Bernie Sanders attempted this twice, and the DNC quashed it.

 

They are terrible at messaging and need to communicate how ordinary basic social programs are, healthcare etc — and then deliver on them so people actually have an improvement in their material conditions. Look at Walz and Minnesota — he has success in this. They didn't learn anything from it.

 

It doesn't matter who the Democrats choose — they can campaign with Liz Cheney and talk about putting Republicans in their cabinet — but they'll still be painted as radical socialist leftists by Trump and much of the media. They also can't outflank the right. I don't understand attempting to appeal to people who simply won’t vote for you, especially at the cost of alienating your base and offering them nothing tangible. They'll just stay at home.

 

PREACH!!! The dnc is to blame. Had they not DESPERATELY sabotaged Bernie TWICE, NONE OF THID WOULD EVEN BE HAPPENING!!! NONE OF IT! Time ro go left. Their propagandists are already screaming that right wing Kamala, appealing to Repubs, is a communist anyway. May as well actually give people a proper choice.

 

The reason why Kamala's csmpsign nosedived and she sropped talking about not going back or calling then weird, was she listened to Hillary staffers :rofl: :rofl: Jesus Christ on a bike!!!

 

DNC had opportunity to do things differently if Biden wasn't seeking reelection from the get go!!!

 

It was too late once he dropped out, people lost trust in the party, hence why 13 million democrats didn't show up at all at polls!!!

It’s so depressing how many people in the UK are pro Trump. Almost everyone in my gym thinks it’s great he’s back in-they also hate Labour. One is a private landlord so that’s no surprise. And yet in the school I work in, everyone is devastated that Trump has been re elected.

 

I just don’t think you can ever underestimate how many people are driven solely by money.

Schools having public sector employees would lead to this political divide I imagine.

Pretty interesting I think

 

@1854366739511030065

I may as well put all my thoughts on this (ill informed and slightly less ill-informed) into one big infodump.

 

Firstly, regardless of who won, I was hoping that the result would be emphatic, with the winner clearing both the Electoral College & the popular vote with sizeable margins, which is what will happen once all the votes are counted, so there's that.

 

My predictions for this election (which I didn't commit to paper this time) were similar to back in 2016 - up until a few weeks ago I thought Trump would win, but then shifted to Kamala Harris with a few weeks to go after seeing the early votes in swing states going in her favour. Once again, never ask me to predict anything political, as I inevitably get it wrong.

 

I do not see election turning out the way because Trump won. The election turned out the way it did because the Democrats lost. When Joe Biden ran in 2020, it should have been clear from the outset that he would run for only one term, so that a proper primary process could be undertaken to find a popular successor within the party. When that didn't happen, the Democrats' chance of winning became slim given Biden's health (I refuse to believe that the Democrats didn't know there were issues with his health until his debate with Trump, I'm sure in the next few years there will be interesting insider books that come out setting out what the Biden White House was like from the inside, which will be rather juicy). Once he finally dropped out, they should have arranged an expediated emergency primary to get a candidate with popular approval within the party. Instead, they went with the vice president Kamala Harris, who proved so unpopular when she ran in 2020 that she withdrew early in the process, and would not likely have won the nomination had she taken part in a full primary. I have some sympathy for her given that she was only given a few months to prepare for running for president instead of a full year lead-in, but in hindsight she was never going to win on a "I'm not Donald Trump", even with the backing of Dick Cheney and Richard Spencer. As to the question of "she lost because she was black & a woman", lets not forget that Barack Obama did win two elections, so colour is not a barrier to the highest office. I've said before that when America does elect a woman as president, I believe that she will be a Republican rather than a Democrat, so the next Republican primary will be interesting.

 

As for those saying that the Democrats lost because [insert something that confirms my priors], I will say that the Democratic campaign that ran was more leftward than the average voter on social issues, and more rightward than the average American on economic issues. It's interesting to note that in ballot initiatives "conservative" deep red states Missouri & Alaska passed votes to increase the minimum wage, whilst bluer than a blue whale California voted 70% in favour of tougher punishments for theft & drug related crime. It's almost as if being economically left wing whilst being more (but not totally) socially conservative is a vote winner.*

 

I've seen it reported that one of the few demographics where the Democrats improved between now and 2020 was with voters who earn more than $100,000 per year. I understand the irony of the working classes voting for the party of billionaire Donald Trump and the richest man in the world Elon Musk, but the Democrats losing its working class support underpins the rightward shift of the working classes. It was once believed that demographics were destiny, and that the less white the US becomes, the less likely the Republicans would ever win again. Given nearly all demographics shifted to Trump (with the majority of Latinos voting for him, even with the "garbage" comments!), I think we can shatter that myth once and for all.

 

This election makes the UK somewhat an outlier in the Western world, with it being one of the few countries that hasn't shifted rightward in its recent elections (although that may have something to do with our jolly electoral system of first past the post, see also France). Hopefully Labour can learn a few lessons from it before 2029 to ensure that they don't become a single term government as well. I also don't envy them having to cosy up to Trump now especially given what they've said about him over the years (especially David Lammy, although he has said that he does have a good relationship with VP elect JD Vance, which I can somewhat understand given his Blue Labour leanings). Being in opposition really is politics on easy mode, but once you're in power everything changes.

 

As for Trump, there are two things that concern me more than anything else with him in a 2nd term. The first is on Ukraine, he has said that he wants the war with Russia to end as soon as possible. Now I'm all for peace and and end to war, but if a peace deal is struck early on in his term, then such a deal would see Ukraine waving goodbye to Crimea for good, and likely have to give up some of the mainland territory in Donbas that Putin has taken since 2022. And I don't trust Putin not to salami slice Europe even if a deal is brokered (Moldova could be next). I'm also pretty concerned if Robert Kennedy Jr is put in charge of health in any future Trump administration, his anti-vaccination stance could literally kill millions of children if he is allowed to enact even a fraction of it.

 

Finally, given how volatile politics are at the moment, I suspect that the Democrats will win back the White House in 2028. I'm not even going to attempt to predict who with just yet.

 

Thar be my two pence worth, whether you agree or not.

 

*Yes, I know I'm a hypocrite.

It's almost as if being economically left wing whilst being more (but not totally) socially conservative is a vote winner.*

I'm seeing a couple of tweets saying the Latinx community are quite socially conservative and find Democrats' stance on social issues too left-wing, hence the shift to the Republican Party even if the immigration policies are not in favour of them and that "garbage" comment too. However, I agree with others that on paper Democrats lost a lot of votes because they are not progressive enough, as the Republican Party has almost the same number of votes as in 2020. Hence, I don't think shifting to the right socially is the answer to win back votes (from Latinos, gen Z who will eventually enter the workforce, Asian-Americans etc.), rather focus on the benefits on being economically left wing in grassroots level, as from I saw, many voters only focused on the current economy of their daily lives. Maybe the Democrats should focus on improving their message in economy in the next couple of elections. I think the Democrats have always been relatively clear on the messaging on the left wing social issues, so for them to lean to the right makes the messaging all the more confusing and is not gaining voters at all. Courting voters by being more right-leaning isn't the answer imo.

I'm seeing a couple of tweets saying the Latinx community

 

This phrase is generally hated by Latino’s. I’ll give you some examples

@ 1854049606104907856

 

@ 1854166743825981688

 

@1854210510994239820

 

Despite Trump doing great he mostly outperformed other Republicans sometimes by quite a lot. So for example he’s 190k ahead in Arizona but the very pro-Trump senator is 30k behind in Arizona and this is among the same voters. I know a lot of people can’t quite get the Trump appeal here but ultimately only Trump is Trump it’s not necessarily a permanent shift or a shift at all. A lot of people don’t view Trump as a Republican or a politician. Interestingly Trump is now about to surpass his 2020 total. Think the podcasts and Elon Musk had a bigger impact than I imagined. To increase the total from four years ago seemed impossible. That’s going to be around 12-13 million more votes for him than in 2016

LatinX makes no sense anyway, as it should be, Latino. LatinX is just a brainrot attempt to impose English rules on Spanish.

The orange thing promised to end the war in Ukraine within 24 hours of being elected, before the inauguration. He's broken an election promise even before he's started.

Thr thing that makes me angriest about this is the thought of Elon Musk jumping up and down in fashy glee at the rallies. And now he gets to glaot even more.

It's a crazy world when the serial adulterer and convicted felon is more popular in the midwestern bible belt than the married baptist former District Attorney.

 

 

Unfortunately, 90-95% of people don't care about policy when it comes to choosing who to vote for. They might care about the impact of policies after the fact- how much money they have, how public services function etc but ultimately when it comes to voting they want a good narrative with punchy soundbites, whether policies feature there or not is irrelevant, it just needs to sound good. There's no room for nuance in electoral politics, by all means parties should 100% should put all the nitty gritty details in paperwork and manifestos and the like, and expand on it in if asked in interviews, but people want to hear certain, simple, clear messages. As abhorrent as Trump is, he can do this remarkably well (building walls, deportations, ending wars - doesn't say how because he has no clue, but it's simple and cuts through) despite often being completely incoherent (especially recently) he's very brash and confident about it. Bernie Sanders was capable of cutting through the bullshit and offering people a real alternative, speaking to the needs of the people when it came to the things they cared about, he offered something both popular and effective- universal healthcare, better working conditions and higher minimum wage for example. I genuinely think if he had been selected in either 2016 or 2020 he would have won, and if we were living in the good timeline, we would just be coming to the end of an 8 year Sanders presidency that would have transformed politics for the better, not just in America but internationally. I've read "It's Ok To Be Angry about Capitalism" and genuinely, it's incredible- I strongly recommend. Sadly, we're here.

 

Harris had some good lines, attacking republicans for being "weird" (though that was more Walz, one of the best parts of the campaign), "not going back" was good, but all the momentum died before the summer did when she stopped. Calling Trump a fascist, while accurate, just feeds the narrative that the median voter has of "the left calling everyone a nazi" (nevermind such ideologies are actually on the rise but I digress)- and she didn't offer a meaningful alternative. The nail in the coffin was completely failing to distance herself from Biden, who has become increasingly unpopular with the left over Gaza amongst other things, and trying to cosy up to the right on immigration and promising to create bipartisan committees if she won, alienating the left and attempting to appeal to Trump leaning voters by going Trump lite on those issues.. but if they liked those ideas why wouldn't they just go for the full version? Trump ran a terrible incoherent campaign but it didn't matter, he offered "change" from the unpopular status quo and has an extreme core of cultish voters who would crawl through glass to vote for him to make their lives worse.

 

Frankly, Labour has a lot of the same issues as the Dems, they just got lucky that a) they weren't the incumbent party, the Tories were supremely unpopular after Truss' budget directly and obviously destroyed the economy and voter's confidence, b) they were viewed as the main opposition and therefore were the main opposition and c) Reform split the right wing vote because of our system, finally restoring the balance of the left wing vote always getting split between Lib Dems, Labour and Greens (and SNP in Scotland). LD and Greens also learnt to target seats really effectively instead of just diluting the left wing vote, leaving other seats open for Labour. Point is, like lots of people have said, Labour weren't popular, the main thing they had going for them was "not Tories" which isn't sustainable long term. I really hope that over the next few years they can not only improve things but learn to present their ideas in a way that really appeals to voters, or maybe another left wing party does and we get a coalition. That said, I don't see Badenoch winning any elections any time soon, especially with reform diluting the Tory vote, but then people said Trump was unelectable in 2016- you don't have to be competent to win. Side note, I remember when May was in when Trump was last time and the one time she said him retweeting Britain First was "wrong" and Trump had a meltdown in response, amazing how far they've moved over since with Badenoch now ecstatic at this result. May was hardly an inspiration but you really don't know what you've got until it's gone I guess, at least within the confines of that awful party.

 

If there is indeed an election in 2028 and the USA doesn't become an oligarchy/ plutocracy (well, more of one than it already is) the Dems should win in theory with Trump unable to run again as the only real figurehead the Republicans have, but 4 years is a long time and who knows what damage will have been done in the meantime.

Thry stopped saying, not going back, and calling then weird, due to advice for Clinton staffers!!! :lol: The Clinton staffers have lodt TWO elections now. Enough now.

Thry stopped saying, not going back, and calling then weird, due to advice for Clinton staffers!!! :lol: The Clinton staffers have lodt TWO elections now. Enough now.

Well quite, establishment Dems attempting to moderate and dilute messages to make them sterile and safe for the corporate interests who are going to prefer corporation tax cutting Trump over Democrats keeping things the same anyway. This needs to be a real wake up call for the Democrats, they've been running on Obama era messaging (or even Bill Clinton era messaging) for far too long now and it just doesn't work any more. They need to remember their base of voters is or should be the workers and create messaging accordingly.

I would caution against assuming that Trump is Trump and that once he's gone the Republicans would be directionless or necessarily unpopular. When you compare Republican messaging and drive to standard Democratic messaging they're invigorated and do get how to entice people to come out to vote for them. They're a very efficient party at getting themselves into power and blaming their opponents. Once Trump is out of the picture they'll still have the Republican infrastructure complete with podcasters and influencers selling themselves as the cool, manly, all-American party of fascism and a leader will emerge from that. Doubt Vance himself is quite up to being the heir even if he obviously thinks himself that at the moment but whoever emerges will absolutely play off that and their new multiracial base (Rubio comeback?).

 

For one thing, something we really hope doesn't happen is that Trump dies a short while into his term and America is lumbered with President Vance. Vance and the people behind him would absolutely use the opportunity to put down roots to institutionalise their ideology into government and probably would go ahead with a wide variety of anti-democratic moves to disadvantage a Democratic comeback. I don't think Trump is going to bother much with that while he's in the Presidency, he's got his second term now and apart from insulating himself for any post-Presidency retirement he won't care much for beyond it - there's no way at his age he thinks he has a 3rd term in him. He likely only orchestrated Jan 6th out of ego. As it always is with him.

The Democrats won't win by default, it's true- they really need another Sanders or someone who really stands for something more than "not them". The saving grace with Trump is that he's a narcissist, which makes him unpredictable with only a propensity for doing awful things as opposed to really intentionally systematically implementing awful things; that said I feel like this term will be worse than the last with fewer milquetoast old Republicans around to hold him back and more MAGA fascists to encourage him or to try to push their ideas through. What I'm most worried about in the short term is Ukraine and the future security of Europe if he completely mishandles Putin, which he probably will.

 

I am hopeful though that assuming he makes it through this term alive, they don't completely destroy democracy and the above Vance scenario doesn't kick in that Republicans will just pick the wrong leader, if someone like DeSantis actually got the nomination they wouldn't make anywhere near the same waves Trump has.

 

Then again, they could pick a charismatic young MAGA nut/ Nazi, who knows. :nocheer:

Remember, there was the Indian almost Nazi at the primaries. They LOVED him. He could easily become the flag bearer next time...

I would caution against assuming that Trump is Trump and that once he's gone the Republicans would be directionless or necessarily unpopular. When you compare Republican messaging and drive to standard Democratic messaging they're invigorated and do get how to entice people to come out to vote for them. They're a very efficient party at getting themselves into power and blaming their opponents. Once Trump is out of the picture they'll still have the Republican infrastructure complete with podcasters and influencers selling themselves as the cool, manly, all-American party of fascism and a leader will emerge from that. Doubt Vance himself is quite up to being the heir even if he obviously thinks himself that at the moment but whoever emerges will absolutely play off that and their new multiracial base (Rubio comeback?).

 

Well long term who knows but this election there has been a consistent trend of Trump getting huge votes and Republicans in the same state struggling

 

@ 1855341856290418790

 

And it hasn’t mattered what kind of republican they are either

Now it’s been confirmed Trump won Arizona that’s 312 electoral votes the biggest Republicans have got since George H W Bush in 1988 got 426(what the hell was going on there?)

I really liked Kamala, but she did worse than Hillary :( The campaign just wasn't it.