Trump v. Harris - US election-a-polooza

[Benzin]

People are hypocritical because politics has become almost equivalent to supporting a sports team rather than any actual consideration to it. Look at the different responses to Biden and Trump having senior moments.

Also people are incredibly easy to manipulate by any good public speaker. Not helped by the bubbles that are pushed by various social media algorithms that help anyone to get supporting views on various theories. The rise of anti-vax shows that one.

Already though seen plenty of consequences to the votes. Companies removing bonuses as they need to stock up before tariffs come into play. Because many seemed to think that it'd be China paying them, not the importer. Also even with the threat of having rights removed or deportation people voted that way because "they're one of the good ones".

Brexit and the "sick of experts" line was the day that polite politics went completely out the door. But I'd also say that a distinct lack of decent critical thinking and "simplified" politics has also led the way. Especially when many claims are never truly challenged or corrected, allowing seeds to be shown amongst the population that teachers really are performing trans surgery at your school. Vote for me and I'll stop that.

The leopards are truly gorging on many faces. And it's hilarious the amount of "my family member/partner now won't speak to me or is leaving due to my voting actions, even though they made me plainly aware of those consequences and how it might affect them".

 

[tayspru]

I’m sick of respectability politics quite frankly. People who voted for Trump are, for the large part, demonstrably selfish morons who fell for his lies

Searches for “what are trump tariffs” went up 4000% AFTER the polls had closed. People literally didn’t know what they were voting for and didn’t care until it was too late

“ I never thought the leopards would eat *my* face”

 

[Matt N]

I think it’s fair to say that preying on fears and insulting rather than setting out a positive vision is a bit of an issue on both sides of the spectrum.

@GooseOnTheLoose You say that Labour and the Democrats led positive campaigns, but I’d argue that a strong undertone of both of them was simply “we’re not the others”. Keir Starmer often did little in debates aside from moan about the Tories and the damage they inflicted, while Kamala Harris (and Joe Biden before her) made “I’m not Trump” a key tenet of the campaign. Harris and Biden went on about how Trump was a convicted felon and how he was a threat to democracy rather than setting out much of a positive vision for change, I would argue. Both Starmer and Harris went in quite hard on simply rubbishing their opponent rather than being overly positive in setting out a new vision, in my view.

One of the key complaints about both Starmer and Harris, in fact, is that they lacked policy.

 

[jon81uk]

Keir Starmer often did little in debates aside from moan about the Tories and the damage they inflicted, while Kamala Harris (and Joe Biden before her) made “I’m not Trump” a key tenet of the campaign. Harris and Biden went on about how Trump was a convicted felon and how he was a threat to democracy rather than setting out much of a positive vision for change, I would argue. Both Starmer and Harris went in quite hard on simply rubbishing their opponent rather than being overly positive in setting out a new vision, in my view.

But thinking about the UK election, it wasn't like the Tories came out with a long list of what they had done well or will do in the future either?

 

[Matt N]

But thinking about the UK election, it wasn't like the Tories came out with a long list of what they had done well or will do in the future either?

I’m not saying they did.

But Keir Starmer’s landslide was very loveless compared to, say, Blair’s; it was more spurred by hatred of the Tories than any particular enthusiasm for what Labour was offering. Much of Starmer’s campaign centred around how awful the Tories were rather than a positive vision, and they got the lowest vote share of any majority government ever; their big win was largely down to a highly effective anti-Tory tactical voting campaign rather than any positive vision set out by Labour.

Starmer won simply because people wanted a change from the status quo, and he was the most viable alternative. If Starmer doesn’t enact drastic positive change quickly enough for the electorate’s liking, I fear that he himself may become the status quo and people may turn to right wing populism in this country like they did in the US.

 

[jon81uk]

I’m not saying they did.

But Keir Starmer’s landslide was very loveless compared to, say, Blair’s; it was more spurred by hatred of the Tories than any particular enthusiasm for what Labour was offering. Much of Starmer’s campaign centred around how awful the Tories were rather than a positive vision, and they got the lowest vote share of any majority government ever; their big win was largely down to a highly effective anti-Tory tactical voting campaign rather than any positive vision set out by Labour.

But if you know the main focus of the entire election is anti-Tory tactics then why not just join everyone in being anti-Tory? That was already the main focus of the last year or two since Johnson's partygate and Truss' collapse. There isn't much to look forward to other than hopefully getting the NHS and similar functional again, so the message was, they made it bad, we will make it better.

 

[Plastic Person]

When you look at the 2024 campaigns run by both Labour and the Democrats, they weren't about attacking people or blaming others (who weren't responsible). They gave consistent positive messages. They were still vilified.

Good VIBES are no longer enough.

Of course, it is profoundly dispiriting that Donald Trump has returned to office. His proven felonies, commitment to banning abortion, and installing a truly heinous deportation plan should have, in a world of even the most basic justice, been enough to keep him far away from the White House forever. But it didn’t work out this way.

The Dems ran a historically unpopular candidate off the back of at least a year of telling potential voters that a man who was obviously neurologically unfit to run for office, was anything but. Until a last-minute shift to playing on the fears of the populace, their campaign was focused on reminding everyone that a strong economy was transforming the country, despite the fact that even the most secure middle classes were struggling to afford their groceries. Harris was asked what her vision for the country was and what she would do differently from Biden. Her responses, often within days of each other, veered between "keep everything exactly the same" and "work with more Republicans".

To demonstrate her commitment to this, she made sure to court the public approval of Dick Cheney, an actual war criminal (and subsequently secured even less of the ephemeral Republican vote than Biden himself did last time around). Meanwhile, good old Slick Willy himself, Bill Clinton, was dispatched to battleground Midwestern states in order to explain to Middle Eastern voters that their dismay at the US-funded genocide ongoing in Gaza was democratically selfish. Barack Obama, once the most reliable, inspirational, and unifying figure in modern political history, found the time to make an appearance to tell Black male voters that he thought that they were fundamentally sexist and that this was their opportunity to prove him wrong. What an honour!

I'd not only concede with @Matt.GC that the traditional left/right paradigm in the US has collapsed, but more accurately, that there is now just a right/far right paradigm. The modern Democratic party feels almost indistinguishable from the moderate Republican party of twenty years ago. It is completely rudderless and disconnected from the concerns of people whose lives are a struggle and who lack meaning and purpose. It is not by any means impossible to install a Democrat in the United States, it literally happened just four years ago. One of the sharpest nuggets of analysis that has stayed with me from various critiques and soul-searching of just the last week (none of it from within the party, just bloodletting), is that the Democrats want to win, but only on their own terms.

The consistent popularity of politicians such as Bernie Sanders and Rashida Tlaib proves that there is room for progression in American politics, without stoking fears or igniting further culture wars. Still, the harsh reality is that the mainstream liberal establishment continues to do whatever it can to maintain the status quo. The leopards are now eating their own faces instead of changing their spots.

 

[Matt.GC]

Good VIBES are no longer enough.

Of course, it is profoundly dispiriting that Donald Trump has returned to office. His proven felonies, commitment to banning abortion, and installing a truly heinous deportation plan should have, in a world of even the most basic justice, been enough to keep him far away from the White House forever. But it didn’t work out this way.

The Dems ran a historically unpopular candidate off the back of at least a year of telling potential voters that a man who was obviously neurologically unfit to run for office, was anything but. Until a last-minute shift to playing on the fears of the populace, their campaign was focused on reminding everyone that a strong economy was transforming the country, despite the fact that even the most secure middle classes were struggling to afford their groceries. Harris was asked what her vision for the country was and what she would do differently from Biden. Her responses, often within days of each other, veered between "keep everything exactly the same" and "work with more Republicans".

To demonstrate her commitment to this, she made sure to court the public approval of Dick Cheney, an actual war criminal (and subsequently secured even less of the ephemeral Republican vote than Biden himself did last time around). Meanwhile, good old Slick Willy himself, Bill Clinton, was dispatched to battleground Midwestern states in order to explain to Middle Eastern voters that their dismay at the US-funded genocide ongoing in Gaza was democratically selfish. Barack Obama, once the most reliable, inspirational, and unifying figure in modern political history, found the time to make an appearance to tell Black male voters that he thought that they were fundamentally sexist and that this was their opportunity to prove him wrong. What an honour!

I'd not only concede with @Matt.GC that the traditional left/right paradigm in the US has collapsed, but more accurately, that there is now just a right/far right paradigm. The modern Democratic party feels almost indistinguishable from the moderate Republican party of twenty years ago. It is completely rudderless and disconnected from the concerns of people whose lives are a struggle and who lack meaning and purpose. It is not by any means impossible to install a Democrat in the United States, it literally happened just four years ago. One of the sharpest nuggets of analysis that has stayed with me from various critiques and soul-searching of just the last week (none of it from within the party, just bloodletting), is that the Democrats want to win, but only on their own terms.

The consistent popularity of politicians such as Bernie Sanders and Rashida Tlaib proves that there is room for progression in American politics, without stoking fears or igniting further culture wars. Still, the harsh reality is that the mainstream liberal establishment continues to do whatever it can to maintain the status quo. The leopards are now eating their own faces instead of changing their spots.

I have to agree with this. The choice was ultimately between voting for the leopard guarding the established order and masquerading as an innocent domestic cat that'll nibble away slowly at your cheeks, or the guy who they knew was a murderous rampaging leopard and promised to bite everyone else's face off, other than yours, on your behalf. They choose to throw the red meat to the more vicious and unpredictable of those cats to see what happens.

Not defending it at all. I remember in the 2019 UK election hovering my pencil above various boxes and deciding which one was the least bad option. Ultimately I decided to vote tactically, but many people didn't, regretted it, and we ended up with the worst 5 year government term in my lifetime. If I was a US citizen, I wouldn't have voted Democrat because I wanted to, I would have done so just to try and avoid Trump, and that's not good enough.

We know Trump is an animal. We don't need Slick Willy wheeled out to remind us of that, just a quick Google search will tell us that. What else do you have to offer? Note that a key attribute was an absolute collapse in Democrat support. You want A.N Other, but they're not on the ballot. You look at the polls, you see it's close, and you hope that there's enough outrage out there to see Trump off and you stay at home. But the MAGA sheep aren't going to stay at home, and the people that Musk threw money on the floor in front of and laughed at as they scrambled around trying to pick it up sent their secret mail in ballots ages ago.

It's the duty of those that stand against everything these populists stand for to understand why they lost. It's not a problem with "the left", that's the argument populists want you to have. Imagine if a radical was on the Democrat ticket instead? Someone who could cut through Trump's threats and lies, and provide an alternative vision. That has nothing to do with being left or right wing, just some change will do.

We have a centrist government in this country at the moment, and honesty doesn't seem to be doing them any favours at the moment. They were elected mostly on an anti-Tory ticket, but will need to be radical to remain in power. With all the criticism of their "doom and gloom" (reality) messaging running concurrent with arrows from the left and right regarding every decision they make, you can either conclude that the public like being lied to, or they just need to crack on and break stuff to see off the false promises of populism.

It also needs to be understood that Trump is not driven by political ideology. He used to be a registered Democrat and buddy of the Clintons. If communism was popular in America, he'd be a communist, and still equally outrageous and controversial. The man has no loyalty to anyone but himself. A pure narcissist who is only obsessed with power and winning, and to hell with anyone who gets in his way. Even his own VP thinks he's evil. The Republicans are using Trump, and Trump is using them. It's a business deal.

So much of the debate surrounding the Democrats drubbing is already centred on trying to blame the electorate for making the wrong decision. This has led to debate here in the UK about what it means for us but I think no lessons seem to be being learnt from what just happened. Trump's golf courses, his mother being Scottish, "the special relationship", his comments about how much he hates Labour and social democracy and that other guff is mostly irrelevant. That maybe how we think, but not him. When the guy who has called fallen soldiers "looses" was asked in private about his views on Kier Starmer, his response was reportedly "he's a winner". That pretty much sums up how a large part of Trump's brain thinks in a nutshell.

 

[Matt N]

The question is, though; what sort of “radical” ideas would need to be pitched to see off right wing populism?

I would have called Jeremy Corbyn radical, but he was profoundly unpopular, and his whole brand of politics was rejected emphatically in 2019 in particular (possibly in part due to Labour’s paralysis on Brexit, I admit). If Corbyn is anything to go by, does the electorate really want radical?

 

[rob666]

What do you think the Americans got...moderate???

No, radical right.

The "haves" have won, they see no need to support the have nots.

 

[Plastic Person]

The question is, though; what sort of “radical” ideas would need to be pitched to see off right wing populism?

I would have called Jeremy Corbyn radical, but he was profoundly unpopular, and his whole brand of politics was rejected emphatically in 2019 in particular (possibly in part due to Labour’s paralysis on Brexit, I admit). If Corbyn is anything to go by, does the electorate really want radical?

Bringing Corbyn's name into political threads tends to open a wormhole that few of us recover from, but it is worth considering that he was briefly very popular indeed in 2017, scoring just a few hundred thousand fewer votes than Blair managed in 1997. The two years following saw plenty of unforgivable missed goals (in my opinion) but also put him up against a media that took it upon themselves to reject a lot of what the public was initially willing to embrace. Corbyn was also regularly accused of antisemitism, often owing to his historical allegiance with the Palestinian people, who he strongly believed were suffering human rights violations under Israeli occupation at the time.

 

[DiogoJ42]

Corbyn seems like a very nice chap I (someone who would vote Borg before he voted Labour) would gladly have a pint with.

There's a reason he didn't win. Nice guys don't win elections. And if you think they are a "nice guy".... Well, history would like a word, over there in that unlit corner...

 

[Matt.GC]

The question is, though; what sort of “radical” ideas would need to be pitched to see off right wing populism?

I would have called Jeremy Corbyn radical, but he was profoundly unpopular, and his whole brand of politics was rejected emphatically in 2019 in particular (possibly in part due to Labour’s paralysis on Brexit, I admit). If Corbyn is anything to go by, does the electorate really want radical?

The Momentum movement was also populist in my view. In their first election, they managed to play a part in removing a Tory majority (and partied as if they had won). In their second election, more people voted for Cobyn's Labour party in 2019, than Starmers in 2024. Polarising yes, but "profoundly unpopular" is not at all an accurate description whatsoever.

I don't have the exact answers, but it starts with trying to address people's concerns. In a post modern era, typified by managed decline among western democracies, people look back on the past and are rightly concluding that prosperous opportunities are declining. The systems that we hold dear are starting to fail.

Populists make false promises of redemption. Red telephone boxes, flag waving, nationalism, and other pretences.

Why is that traditional working class people are abandoning the political organisations that were originally setup to protect their interests? Why are they deciding that they are better off voting for investment bankers, mainstream media personalities, and ultra capitalists instead (such as Farage and Trump)?

They need to take a long hard look in the mirror and decide if they are really fit for purpose.

 

[rob666]

Hey, Mr Clump, why don't you let a rich fellow loony, (who got rich on family money just like you), chop down all big rules limiting big business, so the rich can get richer, then let the same guy cut back government spending on a massive scale, so he can blow it all on fireworks...sorry spaceships, to get a million rich people living on Mars within a couple of decades, because idiots like him have polluted the planet so badly over the last couple of centuries it is time to leave the planet.
The rich get richer, the poor get poorer...the good old American way.
Full control of government this time, and a big bunch of fanboys who haven't got a clue being put in charge of the nation.
Lord help us poor sods stuck on the sidelines.

edit...and you should slap an anti vaxxer in charge of health as well, that will piss off the do gooders all the more.

 

[Matt.GC]

Hey, Mr Clump, why don't you let a rich fellow loony, (who got rich on family money just like you), chop down all big rules limiting big business, so the rich can get richer, then let the same guy cut back government spending on a massive scale, so he can blow it all on fireworks...sorry spaceships, to get a million rich people living on Mars within a couple of decades, because idiots like him have polluted the planet so badly over the last couple of centuries it is time to leave the planet.
The rich get richer, the poor get poorer...the good old American way.
Full control of government this time, and a big bunch of fanboys who haven't got a clue being put in charge of the nation.
Lord help us poor sods stuck on the sidelines.

For Musk, because being a cabinet member means he no longer has to pay all his taxes. Stocks in his businesses are up as a result. He's played Trump like a Chump. Yet people still buy his poorly built and overpriced electric cars and use his poisonous social media website for the slightest little update on a new Top Spin in Forbidden Valley (including people who preached riteousness about Starmer before the UK election)?

For Trump, because he has few politicians who can work with him. Just look how they all turned on him and found him intolerable the last time due to his fascist and child like behaviours. Even his most loyal supporters couldn't stand him by the end of the term, those that he didn't sack anyway. He even launched a coup with a group of thugs against his own Vice President.

The rich do indeed get richer. God bless 'Merica. The Turkeys really have voted for Christmas. They'll pay for it, and he'll still concuct some cock and bull storey about it being someone else's fault, and suckers will believe them.

I really hope that how unattractive and unstable the US is starting to look to international investors can be taken advantage of here in the UK. The US economy is now predicted to slow down in preparation for the madness, and inflation is predicted to speed up again.

 

[Benzin]

Half of it is probably how most Americans believe the world revolves around them, and that other countries have to bend to their will. They won WW2 after all. Just don't mention Vietnam.

Definitely time to delete the Twitter account.

 

[rob666]

As large numbers of rich tories promised to leave under Labour, apparently considerable numbers of rich Democrats are holding their noses and considering Britain.
Things must be bad.

 

[Matt.GC]

As large numbers of rich tories promised to leave under Labour, apparently considerable numbers of rich Democrats are holding their noses and considering Britain.
Things must be bad.

Only that Pimlico plumber tosser and Phil Collins ever left if they were made to pay their taxes didn't they?

I know that jerk James Dyson sacked a load of people in Swindon so he could get even richer, and then campaigned for Brexit and ran away afterwards anyway, but that was separate. Still lauded as some national hero by the Tories that guy, says a lot. I won't buy any of his products either.

Funny how they make these threats but most still find it lucrative enough to stay afterwards anyway. Still loads of money to be made it seems.

2 types of rich people in 'Merica. The globalist elites, and the cronies of Trump. The globalist elites are welcome to claim asylum from Trump here as long as they pay their taxes. Trump can keep his buddies, they can get richer and exploit all those rust belt people that voted for him.

Jobs for the boys.

 

[Matt N]

I’m surprised by just how unpolitical and out there some of Trump’s senior cabinet appointments are.

We’ve got Elon Musk in some sort of “efficiency” role, and a Fox News presenter as defence secretary. Certainly not typical people to fill cabinet posts!

I’ll admit to also being mildly concerned that we have Robert F Kennedy, a known vaccine sceptic and COVID conspiracist, in charge of health…

At a glance, it looks like Trump’s second ministry is almost shaping up to be a government run by conspiracy theorists and the like, which is somewhat concerning for an institution that is supposed to dispel said conspiracies, in my view…

 

[Alsty]

Well, it's not surprising. Trump is a narcissist. He needs to surround himself with people who will massage his ego, to agree with his viewpoint and not challenge anything.

What could go wrong with that mindset?

From: https://youtu.be/COjmPC7pqlM?si=xd6I71igONYoK--E