• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Democrats only: Are there lessons to be learned for team Harris?

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
For purposes of this thread, I'm an honorary Democrat
because I voted a straight ticket this time.
Lessons....
1) Discern what matters most to voters.
Focus primarily on those issues.
2) Avoid aping (or the appearance thereof)
the worst on the other side, eg, Biden's
"trash" remark.
3) Don't let loyalty to party elites (eg, Biden)
allow over-looking their being past their
"best used by date".
4) Don't fete the incumbent President of one's
party by refusing to differ on policies, eg,
taking a different stance on Israel's genocide.

Now I'm taking off my Democrat hat, & putting
back on me Libertarian fedora. (It's tan wool.
I got it in Hawaii for dirt cheap cuz no one
wears those there.)
 
Last edited:
How about comparing to Germany nowadays? Or France? Or UK? A lot of countries had to deal with higher than usual inflation rates in the past few years, but calling USA's inflation rampant only shows ignorance on the subject.

Again, voters don’t look at “average global inflation rates” they look at whether or not they seem to be better off than 4 years ago.

Most people aren’t pouring over pages of stats and economic data, they are going on their experiences.

So Trump is not a better alternative when it comes down to international turmoil. He caused more of it than Biden.

Again, many people would perceive that differently, see Ukraine and the Middle East.

As I said, much of this is down to bad luck but presidential performance is significantly down to the luck of events you can’t control.

Not at all.


In terms of this election, Gatehouse suggests two factors why Trump won. The first and most obvious, speaking to the Cuban Americans in Little Havana, was the cost of living. “A lot of them told me, ‘My grocery bills have gone up exponentially.’ It’s not clear to me what policies Donald Trump offers that will solve that, but it’s quite clear that this is a problem the Democrats haven’t adequately addressed.”

For the other reason, he points to the New York Times/Siena College poll of likely voters in late October. Its top line was that Trump and Harris were neck and neck in the race, but somewhere near the bottom came the question: “Which comes closest to your view about the political and economic system in America?” Only 3% thought the system was working fine and 38% thought it needed “minor changes”, but 51% thought the system needed “major changes” and 7% thought that “the system needs to be torn down entirely”. “So you’ve got a nearly 60% block who are like, ‘The system sucks, it’s ****ed,’ and Trump is attracting those voters. Because, for better or for worse – well, for worse, actually – the Democrats have kind of become the party that defends the system.” The terms “left” and “right” no longer apply in US politics, he says. “I frame it as pro-system and anti-system.”

 

BrightShadow

Active Member
I will take that as a 'yes'.
ItemS80166.jpeg

Others can find their own way there!;)
 

Koldo

Outstanding Member
Again, voters don’t look at “average global inflation rates” they look at whether or not they seem to be better off than 4 years ago.

Most people aren’t pouring over pages of stats and economic data, they are going on their experiences.

First of all, looking up inflation rates across different countries is the rational approach to understand whether you are really having it bad or not.

Second, yes, I understand that people often make superficial evaluations of their economic situation. However, it is the labeling of 'rampant' inflation that I am heavily criticizing as being remarkably ignorant. It is simply unjustifiable.


Again, many people would perceive that differently, see Ukraine and the Middle East.

As I said, much of this is down to bad luck but presidential performance is significantly down to the luck of events you can’t control.

They can only perceive it differently if they completely ignore Trump's past as a president.

In terms of this election, Gatehouse suggests two factors why Trump won. The first and most obvious, speaking to the Cuban Americans in Little Havana, was the cost of living. “A lot of them told me, ‘My grocery bills have gone up exponentially.’ It’s not clear to me what policies Donald Trump offers that will solve that, but it’s quite clear that this is a problem the Democrats haven’t adequately addressed.”

For the other reason, he points to the New York Times/Siena College poll of likely voters in late October. Its top line was that Trump and Harris were neck and neck in the race, but somewhere near the bottom came the question: “Which comes closest to your view about the political and economic system in America?” Only 3% thought the system was working fine and 38% thought it needed “minor changes”, but 51% thought the system needed “major changes” and 7% thought that “the system needs to be torn down entirely”. “So you’ve got a nearly 60% block who are like, ‘The system sucks, it’s ****ed,’ and Trump is attracting those voters. Because, for better or for worse – well, for worse, actually – the Democrats have kind of become the party that defends the system.” The terms “left” and “right” no longer apply in US politics, he says. “I frame it as pro-system and anti-system.”


That would be a great explanation if not for the fact that: 1) Trump was the president in the recent past. He was no longer an outsider this time around, and he wasn't offering any massive change to the system. 2) Trump numbers were significantly lower the first time he got elected, when he better represented a change to the system. 3) Trump numbers on 2024 are very very close to the 2020 election. All things considered, it is not like he managed to convince a whole lot of extra people to vote for him. If anything, the Democratic party lost because it couldn't offer a charismatic candidate offering bolder proposals that compelled the supporters to actually vote.
 
First of all, looking up inflation rates across different countries is the rational approach to understand whether you are really having it bad or not.

The key takeaway is that you should base your ideas on how people act in reality, not how you think they should act.

Second, yes, I understand that people often make superficial evaluations of their economic situation. However, it is the labeling of 'rampant' inflation that I am heavily criticizing as being remarkably ignorant. It is simply unjustifiable.

“yes, I understand many people can’t afford things they used to be able to, and inflation rates are the highest for a generation but the key takeaway from this is that we must call it significant rate of inflation not rampant inflation”

You’d make a tremendous Political campaign manager
They can only perceive it differently if they completely ignore Trump's past as a president.

Ahh, the “Anyone who thinks differently to me is stupid and racist” gambit.

People who voted for trump explain why they voted for trump and you still say they are wrong about why they voted for trump.
 

Koldo

Outstanding Member
The key takeaway is that you should base your ideas on how people act in reality, not how you think they should act.

What makes you think I don't?

“yes, I understand many people can’t afford things they used to be able to, and inflation rates are the highest for a generation but the key takeaway from this is that we must call it significant rate of inflation not rampant inflation”

You’d make a tremendous Political campaign manager

And you would make an excellent dramatist.

It is not even a particularly significant inflation rate in the large scheme, and it keeps getting lower during 2024.

Ahh, the “Anyone who thinks differently to me is stupid and racist” gambit

Strawman.

People who voted for trump explain why they voted for trump and you still say they are wrong about why they voted for trump.

Ah, because every Trump voter has been heard by now shortly after the election and they would obviously confess to being racist, homophobic, xenophobic, etc. if asked by a stranger in a society that no longer accepts such views being openly expressed... Yeah, right...?

And inflation was really high just before 2016, thus explaining why Trump managed to be voted by nearly 63 millions, right? Because inflation is what reaaaaally explains why most Trump supporters vote for him, right?
 

F1fan

Veteran Member
Probably another lengthy conversation but I see society and the left wanting men to remain boys and not become men.
Do you see Trump as a man? A criminal, a liar, sexually assaults women, commits fraud as a core motivation in business? The man is insecure, and not strong in any psycholocal sense. He appears strong because some assume his bullying and insults makes a man.

And from the conservative men I have seen and heard who are prominent cvoices of the right they are immature and lack any core integrity. That's not strength in the classic, formal sense. Look at what a gentleman used to be. Modern conservatives are not that. Have you ever heard of chivalry?

There was a series from England called Hornblower about the fictional character Horatio Hornblower, an English naval officer during the Napoleonic wars. In one episode Hornblower and some of his men were prisoners of the French, and during a massive storm there was a French frigate that was in trouble on some coastal rocks. Hornblower told the French officer holding them prisoner that if let him and his men go they would rescue the men on the frigate, and he gave his word he would return. The French agreed and Hornblower and his men rescued the French sailors, but by circumstances they ended up back in the custody of a nearby English ship. The English officer said they were lucky to have escaped the French. But Hornblower said he had to go back. His men weren't obligated, but they agreed to go back as well out of duty and respect. Hornblower turned himself and his man back over to the French, The French officer was so impressed by Hornblower's integrity and honor that he agreed to let tem go, espcially in light that they saved many French sailors.

Now, to my mind this is wat a man is. Not a cheater. Not a liar. Someone who has honor and intergity. How many these days exhibit anywhere near this level of dignity? I'm not seeing it on the right given who they just elected president.
Society seems to want men to accept the status quo and not rock the boat. not risk failure.
Sounds whiny.
Everything in society says women are objects, then when men treat them as objects they are vilified.
Trump does this.
Society does not want to help men battle their sex drive and how they see women.
And Trump will fix this?
The left says porn actresses should not be shamed but men who look at porn are treating women as objects. The left says if you look at a topless woman on a beach, well that is the man fault.
Where does the left say this? Look at your own side that includes Christian idealists who include many who believe women shouldn't work. Your side includes incels. Can you defend their attitdes?

The educated don't deny that men have hormones and have urges that are difficult to manage. It is a matter of character that can manage these impulses. Are you aware that Trump has 26 sexual assault accusations? There was another recently. Be careful what you are critical of when you openly support an immoral and disrespectful man.
They don't like men that are self reliant and don't care about other people approval.
This isn't factual.
Men have a drive to protect women, society and the left says that is misogynistic.
Yet the right openly elected an ajudicated rapist. Help us make sense of your views.
 
What makes you think I don't?

Your arguments in this thread.

It is not even a particularly significant inflation rate in the large scheme, and it keeps getting lower during 2024.

People don’t think about “the large scheme” they think about the last few years based on experience.

Hence the need to understand people as they are not as you think they should be.

1731129074039.png


And inflation was really high just before 2016, thus explaining why Trump managed to be voted by nearly 63 millions, right? Because inflation is what reaaaaally explains why most Trump supporters vote for him, right?

People experience inflation cumulatively over time, not as a stat at any given point in time.

Also in 2016 inflation was 2.1%

The last 4 years have been bad everywhere so the incumbent gets the blame. Had Trump won last time, the dems would likely have won this one.

As I’ve said, luck is very important in politics.

And yes, the economy makes a very big difference to how people vote, especially among swing voters who decide elections.

Ah, because every Trump voter has been heard by now shortly after the election and they would obviously confess to being racist, homophobic, xenophobic, etc. if asked by a stranger in a society that no longer accepts such views being openly expressed... Yeah, right...?

“They disagree with me because they are stupid and racist”
 

Koldo

Outstanding Member
Your arguments in this thread.

:rolleyes:

People don’t think about “the large scheme” they think about the last few years based on experience.

Hence the need to understand people as they are not as you think they should be.

View attachment 99685

Once again, I have already said that I know that people make superficial assessments. My criticism was on the use of 'rampant'.

People experience inflation cumulatively over time, not as a stat at any given point in time.

Also in 2016 inflation was 2.1%

The last 4 years have been bad everywhere so the incumbent gets the blame. Had Trump won last time, the dems would likely have won this one.

As I’ve said, luck is very important in politics.

And yes, the economy makes a very big difference to how people vote, especially among swing voters who decide elections.

You are either missing my point or not dealing with it. Inflation was very low in 2016 and the few years before. Therefore, the over 60 million votes for Trump back then can not be justified by looking at inflation rates. If, however, you look all the way back to 2004, you will see those numbers had been a constant for the republican candidate.

Biden won in 2020 (during Trump's presidency) when the inflation was also quite low, and had an unseen record number of votes. Not only that, the number of votes for Trump in 2024 and 2020 are very similar.

“They disagree with me because they are stupid and racist”

Disagree about what specifically?
 

Koldo

Outstanding Member
Your arguments in this thread.

:rolleyes:

People don’t think about “the large scheme” they think about the last few years based on experience.

Hence the need to understand people as they are not as you think they should be.

View attachment 99685

Once again, I have already said that I know that people make superficial assessments. My criticism was on the use of 'rampant'.

People experience inflation cumulatively over time, not as a stat at any given point in time.

Also in 2016 inflation was 2.1%

The last 4 years have been bad everywhere so the incumbent gets the blame. Had Trump won last time, the dems would likely have won this one.

As I’ve said, luck is very important in politics.

And yes, the economy makes a very big difference to how people vote, especially among swing voters who decide elections.

You are either missing my point or not dealing with it. Inflation was very low in 2016 (during Obama's presidency) and the few years before. Therefore, the over 60 million votes for Trump back then can not be justified by looking at inflation rates. If, however, you look all the way back to 2004, you will see those numbers had been a constant for the republican candidate, no matter what. A constant even during 2008's rise on inflation (which happened during Bush's presidency).

Biden won in 2020 (during Trump's presidency) when the inflation was also quite low, and had an unseen record number of votes. Not only that, the number of votes for Trump in 2024 and 2020 are very similar. So you definitely can not state that the inflation convinced people to switch sides at any significant ammount or that it made people that weren't voting decide to vote for Trump now. At very best, what you can say is that it made people that had voted for Biden feel demotivated and not vote at all this time around, but even then there is a multitude of other factors that could have played a much more significant role.

“They disagree with me because they are stupid and racist”

Disagree about what specifically?
 

Wandering Monk

Well-Known Member
Again, voters don’t look at “average global inflation rates” they look at whether or not they seem to be better off than 4 years ago.

Most people aren’t pouring over pages of stats and economic data, they are going on their experiences.



Again, many people would perceive that differently, see Ukraine and the Middle East.

As I said, much of this is down to bad luck but presidential performance is significantly down to the luck of events you can’t control.




In terms of this election, Gatehouse suggests two factors why Trump won. The first and most obvious, speaking to the Cuban Americans in Little Havana, was the cost of living. “A lot of them told me, ‘My grocery bills have gone up exponentially.’ It’s not clear to me what policies Donald Trump offers that will solve that, but it’s quite clear that this is a problem the Democrats haven’t adequately addressed.”

For the other reason, he points to the New York Times/Siena College poll of likely voters in late October. Its top line was that Trump and Harris were neck and neck in the race, but somewhere near the bottom came the question: “Which comes closest to your view about the political and economic system in America?” Only 3% thought the system was working fine and 38% thought it needed “minor changes”, but 51% thought the system needed “major changes” and 7% thought that “the system needs to be torn down entirely”. “So you’ve got a nearly 60% block who are like, ‘The system sucks, it’s ****ed,’ and Trump is attracting those voters. Because, for better or for worse – well, for worse, actually – the Democrats have kind of become the party that defends the system.” The terms “left” and “right” no longer apply in US politics, he says. “I frame it as pro-system and anti-system.”

1731155977753.png


 

BrightShadow

Active Member
Whatever floats your train.

Are you trying to sell - train floats?:rolleyes:

This is what Dems do - they try to sell what is obviously false.;)

They shamelessly turned Kamala into someone - she is NOT
They shamefully projected Trump into someone - he is NOT

I see a lot of mini Kamalas still running around like baby sea turtles trying to make it to the sea.
Cute!



:cool:
 

Audie

Veteran Member
Personally because 3 democratic governers warned Biden that the southern border was an issue I believe Harris could have had a bit more political savvy and urged Biden to clamp down on the southern border sooner. I believe that even if the US needs migration sometimes in politics you have to not be too much of a moral crusader and have more of a willingness to listen to the public's concerns even if they are unfounded.

Considering the loathworthy opponent Harris had I personally feel this shouldn't have been such a close race in my view.

Thoughts?

A good candidate would have been a terrific idea.
 

Koldo

Outstanding Member
Are you trying to sell - train floats?:rolleyes:

I am here to tell you - not educate you.
In time you will realize.

This is what Dems do - they try to sell what is obviously false.;)

They shamelessly turned Kamala into someone - she is NOT
They shamefully projected Trump into someone - he is NOT

I see a lot of mini Kamalas still running around like baby sea turtles trying to make it to the sea.
Cute!



:cool:

*yawn*
 
Top