BLAME GAME

  • Thread starter Thread starter tar pal
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 89
  • Views: 2K
  • Politics 
OGtruthhurts said:
nah they just fucking hate your woke godless baby killing side......words of several maga bootlickers i know.
Click to expand...
That's definitely true of the MAGA folks. Those people are lost and I see no way to bring them back. It's not necessarily true of the folks who decided the election though - the ones for whom Trump was the lesser of two evils. I think their decision was astoundingly bad and for many of them the reasoning they reached to get there was utterly bizarre (spending a few minutes inside the mind of a "swing voter" will make you go crazy) but those folks are the ones who caused the election to swing. Many of them are young voters who swung heavily towards Trump and need to be swung back before things really go off the rails.
 
finesse said:
So you lost comprehension by the very second word of my initial post. Nice to know.
Click to expand...
No. I know what "seriously" means in that context.

Whether you believe the lies have been sufficiently called out, aren't Trump's lies still being pointed to as the issue?
 
ZenMode said:
What would they have to do differently to "call out" vs "normalize"?
Click to expand...
Make him justify his border claims. Make him justify his "They eating the pets." Make him answer to any of the numerous false claims he made. Passing it off as Trump being Trump is sheer unmitigated bullshit. Fwiw, those same standards should apply to Biden as well or any party or candidate.
 
rodoheel said:
Like voters all across the world, US voters voted out the administration in control during the COVID recovery. There are plenty of other factors around the margins - things Trump did right and Harris did wrong - but that seems to be the overriding trend, IMO.
Click to expand...
We Americans often like to think of our country as being special and unique. We have historically thought of it as that shining city upon a hill that Reagan alluded to. But roughly 10 years ago, we witnessed a rise in right wing populism around the western world, and we followed suit. Subsequently, there was a backlash against that right wing populism both here and abroad. But in the past couple years, we saw it resurface both here and abroad. And unfortunately there are some very wealthy and powerful people, who have the tools at their disposal to be highly influential, who have gotten behind it this time around.
 
ZenMode said:
No. I know what "seriously" means in that context.

Whether you believe the lies have been sufficiently called out, aren't Trump's lies still being pointed to as the issue?
Click to expand...
You apparently don't understand the meaning of much since you continue to misrepresent what people post. Let me repeat myself. They were an issue. The press has what was historically a claim to educate people about issues. It's why freedom of the press exists. Neither side did that, one by commission, one by omission.
 
Icky Mettle said:
We Americans often like to think of our country as being special and unique. We have historically thought of it as that shining city upon a hill that Reagan alluded to. But roughly 10 years ago, we witnessed a rise in right wing populism around the western world, and we followed suit. Subsequently, there was a backlash against that right wing populism both here and abroad. But in the past couple years, we saw it resurface both here and abroad. And unfortunately there are some very wealthy and powerful people, who have the tools at their disposal to be highly influential, who have gotten behind it this time around.
Click to expand...
I really disagree with this framing. The US was not some moral exemplar up until 2016. That is the sort of thinking that gets Liz Cheney stumping for Kamala Harris.
 
Last edited:
tar pal said:
did Trump get elected because of a desire for him and his policies or was it because of a rejection of Harris and her policies?
Click to expand...
Not even close. Rejection. More to the point, rejection of Democrats being in charge.

How do we know that? Go back to 2016 and ask how Hillary, despite having better favorable ratings then Trump, still lost. In both elections,when a persuade able voter (swing voter) has two bad options (in his mind) then how are those voters going to vote? They are going to break for the least bad option.

Ask yourself this. The odds should be 50% when both sides have the same favorable ratings. But that isn't going to happen when one Party is the "Party of no". Therefore, the voter concludes that he can do the least damage by voting for the "Party or candidate of no". (way over simplified) So Republicans have an automatic advantage in elections of two bad choices.

Keep in mind, that the typical swing voter is not heavily engaged to the point of understanding the nuances of just how dangerous an option someone like Trump is. Therefore, the brand perception of the Party is of vital importance.

Its far easier for a Senate candidate to put some distance between himself and his Party. For national candidate, much harder. It was interesting that in focus groups, there were some swing voters that couldn't give Harris much credit for moderating her views on some things. They just couldn't believe knowing her history and knowing her Party.

So if Democrats maintain their negative perception then they will underperform the 50%winning threshold. EXCEPT as in 2020 when recent history shows the swing voter who the worst option REALLY is.

Frankly, Democrats should do some cleanup so they can outperform the 50% threshold.
 
"Shining city" on a hill? American exceptionalism? Has the United States EVER possessed those traits while embracing during its entire history the twin towers of bigotry and runaway capitalism?
 
breepf said:
I really disagree with this framing. The US was not some moral exemplar up until 2016. That is the sort of thinking that gets Liz Cheney stumping for Kamala Harris.
Click to expand...
Icky Mettle didn't say we were a moral exemplar. He said Americans have historically thought of ourselves that way. Which is absolutely true.
 
UNCMSinLS said:
"Shining city" on a hill? American exceptionalism? Has the United States EVER possessed those traits while embracing during its entire history the twin towers of bigotry and runaway capitalism?
Click to expand...
Americans, and even people from around the world, have often thought of America this way. Whether we've ever truly lived up to the idea is another question entirely.
 
In hindsight Kamala never had a chance. Trump beat Clinton in 2016 because she was a completely unlikeable candidate to most of America. IMO Kamala had all the unlikeable characteristics of Clinton. Add to that the fact that she was joined at the hip to a sitting President with historically low poll numbers. Plus add to that the fact that she's a minority and just had 2-3 months to campaign. All that being said I voted for her and the opinions expressed above are what I think are what gave Trump the swing voters, not how I actually feel about Kamala.

The Dems only chance was to have Biden announce early that he would not seek re-election and have a candidate that could have put some distance between themselves and the Biden Administration.
 
tar pal said:
I know many on here are upset for our latest election results like about half the country after every election in our history. WTBS he did win the electoral and popular vote, not as big as he says but a win. So in the opinion of Zigs did Trump get elected because of a desire for him and his policies or was it because of a rejection of Harris and her policies?
Click to expand...
I think primarily people vote based on the economy and the democrats did a very poor job of explaining that we actually had a good economy, that inflation was under control, and that their way forward was better for the USA than Trump’s.
 
farce© said:
Can you be more specific what that ”cleanup” would look like?
Click to expand...
Can anyone? The Democratic party has too large an umbrella, which leads to infighting. Maybe a viable third party might help balance things out but IDK.
 
ChileG said:
I think primarily people vote based on the economy and the democrats did a very poor job of explaining that we actually had a good economy, that inflation was under control, and that their way forward was better for the USA than Trump’s.
Click to expand...
How do they explain when Trump is claiming the opposite and no one is willing to acknowledge the validity of one side or the other? Fwiw, I don't think this should be just about this year and these candidates. It should be about no party or no candidate being treated this uncritically.
 
farce© said:
Can you be more specific what that ”cleanup” would look like?
Click to expand...
Let's put it in military terms although I'm not an expert. You never go on the offensive unless your flanks are covered. Same thing if you on defense.

Using Jimmy Carter as an example, he saw a problem with the Panama Canal. He thought, got to fix it and the fix has to be on my resume. So he directly went after the problem. Never mind his flanks were completely exposed. Never mind the win on that damaged his Presidency. Would have been better to nudge the country to a solution. Wouldn't be hard. He was right, to hold it was going to be expensive.

Democrats have become captured by the academic, analytic crowd. Saw this on the transgender ad when the Harris campaign was convinced that it couldn't respond. (we never going to get voters that hear that anyway thinking) Really? Swing voters saw the lack of response as confirmation that Democrats had left them. So better to vote for the other bad option. Just wow. Flanks completely exposed.
 
finesse said:
Make him justify his border claims. Make him justify his "They eating the pets." Make him answer to any of the numerous false claims he made. Passing it off as Trump being Trump is sheer unmitigated bullshit. Fwiw, those same standards should apply to Biden as well or any party or candidate.
Click to expand...
Ironically, I think the border claims are largely valid. I don't remember where I found the table, but it showed, I believe, over the last X number of years, the first three years of Biden's term were all higher than all but one of the past years.

In regard to the obvious lies like eating pets, how do you get to him to make him justify the claims? It's not like he does a lot of sit-down interviews with "MSM".
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top