Where do we go from here?

[hedge]

Actually, I think a lot of his humor against Trump and conservatives is funny as hell.

Problem is, it's not humor and it's not funny, nor was it ever intended to be. He's merely using humor to make a larger point that's not humorous at all. Just b/c you chuckle doesn't mean he's not making a serious point. The fact that all you derive from Maher's schtick is a chance to yuck it up says more about you than about Maher or what he's actually getting at, which, overwhelmed and smitten by the easy laugh, you clearly don't "get" at all..

 

[ZenMode]

Some post election polling data.

Lost in Translation: Swing Voters’ Misperceptions of Harris And Late Turn To Trump​

These voters—who remained open to persuasion until the very end—delivered not just a rejection of Harris but what they believed the Democratic Party stands for, absorbing right wing narratives.

KEY FINDINGS:​

• Late Break for Trump: Swing voters broke for Trump 52% versus just 38% for Harris. Nearly half of swing voters who chose Trump made their decision in the final weeks, including 27% in the final days (15% in the last week, 12% on Election Day), suggesting they were genuinely up for grabs. This is substantially later than swing voters who broke for Harris—just 15% of whom decided in the last week or on Election Day.
• Misaligned Democratic Brand: In the eyes of swing voters who chose Trump, Democrats were misaligned on their top policy priorities. These voters were more likely to view Democrats as “too focused on identity politics” (67%) and “not doing enough to address crime” (68%). 75% of swing voters who chose Trump said it is accurate that Democrats are “too focused on fighting Trump rather than bringing the country together.”
• Perception Gap: Over 80% of swing voters who chose Trump believed Harris held positions she didn’t campaign on in 2024, including supporting taxpayer funding for transgender surgeries for undocumented immigrants (83%), mandatory electric vehicles by 2035 (82%), decriminalizing border crossings (77%), and defunding the police (72%).

• Trust Crisis: Only 22% of swing voters who broke for Trump believed Harris prioritized “Americans like me” versus party activists—a stark contrast with the 80% who said Trump prioritizes “Americans like me” over party activists.

In the final days of the 2024 presidential election, one in four swing voters were still making up their minds. When they finally chose, they broke decisively for Donald Trump—delivering a deeply sobering message about Democratic Party misalignment on the high-salience issues of immigration and the economy and laying bare a Democratic brand problem.

More:

Lost in Translation: Swing Voters’ Misperceptions of Harris And Late Turn To Trump - Blueprint

These voters—who remained open to persuasion until the very end—delivered not just a rejection of Harris but what they believed the Democratic Party stands for, absorbing right wing narratives.

blueprint2024.com

 

[Carolina Fever]

Some post election polling data.

Lost in Translation: Swing Voters’ Misperceptions of Harris And Late Turn To Trump​

These voters—who remained open to persuasion until the very end—delivered not just a rejection of Harris but what they believed the Democratic Party stands for, absorbing right wing narratives.

KEY FINDINGS:​

• Late Break for Trump: Swing voters broke for Trump 52% versus just 38% for Harris. Nearly half of swing voters who chose Trump made their decision in the final weeks, including 27% in the final days (15% in the last week, 12% on Election Day), suggesting they were genuinely up for grabs. This is substantially later than swing voters who broke for Harris—just 15% of whom decided in the last week or on Election Day.
• Misaligned Democratic Brand: In the eyes of swing voters who chose Trump, Democrats were misaligned on their top policy priorities. These voters were more likely to view Democrats as “too focused on identity politics” (67%) and “not doing enough to address crime” (68%). 75% of swing voters who chose Trump said it is accurate that Democrats are “too focused on fighting Trump rather than bringing the country together.”
• Perception Gap: Over 80% of swing voters who chose Trump believed Harris held positions she didn’t campaign on in 2024, including supporting taxpayer funding for transgender surgeries for undocumented immigrants (83%), mandatory electric vehicles by 2035 (82%), decriminalizing border crossings (77%), and defunding the police (72%).
• Trust Crisis: Only 22% of swing voters who broke for Trump believed Harris prioritized “Americans like me” versus party activists—a stark contrast with the 80% who said Trump prioritizes “Americans like me” over party activists.

In the final days of the 2024 presidential election, one in four swing voters were still making up their minds. When they finally chose, they broke decisively for Donald Trump—delivering a deeply sobering message about Democratic Party misalignment on the high-salience issues of immigration and the economy and laying bare a Democratic brand problem.

More:

Lost in Translation: Swing Voters’ Misperceptions of Harris And Late Turn To Trump - Blueprint

These voters—who remained open to persuasion until the very end—delivered not just a rejection of Harris but what they believed the Democratic Party stands for, absorbing right wing narratives.

blueprint2024.com

Idiots. All I needed to see was the too focused on Trump to bring the country together crap. Too stupid to see through the lies from Trump and realize the threat he is to the country. It wouldn't have mattered what Harris and the Dems said. These people are just too ignorant to see reality.

 

[heelinhell]

Idiots. All I needed to see was the too focused on Trump to bring the country together crap. Too stupid to see through the lies from Trump and realize the threat he is to the country. It wouldn't have mattered what Harris and the Dems said. These people are just too ignorant to see reality.

What did you expect them to say ?

"In the end I just couldn't bring myself to vote for a black woman" ?

 

[HeelYeah2012]

Idiots. All I needed to see was the too focused on Trump to bring the country together crap. Too stupid to see through the lies from Trump and realize the threat he is to the country. It wouldn't have mattered what Harris and the Dems said. These people are just too ignorant to see reality.

I sounded the sirens for months on here and tried to tell you guys that half the country (including moderates and swing voters) saw the prosecution of Trump as using the justice department to prosecute a political rival.

People here were appalled when I would explain to them I knew no details about the Trump trials because I had checked out from following them. While many on the left obsessed over every detail of the individual cases, they failed to see the forest for the trees there on what was actually going on - and most importantly, how swing voters perceived it.

 

[stankeylegjones]

How did I switch sides so effortlessly? Because I have immutable principles. I believe that character, honor, and decency are the most important qualifications any leader can possibly have above all else. Period, point blank, full stop. Without those three characteristics, nothing else matters to me. In my book, the Republican Party lost every bit of character, honor, and decency forever by enabling and supporting someone like Donald Trump over the last 8 years.

How did I switch sides so effortlessly? Because I have pride. There is nothing that I hate more than being lied to and to be treated like I am stupid. That is exactly what the Republican Party does every moment of every day. They lie about everything; nothing is too small or too trivial or too outlandishly ridiculous to lie about. Everything about the Republican party in its current state is a lie, and a damned bad lie at that. They treat their voters like they are the dumbest effing people on the planet, and their voters provide them correct over and over and over again. I have way too much pride for that.

How did I switch sides so effortlessly? Because the Republican Party completely abandoned every conservative ideal on which it claimed to stand. I'm a conservative. I believe in the rule of law. I believe in the sanctity of the United States Constitution. I believe in free markets. I believe in limited regulation of business and commerce, but also that we should heavily regulate environmental and worker protections. I believe in having the strongest, most powerful military in the world. I believe in America's role in standing up to foreign dictators and thugs, and crushing them when necessary. I believe in America's role as a keeper of peace through strength. I believe in supporting our democratic friends and allies abroad. I believe in the power of our geopolitical alliances and I believe that we gain just as much from their friendship as they gain from ours. I believe in keeping the government as small as possible when it comes to ensuring individual freedom and personal liberty. I believe that diversity is what makes America truly great, and that we need *both* strong, secure borders AND a humane, fair, and efficient system of legal immigration to ensure that the best, brightest, and hardest working in the world can come to the United States and make their lives *and* ours better by contributing positively to our economy and our society. I believe that as the wealthiest country in the history of the world, we should do everything that we can to ensure that we provide a helping hand up (and not a helping hand *out*) to the less fortunate among us. I believe that every able-bodied soul should work. I believe in free speech, even and especially when I don't agree with the speaker. I believe in the constitutional right to own guns, but as a responsible gun owner myself, I believe that we should have robust restrictions and guidelines that ensure that the wrong people can't buy and own guns. Most importantly, I believe in human dignity. I couldn't care less whether you're white, Black, Latino, Asian, straight, gay, Christian, Muslim, Jewish, atheist, agnostic, rich, poor, etc. I don't see people as their race or their ethnicity or their gender or their sexual preference or their religion or their wealth. I just see them as my fellow Americans, and human beings worthy of respect, kindness, compassion, and generosity. The Republican Party has abandoned each and every single one of these conservative ideals over the last 8 years.

Am I an opportunist? You mean as a completely anonymous politics nerd with a totally made-up username who posts on a boutique political forum in one tiny corner of the internet, am I opportunistically seeking some sort of praise or recognition or gain? Uhhhhh....no? I think that's the easiest way to answer that asinine question.

Will my new friends ever accept me? You know, that's a good question, but I guess I'll just have to point to the fact that they accepted me just fine when I was a member of this forum community 8 years ago and openly discussed how I was voting for Donald Trump in 2016, and then again when I stuck by my man and defended him during the early part of his presidency even when I knew internally that I was having a lot of doubt about him, before finally starting to realize in 2019 what a terrible person he is, and then ultimately switching sides in 2020.

Am I man without a country? I don't even know what that means, but I reckon I've got a country. Last time I checked, I'm still here, still proud to be an American, still proud to love my country even when (especially when) my preferred presidential candidate doesn't win an election, and still looking forward to cheering on President Trump's success (and hoping that I have a lot of success to cheer and a lot of crow to eat).

Hope that helps.

Thank you for posting this, CFordUNC. Perhaps I missed it, and I'm not sure you want to discuss it, but I'm wondering why you were drawn to Trump/the republicans in the first place?

 

[wmheel1287]

I sounded the sirens for months on here and tried to tell you guys that half the country (including moderates and swing voters) saw the prosecution of Trump as using the justice department to prosecute a politics rival.

People here were appalled when I would explain to them I knew no details about the Trump trials because I had checked out from following them. While many on the left obsessed over every detail of the individual cases, they failed to see the forest for the trees there on what was actually going on - and most importantly, how swing voters perceived it.

And yet you didn't feel the same way about "Lock Her Up" and I'm pretty sure you won't feel the same way about how the next administration is going to go after anyone who hasn't been a Trump loyalist. It's really an amazing thing to watch what does and doesn't concern you as the self-anointed spokesperson for the average man.

 

[HeelYeah2012]

And yet you didn't feel the same way about "Lock Her Up" and I'm pretty sure you won't feel the same way about how the next administration is going to go after anyone who hasn't been a Trump loyalist. It's really an amazing thing to watch what does and doesn't concern you as the self-anointed spokesperson for the average man.

I never claim to be the perfect average man, but I’m way closer to a political moderate/swing voter than 99% of people who post on here, based on the mere fact that so few here vote for any Republicans - while I routinely split my ticket and vote based on the candidate and not simply the party.

I’ve always said I’m center-right and not dead center. But I do bring a perspective to the board that could be valuable to people if they would take some of my posts as a differing perspective that comes from a place of good faith.

 

[Paine]

Why Are Latinos Fleeing Democrats? Arizona’s New Senator Offers Answers.

After a victorious Senate campaign, Ruben Gallego thinks others can follow his lead by signaling that they hear Latino voters’ economic pain. But repeating his success might not be so easy.

www.nytimes.com

“In an interview, Mr. Gallego said the Democratic Party had failed to address the deep-seated anxiety that Latino men felt over rising prices, which left them unable to provide for their families no matter how much harder they worked.”

“‘You could use identity politics to connect, but you’ve got to deliver an economic message at the end,” Mr. Gallego said. “Right now, there’s these two warring camps, and they’re both wrong. You’re going to have to do both.’”

 

[Ramrouser]

How did I switch sides so effortlessly? Because I have immutable principles. I believe that character, honor, and decency are the most important qualifications any leader can possibly have above all else. Period, point blank, full stop. Without those three characteristics, nothing else matters to me. In my book, the Republican Party lost every bit of character, honor, and decency forever by enabling and supporting someone like Donald Trump over the last 8 years.

How did I switch sides so effortlessly? Because I have pride. There is nothing that I hate more than being lied to and to be treated like I am stupid. That is exactly what the Republican Party does every moment of every day. They lie about everything; nothing is too small or too trivial or too outlandishly ridiculous to lie about. Everything about the Republican party in its current state is a lie, and a damned bad lie at that. They treat their voters like they are the dumbest effing people on the planet, and their voters provide them correct over and over and over again. I have way too much pride for that.

How did I switch sides so effortlessly? Because the Republican Party completely abandoned every conservative ideal on which it claimed to stand. I'm a conservative. I believe in the rule of law. I believe in the sanctity of the United States Constitution. I believe in free markets. I believe in limited regulation of business and commerce, but also that we should heavily regulate environmental and worker protections. I believe in having the strongest, most powerful military in the world. I believe in America's role in standing up to foreign dictators and thugs, and crushing them when necessary. I believe in America's role as a keeper of peace through strength. I believe in supporting our democratic friends and allies abroad. I believe in the power of our geopolitical alliances and I believe that we gain just as much from their friendship as they gain from ours. I believe in keeping the government as small as possible when it comes to ensuring individual freedom and personal liberty. I believe that diversity is what makes America truly great, and that we need *both* strong, secure borders AND a humane, fair, and efficient system of legal immigration to ensure that the best, brightest, and hardest working in the world can come to the United States and make their lives *and* ours better by contributing positively to our economy and our society. I believe that as the wealthiest country in the history of the world, we should do everything that we can to ensure that we provide a helping hand up (and not a helping hand *out*) to the less fortunate among us. I believe that every able-bodied soul should work. I believe in free speech, even and especially when I don't agree with the speaker. I believe in the constitutional right to own guns, but as a responsible gun owner myself, I believe that we should have robust restrictions and guidelines that ensure that the wrong people can't buy and own guns. Most importantly, I believe in human dignity. I couldn't care less whether you're white, Black, Latino, Asian, straight, gay, Christian, Muslim, Jewish, atheist, agnostic, rich, poor, etc. I don't see people as their race or their ethnicity or their gender or their sexual preference or their religion or their wealth. I just see them as my fellow Americans, and human beings worthy of respect, kindness, compassion, and generosity. The Republican Party has abandoned each and every single one of these conservative ideals over the last 8 years.

Am I an opportunist? You mean as a completely anonymous politics nerd with a totally made-up username who posts on a boutique political forum in one tiny corner of the internet, am I opportunistically seeking some sort of praise or recognition or gain? Uhhhhh....no? I think that's the easiest way to answer that asinine question.

Will my new friends ever accept me? You know, that's a good question, but I guess I'll just have to point to the fact that they accepted me just fine when I was a member of this forum community 8 years ago and openly discussed how I was voting for Donald Trump in 2016, and then again when I stuck by my man and defended him during the early part of his presidency even when I knew internally that I was having a lot of doubt about him, before finally starting to realize in 2019 what a terrible person he is, and then ultimately switching sides in 2020.ernment

Am I man without a country? I don't even know what that means, but I reckon I've got a country. Last time I checked, I'm still here, still proud to be an American, still proud to love my country even when (especially when) my preferred presidential candidate doesn't win an election, and still looking forward to cheering on President Trump's success (and hoping that I have a lot of success to cheer and a lot of crow to eat).

Problem is, it's not humor and it's not funny, nor was it ever intended to be. He's merely using humor to make a larger point that's not humorous at all. Just b/c you chuckle doesn't mean he's not making a serious point. The fact that all you derive from Maher's schtick is a chance to yuck it up says more about you than about Maher or what he's actually getting at, which, overwhelmed and smitten by the easy laugh, you clearly don't "get" at all..

Problem is, it's not humor and it's not funny, nor was it ever intended to be. He's merely using humor to make a larger point that's not humorous at all. Just b/c you chuckle doesn't mean he's not making a serious point. The fact that all you derive from Maher's schtick is a chance to yuck it up says more about you than about Maher or what he's actually getting at, which, overwhelmed and smitten by the easy laugh, you clearly don't "get" at all..

Problem is, it's not humor and it's not funny, nor was it ever intended to be. He's merely using humor to make a larger point that's not humorous at all. Just b/c you chuckle doesn't mean he's not making a serious point. The fact that all you derive from Maher's schtick is a chance to yuck it up says more about you than about Maher or what he's actually getting at, which, overwhelmed and smitten by the easy laugh, you clearly don't "get" at all..

Maher IS funny in a way modern, late night comedians are not. He pokes fun at both sides.

I sounded the sirens for months on here and tried to tell you guys that half the country (including moderates and swing voters) saw the prosecution of Trump as using the justice department to prosecute a politics rival.

People here were appalled when I would explain to them I knew no details about the Trump trials because I had checked out from following them. While many on the left obsessed over every detail of the individual cases, they failed to see the forest for the trees there on what was actually going on - and most importantly, how swing voters perceived it.

So true. So true. I consume a lot of MSNBC just to see what the other side is up too. It's hard to describe how much energy they put into covering lawfare. Show after show would have their legal panels on to breathlessly discuss the lawsuits (civil and criminal) against Trump, analyzing each and every aspect of the cases with the end game of Trump being frog marched out of Mar Lago in an orange jumpsuit. Their audience obviously ate it up. Now, it's all gone. Their dream is dead and the public at large didn't buy it.

 

[finesse]

I had no idea that defending the legal system against intimidation and corruption was lawfare. I thought that once a jury came to a verdict according to law, that in itself met every standard of our justice system and our Constitution. It seems like it's the convicted criminals who use every means available to escape paying for their crimes who are trying to start a war on law.

 

[ZenMode]

I sounded the sirens for months on here and tried to tell you guys that half the country (including moderates and swing voters) saw the prosecution of Trump as using the justice department to prosecute a political rival.

People here were appalled when I would explain to them I knew no details about the Trump trials because I had checked out from following them. While many on the left obsessed over every detail of the individual cases, they failed to see the forest for the trees there on what was actually going on - and most importantly, how swing voters perceived it.

I think there's definitely truth to this. Some voters perceived it as Democrats utilizing government to go after someone because they didn't like him. Someone one who was an outsider and was saying things they didn't like. You had a multi-year investigation into Russian collusion that turned up essentially nothing while Dem leaders, like Schiff, were claiming to have a "smoking gun". You had state candidates running on a platform that included "I'm going to get Trump". You had state DA's coming up with "creative" charges to turn hush money into something much bigger.

I think people saw that happening and it scared them. It scared them to see essentially one party come together to utilize the power of government, state and federal, to try to destroy someone... and some Dems were calling their shot about their intentions.

That doesn't mean that Trump isn't a piece of shit person and the most prolific liar ever to hold the presidency.

 

[Ramrouser]

I had no idea that defending the legal system against intimidation and corruption was lawfare. I thought that once a jury came to a verdict according to law, that in itself met every standard of our justice system and our Constitution. It seems like it's the convicted criminals who use every means available to escape paying for their crimes who are trying to start a war on law.

It was a multi jurisdictional coordinated attack against Trump to keep him from winning the election. You keep believing otherwise if it helps you cope with the election loss.

Now Merchan needs to dismiss the fraud verdict against Trump so the Country can move on and he can serve as our duly elected President. The verdict is hopelessly tainted by the testimony of Hope Hicks given the SC's immunity decision, but the bigger issue is that you can't imprison the President elect and President of the United States.

 

[UNCatTech]

I sounded the sirens for months on here and tried to tell you guys that half the country (including moderates and swing voters) saw the prosecution of Trump as using the justice department to prosecute a political rival.

People here were appalled when I would explain to them I knew no details about the Trump trials because I had checked out from following them. While many on the left obsessed over every detail of the individual cases, they failed to see the forest for the trees there on what was actually going on - and most importantly, how swing voters perceived it.

See you checking out and believing the false narrative that it was a witch hunt is the real concern.

The tictok generation isn't willing to put any effort into actually understanding.

That puts the future of the country in jeopardy. Now those running for office can simply lie about everything knowing that a great percentage of the population will simply believe and not pursue any evidence.

 

[finesse]

It was a multi jurisdictional coordinated attack against Trump to keep him from winning the election. You keep believing otherwise if it helps you cope with the election loss.

Now Merchan needs to dismiss the fraud verdict against Trump so the Country can move on and he can serve as our duly elected President. The verdict is hopelessly tainted by the testimony of Hope Hicks given the SC's immunity decision, but the bigger issue is that you can't imprison the President elect and President of the United States.

Was he found guilty by a jury according to the laws of the land and the Constitution? If so, he's guilty as hell if you believe in America. Hell, many of those charges came before he was even a candidate. Don't tell me that a politician thinking of running is sufficient to halt criminal charges against them. That's seriously sick thinking on your part.

He was charged separately in separate places for separate infractions and they were stonewalled by his use or power, money and intimidation. That's the pursuit of justice and you know it and his actions and those of his supporters were a criminal conspiracy.

 

[UNCatTech]

It was a multi jurisdictional coordinated attack against Trump to keep him from winning the election. You keep believing otherwise if it helps you cope with the election loss.

Now Merchan needs to dismiss the fraud verdict against Trump so the Country can move on and he can serve as our duly elected President. The verdict is hopelessly tainted by the testimony of Hope Hicks given the SC's immunity decision, but the bigger issue is that you can't imprison the President elect and President of the United States.

We really should change the criteria so that a convicted felon cannot run for office. Hell more Republicans don't even want them voting, yet they elected one.

 

[uncjhodges]

It’s truly mind blowing to see people twist themselves into pretzels to defend Donald Fucking Trump, a caricature of a human

 

[TangledUpInBlue06]

I think there's definitely truth to this. Some voters perceived it as Democrats utilizing government to go after someone because they didn't like him. Someone one who was an outsider and was saying things they didn't like. You had a multi-year investigation into Russian collusion that turned up essentially nothing while Dem leaders, like Schiff, were claiming to have a "smoking gun". You had state candidates running on a platform that included "I'm going to get Trump". You had state DA's coming up with "creative" charges to turn hush money into something much bigger.

I think people saw that happening and it scared them. It scared them to see essentially one party come together to utilize the power of government, state and federal, to try to destroy someone... and some Dems were calling their shot about their intentions.

That doesn't mean that Trump isn't a piece of shit person and the most prolific liar ever to hold the presidency.

But this is a core issue with Trump and Trumpism. He walks a very fine line of criminality but there is usually plausible deniability or people willing to clam up on his behalf, etc., etc. Should we not investigate powerful people that may have broken the law? Of course we should. Powerful law-breakers are the most dangerous kind.

But then, Trump yells "political prosecution!" at any attempt to investigate. Robert Mueller was a lifelong Republican and was appointed special counsel by a Republican acting AG that was part of Trump's administration. That's not indicative of a political prosecution. That's indicative of a prosecution that involves a politician.

So where does that leave us? Should politicians be treated differently than non-politicians? Should we not investigate or prosecute politicians? That's a very bad outcome. Should we not investigate or prosecute politicians who cry political prosecution? That's not any better. Or should we investigate politicians that it appears may have broken the law and bring charges if and when the evidence supports a conviction? I imagine prosecutors would already be very wary of bringing a weak case against a politician because of that "political prosecution!" charge. But creating a political class that is immune from consequences (other than I guess not being reelected?) seems to me to be very, very dangerous.

 

[Ramrouser]

He's no longer a convicted felon since, under NY law, there's no conviction until final sentencing. Trump hasn't been sentenced; hence, he's not a felon.

Yes he was found guilty by a jury with legal process. No one is disputing that. It's not the jury's fault they were given faulty jury instructions and improperly were allowed to hear the testimony of Hope Hicks. These issues would have been addressed and corrected on his appeal (which is also part of his due process).

 

[CFordUNC]

Thank you for posting this, CFordUNC. Perhaps I missed it, and I'm not sure you want to discuss it, but I'm wondering why you were drawn to Trump/the republicans in the first place?

Happy to share. I grew up in a small, rural town and grew up in a working class family. I know the term "working class" gets debated as to its true meaning, but I'd say that my parents were absolutely working class. My dad didn't finish high school and my mom has a GED. My dad was a construction worker and my mom was a part-time secretary. The highest annual income they ever earned together was ~$32,000 in mid-2000's dollars; I know this because I saw their Social Security income history when I was helping my mom file for my dad's survivor benefits after he died when I was in college. I grew up in a family where I had 62 first cousins, and I was ultimately the first of the cousins to attend or graduate from college. I say all of that to say, my entire family was largely non-college-educated and working class, and the overwhelming vast majority of my family still live in (and never once left) Robeson County. I grew up in the Southern Baptist church- the twice-on-Sundays, once-on-Wednesdays kind.

All of that to say, my Republican upbringing stemmed from the fact that I grew up in a largely lower-income, working class, rural, evangelical Christian environment. We supported the Republican Party because they were the party of God-fearing, Jesus-loving, rules-based law and order, support the troops, and family values. When you grow up in that kind of environment, you are naturally afraid of change, of diversity, and of people of different backgrounds and walks of life. It doesn't inherently make anyone coming from that environment a bad person; it just means that they are extraordinarily limited in the kind of worldly experiential opportunities that I believe have moderated me significantly.

I even maintained my Republican bonafides all throughout my time at UNC- I voted for John McCain and Mitt Romney while I was in college- but I definitely credit my experience at UNC with being the beginning of my ideological moderation. Yet, I still voted for Trump the first time, barely two years removed from graduating from college and in my mid-20's, because old Republican habits died hard for me, and because the opponent was Hillary Clinton, whom I'd grown up to believe was a horrible person and an even worse presidential candidate. I wouldn't say that I *liked* Trump- I voted for John Kasich in the primary and hoped that literally any one of the other Republican contenders would beat him- but once he was the Republican nominee I had very little hesitation at the time to vote for him.

The beginning of the end for me with regard to my support of Trump was two-fold: the poor way that he handled the Charlottesville tragedy in 2017 by refusing to condemn white supremacists and anti-semites, followed by the disastrous summit in Finland in 2018 where he stood next to Vladimir Putin in front of the entire world and said that the United States intelligence community was a bunch of liars and that he believed the Russians over our own.

I may be more conservative ideologically than many folks in the Democratic Party, but I have zero doubts or questions as to whether the Democratic Party- regardless of what ideological or policy differences I may have on occasion- demands honor, decency, and character from its leaders; or whether the Democratic Party stands for rules-based law and order; or whether the Democratic Party believes in America's role as a global defender of freedom or democracy; or whether the Democratic Party can be trusted with our most sensitive national secrets. That's why I vote Democratic now, and why I will continue to do so for as long as the Republican Party is no longer the conservative party that it claims to be.