Dems proudly claimed until the second debate that they were above name calling and were solutions-focused, and then promptly went to name calling in the final weeks.
Dems wound up being very hypocritical in that they did a lot of the things they accused Trump's base of. That doesn't make Trump right or righteous but the path to victory was always staying out of the trenches and sticking to the high road.
The Hitler, fascist, garbage talk was always going to do more harm than help.
Foolish.
Funny how that behaviour helps trump but hurts the Dems. The embodiment of the worst of us can do no wrong and whoever the Dems put up has to be perfect.
The Following User Says Thank You to MonaTone For This Useful Post:
I think the turning point was Kamala bragging about Cheney endorsing her, she went from the new, refreshing candidate to just another establishment candidate who seemingly loves neocons.
Yeah, I don't think they necessarily needed to specifically cater to progressives with policy or anything, as that may have hurt their chances with swing voters. But whatever meagre benefit they may have derived by parading around with Liz Cheney and talking about Dick Cheney endorsing them was extremely unlikely to overcome the potential negative impacts of that type of campaigning.
Yeah, I don't think they necessarily needed to specifically cater to progressives with policy or anything, as that may have hurt their chances with swing voters. But whatever meagre benefit they may have derived by parading around with Liz Cheney and talking about Dick Cheney endorsing them was extremely unlikely to overcome the potential negative impacts of that type of campaigning.
Neoliberals will always swing right before looking left, to their and everyone's detriment.
We voted in Trudeau and are a laughing stock of a country now so we shouldn't say much
Only from the perspective of those with an axe to grind about getting booted off his lawn after trying to live on it for 2 weeks (and those who believe said aprés lawn-booting smear campaign they've been running ever since).
The Following User Says Thank You to Sainters7 For This Useful Post:
I predicted that the US just wasn't ready for a female president when Kamala got the nomination, and sadly that looks to be still accurate. They would rather vote for a convicted rapist/felon than a woman, their hate for the XX chromosome seems only slightly less than the Taliban at this moment. It's too bad the Democrats didn't learn a single ####ing thing from 2016, if Shapiro or Walz is at the top of the ticket it would have likely been a blue wave
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Hemi-Cuda For This Useful Post:
AltaGuy has a magnetic personality and exudes positive energy, which is infectious to those around him. He has an unparalleled ability to communicate with people, whether he is speaking to a room of three or an arena of 30,000.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: At le pub...
Exp:
Wise sages in this thread waxing poetic on the grand failures of the Democrats should really reflect that even were it inanimate rod red vs Kamala Harris, inanimate rod has a decent chance in the swing states, well within the margin of error.
Sure, the Democrats have some large systemic problems, but ultimately the people deciding the elections are a tiny minority of Americans who can swing one way or another based on very, very specific issues ("My favorite shoes now cost $15 more!" I heard that one from a Michigan voter).
The US is so polarized that absolutely nothing can change the minds of 80%+ of voters. So whatever grand failures you wish to assign to the Democrats are probably not as important as your vast wisdom would have us believe.
I read Jason Brennan’s “Against Democracy” a few years ago and am always reminded of it when following election results. It’s shocking to me this is even close, let alone in Trump’s favor. A 2 minute speech should disqualify this man from holding any public office.
The Following User Says Thank You to Elkyiv For This Useful Post:
Yeah, I don't think they necessarily needed to specifically cater to progressives with policy or anything, as that may have hurt their chances with swing voters. But whatever meagre benefit they may have derived by parading around with Liz Cheney and talking about Dick Cheney endorsing them was extremely unlikely to overcome the potential negative impacts of that type of campaigning.
Refusing to break with the administration over Israel/Palestine absolutely hurt them, too, IMO. It seems like she did horrible with Arab voters in swing states.
The response to this is "But Trump is worse!" Okay, but we're dealing with a lot of low-propensity voters here, who may not be all that tuned in to Trump's stance on Israel, but they know for damn sure what Biden's is.
The same arabs who are mad at Biden and Harris over what’s happening, I hope they are interviewed in March when nothing changes. Maybe they will be on the plane being deported.
The Israel issue is a stupid hill to die on. The US will never ever stop supporting Israel regardless of party.
Again, it's pretty depressing that 7 states get to decide the outcome of elections for the other 43. Such a dumb, antiquated system that just makes no sense whatsoever in today's America.
Wise sages in this thread waxing poetic on the grand failures of the Democrats should really reflect that even were it inanimate rod red vs Kamala Harris, inanimate rod has a decent chance in the swing states, well within the margin of error.
Sure, the Democrats have some large systemic problems, but ultimately the people deciding the elections are a tiny minority of Americans who can swing one way or another based on very, very specific issues ("My favorite shoes now cost $15 more!" I heard that one from a Michigan voter).
The US is so polarized that absolutely nothing can change the minds of 80%+ of voters. So whatever grand failures you wish to assign to the Democrats are probably not as important as your vast wisdom would have us believe.
Why the sanctimony? Yes a close election hinges on certain issues. So if the Dems have "large systemic problems" couldn't those have been the tipping point in a tight election.
Inflation was certainly a hot button issue. I saw a Harris ad in Nevada this weekend. She articulated a mini 5 point platform, and point 1 was that she was "going to cut costs". Huh? She's going to announce a RIF or something? I just don't think she was able to connect at all.
Dems underestimated the need to attract male votes (young males especially).
I listed to Scott Galloway on the Diary of a CEO podcast a couple days ago and he was right about a lot; although his election prediction and endorsement of Harris seems to be wrong.
The Dem's literally chased off men in this election, whoever put together the campaign ads that made men look like dolts and all trump supporters who wives were smarter, and the cringe ad of those "tough guy alpha males" voting for Kamala that came across extremely phony probably didn't help them.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
