OFFICIAL ELECTION RESULTS - POTUS | TRUMP ELECTED 47th President

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 2K
  • Views: 31K
  • Politics 
Trump coming out now to give his speech. Unclear prior to the speech if Harris has called him yet to concede.
 
So did Harris not yet call Trump to concede?

That speech was pretty subdued. I don’t think he mentioned Harris or Biden one time.
 
Awinisawin said:
I wonder what’s going thru Kamala’s mind right now.
Click to expand...
Of all people to blame for what happened tonight, she shouldn’t be near the top of the list for Democrats.

Sure, she holds some blame as an ineffective VP and overall subpar candidate. But she faced a lot of headwinds and she at least gave the Democrats hope in an election that otherwise would’ve been a total landslide against Biden. She ran a pretty clean campaign other than the clunky “nothing comes to mind” comments about what she’d do differently than Biden.

Point being, she didn’t do a bad job with the crappy hand she was dealt. She was thrust into the race without receiving a single primary vote because it was basically her or Joe Biden, and at that point any warm body would’ve done better than Joe Biden.
 
altmin said:
ground game
enthusiasm
small donors
war chest
rallies
supposedly disqualifying behavior
personal rights
coherent messaging


none of it matters over tribalism
Click to expand...
I think we can only make broad generalizations as to what happened because each voter responds in different ways. Thinking about it in terms of tactics or issues or data points is not going to explain such a huge election failure.

It might be helpful to think about it from a brand marketing point of view. . There's nothing good about Trump's brand. He is the worst candidate in history. Most voters know that. So then why couldn't a few extra voters see at least something positive in what the Democrats were selling as the alternative to a negative?

Or more to your point..........the effect of tribalism could be mitigated by a more positive brand from the Democrats. Beating a negative with a negative in politics works some of the time. But its easier if a few extra voters see you as a positive.

But, my thoughts on this are still in the evolution stage.
 
altmin said:
*ground game
*enthusiasm
*small donors
*war chest
*rallies
supposedly disqualifying behavior
personal rights
coherent messaging


none of it matters over tribalism
Click to expand...
I don't know that hardly any of this is "tribalism" rather than a realignment of how elections now work.

Everything that has a star (*) are traditional measures of enthusiasm/support...but it may very well be that with social media that campaigns generate support and do GOTV activities via social media. There's no longer the need to rely on traditional support-generating or GOTV activities when you can reach voters directly via social media. And that may be especially true for Republicans who may have voters who are more self-sufficient and more likely to go to the polls without direct contact from a campaign-related person.

As far as the other things, I agree on "supposedly disqualifying behavior". I have no idea how Trump's behavior hasn't disqualified him from consideration for office by Pubs, but it isn't a new thing that his behavior is not only acceptable to them, but that at the party level it motivates them.

Personal rights, at least personal rights for others, have never been a motivating factor for a large swath of the electorate. That's nothing new.

I think we have to consider that Trump has a coherent message that appeals to his base and leans, just not one that appeals to you and me. A lot of folks are unhappy with the way things are going and Trump speaks to them in a way that they understand and motivates them. You and I may find Trump's message of "Everything sucks and I'm the only one who can fix it!" to be somewhere between silly and insane, but it very obviously speaks to a large percentage of the voting population.
 
The other thing that we're going to have to do before we can start to divine the reasons for this outcome is to wait for the votes to be counted and more information to be available about where votes were won/lost and how many were "switches".

There are a lot of possible reasons for the outcome we're getting, but the nitty-gritty details are where we can learn what caused this outcome.
 
SnoopRob said:
The other thing that we're going to have to do before we can start to divine the reasons for this outcome is to wait for the votes to be counted and more information to be available about where votes were won/lost and how many were "switches".

There are a lot of possible reasons for the outcome we're getting, but the nitty-gritty details are where we can learn what caused this outcome.
Click to expand...
Democrats don’t control the media, social media, and the misinformation machine. The rich have won.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top