2024 U.S. Elections | Trump wins

[Iker Quesadillas]

So desperate people voted for the person that untruthfully promises to fix everything, not a whole lot you can do to combat that.

Obama did well enough in 2012.

 

[R'hllor]

Listening media clips and statements from supporters, seems its really hard to pick up a mirror.

 

[Carolina Red]

This is really something considering the history of Cuban immigration to America

 

[Carolina Red]

Interesting. Is this if 250k votes in specific areas went differently, Harris would have won?

Yes, in the swing states

 

[RoadTrip]

It’s almost luck, to an extent. Who is in power when an economic shock happens? They tend to get blamed and voted out. I genuinely think if the roles were reversed and Trump had presided over the last 4 years and Kamala was the challenging candidate, she’d have likely swept the election.

It’s obviously a little more nuanced than that, but fundamentally, it’s also true. Economics is far more complex than the majority of voters understand. An argument of nuance won’t ever win out.

One thing left leaning parties do need to do though, is become much better at their messaging and getting it out. They’re just miles behind on using social media.

 

[Redivy]

Continue on like what? At what point were they remotely doing that? They ran on having Republicans in the cabinet! Hillary & Kamala ran possibly the two most centrist campaigns in history and lost to a melting rapist in clown makeup who didn’t even increase his number of votes.

It’s not just Kamala and Hillary. It’s the whole party, what they stand for and who stands with them. That may not be fair, but it’s how politics has always been.

Like it or not, people linked Kamala to certain issues such as “defund the police”, and a whole lot of gender identity. And I don’t even think that’s fair, but that’s what is happening.

I’m not here to argue about which policies I do or don’t like, I’m just telling you that the Dems need to re-position themselves if they want to reclaim power.

I think the Dems need someone from the outside to come in. Harris represented the institution, same as Biden, and same as Hillary. People don’t respond to that well.

 

[VorZakone]

Stephen A Smith for Democratic nominee 2028.

 

[padzilla]

Trump, while standing with the world's richest man beside him on stage, apparently connects with the working class and has their interests at heart while Harris is out of touch because Taylor Swift and her celebrity friends endorsed her.

 

[Mockney]

It’s not just Kamala and Hillary. It’s the whole party, what they stand for and who stands with them. That may not be fair, but it’s how politics has always been.

Like it or not, people linked Kamala to certain issues such as “defund the police”, and a whole lot of gender identity. And I don’t even think that’s fair, but that’s what is happening.

I’m not here to argue about which policies I do or don’t like, I’m just telling you that the Dems need to re-position themselves if they want to reclaim power.

I think the Dems need someone from the outside to come in. Harris represented the institution, same as Biden, and same as Hillary. People don’t respond to that well.

The last part is true, but the first part is nonsense. No one has said ‘Defund The Police’ at all this election cycle and when they were actually saying it (back in 2020) it didn’t negatively affect Biden’s votes all… He actually won comfortably directly after the BLM riots.

All this “progressive language is turning people off” stuff is projected personal gripes and culture war schtick. There’s no evidence for it. It’s received wisdom and right wingers saying it. It was largely progressives who stayed away this time as opposed to 2020 anyway.

*There's some evidence that Latinx stuff wasn’t popular with Latino voters, but again, she wasn’t really using this, and no one is really clamouring for her to either.

 

[amolbhatia50k]

It’s not just Kamala and Hillary. It’s the whole party, what they stand for and who stands with them. That may not be fair, but it’s how politics has always been.

Like it or not, people linked Kamala to certain issues such as “defund the police”, and a whole lot of gender identity. And I don’t even think that’s fair, but that’s what is happening.

I’m not here to argue about which policies I do or don’t like, I’m just telling you that the Dems need to re-position themselves if they want to reclaim power.

I think the Dems need someone from the outside to come in. Harris represented the institution, same as Biden, and same as Hillary. People don’t respond to that well.

The “institution” is better than that rapey cnut. But I know what you mean. However I also think a man / candidate who connects with people would have won this race either way.

 

[amolbhatia50k]

Trump, while standing with the world's richest man beside him on stage, apparently connects with the working class and has their interests at heart while Harris is out of touch because Taylor Swift and her celebrity friends endorsed her.

It really is something. The guy who commits felonies, rape etc and wants to give tax cuts to the rich is the people’s champion.

Let’s be honest as well and not absolve the American people who have shown some of their worst qualities in this election and Trump has capitalised on that depraved mindset (as well the Democrats failings).

 

[Kaos]

This is really something considering the history of Cuban immigration to America

A lot of these Miami Cubans long for the days of Batista, where they all enjoyed their lavish lifestyles, owning casinos and hotels, while the rest of the country lived under abject poverty and near-slavery, racial-segregation, all while getting pummelled by the brutal fist of Batista's military government. Hardly surprising that they'd embrace Trump.

And yes I'm aware they default to the GOP ticket on the back of Republicans harbouring a stronger anti-Castro sentiment.

 

[Redivy]

The last part is true, but the first part is nonsense. No one has said ‘Defund The Police’ at all this election cycle and when they were actually saying it (back in 2020) it didn’t negatively affect Biden’s votes all… He actually won comfortably directly after the BLM riots.

All this “progressive language is turning people off” stuff is projected personal gripes and culture war schtick. There’s no evidence for it. It’s received wisdom and right wingers saying it. It was largely progressives who stayed away this time as opposed to 2020 anyway.

*There's some evidence that Latinx stuff wasn’t popular with Latino voters, but again, she wasn’t really using this, and no one is really clamouring for her to either.

I don’t know man, even the fact that Dems are acknowledging the most successful Trump ad was the “Kamala is for they/thems, Trump is for you” shows that these stereotypes were really hanging around.

 

[Iker Quesadillas]

I don’t know man, even the fact that Dems are acknowledging the most successful Trump ad was the “Kamala is for they/thems, Trump is for you” shows that these stereotypes were really hanging around.

Dems are acknowledging a million different things, because every Democrat with an ax to grind and an idea of how to 'fix things' will want to push their own version of events out there.

 

[M16Red]

This is going to be nuts...

 

[Mockney]

I don’t know man, even the fact that Dems are acknowledging the most successful Trump ad was the “Kamala is for they/thems, Trump is for you” shows that these stereotypes were really hanging around.

The Dems acknowledging it are the Dems who don’t want to admit that this strategy failed, because it’s been their whole thing since 2016.



I’m not saying they should embrace progressive language more or anything, there are definitely some needlessly off putting things about it, I just don’t think it really matters with the average person at all. If you look at the voting patterns both here & there, left and right don’t seem to matter as much as change and the feeling that someone will actually enact it

I mean in the last decade the UK has voted for Brexit, then almost voted for Jeremy Corbyn a year later, then pivoted to Boris Johnson hard, then to Starmer hardish again, all within 7 years! You’d be hard pressed to find 3 more different politicians, but each in their own way was promising a change from what was currently happening. That’s what registers with people who aren’t entrenched on either side. And if they don’t get it quickly they will happily change tac. Its the most basic voting instinct.

 

[amolbhatia50k]

This is going to be nuts...

What an utter prick he is. He’ll set Murica back decades once he’s done.

The transgender in sports one I still get has legitinate concerns but for the US which many countries look up to in terms of how far they’ve come culturally and human rights wise, to basically target transgender people and those looking to switch the way he is, is pathetic. Not just a racist rapist but a deeply regressive one. Feel sorry for those who this actually affects.

 

[Zehner]

If only it were so easy. As said many, many times in this thread, people for some reason hold the Democrats at a much higher standard than Republicans.

Trump is the epitome of "0 policies, just trying to win elections". All he stands for is taking a shit on everything that is in his path to power: opponents, (former) allies, even the democratic system itself. But somehow it's not the Republicans but the Dems who need more principled positions and policies.

What's also interesting, is that despite the Dems being essentially a centre/centre-right party by international standards as you imply, their rejection by the US electorate is not for being too right wing or lacking policies, as I believe you claim. If anything the masses still perceive them as "socialist" and "left-wing liberals". And a party with no policies has literally just won the elections. What this tells me is that you're perhaps using your personal grievances with the Democrats to explain their defeat, which is a form of confirmation bias. It doesn't mean that your views are shared by the wider populace or that becoming a more traditional left-wing party will get the Dems back into power. You're conveniently ignoring the elephant in the room, which is that the US electorate has shifted right by all observable metrics.

The right has won the blue-collar and the minority votes by peddling irrational fear of immigrants and engaging in culture wars over trans rights. It hasn't won them on policies. And there's no indication that Dems becoming more left-leaning in policies, will revert that loss.

Edit: For me, nowadays it's all about appearances and far more basic instincts. A white, male mid-Western candidate would have faired better than Harris even with less policies and oratory skills.

But I wonder, has that assumption ever really been put to the test? People had much higher standards for Republican presidential candidates as well before Trump came and disproved that all the assumptions of what makes a candidate unelectable in the eyes of the base time and again. Eventually, people will always vote for the lesser evil, you don't have to make everybody happy. By now, it should be clear that the economic situation of the working class was what decided this election and you really have to wonder why on earth the Democrats didn't make this their first and foremost topic. Progressive women, the queer community, etc. would have voted for them anyway but what would have been most important is to convince blue collar workers that a ultra-capitalist billionaire with a history of evading taxes and using tax money for his private interests is not the one you should trust over a left-leaning party that wants affordable health care, etc. And every point of criticism should have been tied to that. Trump wants to stop supporting Ukraine? Prices would skyrocket if Russia conqueres it. Trump wants import taxes? This will further boost inflation because the suppliers will just pass the costs to the customers.

IMO, the Democrats ran their campaigns through the lens of privilege. For a person who does not have to worry about food or gas prices because they make up a low percentage of their income anyway, the outlook of a Trump presidency that threatens the Democratic foundation of the nation is so terrifying that they think this is a wildcard for an election win. But people will always want to secure their basic needs first. It seems the Dems completely miscalculated which arguments could sway people in their direction because they projected their own views onto the voters they tried to convince.

And I can't even blame them. As a foreigner, I wouldn't have thought that the situation was this severe while the outlook of Project 25 really terrified me. Empathy is key.

 

[amolbhatia50k]

Oh that’s a year old

 

[R'hllor]

Learning more about this election just reminds me why i cant stand politics in general.

Isnt it weird to act like you are against racism etc. but then have split voting block by race and so on as stats, so can use it as a weapon to blame attack certain groups as reason why you or your candidate lost?! How full of shit and fake you actually can be

Also, saw somewhere this push with `Hombres con Harris` as attempt to gain more votes, i mean how patronizing is that, those people aint Hombres, they are Americans, they worked their ass of, so they and their children can be and seen as such, or for at least good portion of them.

Its just so obnoxious to main blame someone race, gender, nationality for your own failings, reminds me when we lose against underdog in PL and dumbfecks come out with "those game raising cnuts" lines, no we just fecking suck on that day.

Maybe my views are wrong from a sideline but thats the shit i see.

 

[LDUred]

Trump, while standing with the world's richest man beside him on stage, apparently connects with the working class and has their interests at heart while Harris is out of touch because Taylor Swift and her celebrity friends endorsed her.

She didn't take the opportunity to go on the Joe Rogan show. Rogan's seen as right wing these days but he's essentially a Democrat.

If she had, she could (hypothetically at least) have connected with floating voters and gotten rid of the accusations of being robotic and scripted by talking off the cuff.

Both Trump and Vance did it and because of that she needed to.

 

[MTF]

If only it were so easy. As said many, many times in this thread, people for some reason hold the Democrats at a much higher standard than Republicans.

Trump is the epitome of "0 policies, just trying to win elections". All he stands for is taking a shit on everything that is in his path to power: opponents, (former) allies, even the democratic system itself. But somehow it's not the Republicans but the Dems who need more principled positions and policies.

What's also interesting, is that despite the Dems being essentially a centre/centre-right party by international standards as you imply, their rejection by the US electorate is not for being too right wing or lacking policies, as I believe you claim. If anything the masses still perceive them as "socialist" and "left-wing liberals". And a party with no policies has literally just won the elections. What this tells me is that you're perhaps using your personal grievances with the Democrats to explain their defeat, which is a form of confirmation bias. It doesn't mean that your views are shared by the wider populace or that becoming a more traditional left-wing party will get the Dems back into power. You're conveniently ignoring the elephant in the room, which is that the US electorate has shifted right by all observable metrics.

The right has won the blue-collar and the minority votes by peddling irrational fear of immigrants and engaging in culture wars over trans rights. It hasn't won them on policies. And there's no indication that Dems becoming more left-leaning in policies, will revert that loss.

Edit: For me, nowadays it's all about appearances and far more basic instincts. A white, male mid-Western candidate would have faired better than Harris even with less policies and oratory skills.

Good post, there's not really any evidence that being more left in itself would position democrats better. Better messaging/reach on any positive issues for them would likely improve results, regardless of where the issues and policy land on the spectrum.

 

[Kaos]

What an utter prick he is. He’ll set Murica back decades once he’s done.

The transgender in sports one I still get has legitinate concerns but for the US which many countries look up to in terms of how far they’ve come culturally and human rights wise, to basically target transgender people and those looking to switch the way he is, is pathetic. Not just a racist rapist but a deeply regressive one. Feel sorry for those who this actually affects.

The US is culturally a third world country when you take into account their views on women, gender equality, healthcare, policing, social justice, worker's rights, and not to mention their hardon for late stage capitalism and all the shenanigans that come with it.

Yes I'm aware it varies across state lines, but holistically it would be madness to consider them some form of aspirational and cultural benchmark for other nations, certainly in 2024 and now beyond.

 

[nimic]

This is really something considering the history of Cuban immigration to America

Right wing parties are experts at getting people to vote against their own interests.

 

[Wibble]

Rogan's seen as right wing these days but he's essentially a Democrat.

What the actual feck? Have you ever listened to him?

 

[amolbhatia50k]

The US is culturally a third world country when you take into account their views on women, gender equality, healthcare, policing, social justice, and not to mention their hardon for late stage capitalism and all the shenanigans that come with it.

Yes I'm aware it varies across state lines, but holistically it would be madness to consider them some form of aspirational and cultural benchmark for other nations, certainly in 2024 and now beyond.

To be fair you’re right. They’re just the ones with the biggest magnifying glass rather than the gold standard.

 

[R'hllor]

She didn't take the opportunity to go on the Joe Rogan show. Rogan's seen as right wing these days but he's essentially a Democrat.

If she had, she could (hypothetically at least) have connected with floating voters and gotten rid of the accusations of being robotic and scripted by talking off the cuff.

Both Trump and Vance did it and because of that she needed to.

Regardless of what he is, that would be also be an attempt to reach male group, might not be successful but at least you showed effort.

 

[amolbhatia50k]

She didn't take the opportunity to go on the Joe Rogan show. Rogan's seen as right wing these days but he's essentially a Democrat.

I don’t think anyone who votes for Trump and a party so right wing it’s off the scale, can really call themselves a democrat.

 

[Wibble]

Right wing parties are experts at getting people to vote against their own interests.

Yes they are. In a nutshell. Depressing isn't it?

 

[LDUred]

What the actual feck? Have you ever listened to him?

He endorsed Bernie Sanders back in 2020.

It wasn't a big deal for Kamala to go on there. Ultimately, she would have had to face down bigger fish than Joe Rogan.

 

[amolbhatia50k]

Regardless of what he is, that would be also be an attempt to reach male group, might not be successful but at least you showed effort.

She should have gone to an equivalent. Rogan’s interview with her would have been very different and intended to “get her” as opposed to the chummy promo one he did with Trump.

 

[Raoul]

Time to replace the DNC chair as well

 

[LDUred]

I don’t think anyone who votes for Trump and a party so right wing it’s off the scale, can really call themselves a democrat.

Rogan said live on air in 2020 that he was endorsing Bernie Sanders and his campaign accepted the endorsement.

No one can say for definite how the interview would have gone, but to turn down interviews always backfires in politics. It's impossible to put a positive spin on that and it explains, at least in part, Kamala's poor performance with voters.

Even if the interview was tough, so what? They're supposed to be. You are asking to be the president of a country and you are using someone's platform to spread your message. She should have gone on.

 

[Iker Quesadillas]

By now, it should be clear that the economic situation of the working class was what decided this election and you really have to wonder why on earth the Democrats didn't make this their first and foremost topic. Progressive women, the queer community, etc. would have voted for them anyway but what would have been most important is to convince blue collar workers that a ultra-capitalist billionaire with a history of evading taxes and using tax money for his private interests is not the one you should trust over a left-leaning party that wants affordable health care, etc. And every point of criticism should have been tied to that. Trump wants to stop supporting Ukraine? Prices would skyrocket if Russia conqueres it. Trump wants import taxes? This will further boost inflation because the suppliers will just pass the costs to the customers.

The Democratic Party does not want to be the party of the working class. They want to be a party of the middle class, especially upper middle class. It's there in that famous quote that Mockney posted a few posts up: "for every blue-collar Democrat we lose in Western PA, we will pick up two moderate Republicans in the suburbs of Philadelphia."

And they are actually succeeding at this. They do better with these voters than they used to.

The problem for them is the math isn't "lose 1 gain 2."

 

[M16Red]

Right wing parties are experts at getting people to vote against their own interests.

What if, that is just what they believe? As a human..

Judging people's opinions by the race or immigration status (1st or 2nd) sounds like identity politics or even racism to me.

 

[RedC]

This is basically the thought I’ve been having myself.

The only way I can figure you combat that is to out untruthful promise the other guy & hope that your base doesn’t ask questions

Education is the only real way to combat it, and America seems to be getting worse in that regard.

 

[Raoul]

He endorsed Bernie Sanders back in 2020.

It wasn't a big deal for Kamala to go on there. Ultimately, she would have had to face down bigger fish than Joe Rogan.

The Trump-Rogan interview got 42m views, which excepting a live debate, is far more than what any candidate would ever get on TV. Harris then had a chance to go on Rogan as well to reach his audience but tap danced around it by trying to get Rogan to travel to her, which they knew would cause him to say he wouldn't do it. She was actually in Texas to promote Colin Allred around that time as well. She then instead went on Club Shay Shay and got 1.6m views, so that was a big missed chance for her. Trump got to amplify his narrative to such a large audience on the various podcasts he went on, that one could realistically say it was enough to generate higher GOTV to create separation between him and Harris to win the election.

 

[Kaos]

What if, that is just what they believe? As a human..

Judging people's opinions by the race or immigration status (1st or 2nd) sounds like identity politics or even racism to me.

Perhaps, but if people vote against their interests (working class gravitating towards Trump) on the back of reductionist points about immigrants of certain creeds being culpable for most of their problems, then it absolutely is an issue of racism. If all the empirical evidence objectively paints a picture that the racist billionaire candidate with his racist billionaire backer would enact policies that exacerbates your hardships, yet you still chose to vote for him on the back of his points about Haitians/Mexicans/Transgender people being the problem, then that says a lot about your principles unfortunately.

 

[Revan]

Time to replace the DNC chair as well

That would be good, but don't see how that happens. They first need to realize why they lost, but I fear that they are stuck in an echo chamber and will lose again, again, and again.

At least they can blame everyone except themselves though, which is their favorite thing to do.

 

[FriedClams]

The Trump-Rogan interview got 42m views, which excepting a live debate, is far more than what any candidate would ever get on TV. Harris then had a chance to go on Rogan as well to reach his audience but tap danced around it by trying to get Rogan to travel to her, which they knew would cause him to say he wouldn't do it. She was actually in Texas to promote Colin Allred around that time as well. She then instead went to on Club Shay Shay and got 1.6m views, so that was a big missed chance for her. Trump got to amplify his narrative to such a large audience on the various podcasts he went on, that one could realistically say it was enough to generate higher GOTV to create separation between him and Harris to win the election.

And this is where we are at in this country. Going on more popular podcasts and getting more views = win election.