mboy
Liberal
Listen. Think. Speak.
Posts: 23,620
|
Post by mboy on Nov 16, 2024 10:56:22 GMT
Without commenting on what the Democrats should and shouldn’t do going forward, I would just note that this was not some enormous loss. We are going to end up with a 1-2% Trump win in both the popular vote and the tipping point state - hardly an historic landslide, however you slice it. In contrast, the Democrats won in 2020 by more than 4% and the Republicans changed precisely nothing - indeed running the exact same nominee, despite him becoming an objectively worse candidate post-election. Politics doesn’t happen in stable conditions. I wouldn’t place bets on anything at this stage, but it’s perfectly possible that after 4 years of Trump the Democrats could run with an identical platform to this year and win, possibly even convincingly. Or Republicans could run a successful administration (though let’s say that initial signals are … unpromising … on that front) and hold the Presidency no matter what Democrats do. The Democrats lost by "only 1-2%" against objectively the worst and least suitable candidate in history. One day the GOP is going to find a charismatic Trumpite candidate who isn't a convicted felon sociopath rapist fraudster. Praying that day isn't 2028 and carrying on as before is a somewhat dangerous plan. |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,853
Member is Online
|
Post by The Bishop on Nov 16, 2024 11:07:23 GMT
The Democrats lost by "only 1-2%" against objectively the worst and least suitable candidate in history. One day the GOP is going to find a charismatic Trumpite candidate who isn't a convicted felon sociopath rapist fraudster. Praying that day isn't 2028 and carrying on as before is a somewhat dangerous plan. Do you think they grow on trees or something? Trump is (thankfully) sui generis. Which is not to say the Democrats should be complacent about their future chances - if there is one thing we have now learned about US politics over the decades, it is that "demographics are destiny" predictions are total bunk - and yes, they very likely do need to calibrate their stance on stuff like immigration and trans issues. But the previous poster is essentially correct about the result, and running around like headless chickens as if this was a 1980s style GOP landslide won't help. |
|
|
|
Post by eastmidlandsright on Nov 16, 2024 11:08:59 GMT
Without commenting on what the Democrats should and shouldn’t do going forward, I would just note that this was not some enormous loss. We are going to end up with a 1-2% Trump win in both the popular vote and the tipping point state - hardly an historic landslide, however you slice it. In contrast, the Democrats won in 2020 by more than 4% and the Republicans changed precisely nothing - indeed running the exact same nominee, despite him becoming an objectively worse candidate post-election. Politics doesn’t happen in stable conditions. I wouldn’t place bets on anything at this stage, but it’s perfectly possible that after 4 years of Trump the Democrats could run with an identical platform to this year and win, possibly even convincingly. Or Republicans could run a successful administration (though let’s say that initial signals are … unpromising … on that front) and hold the Presidency no matter what Democrats do. The Democrats lost by "only 1-2%" against objectively the worst and least suitable candidate in history. One day the GOP is going to find a charismatic Trumpite candidate who isn't a convicted felon sociopath rapist fraudster. Praying that day isn't 2028 and carrying on as before is a somewhat dangerous plan. Perhaps more importantly is the Supreme court. Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett are 57, 59 and 52 respectively. They could easily serve another 20 years or more, and/or retire at an optimal time. If Trump gets to replace Thomas and Alito with justices in their early 50s or younger that is almost certainly a conservative majority on the Supreme Court for a generation. Also Sotomayer is not exactly in the best of health. |
|
|
|
Post by agedlikewine on Nov 16, 2024 11:16:12 GMT
Which is why Democrats are cooling nobody if they again run on Obama-style "Change, but while still respecting the GOP". They need someone who will talk about packing the court, and their own form of Project 2025, an institutional takeover. The GOP cannot complain, since "owning the libs" is their own platform now.
|
|
iain
Lib Dem
Posts: 11,415 
|
Post by iain on Nov 16, 2024 11:26:22 GMT
Without commenting on what the Democrats should and shouldn’t do going forward, I would just note that this was not some enormous loss. We are going to end up with a 1-2% Trump win in both the popular vote and the tipping point state - hardly an historic landslide, however you slice it. In contrast, the Democrats won in 2020 by more than 4% and the Republicans changed precisely nothing - indeed running the exact same nominee, despite him becoming an objectively worse candidate post-election. Politics doesn’t happen in stable conditions. I wouldn’t place bets on anything at this stage, but it’s perfectly possible that after 4 years of Trump the Democrats could run with an identical platform to this year and win, possibly even convincingly. Or Republicans could run a successful administration (though let’s say that initial signals are … unpromising … on that front) and hold the Presidency no matter what Democrats do. The Democrats lost by "only 1-2%" against objectively the worst and least suitable candidate in history. One day the GOP is going to find a charismatic Trumpite candidate who isn't a convicted felon sociopath rapist fraudster. Praying that day isn't 2028 and carrying on as before is a somewhat dangerous plan. You could look at it that way, or you could see it as the GOP only winning by 1-2% in historically good conditions for a challenger party (and in fairness, they would have won by a lot more against Biden), and their bench looks historically weak. Anyway, as I say, I’m not really arguing for Democrats to do anything in particular, I just don’t want us to lose track of what Trump actually achieved. His win is being spun by many on the right as some ‘historic victory’, simply because the GOP has failed to win the popular vote in such a long time. In reality his victory was a pretty narrow one. |
|
mboy
Liberal
Listen. Think. Speak.
Posts: 23,620
|
Post by mboy on Nov 16, 2024 11:34:32 GMT
The Democrats lost by "only 1-2%" against objectively the worst and least suitable candidate in history. One day the GOP is going to find a charismatic Trumpite candidate who isn't a convicted felon sociopath rapist fraudster. Praying that day isn't 2028 and carrying on as before is a somewhat dangerous plan. Do you think they grow on trees or something? Trump is (thankfully) sui generis. I would argue that Europe has found at least a dozen of these characters over the last decade, where they have only been held back by proportional voting systems. Now even that is breaking. |
|
|
|
Post by sanders on Nov 16, 2024 11:36:24 GMT
The Democrats lost by "only 1-2%" against objectively the worst and least suitable candidate in history. One day the GOP is going to find a charismatic Trumpite candidate who isn't a convicted felon sociopath rapist fraudster. Praying that day isn't 2028 and carrying on as before is a somewhat dangerous plan. Perhaps more importantly is the Supreme court. Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett are 57, 59 and 52 respectively. They could easily serve another 20 years or more, and/or retire at an optimal time. If Trump gets to replace Thomas and Alito with justices in their early 50s or younger that is almost certainly a conservative majority on the Supreme Court for a generation. Also Sotomayer is not exactly in the best of health. Surely Clarence Thomas will retire soon? At least before 2026 midterms anyway. |
|
|
|
Post by timmullen on Nov 16, 2024 11:42:47 GMT
Perhaps more importantly is the Supreme court. Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett are 57, 59 and 52 respectively. They could easily serve another 20 years or more, and/or retire at an optimal time. If Trump gets to replace Thomas and Alito with justices in their early 50s or younger that is almost certainly a conservative majority on the Supreme Court for a generation. Also Sotomayer is not exactly in the best of health. Surely Clarence Thomas will retire soon? At least before 2026 midterms anyway. However if he were to go beyond the midterms he would become the longest serving Justice in US history, which might appeal, and could he afford to live without the external lobby group payments he and Mrs Thomas currently receive which might dry up if he was no longer on the bench. |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,853
Member is Online
|
Post by The Bishop on Nov 16, 2024 11:42:52 GMT
Do you think they grow on trees or something? Trump is (thankfully) sui generis. I would argue that Europe has found at least a dozen of these characters over the last decade, where they have only been held back by proportional voting systems. Now even that is breaking. Even accepting your premise, PR systems arguably enable the likes of le Pen and Wilders - rather than holding them back as you claim. Most will never get near the c50% of the vote that Trump has achieved. |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Nov 16, 2024 11:47:02 GMT
If you're paying tax and/or social security payments, then by definition you are documented. "documented" AIUI refers to those who have formally applied for citizenship. For example. as I'm married to a US citizen I could have gone to live and work there anytime (green card) and have "indefinite right to remain" by dint of spouse. However, I would not have been obliged to formalise it . This would involve spending thousands of dollars on a citizenship test and a formal ceremony (rather like a baptism!) and swearing an oath of allegiance etc. So yes, you can work/pay tax but still be "undocumented". The worrying thing is if someone similar (I wonder who) ever got their greasy hands on the levers of power here, then my wife - who has lived and worked here for 25 years but has never formalised her citizenship here (cos it costs thousands of pounds too over here and we dont have that sort of money to frivolously waste) - could end up being on the receiving end of a mass deportation. So in that dystopian society, I would either have to pay thousands of dollars to live with her there , or vice versa. One thing is for sure, neither of us would do what those Latino Trump voters did! So when my party come to power and we start the mass deportations your wife will not be a citizen but just a foreigner. When she departs it will be 100% your fault for denying the importance of 'being a fully documented' citizen with entitlement to stay. You have cheerfully derided and despised the need, evaded the responsibility and stupidly not reckoned it was 'worth the price'. You are part of our problem. |
|
mboy
Liberal
Listen. Think. Speak.
Posts: 23,620
|
Post by mboy on Nov 16, 2024 11:47:40 GMT
I would argue that Europe has found at least a dozen of these characters over the last decade, where they have only been held back by proportional voting systems. Now even that is breaking. Even accepting your premise, PR systems arguably enable the likes of le Pen and Wilders - rather than holding them back as you claim. Most will never get near the c50% of the vote that Trump has achieved. Come on, you know that isn't how FPTP works. Probably half of Trump voters voted *against* the Democrats and *despite* Trump. Under PR Trump would be in a right-populist party entirely separate to the GOP. It's FPTP that allows Trumpism - a minority of US voters - to net the whole of the right-wing church. |
|
|
|
Post by eastmidlandsright on Nov 16, 2024 11:50:08 GMT
Surely Clarence Thomas will retire soon? At least before 2026 midterms anyway. However if he were to go beyond the midterms he would become the longest serving Justice in US history, which might appeal, and could he afford to live without the external lobby group payments he and Mrs Thomas currently receive which might dry up if he was no longer on the bench. I suspect that retired Supreme Court Justices are not short of opportunities to make money. More importantly it looks like the GOP will control the Senate for the whole of Trump's presidency so Thomas and Alito are under no pressure to retire any time soon. |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Nov 16, 2024 12:06:30 GMT
Without commenting on what the Democrats should and shouldn’t do going forward, I would just note that this was not some enormous loss. We are going to end up with a 1-2% Trump win in both the popular vote and the tipping point state - hardly an historic landslide, however you slice it. In contrast, the Democrats won in 2020 by more than 4% and the Republicans changed precisely nothing - indeed running the exact same nominee, despite him becoming an objectively worse candidate post-election. Politics doesn’t happen in stable conditions. I wouldn’t place bets on anything at this stage, but it’s perfectly possible that after 4 years of Trump the Democrats could run with an identical platform to this year and win, possibly even convincingly. Or Republicans could run a successful administration (though let’s say that initial signals are … unpromising … on that front) and hold the Presidency no matter what Democrats do. But the enormity is that with this near-to-perfect-designer-created-unsuitable-boorish-buffoon, you not only failed to get a landslide complete rout of the GOP, you could not even actually beat them! WHY? |
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,741
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Nov 16, 2024 12:09:47 GMT
If you're paying tax and/or social security payments, then by definition you are documented. "documented" AIUI refers to those who have formally applied for citizenship. For example. as I'm married to a US citizen I could have gone to live and work there anytime (green card) and have "indefinite right to remain" by dint of spouse. However, I would not have been obliged to formalise it . This would involve spending thousands of dollars on a citizenship test and a formal ceremony (rather like a baptism!) and swearing an oath of allegiance etc. So yes, you can work/pay tax but still be "undocumented". The worrying thing is if someone similar (I wonder who) ever got their greasy hands on the levers of power here, then my wife - who has lived and worked here for 25 years but has never formalised her citizenship here (cos it costs thousands of pounds too over here and we dont have that sort of money to frivolously waste) - could end up being on the receiving end of a mass deportation. So in that dystopian society, I would either have to pay thousands of dollars to live with her there , or vice versa. One thing is for sure, neither of us would do what those Latino Trump voters did! To paraphrase: that's not what that word means. But we know Americans use words that are completely at odds with their actual meaning.  |
|
|
|
Post by bigfatron on Nov 16, 2024 12:10:28 GMT
Without commenting on what the Democrats should and shouldn’t do going forward, I would just note that this was not some enormous loss. We are going to end up with a 1-2% Trump win in both the popular vote and the tipping point state - hardly an historic landslide, however you slice it. In contrast, the Democrats won in 2020 by more than 4% and the Republicans changed precisely nothing - indeed running the exact same nominee, despite him becoming an objectively worse candidate post-election. Politics doesn’t happen in stable conditions. I wouldn’t place bets on anything at this stage, but it’s perfectly possible that after 4 years of Trump the Democrats could run with an identical platform to this year and win, possibly even convincingly. Or Republicans could run a successful administration (though let’s say that initial signals are … unpromising … on that front) and hold the Presidency no matter what Democrats do. The Democrats lost by "only 1-2%" against objectively the worst and least suitable candidate in history. One day the GOP is going to find a charismatic Trumpite candidate who isn't a convicted felon sociopath rapist fraudster. Praying that day isn't 2028 and carrying on as before is a somewhat dangerous plan. However bizarre some of us may find it, to a large segment of the US public Trump IS a charismatic candidate… |
|
|
|
Post by holderness on Nov 16, 2024 12:28:34 GMT
A good article in the FT showing how the Democrats have deserted the working class. Whether or not progressives are ready to accept it, the evidence all points in one direction. America’s moderate voters have not deserted the Democrats; the party has pushed them away.
So people associated them with sociocultural issues more than class issues in 1944, did they? I doubt it. Even if they did, Democrats still won that election. What Democrats need to do now is commit to implementing FDR's economic bill of rights from the 1940s. The General Social Survey began in 1972, so I'm not sure where the "first time in 80 years" comes from? More to the point, if the Democrats are simply beholden to a slightly different set of billionaires, they have to find some way to differentiate themselves to the voters. On this occasion, it hasn't worked. |
|
iain
Lib Dem
Posts: 11,415
|
Post by iain on Nov 16, 2024 12:39:57 GMT
Without commenting on what the Democrats should and shouldn’t do going forward, I would just note that this was not some enormous loss. We are going to end up with a 1-2% Trump win in both the popular vote and the tipping point state - hardly an historic landslide, however you slice it. In contrast, the Democrats won in 2020 by more than 4% and the Republicans changed precisely nothing - indeed running the exact same nominee, despite him becoming an objectively worse candidate post-election. Politics doesn’t happen in stable conditions. I wouldn’t place bets on anything at this stage, but it’s perfectly possible that after 4 years of Trump the Democrats could run with an identical platform to this year and win, possibly even convincingly. Or Republicans could run a successful administration (though let’s say that initial signals are … unpromising … on that front) and hold the Presidency no matter what Democrats do. But the enormity is that with this near-to-perfect-designer-created-unsuitable-boorish-buffoon, you not only failed to get a landslide complete rout of the GOP, you could not even actually beat them! WHY? It’s the economy, stupid. |
|
|
|
Post by timmullen on Nov 16, 2024 12:41:05 GMT
I suspect that retired Supreme Court Justices are not short of opportunities to make money. More importantly it looks like the GOP will control the Senate for the whole of Trump's presidency so Thomas and Alito are under no pressure to retire any time soon. Indeed not, but do they come to over $4 million which is the conservative estimate of the gifts Thomas has received? |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Nov 16, 2024 12:43:07 GMT
But the enormity is that with this near-to-perfect-designer-created-unsuitable-boorish-buffoon, you not only failed to get a landslide complete rout of the GOP, you could not even actually beat them! WHY? It’s the economy, stupid. If you are comfortable with that trite remark as being the whole story, then prepare to enjoy a life of endless failure. |
|
iain
Lib Dem
Posts: 11,415
|
Post by iain on Nov 16, 2024 12:51:41 GMT
It’s the economy, stupid. If you are comfortable with that trite remark as being the whole story, then prepare to enjoy a life of endless failure. Inflation was clearly the macro factor. All other issues (with the partial exception of immigration) were secondary. If you are incapable of seeing that obvious truth then I can’t help you. Circa 70% of US voters felt the country to be on the wrong track, and the incumbent President had an approval rating of 40%. Inflation is well-known as a government killer. In those circumstances history dictated a Republican landslide. As it was, they won only a narrow victory with their terrible candidate. Exit polls showed Harris with a noticeably higher favourable rating than Trump, and was viewed as less extreme. But that wasn’t good enough to overcome the record of an unpopular administration. |
|
