2024 Presidential Election -- new thread for the final week

What will be the outcome of the 2024 Presidential Election


  • Total voters
    86
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
For all the talk and opining the post mortem of Harris’ candidacy, what about Trump’s campaign? What exactly did he do well?

We know his campaign was plagued with infighting and chaos. There was the deranged debate performance over Haitians eating cats and dogs. There was the definitively disastrous scene at the Black Journalists conference where he questioned Harris’ race, insulted the journalists and left. There was the hobnobbing with white supremacist and conspiracy theorist Lara Loomer at the 911 memorial. He turned down a second debate. He turned down an interview with 60 minutes. The MSG rally was a modern day Nazi celebration with ethnic groups receiving insults and Kamala likened to the anti-christ. Multiple times Trump was quoted as describing his political opposition and those who don’t support him as the enemy within. There was the rally where he stood there for an awkward 38 minute dance/stare party on stage instead of answering town hall questions. One of his last rallies he railed on about microphone technical issues while motioning like he was performing oral sex.

So he was an objectively bad candidate running a truly awful campaign right? But he won. So what exactly did he do right, besides show up as a non-incumbent during a time of dissatisfaction with the economy?

Did the incessant racism and misogyny actually work favorably for him? Did the vulgarity and showmanship work favorably to sell him as a person fit and effective to serve office? Real questions because I think there could be attraction there. Who gets the moral bar and who doesn’t? Or can we finally dismiss that as ever being a factor going forward?

Did he land on coherent policy plans going forward? What’s up with health care. How will the deportations be carried out? How is housing made cheaper? How will eggs be cheaper? Or are these in essence immaterial?
The campaign may have been weak but the circumstances (economy), message (immigration + implicit promise of maintaining current race and sex hierarchy) and method (showmanship, social media and vulgarity) were spot on. I hate that some or all of this appeals to a majority of the US.

I’ve seen several comparisons to 1930 Germany but there are better analogs. Throughout history whenever a dominant cultural group is threatened by demographic or rights shifts, there is a hard push to the right to protect the existing hierarchy. It’s not a white thing - it’s all cultures. Recent social science research has verified and explained what history has shown. The 2008 census, predicting whites would lose a majority by 2050, combined with Obama’s election, was the beginning of an inevitable retrenchment.

I don’t think the dems problem is messaging, I think the message is just not what many/most care about. Do the dems keep selling the country they want or abandon principles and sell to the country they live in?

Happy to share cites for all of the above.
 
Yes, surviving an assassination attempt from a registered Republican is key to being able to govern…as a Republican.

But what did he do as a choice that was good for him?
As you surely know, it’s just all about the optics. Who attempted to assassinate him was completely lost on the masses. All everyone knew is he was shot at, got up yelling “Fight! Fight! Fight!” and that was that. He absolutely gained some supporters from that. No doubt about it.
 
On a positive note (when did that last occur on this thread?):

1. Humans should not be burdened with moderating the 2028 POTUS thread. IMO, AI will be capable of moderating social media by then.

2. AI moderation should enable posting opposing views without as much retaliatory criticism and censorship.
Yes! AI will allow the perfectly worded rebuttal that is bitingly dismissive, but evades the mods.
 
You think that, I think that, but apparently 72+ million don't think that, and this has been endlessly frustrating to me ever since he so cruelly made fun of that disabled person 8 years ago. That moment right there should have ended his political career forever.
This was OG ... THE MOMENT for me. I am so repelled that we now have a MAJORITY of voters that feel otherwise (or don't remember/care).

Also, don't give up. Much introspection required. We have to figure this out...
 
This was OG ... THE MOMENT for me. I am so repelled that we now have a MAJORITY of voters that feel otherwise (or don't remember/care).

Also, don't give up. Much introspection required. We have to figure this out...
Agree with you, Truth. Don’t give up.
 
Yes, surviving an assassination attempt from a registered Republican is key to being able to govern…as a Republican.

But what did he do as a choice that was good for him?
Wasn't he a Democrat? The FBI said he donated to that party. They also said he researched both Trump and Biden to see when they would be in the area.
 
Wasn't he a Democrat? The FBI said he donated to that party. They also said he researched both Trump and Biden to see when they would be in the area.
No. He was a registered Republican but yes he did also donate to a progressive cause ($15). He also posted anti-Semitic comments online. His motives are still under investigation including whether they were political or not.

Personally, I suspect he falls more into the Hinckley camp than the Booth camp when it comes to motives and don’t think it’s useful to politicize him in particular, though he undoubtedly created the most iconic image of the campaign.
 
I think it's as simple as Americans have voted the incumbent party out of the Presidency for three straight elections now.

We haven't done that since Grover Cleveland, during the last Gilded Age.

It could be that Americans in general are not particularly happy with the direction of the country and they are looking for anybody who promises change from status quo.

If that's the case, Donald Trump is just surface level face to a deeper systemic issue.

...

Assuming race and gender wasn't part of this systemic issue (that's beyond the decorum of this board), the winning play would have been to distance yourself as far as possible from the incumbent President. Telling viewers that you wouldn't have done anything differently than the incumbent was a poor choice.
 
On a positive note (when did that last occur on this thread?):

1. Humans should not be burdened with moderating the 2028 POTUS thread. IMO, AI will be capable of moderating social media by then.
You're nearly correct - humans should not be burdened with moderating the 2028 POTUS thread because we aren't going to have to vote after this, remember?

/attempt at levity
 
Wasn't he a Democrat? The FBI said he donated to that party. They also said he researched both Trump and Biden to see when they would be in the area.

He was a registered R who had donated to both parties. Not that this ultimately matters. Another man with a lot of problems who has a gun.
 
Communicating via traditional media (TV, newspapers) is increasingly irrelevant. So many people get what passes as information from X (god help us), Faceplant, all the usual suspects for which there are few if any rules. It's the Wild West. Do Dems have to become more dishonest/misleading to compete with that onslaught?
 
Communicating via traditional media (TV, newspapers) is increasingly irrelevant. So many people get what passes as information from X (god help us), Faceplant, all the usual suspects for which there are few if any rules. It's the Wild West. Do Dems have to become more dishonest/misleading to compete with that onslaught?
Ezra Klein supports this saying Trumps’ Rogan interview got 46 million views on YouTube alone. It’s political malpractice going forward not to engage with this world.

 
The campaign may have been weak but the circumstances (economy), message (immigration + implicit promise of maintaining current race and sex hierarchy) and method (showmanship, social media and vulgarity) were spot on. I hate that some or all of this appeals to a majority of the US.

I’ve seen several comparisons to 1930 Germany but there are better analogs. Throughout history whenever a dominant cultural group is threatened by demographic or rights shifts, there is a hard push to the right to protect the existing hierarchy. It’s not a white thing - it’s all cultures. Recent social science research has verified and explained what history has shown. The 2008 census, predicting whites would lose a majority by 2050, combined with Obama’s election, was the beginning of an inevitable retrenchment.

I don’t think the dems problem is messaging, I think the message is just not what many/most care about. Do the dems keep selling the country they want or abandon principles and sell to the country they live in?

Happy to share cites for all of the above.

Yes, I have always seen Obama’s presidency was a key to the rise in Trump as a backlash. In that way it was very much a white thing. Now with the Me Too movement having joined the mix there is a backlash among men that transcends cultures. So yeah the social hierarchy has come into play. Now, despite a soaring economy, prices are still high coming out of a tumultuous period of Covid and people feel like they have had enough. This also coincides with a successful and thorough takeover of the GOP by the far right. More than ever, anger and fear is being sold and the evangelicals are eating it up.

So this is kind of the point I was getting to. It seems it didn’t really matter how bad the non-incumbent campaign was. And it didn’t matter how great or effective the incumbent campaign could have been. This was a layup for the non-incumbent no matter how awful or incompetent that candidate presents himself. If Biden had folded his candidacy far earlier and the Democrats had gone through the normal primary process would the result have been any different? Based on what the electorate is ok with accepting these days, I highly doubt it.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top