OFFICIAL ELECTION RESULTS - POTUS | TRUMP ELECTED 47th President

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 2K
  • Views: 31K
  • Politics 
altmin said:

LGBTQ+ crisis hotlines report spike in calls after Trump victory​

Crisis hotlines catering to LGBTQ+ youths and adults have seen a staggering rise in calls fr people distressed over Donald Trump’s win.
Click to expand...
I was listening to a call in show earlier today. A number of trans callers and you could hear the anxiety and fear through their calls.

If you have a way to support local LGBTQ groups, please set aside some time to do so.
 
wmheel1287 said:
For what reason do you think someone's income should not be taxed? You do realize that there are PLENTY of us who are business owners that work hours that dwarf 40 a week, right? Should we also be able to delineate the portion of our income attributed to anything above 40 hours? And why should tips be untaxed? That's their income. Why should being a service worker automatically make someone tax exempt?
Click to expand...

Only the first 40 hours. Tax on overtime being for the worker makes sense to me. I see no reason the government should get to keep taking and taking. Just let the workers have their whole check beyond the first 40. Why not? They may not work the same overtime if it will continue to be taxed, who knows. Let people have more of the pie if they are willing to work for it.
 
BillOfRights said:
Almost no one would argue that people aren't struggling, but there are all kinds of reasons that people misremember, and most voters don't have much of a grasp of economics. Add to that that they've been lied to by right-wing media, and Democrats didn't effectively counter that.

The economic benefits of the Biden administration have gone mostly to those less well off. They are, indeed, better off than they were four years ago.

View attachment 5977
Click to expand...
It’s hard for democrats to counter lies from right wing media when the people they are trying to get the message to consume only right wing media.
 
Paine said:
Harris had the opportunity to appear on media that these right-wingers consume in order to push her agenda and counter lies. She chose not to do it.
Click to expand...
She did appear on FOX News. I assume you’re referring to Rogan. Not sure that truly counts as a right wing media source. But most people are getting their news via internet/social media. You can’t just get a message across through a tweet or a Facebook post or a TikTok video, etc. that’s specifically designed to spread right wing disinformation to people who seek to consume right wing disinformation.
 
EhringhausSouth said:
I see no reason the government should get to keep taking and taking.
Click to expand...
It's an income tax. It taxes income. If you look at taxes as the government "taking," then you will never understand tax policy, which values economic neutrality as a fundamental goal. A tax policy that hands out favors for small subsections of the economy for essentially no reason (as if people who don't get overtime don't work hard!) is terrible, distortive, and not sustainable because everyone is going to want that same benefit. Which is why Trump ended up with "repeal the whole income tax code and fund the government with tariffs."
 
Icky Mettle said:
She did appear on FOX News. I assume you’re referring to Rogan. Not sure that truly counts as a right wing media source. But most people are getting their news via internet/social media. You can’t just get a message across through a tweet or a Facebook post or a TikTok video, etc. that’s specifically designed to spread right wing disinformation to people who seek to consume right wing disinformation.
Click to expand...
I would say that going on Rogan would’ve been infinitely more valuable than whatever she did with Brett Baier.

Very few people watching Fox were going to vote for Harris. Rogan’s audience is right-leaning, not right wing as you say. She could’ve offered a more compelling argument to these people. Could’ve made the difference.

She didn’t go on Rogan because she didn’t really have a message to tell on his show.
 
Last edited:
Paine said:
I would say that going on Rogan would’ve been infinitely more valuable than whatever she did with Brett Baier.

Very few people watching Fox were going to vote for Harris. Rohan’s audience is right-leaning, not right wing as you say. She could’ve afforded a more compelling argument to these people. Could’ve made the difference.

She didn’t go on Rogan because she didn’t really have a message to tell on his show.
Click to expand...
I think it was a mutual convenient excuse. Rogan didn't really want her on either. He could easily have moved his podcast location for her schedule. By then the election was already baked anyway.
 
Paine said:
I would say that going on Rogan would’ve been infinitely more valuable than whatever she did with Brett Baier.

Very few people watching Fox were going to vote for Harris. Rohan’s audience is right-leaning, not right wing as you say. She could’ve afforded a more compelling argument to these people. Could’ve made the difference.

She didn’t go on Rogan because she didn’t really have a message to tell on his show.
Click to expand...
Most of that people consuming nothing but right wing media aren’t listening to Rogan though. I’m not talking about his audience.

I also don’t think it’s much of the Rogan audience complaining about the Biden economy.
 
Icky Mettle said:
Most of that people consuming nothing but right wing media aren’t listening to Rogan though. I’m not talking about his audience.
Click to expand...
from my experience, they are. It’s just they are consuming soft right wing content all within the Rogan sphere and sometimes just Rogan.
 
Paine said:
Harris had the opportunity to appear on media that these right-wingers consume in order to push her agenda and counter lies. She chose not to do it.
Click to expand...
What was that sit down interview with Brett Bair? MAGAs get their news from Fox, Xhitter, and Facebook.
 
Paine said:
I would say that going on Rogan would’ve been infinitely more valuable than whatever she did with Brett Baier.

Very few people watching Fox were going to vote for Harris. Rohan’s audience is right-leaning, not right wing as you say. She could’ve afforded a more compelling argument to these people. Could’ve made the difference.

She didn’t go on Rogan because she didn’t really have a message to tell on his show.
Click to expand...
Going on Joe Rogan's show wouldn't have made an ounce of difference. It's idiotic to think it would have. His show is followed by testosterone-filled manosphere incels. How would her going on his show have persuaded those types of voters to vote for her?

And let's say in your fantasy world that she was able to convince some of them that yes, a woman COULD excel as POTUS. She was blown the fuck out, and lost every single battleground state in the process. How many of those incels turning in her favor was going to win her 3-4 of those states?

I'm not saying that we don't have to change up what type of media we get involved with. We absolutely do need to become much more active with digital media and less reliant on mainstream media coverage to reach people, but going on the Joe Rogan show a week before the election wouldn't have made a lick of difference.
 
WaynetheDrain said:
Going on Joe Rogan's show wouldn't have made an ounce of difference. It's idiotic to think it would have. His show is followed by testosterone-filled manosphere incels. How would her going on his show have persuaded those types of voters to vote for her?

And let's say in your fantasy world that she was able to convince some of them that yes, a woman COULD excel as POTUS. She was blown the fuck out, and lost every single battleground state in the process. How many of those incels turning in her favor was going to win her 3-4 of those states?

I'm not saying that we don't have to change up what type of media we get involved with. We absolutely do need to become much more active with digital media and less reliant on mainstream media coverage to reach people, but going on the Joe Rogan show a week before the election wouldn't have made a lick of difference.
Click to expand...
I don’t think it would’ve made a difference alone, no. It was just indicative of their failed media strategy overall.
 
Paine said:
from my experience, they are. It’s just they are consuming soft right wing content all within the Rogan sphere and sometimes just Rogan.
Click to expand...
I think you responded before I edited my post to add that I don’t think those are the folks being fed right wing disinformation about the economy.
 
WaynetheDrain said:
I'm not saying that we don't have to change up what type of media we get involved with. We absolutely do need to become much more active with digital media and less reliant on mainstream media coverage to reach people, but going on the Joe Rogan show a week before the election wouldn't have made a lick of difference.
Click to expand...
I generally agree with respect to the timing, but the lack of urgency to get on those types of shows, earlier in the cycle, was laid bare as a terrible, terrible strategy. Hindsight, and all.
 
Icky Mettle said:
I think you responded before I edited my post to add that I don’t think those are the folks being fed right wing disinformation about the economy.
Click to expand...
I mean, they are fed disinformation about it directly from him at times. Regardless, I think the majority of Rogan viewers are pretty in touch with the state of the economy. They’re young men who are overwhelmingly likely to be renters compared to home owners. That alone creates economic anxiety that is legit and can’t be brushed off as disinformation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top