Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[ZBridges]

Republicans are now projected to retain control of the House of Representatives. Source.

[McTraveller]

On behalf of the tens of millions of us in the "minority" in the US... sorry, world.

[Loud Whispers]

Trump is successful because he acts like he has a plan and is going to change things. It doesn't matter that he's lying and full of shit when the other choice's stance is to keep on truckin' the way we are. This is not about wanting an ideal candidate, about protest voting, or any other deflection. It's about the categorical inability of the current Democratic party to field a candidate who can get people mobilized and excited to vote for them.

Yeah we have this same problem in the UK where the parties focus far too much on negative messages that they forget to have a message of their own. If you have two candidates and one side is saying "don't vote for that guy because they're racist, unhinged, corrupt and downright dangerous" and the other guy is saying "vote for me I'll make bread and eggs cheap" the response "nuh uh he won't" isn't as powerful as having your own bold plan to actually make things better. FPTP liberal politics is kinda fucked though because for as long as the liberal political class continues to prioritise the interests of billionaire donors over things their own supporters want, they'll always just end up being a milder version of the far right. That inherently depresses their own support base's support to appeal to a crowd that will never think they're extreme enough, shifting the overton window further and further right each time

There will never be a firm electoral victory on the basis of "Hey at least I'm not the other guy," not because people want the perfect candidate but because it doesn't make people want to vote at all, much less for that candidate. There's a firm systemic denial of reality going on in the party establishment and way too many people buy the bullshit with the lines about not splitting the vote. Realize that 99% of the voting public doesn't think or care about any of the complexities of electoral politics. They care about their job, family, home, food, retirement, bank account, and rarely anything else beyond a superficial level. If you don't promise to make any of those things better or more secure, they won't care about what you say. You're never going to stop getting split votes and voter flips until you stop ignoring reality.

Too bloody right

I think it's also worth mentioning that what comes after the election is just as important as actually winning it. Whether you look at the USA, UK or France, last 10 years the politics has been dominated by "at least I'm not the other guy" elections. And the countries have been ungovernable

I've seen a lot of posts about what the Democrats did wrong, when really, they didn't lose because they did things wrong. Could they have done stuff better? Yeah, 100%. But the reason they did so bad wasn't that, 100% #ItsTheEconomyStupid.

[snip]

Again, they could have done stuff better.
People were really worried about the economy, and Trump lied constantly "Yeah, I'll magically fix it", and Democrats did stuff like saying "Nah, the economy is perfect, your just imagining you can barely afford to eat/pay rent, look at all these statistics" or just as bad, didn't lie and pretend they could fix the global economy with a push of a button. Like they still would have lost, but *shrugs* less so.

Just about the only way I think they could have won is if they picked Bernie (lol, like the Party officials would have ever done that).

I think there is a worthwhile point here you make, which is that politicians will routinely tell people the economy is doing great if they will just look at what the chart says, whilst populists like Trump will go tour a McDonalds drivethrough and talk to people directly about how they are struggling to pay for food and rent. People don't like being told the economy is doing great because the stock market is up. There needs to be a distinction between "we extracted value" and "we actually made wealth"

Alternately

2016 - Harambe is shot. Trump wins

2020 - no fluffy animal is killed before the elections. Trump loses

2024 - Peanut the squirrel and Fred the raccoon are shot. Trump wins

[Frumple]

On behalf of the tens of millions of us in the "minority" in the US... sorry, world.

hundreds*, as your standard reminder that less than a third of the country voted for any particular candidate. "Ineligible or insufficiently interested" is the actual majority in this country, shame they're the ones probably about to be shat on the hardest

Trump is successful because he acts like he has a plan and is going to change things. It doesn't matter that he's lying and full of shit when the other choice's stance is to keep on truckin' the way we are. This is not about wanting an ideal candidate, about protest voting, or any other deflection. It's about the categorical inability of the current Democratic party to field a candidate who can get people mobilized and excited to vote for them.

Yeah we have this same problem in the UK where the parties focus far too much on negative messages that they forget to have a message of their own. If you have two candidates and one side is saying "don't vote for that guy because they're racist, unhinged, corrupt and downright dangerous" and the other guy is saying "vote for me I'll make bread and eggs cheap" the response "nuh uh he won't" isn't as powerful as having your own bold plan to actually make things better.

Like, the thing is, that's more characterized by the winning campaign than the losing one, this cycle.

Dems were constantly spitting out their bold plans to make things better, it's just too many people didn't pay any bloody attention and the media refused to cover it. Fuck the forth estate, and all that.

[Loud Whispers]

Dems were constantly spitting out their bold plans to make things better, it's just too many people didn't pay any bloody attention and the media refused to cover it. Fuck the forth estate, and all that.

The party was sure, but Kamala Harris did basically no outreach, one debate vs Trump but no debates vs other Democrats, no unscripted media interviews or unscripted dialogues with normal people. Whereas Trump beat out all the Republican candidates, was constantly touring USA getting free publicity stunts, doing unscripted media interviews with just about anyone (and unscripted interviews in non-traditional venues like McDonalds, Elon Musk, even youtube influencers like Logan Paul). The lack of clarity and genuineness vs other candidate's overabundance of it is bad for that kind of voter engagement, when voters aren't clear at all which side of the fence you're gonna sit on, whereas Trump leaves nothing to imagination with his rhetoric

Unironically think Bernie would have rinsed Trump if he was the candidate because voters would've had something to attach their imagination to. When we had Jeremy Corbyn vs Boris Johnson, Jeremy did this middle of the road fence sitting where he wouldn't declare if we was going to be liberal or socialist. Boris made promises to the moon that he had no chance of fulfilling - but he still made them, and people could understand the vibe
Trump picks big visceral imagery like building walls or blaming immigrants for eating pet dogs, and it spreads faster than his broken promises or fact checks. Kamala had 4 years to make her economic platform clear and people still didn't really understand what she was doing, if anything, to help people who can't afford their own political lobbyist

[MonkeyHead]

Plus, Trump is already famous before you throw in all the politics bullshit. That sort of thing always goes far in the US.

[Strongpoint]

Elon Musk leading the Department of Government Efficiency?

Yeah, the era of efficiency is coming. The era of efficient appropriation of government money by Elon. Perfect position for a conman.

[martinuzz]

The self-driving government on the right side of the road.

[Loud Whispers]

Elon Musk leading the Department of Government Efficiency?

Yeah, the era of efficiency is coming. The era of efficient appropriation of government money by Elon. Perfect position for a conman.

Sounds like a quango post meant to involve Musk in cabinet level meetings without giving him real power

Department
Of
Government
Efficiency

DOGE - much government, very politics. Nothing speaks efficiency like making a new government department based off a 14 year old meme

[martinuzz]

Bitcoin prices are rising fast after the news.

[Frumple]

DOGE - much government, very politics. Nothing speaks efficiency like making a new government department based off a 14 year old meme

Not just a new government department, but a new government department that's actively duplicating the efforts for at least two already existent ones. The extra level of farce to the whole thing is that the OMB and the GAO are right there. They already exist and these chucklefucks are apparently very pointedly not being put anywhere near them.

Real question is, is that intentional or is everyone involved just too goddamn ignorant of federal functioning to realize the departments are already there?

[martinuzz]

Things are really starting to look up eh.
The president: a convicted rapist.
Minister of shady money: a cocaine, XTC, ketamine, designer drug, trip addict with a Messiah complex.
Minister of Defense: some guy who got kicked out of the army for extreme right viewpoints.

We're in for a crazy ride.

[McTraveller]

And in Michigan there were some neo-Nazis waving flags around a Diary of Anne Frank theatrical production.

[wobbly]

DOGE - much government, very politics. Nothing speaks efficiency like making a new government department based off a 14 year old meme

Not just a new government department, but a new government department that's actively duplicating the efforts for at least two already existent ones. The extra level of farce to the whole thing is that the OMB and the GAO are right there. They already exist and these chucklefucks are apparently very pointedly not being put anywhere near them.

Real question is, is that intentional or is everyone involved just too goddamn ignorant of federal functioning to realize the departments are already there?

If a department exists in a forest, and Trump fires the department head every week, or leaves the role unfilled does it exist?

[MonkeyHead]

Nothing says government efficiency like giving your efficiency department two leaders. Genius.