2024 U.S. Presidential Election Thread: Donald Trump wins & will return to the White House; GOP wins U.S. Senate & U.S. House

[Outlaw]

The political program of the Harris '24 campaign is more aligned with centrist policies than leftist policies. The left are sucking it up to the degree they are in spite of being disregarded by the Democratic Party because the left realizes there is a broader goal of defeating Trump. The left are more ideologically aware than centrists. She is courting centrists because it has been a long-standing project in the Democratic Party to dilute the political power of the left in the Democratic coalition moving forward, so Democratic elites don't have to be threatened by leftist activists who are hostile to their attempts to pursue the policies of the monied interests. When the private insurance lobbyists come knocking, it's much easier to take their money to not fix healthcare when you have to convince an Adam Kinzinger vs a Cory Bush.

Which domestic policies of hers do you disagree with?

 

[88m3]

what these cacs want to say is not white

 

[King Kreole]

I can't disagree with anything you said here.

From a pragmatic (and electoral perspective), why do you think neither Liz Warren and Jesse Jackson came close to being elected?

They both had to face the headwinds that this country culturally is the domain of white male leadership, so envisioning someone with their identity as the head of the country was an uphill battle. Also, they faced one of the most perniciously idiotic beliefs in this country, which is the default assumption many hold that the correct path is always in the middle, so when someone is successfully painted as "the left candidate" by the media, voters automatically consign them to the status of an imbalance that needs to be counteracted, even if they fundamentally agree with them on many issues. Then there's also the internal machinations of the Democratic Party and how leaders are selected via the primary schedule. But ultimately they lost because not enough people were buying what they were selling. The Republican right has been putting in yeoman's work for decades to poison the well of this country being a healthy, democratic society. This requires robust counterprogramming work that the Democratic Party is not constituted for or particularly interested in.

 

[MushroomX]

This Puerto Rico shyt has me howling... it's like when Trump is on stage, the Cult Leader image puts a giant Mute Button when he says racist shyt... but then when some random nobody comes on, folks are like "Yeah, that's a bit too edgy for my liking..." as even the crowd was like a bit concerned about these jokes and now you got Florida GOP going, "These statements do not reflect Trump/Musk." despite the photo of the lectern stating the obvious.

 

[Piff Perkins]

They both had to face the headwinds that this country culturally is the domain of white male leadership, so envisioning someone with their identity as the head of the country was an uphill battle. Also, they faced one of the most perniciously idiotic beliefs in this country, which is the default assumption many hold that the correct path is always in the middle, so when someone is successfully painted as "the left candidate" by the media, voters automatically consign them to the status of an imbalance that needs to be counteracted, even if they fundamentally agree with them on many issues. Then there's also the internal machinations of the Democratic Party and how leaders are selected via the primary schedule. But ultimately they lost because not enough people were buying what they were selling. The Republican right has been putting in yeoman's work for decades to poison the well of this country being a healthy, democratic society. This requires robust counterprogramming work that the Democratic Party is not constituted for or particularly interested in.

It's been years buddy, you can admit Warren ran a shytty campaign and is a bad politician. It's ok. I agree with her on a variety of things but she's...not good at this, and her campaign imploded on her own accord. Like Howard Dean was at one point, she's better off behind the scenes influencing policy than being front and center.

 

[wire28]

I posted this yesterday.

After other leaders and the mayor of Dearborn heights were on stage with Trump a day or two before

 

[Pull Up the Roots]

Trump hasn't been treated with kid gloves man, people need to stop saying this. He's rightly been the most relentlessly shyt on person by mainstream media for like 8 years straight. The coverage of this rally isn't substantively different from the coverage he's been getting for years. This is like when Charlamagne and Angela Rye went on AC360 and chastized Anderson for not being willing to call out Trump's bullshyt, and Anderson almost had an aneurysm because that's basically all the network does. For a little while during his first term they were willing to engage in some effort of normalization because of their structural deference to power, but that didn't last long, and since then the only time they've been willing to give him props is when he's engaging in militaristic violence overseas.

Saying "Did you see that latest bad thing Trump has done?" is just masturbatory and is past diminishing returns. There isn't some magic word the mainstream media is refusing to say that will destroy Trump. It's a lazy analysis made by Liberals who won't accept that about half the electorally relevant voting base in this country has heard and seen Trump in all his ugliness and seen and heard the Democratic response pitch and prefer Trump, which means Liberals are going to actually have to do work to reliably regain power instead of relying on their propaganda wing in mainstream media to do it for them. Kamala has decided this work consists of moving right to placate Republicans and conservatives and welcome them into the fold, but at least she's acknowledging there's work to be done, even though I fundamentally disagree with her about the direction of that work and think she should be plowing the opposite side of the field.

The idea that Trump has been relentlessly "shyt on" by the media is laughable. What the media has really done is treat him with a odd mix of kid gloves and addiction to the spectacle, amplifying his insanity while pretending it's just business as usual. Sure, they report on the latest outrage, but they wrap it in both-sides nonsense by calling blatant lies "controversial statements," sane washing his Nazi-esque obsession with eugenics as a simple "fascination" and sedition as "chaos," among other things, as if framing his assault on democracy as just another day at the office.

They platformed his rallies for ratings, sanitized his authoritarianism, and only occasionally findd the courage to criticize him, usually after the damage was already done. The media's obsession with Trump has been shallow, reactive, and cowardly. They're more concerned with clicks and appearances than with holding power to account. And no, the fact that people still vote for him isn't proof that the media has done its job; it's proof they've failed to confront the deeper sickness that makes him palatable. They haven't framed him as the existential threat he is. They've framed him as entertainment. If "liberals" are frustrated, it's not because they expect the media to fight their battles for them, but because the media failed in its responsibility, which is to tell the truth and treat Trump's movement as the danger it is, not as a recurring reality show villain.

You've spent years on here extolling the virtues of Trump and pushing the distorted reality where he is a force for good, so I don't think you have the good sense to actually look at this with a truly critical eye. No offense.

 

[iceberg_is_on_fire]

Does anyone watch that voting trend channel on YouTube? It's kinda seeming like his models aren't that good. He keeps panicking about PA and I just looked and the margin is wider now. It doesn't really look like Republicans are closing the gap so far.

Some may have a better handle than others but no one knows what's going on because the alignment is off. People are trying to use traditional modeling to this election with is traditionally R+3.

Here are some things at play that will show itself after numbers come out.

Kamala Harris will have the highest total of Republican registered voters of any Democrat candidate, past, present or future.

Traditionally, Donald Trump can only get to 47%. That number will shrink. This point is important because pollsters are trying not to miss his level of support like they did on 2016 and 2020. The level of vitriol towards Trump cannot be accurately measured in a poll but will show on the exit numbers.

Neither party will know what they really are on a national level after this.

Most people are just simply tired of the Donald Trump / MAGA experience and will vote accordingly. This is not going to be close.

 

[Sghost597]

 

[Big Jo]

The recent polls are frightening as hell but realistically is there any reason to think Kamala won't win MI, WI and PA?

Outside of one or two outlier polls, Wisconsin seems to be comfortably blue. I think the Walz pick basically sewed it up

Michigan momentum wise - union support, etc. Most factors seem to be in Kamala's favor.

PA is tighter than it should be but early voting numbers, 2022 results, Dems have only lost it once since 1992. I really don't see it flipping.

So fukkery and other wild cards like AZ,NV,GA aside.. MI/WI/PA feel fairly good to me still. And with that she wins.

Am I wrong?

 

[CEO of Morgan Industries]

The recent polls are frightening as hell but realistically is there any reason to think Kamala won't win MI, WI and PA?

Outside of one or two outlier polls, Wisconsin seems to be comfortably blue. I think the Walz pick basically sewed it up

Michigan momentum wise - union support, etc. Most factors seem to be in Kamala's favor.

PA is tighter than it should be but early voting numbers, 2022 results, Dems have only lost it once since 1992. I really don't see it flipping.

So fukkery and other wild cards like AZ,NV,GA aside.. MI/WI/PA feel fairly good to me still. And with that she wins.

Am I wrong?

Weird thing about the polls is that top line numbers don't match the numbers underneath the top line.

If we keep seeing Harris +15 or more with white college grads, for example, that indicates that Even or +2 either way probably isn't true.

But what do I know? I'm not a polling expert.

 

[good pups]

Outside of one or two outlier polls, Wisconsin seems to be comfortably blue. I think the Walz pick basically sewed it up

I think you're right that the blue wall's generally polling the best. from what I've seen people are nervous about WI more than the other two.

 

[Sghost597]

This shyt is so wild

 

[MushroomX]

The recent polls are frightening as hell but realistically is there any reason to think Kamala won't win MI, WI and PA?

Outside of one or two outlier polls, Wisconsin seems to be comfortably blue. I think the Walz pick basically sewed it up

Michigan momentum wise - union support, etc. Most factors seem to be in Kamala's favor.

PA is tighter than it should be but early voting numbers, 2022 results, Dems have only lost it once since 1992. I really don't see it flipping.

So fukkery and other wild cards like AZ,NV,GA aside.. MI/WI/PA feel fairly good to me still. And with that she wins.

Am I wrong?

Elections are always anxiety ridden, but it just goes back to energy...

Trump's rallies have been small, with people paid to attend.
Kamala's have been packed events.

Trump has had little care about getting Independents, but also the remnants of Moderate Republicans.

There is thought, while valid, that Trump is going attempt the steal with Johnson as the Speaker... but at the same time Trump has failed to ensure certain scenarios happen to even try it.

There is just a ton of headwinds against the Trump campaign... really ever since Kamala become the nominee.

 

[wire28]

The idea that Trump has been relentlessly "shyt on" by the media is laughable. What the media has really done is treat him with a odd mix of kid gloves and addiction to the spectacle, amplifying his insanity while pretending it's just business as usual. Sure, they report on the latest outrage, but they wrap it in both-sides nonsense by calling blatant lies "controversial statements," sane washing his Nazi-esque obsession with eugenics as a simple "fascination" and sedition as "chaos," among other things, as if framing his assault on democracy as just another day at the office.

They platformed his rallies for ratings, sanitized his authoritarianism, and only occasionally findd the courage to criticize him, usually after the damage was already done. The media's obsession with Trump has been shallow, reactive, and cowardly. They're more concerned with clicks and appearances than with holding power to account. And no, the fact that people still vote for him isn't proof that the media has done its job; it's proof they've failed to confront the deeper sickness that makes him palatable. They haven't framed him as the existential threat he is. They've framed him as entertainment. If "liberals" are frustrated, it's not because they expect the media to fight their battles for them, but because the media failed in its responsibility, which is to tell the truth and treat Trump's movement as the danger it is, not as a recurring reality show villain.

You've spent years on here extolling the virtues of Trump and pushing the distorted reality where he is a force for good, so I don't think you have the good sense to actually look at this with a truly critical eye. No offense.