drive up inflation. Exceptional events require exceptional acts, and it’s fairytale thinking to expect only positives from that.
The supply shock and huge increases in raw materials, semiconductors, shipping costs etc. as a direct result of Covid was unambiguous too. As was the effect of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
We know Biden didn’t cause that, because every other country in the world didn’t have Biden, and every similar country experienced the same pattern. Most of them suffered deeper and longer from the same problems.
Trump didn’t face any of those things, so how can you just wave your hands and say sure maybe this Covid stuff was important, maybe not, all we know is things were better under Trump. If they were better because he didn’t face these things he wasn’t in control of - and he inevitably would’ve faced them if not for the fact that he handled the pandemic so badly that people didn’t want him to - then how is that an argument for Trump?
If you look at her senate voting record, you will see - she is perhaps even closer to the left than Bernie Sanders
So, when republicans instate federal abortion ban, it will override the states currently protecting it, right?
Not sure about the woke stuff but guessing they're feeling like they've been P Diddied
You don't need to explain. But you should at least try and meet voters where they are.Plus, the old adage is that if you are explaining, you are losing. So maybe the Harris team just didnt want to go there.
I don’t think Harris was a good candidate, but she wasn’t given much to work with on this one. The incumbent in a period of economic turmoil - excessive inflation, recession, whatever - is going to take a beating regardless of the causes. The political culture puts so much emphasis on the president, and the US is so focused on individual responsibility, that they’re always going to attribute blame for economic problems to that individual. That doesn’t help them get to the root cause and make choices that solve the problems they care about, but it’s understandable.This is all true, but unfortunately, most voters don't look that deeply into it.
It would frustrate me that Harris wasn't better able to explain this in a neat tidy package for voters. But obviously her consultants didn't think it was a good idea to lecture voters on the causes of inflation. Especially when they already blame Biden for it.
Yes, she could have said that all nations have experienced inflation post COVID and the US have recovered faster than most. She could have also pinned it on the stimulus, but no one wants to hear that the free money they received was the problem.
I would have loved her to stand up for a lot of the positive policy that were passed under the Biden administration, such as the Inflation Reduction Act, The Bipartisan Infrastructure bill and the Chips and Science Act, but she seemed reluctant to do it. She should have been more bullish about the stock market and the fact that the US COVID recover was the best in the world under Biden and that inflation is now down to low levels. She should have been able to communicate that the Biden administration was all about COVID economic recovery after Trump's mess and hers would be about building on that to lower prices.
But the issue is, people are not seeing the price of their bacon and eggs drop. More people are voting based on this than any other metric. Trumps message of "you were better off under me" was too simple and too compelling for those unwilling to look any deeper.
Plus, the old adage is that if you are explaining, you are losing. So maybe the Harris team just didnt want to go there.
Something I’ve been guilty of as much as anyone else - projecting your own beliefs onto the average American. Honestly, we are not the same.
The average American is right wing conservative capitalist that believes in Reagonomics. They believe the corporate greed of the 80s is a big part of what made America great. The voting demographic is not progressive and what you’ve suggested would be eviscerated by Fox News and its ilk as anti-capitalist, anti-growth communism.
Maybe reading your strong suit. I did and I also listened to her when she spoke.
Wow. Also an implicit admission that minorities aren’t in control of their destiny. So much for the personal responsibility narrative.
Yeah I mostly agree with this, and it’s true that Trump’s economic message is much simpler and more memorable.makes sense to you =/= imagine how it can make sense to someone else. especially someone who isn't a news obsessive.
here is how it makes sense:
economy "good". covid, trump gone, biden prez. economy "bad".
add to that the absolute 100% total messaging failure from the democrats on why the economy was bad, the refusal to use a scapegoat ("price-gouging CEOs"), the refusal to suggest a plan, and simply insist the economy is good, without specifics. it's political malpractice. especially when the other guy says short simple memorable things about tarrifs, taxes, "what it was like before"
edit -
further, the "%age of prime-age americans in employment" never really recovered post-covid, even though the "unemployment" metric did. finally, the 4 years of biden produced *negative* real income growth, while trump's 4 years produced substaantial positive growth. just by itself, that could cost an incumbent their election.
You don't need to explain. But you should at least try and meet voters where they are.
I am reading Harris' DNC speech right now. There is just very little in it about economic conditions in general. There is no acknowledgement that people might be struggling. The only negative thing it says is that 'opportunity is not available for everyone'. You compare to Obama's 2012 speech and in that one, while there is some boasting about good things, there is a lot more talk about the struggles people have faced.
That has never been an important part of Taylor's ideology.
Just infuriating that these cowardly Dems are still too afraid to say Harris was a bad candidate. I have seen the "analysts" like Bakari Sellers, Donna Brazile and Howard Dean who been gushing over Harris and still have nerve to say she ran a really good campaign and was a brilliant candidate.
I'm with you except for that part. Its the biggest scam to have perpetuated American politics that somehow the Rs are your averages joes who don't have the support of all the super wealthy. Elon alone holds more wealth than the next 50 or more Hollywood celebs *combined*. Many of the wealthiest people in this country from real estate moguls, to sports team owners, fortune 500 CEOs and investment bankers have donated not just tons of money but time as well to the right. And then we haven't even gotten into a lot of the untraceable dark money both from within, and a lot from outside our borders.Wow. This has been a real eye opening result. I have been a liberal for years and often ostracised in my friends and family groups in a deeply conservative Indian society, and this election result has finally made me realise, that liberalism will only work if people are well off. Do not expect the majority of people to be empathetic, good hearted, willing to pay higher taxes for the improvement of society if they themselves are in a bad position. Liberalism has grown in the western world post world war 2 because of a high standard of living. It was easier for politicians with better policies to win earlier because the media and the opponents played fair. But now in the post truth world where there are no restrictions on spreading baseless propaganda, liberalism will not work if people are going through economic hardship. I feel America is socially and culturally left enough, they dont want more DEI, pronouns, or open immigration. They want their economic problems fixed first. They want strong immigration laws, safer streets, and no trans-women in the women’ restroom. And while I agree that these might not be Kamala’s policy but they were still used by republicans to attack her. So yeah drop the liberalism.
Someone wrote a big post about how electing the Rock would have made the dems win the election. And while I agree with the fact that a lot of Americans are dumb enough to treat the presidential election as some sort of WWE contest I think that it doesn’t would hold true next time. It doesn’t explain how Biden an old white man with ordinary oratory skill won 2020. The elections come down to driving turnout, and 80% of the electorate doesn’t read long form articles on economist or FT. They dont read policy documents by candidates, they dont listen to the experts. The left needs to up their media game, target youtube and tik tok, build their own media chamber and go to right leaning podcasts and news channels and hold their grounds. Prepare more people like Pete and Newsom who can hold their own on Fox and counter right wing propaganda.
I dont think Harris ran a bad campaign, she was simply a bad candidate who was dealt and even worse hand. She did the best she could, but the dems now need to wake up and smell the coffee. Running centrist politicians with economic policies similar to Tories in Britain isn’t going to energise your base. If people want right wing economics they will vote republican. What they need is someone who can deliver for the working class people, and have good oratory skills to actual make people trust him. They had the perfect candidate in Bernie but decided to feck him for pro establishment candidates, which allowed Trump to get in and start the MAGA movement. The Dems need to be the working class party and work for the poor. Get rid of identity politics which gave them terrible candidates like Hillary and Kamala. The Latinos or the blacks or the LGBT people arent going to vote for some token candidate above their own financial well being.
The dems need a new Bernie. While AOC has a lot of potential I dont think Americans will vote in a woman especially a minority. But overall they have to allow the leftists a greater say in policy making, support an increase in minimum wages, provide free health care and education, and work for the betterment of the working class. Ofcourse they need to figure out how to do that without sounding communist. The next election will be easier to win anyway with Trump and Vance being extremely incompetent people making lives harder for everyone but the billionaires.
One for thing that they need to do when they eventually have power again is actually implement changes which helps them to hold onto power. They have ruled for 12 of the last 16 years and have done nothing to increase their grip on power while two trump presidencies probably end with a 7-2 supreme court. They need to expand the court, give state hood to DC and Puerto Rico, and get rid of the filibuster. They should have gone after Trump much earlier, immediately after J6, and made it impossible for him to run. They should have replaced RBG and Sotomayor when they had the chance. The base feels that despite voting for the Dems, the dems never end up using the power to make long term significant reforms and then after every four years they come back and cry saying how this election is the most important even and how democracy is in danger. They need to stop being the bigger party and give up on going high when the republicans go low. Punish the corrupt republicans, make fun of people like MTG and Bobo, call out the Russian stooges in the republican party and make the American people realise that stupidity and a lack of scientific temper doesn’t have a place in the US politics.
I feel a lot less depressed this time than I did in 2016. The dems can either use this chance for a complete reset and become the party of the working class. Or they can continue being the party of the liberal elite, Hollywood, and the billionaires, but that only works if first the economic condition of your citizens is in a good place.
Taylor is the white dude there? Can’t say I’m familiar with him.
Very good post.I don’t think Harris was a good candidate, but she wasn’t given much to work with on this one. The incumbent in a period of economic turmoil - excessive inflation, recession, whatever - is going to take a beating regardless of the causes. The political culture puts so much emphasis on the president, and the US is so focused on individual responsibility, that they’re always going to attribute blame for economic problems to that individual. That doesn’t help them get to the root cause and make choices that solve the problems they care about, but it’s understandable.
They didn’t need to read the tea leaves on that one. The economy is always a key factor, this is a time when the economy is under more of a microscope and goes deep, and the sentiment was bad. You stick with the incumbent in that scenario if they’re hugely popular as an individual, or there’s a desire for stability and weathering the storm because there’s legitimate fears of things getting worse if change is forced through.
None of that applied here. So then you usually have the difficult decision of showing weakness by replacing your leader halfway through his intended term, or sticking with a slightly inferior candidate and hoping them looking presidential carries enough compensatory weight. But again neither of these applied here. He got voted in on the basis of being a 1 term president, a bridge, it wouldn’t have looked weak to follow through on that. And he didn’t look presidential. They had free reign to get rid of that deadweight, and somehow they decided to go with the only other person who’d be weighed down by the same stuff.
If it was Newsom, Whitmer, etc. as VP stepping up, they wouldn’t have solved that problem either. You can’t break with the president on such a fundamental position while he’s still in office and you’re his right hand. Whatever you gain from the separation, you lose at least an equal amount by being disloyal, drawing attention to your party’s flawed policies, etc.
On promoting the infrastructure bill, chips act etc. it seems plausible that both Biden and Harris were just bad advocates of it. There really isn’t any rational explanation for why Americans are so unhappy with the economy in its totality, or in how the economic policies were designed to help them. That should have won more votes but the voters just weren’t having it. There’s obviously some environmental factors that make it difficult to sell that message, but it doesn’t seem like an impossible task, just one they abjectly failed at.
It was like basing her campaign on being a Hilary Clinton 2016 tribute act was a bad idea for Harris... Trump's two election wins were against divisive opponents who were anointed to run behind closed doors by the upper echelons of the Democratic party.
Agree 100%. Biden waited far to long for there to be any other option.She wasn't anointed. Biden put the party in a bad spot where she was the only viable candidate. It was 3 weeks to the convention. Whitmer had already said she wasnt running no matter. But for everyone else the risk was too much. Lets say you are Shapiro. You have no organization. And you have 3 weeks to build it up to try and win delegates that were going to vote for Biden and then launch a National campaign and again with no time. It was a lose lose. He goes against Harris, she wins nomination and looses presidency. He gets some blame and tanks his chances of running next time.
He wins but he's to an election at a huge disadvantage. He has weeks to build up a new platform, get volunteers, new organization at National level. That's a lot to ask.
The timing made it impossible for anyone who wanted to run again to challenge Harris.
So this one is soley on Biden
She wasn't anointed. Biden put the party in a bad spot where she was the only viable candidate. It was 3 weeks to the convention. Whitmer had already said she wasnt running no matter. But for everyone else the risk was too much. Lets say you are Shapiro. You have no organization. And you have 3 weeks to build it up to try and win delegates that were going to vote for Biden and then launch a National campaign and again with no time. It was a lose lose. He goes against Harris, she wins nomination and looses presidency. He gets some blame and tanks his chances of running next time.
He wins but he's to an election at a huge disadvantage. He has weeks to build up a new platform, get volunteers, new organization at National level. That's a lot to ask.
The timing made it impossible for anyone who wanted to run again to challenge Harris.
So this one is soley on Biden
I don’t think Harris was a good candidate, but she wasn’t given much to work with on this one. The incumbent in a period of economic turmoil - excessive inflation, recession, whatever - is going to take a beating regardless of the causes. The political culture puts so much emphasis on the president, and the US is so focused on individual responsibility, that they’re always going to attribute blame for economic problems to that individual. That doesn’t help them get to the root cause and make choices that solve the problems they care about, but it’s understandable.
They didn’t need to read the tea leaves on that one. The economy is always a key factor, this is a time when the economy is under more of a microscope and goes deep, and the sentiment was bad. You stick with the incumbent in that scenario if they’re hugely popular as an individual, or there’s a desire for stability and weathering the storm because there’s legitimate fears of things getting worse if change is forced through.
None of that applied here. So then you usually have the difficult decision of showing weakness by replacing your leader halfway through his intended term, or sticking with a slightly inferior candidate and hoping them looking presidential carries enough compensatory weight. But again neither of these applied here. He got voted in on the basis of being a 1 term president, a bridge, it wouldn’t have looked weak to follow through on that. And he didn’t look presidential. They had free reign to get rid of that deadweight, and somehow they decided to go with the only other person who’d be weighed down by the same stuff.
If it was Newsom, Whitmer, etc. as VP stepping up, they wouldn’t have solved that problem either. You can’t break with the president on such a fundamental position while he’s still in office and you’re his right hand. Whatever you gain from the separation, you lose at least an equal amount by being disloyal, drawing attention to your party’s flawed policies, etc.
On promoting the infrastructure bill, chips act etc. it seems plausible that both Biden and Harris were just bad advocates of it. There really isn’t any rational explanation for why Americans are so unhappy with the economy in its totality, or in how the economic policies were designed to help them. That should have won more votes but the voters just weren’t having it. There’s obviously some environmental factors that make it difficult to sell that message, but it doesn’t seem like an impossible task, just one they abjectly failed at.
