ragamuffin
Member
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.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?
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.