2024 U.S. Elections | Thread Closed

Status
Not open for further replies.
Its laughable to think going on Joe Rogan would have had any effect on the elections.
Then why campaign at all?

Joe Rohan’s podcast is by far the most watched one. More people apparently watch it than legacy media. 60 million people watched Trump’s interview there. Sure, not all of them are Americans, but even if just 20m are, that is still a colossal number. If you can speak to 20 million voters, you do it, that is more effective than one day of campaigning. Or what Harris did, went to some podcast in LA that no one watches.
 
You really think so? I think part of the problem was Trump coming off as approachable (for lack of a better word), whereas Harris appeared more stiff and like a polished politician. Going on these bro Podcasts and having a normal chat might have closed that gap somewhat. That is if Harris was able to do it.

And just to be clear, I’m not at all saying it was the difference between winning and losing.
The problem with Harris is that she was perceived as an empty suit, unable to stray away from her script and sticking to an administration that was clearly judged defavorably, rightly or not.

Her campaign team did everything to reinforce this image, whereas the orange conman at least could show some conviction in his "ideas" and intention to break away from the establishment (as if).
 
Last edited:
I reject the idea that the democrats somehow failed. There are always things you can do differently: no one has any idea whether it would have made a difference.

For Trump to be reelected, two things had to happen:

- people had to be willing to ignore Trumps misdeeds, especially his rapes, racism, treason and corruption
- people had to be willing to vote for further loss of abortion rights, voting rights and mass deportations

It is men who have thrown women under the bus, racists, and others who voted ‘for the economy’ who are morally bankrupt.

Before you discuss what the democrats could have done done, reflect on the two choices that were there: an experienced career politician vs a rapist criminal who is losing his cognitive abilities. It should never have been a contest.
 
Before you discuss what the democrats could have done done, reflect on the two choices that were there: an experienced career politician vs a rapist criminal who is losing his cognitive abilities. It should never have been a contest.
The two actual choices they had were "continuity with the current administration" and "the previous administration." They thought the current administration was bad so they went with the other one.
 
The two actual choices they had were "continuity with the current administration" and "the previous administration." They thought the current administration was bad so they went with the other one.
Not really.

It was "continuity with the current administration" and "rapist criminal who is losing his cognitive abilities".
 
I reject the idea that the democrats somehow failed. There are always things you can do differently: no one has any idea whether it would have made a difference.

For Trump to be reelected, two things had to happen:

- people had to be willing to ignore Trumps misdeeds, especially his rapes, racism, treason and corruption
- people had to be willing to vote for further loss of abortion rights, voting rights and mass deportations

It is men who have thrown women under the bus, racists, and others who voted ‘for the economy’ who are morally bankrupt.

Before you discuss what the democrats could have done done, reflect on the two choices that were there: an experienced career politician vs a rapist criminal who is losing his cognitive abilities. It should never have been a contest.
This just underlines how bad the Harris campaign actually did. They were running against a walking, talking disaster. Trump did not run a good campaign, and yet he won quite easily in the end.

Shaming the voters has been tried before, and it failed. The Democrats have to actually offer something, and drastically improve their messaging to drive turnout with their base.
 
This just underlines how bad the Harris campaign actually did. They were running against a walking, talking disaster. Trump did not run a good campaign, and yet he won quite easily in the end.

Shaming the voters has been tried before, and it failed. The Democrats have to actually offer something, and drastically improve their messaging to drive turnout with their base.
You really don't need to convince people you are better than a convicted felon who also tried to organise an insurrection. As bad of a candidate Kamala is, Trump should have not even registered on the polling. They are in different universes integrity wise. The fact that this did not happen reflects extremely badly on the general voter in US.
 
Not really.

It was "continuity with the current administration" and "rapist criminal who is losing his cognitive abilities".

That's not how a tens of millions people viewed the choice though. The Trump team was effective at negating that and making it seem like those court cases were just politically motivated "lawfare". Iker is spot on with how at least 50% of the electorate viewed the choice. They don't accept that Trump is a "rapist criminal".
 
You really don't need to convince people you are better than a convicted felon who also tried to organise an insurrection. As bad of a candidate Kamala is, Trump should have not even registered on the polling. They are in different universes integrity wise. The fact that this did not happen reflects extremely badly on the general voter in US.
If this was true, Harris would have won easily.
 
I mean obviously it isn't true after the result. Hence the point that the average US voter is kinda nuts.
It obviously reflects poorly on the electorate, no argument there. But I think a better description than "nuts" would be "disengaged and uninformed". Substance and policy is nothing in US presidential elections now. Messaging is everything. And that is something Trump did far better than Harris.
 
Its hardly an original point, but Democratic establishment didn't really act like Trump was a dangerous insurrectionist, rapist, etc.
 
I reject the idea that the democrats somehow failed. There are always things you can do differently: no one has any idea whether it would have made a difference.

For Trump to be reelected, two things had to happen:

- people had to be willing to ignore Trumps misdeeds, especially his rapes, racism, treason and corruption
- people had to be willing to vote for further loss of abortion rights, voting rights and mass deportations

It is men who have thrown women under the bus, racists, and others who voted ‘for the economy’ who are morally bankrupt.

Before you discuss what the democrats could have done done, reflect on the two choices that were there: an experienced career politician vs a rapist criminal who is losing his cognitive abilities. It should never have been a contest.

Not really.

It was "continuity with the current administration" and "rapist criminal who is losing his cognitive abilities".

You really don't need to convince people you are better than a convicted felon who also tried to organise an insurrection. As bad of a candidate Kamala is, Trump should have not even registered on the polling. They are in different universes integrity wise. The fact that this did not happen reflects extremely badly on the general voter in US.

Sticking to hard lines like this and not focusing on offering something tangible as a reason to vote for you is likely a part of the reason why Harris lost. For better or worse, regardless of what you think of the voters, they are the voters and you need to find a way to win them over.

Shaming the electorate and saying they should not even consider voting for this other person is not going to win any elections. “I’m not the other guy” is only going to get you so far, regardless of who the other guy is.
 
This just underlines how bad the Harris campaign actually did. They were running against a walking, talking disaster. Trump did not run a good campaign, and yet he won quite easily in the end.

Shaming the voters has been tried before, and it failed. The Democrats have to actually offer something, and drastically improve their messaging to drive turnout with their base.
The future is bleak. Social media algorithms have introduced people like Ben Shapiro and Jordan Peterson to young and mid age men and female varieties for young women. Most of the voters don't even know 1/10th of the info out there, they just know they hate the democratic nominee and think trump is better for the economy because their algorithm told them that. I'm seeing it here in Canada. Otherwise normal, smart people with the absolute worst political takes about how Trump is the best option. I ask for one example and they can't give it.

The right wing money in social media is winning them these elections. They're getting to elderly Latino, Indian and other minority segments.

There are more gullible people with no ability to filter through the bullshit than there are left leaning voters. This won't stop unless something is done to change education and social media influence
 
It is men who have thrown women under the bus
I really do hope this mode of thinking is on its last legs. It's just not very useful.

The gender gap was 10 points, according to exit polls. 55% of men (a small majority) voted of Trump. 55% of women (a small majority) voted for Harris. You can't really leap from that to "men betrayed women."

Trump won Missouri by 18 points. Harris got 1,190,823 votes. Meanwhile, Amendment 3, which adds "the fundamental right to reproductive freedom" to the Missouri Constitution, got 1,527,096 votes.
 
Last edited:
You really don't need to convince people you are better than a convicted felon who also tried to organise an insurrection. As bad of a candidate Kamala is, Trump should have not even registered on the polling. They are in different universes integrity wise. The fact that this did not happen reflects extremely badly on the general voter in US.
Amen.
 
Sticking to hard lines like this and not focusing on offering something tangible as a reason to vote for you is likely a part of the reason why Harris lost. For better or worse, regardless of what you think of the voters, they are the voters and you need to find a way to win them over.

Shaming the electorate and saying they should not even consider voting for this other person is not going to win any elections. “I’m not the other guy” is only going to get you so far, regardless of who the other guy is.
Disagree. What should have happened is that established Republicans got rid of Trump. When that didn’t happen, Trump should have lost in a landslide, forcing the Republican party to normalize.

Ignoring how bad of a choice Trump is, to avoid ‘shaming Trump voters’, doesn’t do any good. It is going to be chaos for four years, thanks to Trump voters.

It is not the Democrats job to save the country over and over, the electorate has to do it. I also blame the media for not portraying Trump for what he is.
 
New research suggests that the Democrats’ struggles in communities battling fentanyl addiction had little to do with economic theory or messaging—it was, more simply, a failure of political attention.
 
"Every quote becomes 10x better once you attach a famous name to it" - Abraham Lincoln
I'm not sure where people get these "He never said it" gotchas. There's just no way to know.
“Don’t believe everything you read on the internet” - Abraham Lincoln
Now, this is unlikely to have been said considering the internet was not a thing then. But even then, we can't say for sure.
 
I'm not sure where people get these "He never said it" gotchas. There's just no way to know.
They usually come from the fact that Jeffries has the exact same access to quotes from Winston Churchil as general public does and if hundreds of people actually digging for that quote can't find a reasonable source, Jeffries probably didn't find it either and just ran with a shitty source, because it's much more important for him that a speech sounds cool than that it's historically accurate.
Now, this is unlikely to have been said considering the internet was not a thing then. But even then, we can't say for sure.
I guess? We can't say for sure that we don't live in a simulation with milions of Churchils reenacting the "infinite monkeys on infinite typewriters" kind of deal. It's just not a useful assumption to make.
 
I'm not sure where people get these "He never said it" gotchas. There's just no way to know.

Now, this is unlikely to have been said considering the internet was not a thing then. But even then, we can't say for sure.
Chances are that he did say this, just not the one that used to be President!
 
GMgiHVPW8AAnZmX


https://jacobin.com/2024/04/liberals-fascism-rhetoric-democrats-election
 

It was mainly about money. Trump was a ratings juggernaut for lib networks during an era where they were languishing behind Fox, which is why they fixated on him with the perpetual assistance of all the self aggrandizing things he said and did over the years, many of them bordering on criminal, or else outright crimes. All of this happened during a 5 year stretch when people began to slowly get their news from social media and podcasts, which was one of the reasons Trump managed to win again.
 
It was mainly about money. Trump was a ratings juggernaut for lib networks during an era where they were languishing behind Fox, which is why they fixated on him with the perpetual assistance of all the self aggrandizing things he said and did over the years, many of them bordering on criminal, or else outright crimes. All of this happened during a 5 year stretch when people began to slowly get their news from social media and podcasts, which was one of the reasons Trump managed to win again.

I think there was a statistics or some bum mentioned it, that networks are < 10M viewers vs Rogan etc are > 50M viewers. dynamics have completely shifted. All due respect to CNN/MSNBC crew from last decade or so, but they are not what majority folks watch or get their info from anymore.
 
I think there was a statistics or some bum mentioned it, that networks are < 10M viewers vs Rogan etc are > 50M viewers. dynamics have completely shifted. All due respect to CNN/MSNBC crew from last decade or so, but they are not what majority folks watch or get their info from anymore.

True. Although a sizeable portion of Rogan’s audience may not necessarily be US based, the dynamics of where people get their information from during elections has definitely shifted a lot from just Twitter and Facebook during the earlier part of Trump’s rise, to now an entire self contained podcast ecosystem that allows Trump and the right wing to essentially speak to their own audience whilst winning elections by ignoring people on the outside.
 

Well said. Crisis-driven narratives—CNN’s bread and butter since the Gulf War and eagerly picked up by MSNBC—are past their sell by date. This apocalyptic talk about democracy’s collapse isn’t helping. It’s a distraction from real issues.

Is it time to move on from the 'fascism' debate? Considering the pervasive echo chambers and the stupidity of their target audiences, I'm not holding my breath.
 
Biden and some of his aides still believe he should have stayed in the race, despite the rocky debate performance and low poll numbers that prompted Democrats to pressure him to drop out. Biden and these aides have told people in recent days that he could have defeated Trump, according to people familiar with their comments, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe private conversations. Aides say the president has been careful not to place blame on Harris or her campaign.

https://www.mediaite.com/news/biden...ause-he-could-have-defeated-trump-allies-say/

He is a walking corpse that was embarrassed by a dementia-riddled fascist in a debate, and had internal polling showing Trump over 400 electoral votes before dropping out.

Not only did dropping out possibly stop a historically embarrassing loss, he should've dropped out when the GOP primaries were re-anointing Trump to give someone new a shot to break clean from "covid incumbents" issue we're seeing around the world.

These old fools, dems and gop, holding onto power like corpses with rigor mortis need to feck off.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.