PBP: Kamala Harris vs Donald Trump :: Election Day Thread [R]

You should be ashamed of electing the Shit Gibbon for the second time.

 

Yeah well, we cannot all be sociopaths with a not a morsel of empathy in our hearts. Toodles, sweetheart.

 

Honest question….who is going to stop him this time?

 

You sound angry.

The responses to my post just prove my point. You just can't do self-criticism. The problem is the OTHERS, not you. Always.

LOSERS!

 

These people are violent. Better leave them alone in their bubble. They might hurt us with their soyboy karate.

 

Judges fell already.

 

I’ve been reading your posts on this site for over twenty years. While I’ve always appreciated your moderate stance and input here….ive always thought you were hopelessly naive about what can happen here. I’ve never said it as I didn’t want to offend you. And I don’t do so here out of malice or ill will. Judges have already gone. The military has been indoctrinated for thirty years. That those are the best you can come up with is well…

 

Evangelicals turned out in even greater numbers for the orange Hitler-loving felon. The goal of Christian nationalism was wonderful bait for them.

 

That's what happens when you make nihilism your defining trait.

Also, that and growing up under Reagan.

 

Wow people really really loved Joe Biden! That’s the only logical explanation here…. Right?

 

You seem to be under the mistaken impression I care one iota what you and your ilk think of me (or anything else). As I said before, you are all beneath contempt as far as I am concerned.

 

@Deadtigers

As a follow-up, according to the NBC exit poll, blacks were 86-12 for Kamala and LGBT+ were 86-12 for Kamala as well. Absolutely no difference at all.

 

All driven by Latino and even Black voters swinging Republican. Take the changes in the Black vote for Trump between 2020 to 2024

Wisconsin 8% ---> 21%
Georgia 6% ---> 12%

North Carolina Black 7% ---> 12%
North Carolina Black Men 9% ----> 21% (marginal change with Black women)
Black Independents 15% ---> 28%
​

A few weeks ago the Lincoln Project's Stuart Stevens Tweeted about how for his entire career he'd seen innumerable polls showing a GOP candidate getting 15-20% of the Black vote and it had never, ever happened, which is why he disbelieved the polls. He was wrong.

So please, @Sounders78 @Deadtigers @Auriaprottu let's give the "white people are to blame" a rest, please. There are structural changes underlying this that affect all races which Trump is riding and the Dems aren't structured to deal with but neither knows how to address. Why would Blacks and Latinos be immune?

 

Several pages behind, but. . . The idea that Trump exudes macho-ness is baffling. His constant self-absorbed whining is so freaking juvenile. If that's the appeal, the real solution isn't "appeal to young men," it's make more of an effort to encourage young men to grow the ******** up.

 

It's lowest because many people are working 2 or 3 jobs.
And let's not even mention the other economic indicators.

 

Why is it so horrible for Trump to appeal to young men? What's wrong with that?
What does Kamala (who appeals to young women) have more than him?

 

Good post, but you're wasting a lot of time on someone who can't think at a global level without seeing imaginary enemies. In all likelihood, he can't think beyond his car's windshield without seeing imaginary enemies.

 

As a young guy I've seen a lot of my peers being frustrated with the state of their lives at the moment. The rise of incels has definitely played a part in this.

 

It is so bad that young men vote for what they believe is in their best interest, it's like the worst thing ever, let me tell you about it.
Why even have "democracy" then?

 

Thanks. It was about running a white male at the top of the ticket. In a world where few whites have women or minority bosses a woman POC was a bridge too far. That and have Walz type speakers. Plain spoken seems to be a key for people. Trump cleaned up the no college degree crowd and those folks don't like fancy eloquent talkers.

I am taking a break from here. I will see you guys around.

 

I hate repping a post that features the words "David Brooks nailed it," . . . but...

Here's the arkive link: https://archive.ph/wLsQo#selection-853.0-861.432

But today neither party has been able to expand its support to create that kind of majority coalition. As the American Enterprise Institute scholars Ruy Teixeira and Yuval Levin note in a new study, “Politics Without Winners,” we have two parties playing the role of minority party: “Each party runs campaigns focused almost entirely on the faults of the other, with no serious strategy for significantly broadening its electoral reach.”

Teixeira and Levin observe that both parties are content to live with deadlock. The parties, they write, “have prioritized the wishes of their most intensely devoted voters — who would never vote for the other party — over the priorities of winnable voters who could go either way.” Both parties “treat narrow victories like landslides and wave away narrow defeats, somehow seeing both as confirmation of their existing strategies.”​

​

Debatable, obviously, and Teixeira is the guy who came up with that lazy ass-ed "Demography is Destiny" plan of inaction for Democrats 22 years ago (he's currently at the American Enterprise Institute, IIRC). But here...

Trump has spent the past nine years not even trying to expand his base but just playing to the same MAGA grievances over and over again. Kamala Harris refuses to break with Biden on any significant issue and is running as a paint-by-numbers orthodox Democrat. Neither party tolerates much ideological diversity. Neither party has a plausible strategy to build a durable majority coalition. Why?

I think the reason for all this is that political parties no longer serve the function they used to. In days gone by, parties were political organizations designed to win elections and gain power. Party leaders would expand their coalitions toward that end. Today, on the other hand, in an increasingly secular age, political parties are better seen as religious organizations that exist to provide believers with meaning, membership and moral sanctification. If that’s your purpose, of course you have to stick to the existing gospel. You have to focus your attention on affirming the creed of the current true believers. You get so buried within the walls of your own catechism, you can’t even imagine what it would be like to think outside it.​

​

I disagree somewhat with the "they're better seen as "religious organizations." I would have said "fund-raising juggernauts," but his point stands.