OFFICIAL ELECTION RESULTS - POTUS | TRUMP ELECTED 47th President

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 2K
  • Views: 31K
  • Politics 
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...
Rogan’s podcast isn’t just followed by testosterone filled manosphere incels. It’s like the most popular podcast on the planet.

Signed,
A guy who has never listened to his podcast (yet knows how popular it is)
 
Paine said:
I don’t think it would’ve made a difference alone, no. It was just indicative of their failed media strategy overall.
Click to expand...
In the post I was quoting, you said, "Could have made the difference." That's what I was responding to.

But yes, not only do we need more of a presence in digital and social media, but we need it immediately. We have a lot of catching up to do. Quite frankly, Pete Buttiegieg will be out of a job in a couple of months. We need to start him doing the circuit immediately after that. He's the best messenger the Democratic party has right now. The DNC should put him on a salary and send him out over the next four years with our messaging.
 
Paine said:
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.
Click to expand...
Says he's closer to communism than to liberal Democrats. Laments that young people can't own houses. Shrug.

I'm just teasing. Sort of.
 
WaynetheDrain said:
In the post I was quoting, you said, "Could have made the difference." That's what I was responding to.

But yes, not only do we need more of a presence in digital and social media, but we need it immediately. We have a lot of catching up to do. Quite frankly, Pete Buttiegieg will be out of a job in a couple of months. We need to start him doing the circuit immediately after that. He's the best messenger the Democratic party has right now.
Click to expand...
Respectfully disagree about Buttigieg. He’s a good messenger, I agree. If he’s pushing the same message he pushed in the 2020 primary, I don’t think that’s what we need right now.
 
superrific said:
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."
Click to expand...

I get it, but I think letting people keep their whole check past the first 40 hours is a good idea. Just my opinion. But I don't feel so strongly about it that I'd be upset if it didn't happen, I guess I'm pretty neutral on it. If it happens, fine, great. But if it doesn't also fine.
 
superrific said:
In related news, FDR was operating in an environment where black people largely couldn't vote; there were few non-white people other than them; and women were not expected to have careers in most cases.

As much good as FDR did, he was still the leader of the party that maintained a base of support in the Solid South.

And isn't what you're ascribing to FDR (which I've not heard but I'll trust you) basically what Tim Walz meant by "one man's socialism is another man's neighborliness"?
Click to expand...
Perhaps, but none of what you mentioned is my point, which is that FDR was a master of slogans and simplifying issues so that everyone could understand them. I'm well aware that he was operating in a time in which blacks, women, Asian-Americans, and others had few rights, but that doesn't relate to his communication style.
 
CallMeTyler said:
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.
Click to expand...
And honestly, they should be. I would be terrified right now if I were transgender. It seems obvious that attacking transgenders is going to be a priority for the new administration, and even more at the state level, and it will likely be much worse than it has been in even the last few years. Republicans may grudgingly accept gays and lesbians (although they'll go after them if they see an opening), but I think they're determined to remove transgenders from public life and try to use government to ultimately ensure that no one can get the surgery needed to change genders. For example, we're likely going to see laws passed that will forbid public schools from calling students by anything other than their birth name, even if their parents give their consent.
 
EhringhausSouth said:
I get it, but I think letting people keep their whole check past the first 40 hours is a good idea. Just my opinion. But I don't feel so strongly about it that I'd be upset if it didn't happen, I guess I'm pretty neutral on it. If it happens, fine, great. But if it doesn't also fine.
Click to expand...
You are going to require W2s to report overtime and regular time separately, adding another bookkeeping expense. Employees will still need to pay state tax, unless the states match the policy. The federal income tax is fairly low (12%, less huge standard deduction) until you get to about $45k, which is less than most hourly workers make. You are making overtime wages more desirable than straight time (they already get paid 1.5x for overtime, and 2x for double overtime), potentially reducing the total number of jobs available and incentivizing parents to spend less time with their family members and more time at work.

Also, are you exempting overtime from the 15.3% FICA tax, or just income tax? If you are taking it out of FICA, you are going to further threaten the solvency of social security.
 
Calheel said:
You are going to require W2s to report overtime and regular time separately, adding another bookkeeping expense. Employees will still need to pay state tax, unless the states match the policy. The federal income tax is fairly low (12%, less huge standard deduction) until you get to about $45k, which is less than most hourly workers make. You are making overtime wages more desirable than straight time (they already get paid 1.5x for overtime, and 2x for double overtime), potentially reducing the total number of jobs available and incentivizing parents to spend less time with their family members and more time at work.

Also, are you exempting overtime from the 15.3% FICA tax, or just income tax? If you are taking it out of FICA, you are going to further threaten the solvency of social security.
Click to expand...


I'll be honest, I have not thought it through that much. You're probably right. You'd need to at least leave FICA on the overtime. But again, it's a proposal so far down the list for me, I wouldn't care either way.
 
There are cases pf people in state and city agencies rigging the system where high seniority workers are racking up $100,000 or more in overtime, both gaining more than their hourly income and padding their pension. There's more problems with this than whether or not to tax their overtime but some sort of limitation on where that ends needs to be considered.
 
finesse said:
There are cases pf people in state and city agencies rigging the system where high seniority workers are racking up $100,000 or more in overtime, both gaining more than their hourly income and padding their pension. There's more problems with this than whether or not to tax their overtime but some sort of limitation on where that ends needs to be considered.
Click to expand...

Good points.
 
finesse said:
There are cases pf people in state and city agencies rigging the system where high seniority workers are racking up $100,000 or more in overtime, both gaining more than their hourly income and padding their pension. There's more problems with this than whether or not to tax their overtime but some sort of limitation on where that ends needs to be considered.
Click to expand...
Signed every major city police department in America.
 
rodoheel said:
What do you think he meant by this? Did he just not understand how the marginal tax brackets worked?
Click to expand...
Perhaps in his day, before Reagan, the tax rates were pretty high. But honestly, the enemy today may just be the Earned Income Tax Credit and it actually being the enemy of additional work.

If you are a low income worker with children, the number one thing you want is to maintain your Medicaid insurance which additional income could threaten. Beyond that, its about the ADDITIONAL take home pay for each additional hour of work.

Because of the Credit's phase out, most low income workers know from experience that additional work just doesn't show up in their take home pay. I once did some tax calculations using estimated tax software for a head of household with one child. The numbers were rather shocking what extra work causes from a federal income tax point view. And that's before state taxes and payroll taxes come into play.
 
How did Nate Silver do this time around? I remember in the lead up to elections there were some comments directed his way.
 
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. 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.
Click to expand...
Didn't have a message? She was the only candidate who articulated a plan on how to attack price gouging on groceries, housing and supporting the middle class with tax breaks. I have no idea what Trump’s plan to help with any of that stuff outside of magical tariffs and expanding the record breaking oil production happening under the Biden administration.

Trump is a showman and it helped the majority of our voting public to ignore his lack of a beneficial plan and the extreme threat he poses to our republic. But at least he's not a woman.
 
bridgetender said:
Didn't have a message? She was the only candidate who articulated a plan on how to attack price gouging on groceries, housing and supporting the middle class with tax breaks. I have no idea what Trump’s plan to help with any of that stuff outside of magical tariffs and expanding the record breaking oil production happening under the Biden administration.

Trump is a showman and it helped the majority of our voting public to ignore his lack of a beneficial plan and the extreme threat he poses to our republic. But at least he's not a woman.
Click to expand...
She abandoned her price gouging plan after pushback from donors, then tried to say she just wanted the price gouging to be a federal version of the state bans that affect emergencies only. That’s not a bold plan to address people’s economic problems.

$25,000 home buyers assistance doesn’t touch many people and wouldn’t really address the root issue of supply problems in housing.

Trump doesn’t offer a plan, but he offers a coherent narrative of why people are struggling. It’s only attracts an electoral majority when the left doesn’t present a coherent alternative to working class people.

Joe Biden ran on a more progressive platform in 2020 than Harris did in 2024 and won. Why did Harris not seem willing to emphasize the good work the Biden admin had done in regards to antitrust? She was trying to keep everyone in the party happy, mainly wealthy donors and consultants.

It’s no wonder her message was incoherent. You can’t have a coherent message when you’re trying to appeal to Bernie Sanders and Liz Cheney. You have to choose.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top