2024 Election Discussion General

[Raze]

2 minutes ago, Ulax said:

Neither of these were black woman.

It proves race and gender are not unsolvable obstacles. Unless you’re saying everyone just hates black women in particular.

Kamala was a weak candidate. She offered men nothing, barely campaigned, and acted like a condescending douche to Muslims and the anti war left.

[ryandesreu]

6 minutes ago, bambi said:

Awesome I liked JD Vance, seems intelligent and rounded.

Liberals over-demonize trump. He isnt going to be starting any wars, theres no evidence for this. Ultimately he seeks self-promotion, and economic success, wars arent going to be high on his agenda

We don't know this, and trade-wars will increase inflation. 

[mojsterr]

3 minutes ago, Kid A said:

removed the Media Neutrality Act

I don't know anything about this, but what was his reasoning to the people for this?

[hundreth]

4 minutes ago, Nemra said:

I know.

It's fascinating that people don't get that.

Even if you're staunchly anti Israel, who cares in the grand scheme of things?

Why doesn't the left understand that most citizens are America first and care primarily on the economy, not social justice and the plight of others. It doesn't even stem from a lack of empathy, its the same rationale as "Put your oxygen mask on first."

Progress happens when times are good, not bad. When the economy is struggling and people are struggling, you need to go back to basics and address people's immediate needs. 

Americans voted to stop the bleeding of immigration and it's impact on the US economy. They misguidedly believe Trump can reverse inflation. They would literally let half the world burn if it meant cheaper gas prices for them. 

The left needs to understand that they always need to have a foundation around a strong economy and America first ideals. Justice related causes will have to be sprinkles on top.

The reason Biden was elected last time was for the same reason. Americans saw they were struggling during Covid, and they wanted a change. Simple as that. Biden was a very weak candidate, he won simply because Americans hoped he would restore the economy.

[Kid A]

.

Edited 14 hours ago by Kid A

[Kid A]

11 minutes ago, mojsterr said:

I don't know anything about this, but what was his reasoning to the people for this?

From ChatGPT:

"Ronald Reagan justified the removal of the "Fairness Doctrine" by emphasizing principles of free speech and the need to promote a more diverse media discourse. He argued that the regulation, which required broadcasters to provide equal time to different viewpoints on controversial issues, stifled press freedom and made it difficult for broadcasters to effectively cover topics.

Reagan and his supporters believed that eliminating the doctrine would open up a wider range of opinions and perspectives, benefiting the public. They argued that the market, rather than the government, should determine which viewpoints were presented, contending that this approach would lead to a more dynamic and competitive media landscape."

[zazen]

6 minutes ago, hundreth said:

Even if you're staunchly anti Israel, who cares in the grand scheme of things?

Why doesn't the left understand that most citizens are America first and care primarily on the economy, not social justice and the plight of others. It doesn't even stem from a lack of empathy, its the same rationale as "Put your oxygen mask on first."

Progress happens when times are good, not bad. When the economy is struggling and people are struggling, you need to go back to basics and address people's immediate needs. 

Americans voted to stop the bleeding of immigration and it's impact on the US economy. They misguidedly believe Trump can reverse inflation. They would literally let half the world burn if it meant cheaper gas prices for them. 

The left needs to understand that they always need to have a foundation around a strong economy and America first ideals. Justice related causes will have to be sprinkles on top.

The reason Biden was elected last time was for the same reason. Americans saw they were struggling during Covid, and they wanted a change. Simple as that. Biden was a very weak candidate, he won simply because Americans hoped he would restore the economy.

Spot on man. Lets see if Donald can end the war in Israel in a fair enough manner considering the Palestinians. Abraham accords didn't consider them but with everything that;s happened the key Arab players won't allow things to move along without recognizing and addressing the Palestinian cause.

The two key issues are economic and security (border and domestic) - socio cultural issues are also important, but economics and security take priority. This is the problem of the left, prioritization. It's not that identity and inclusion don't matter - it's that they can't matter more than a society's foundations weakening.

You can have the most inclusive team on the Titanic, but if no ones watching out for icebergs, everyone drowns equally. You can have ''soft on crime'' progressive policies, but what does this misplaced compassion matter if it renders the citizens incapable of walking safely at night, or the viability of a business staying open. For example - California reclassified non-violent offenses such as theft of property valued under 950 dollars to be a misdemeanor, and obviously theft increased. Boeing just collapsed its DEI department last week. Nature is healing and delusions are being met with reality.

Edited 13 hours ago by zazen

[Nemra]

4 minutes ago, hundreth said:

Even if you're staunchly anti Israel, who cares in the grand scheme of things?

I didn't say that Israel shouldn't exist. What has been done is done. But they are not stopping the settlements. Trump will make sure it continues that way.

[hundreth]

Just now, Nemra said:

I didn't say that Israel shouldn't exist. What has been done is done. But they are not stopping the settlements. Trump will make sure it continues that way.

Sure, but what's tomorrow's gas price going to be compared to today's?

No one cares.

[Hatfort]

There's blame to put on the Democrat Party, it was a gamble to put such an old man considering what should be an 8-year job. By the time he left, there wasn't much time for a primary process. There was the difficulty of defending some of the office positions, mostly abroad. Two huge conflicts at the same time. Kamala has not been good enough, that's the truth. Next time have a clean primary at least, and learn to earn voters by differentiating from the other party more clearly.

There's some blame to put on the voters who chose to vote for this conman or the ones that couldn't choose for the least bad at least. Now they'll get what they voted for, but many that didn't will pay the price too.

It will be bad for its economy, foxes taking care of the hens again. Probably Ukraine will stop receiving money, that will accelerate the end of that war, which was inevitable anyway. Netanyahu gets a better ally, if the previous wasn't good enough, but that can result in a bigger war in the Middle East, and the effects and results of that are not predictable. Whatever mess they get into next too, we'll see.

[hundreth]

The irony is that leftists make the argument that the development level of other societies, such as Gaza are the product of economic turmoil - but they can't apply the same logic internally to the U.S. 

If you want progress, focus on Americans being able to afford basic housing.

[Nemra]

2 minutes ago, hundreth said:

Sure, but what's tomorrow's gas price going to be compared to today's?

How's Trump and his team going to solve that?

Do you understand who Trump is?

[UnbornTao]

49 minutes ago, josemar said:

Much less than her inability to answer a question without blaming everything on Trump or bringing up her middle class background.

Likely much more, unfortunately.

Edited 13 hours ago by UnbornTao

[QandC]

42 minutes ago, zurew said:

This is false. There is such a thing as conservative mainstream media (for example Fox news) and Trump supporters didn't have any ounce of skepticism towards them. Its not a question of mainstream or non-mainstream media its more of a question of anti vs pro establishment narratives.

Low information voters will just trust stuff thats in-line with either an anti or pro estabishment narrative.

And there is an incredibly small fraction of voters who have the time and capability to actually honestly investigate claims regardless if those claims go against their view. But these people don't outright just reject mainstream media claims, they actually try to engage with those claims and investigate those claims.

The idea that voters are simply low-information, swayed entirely by pro- or anti-establishment narratives, misses the complexity of how people actually interact with media. Many voters are more skeptical than they’re given credit for and don't blindly follow narratives; they often engage with information in a nuanced way, picking apart what they believe aligns with their own experiences or values.

Think about it—most people don’t easily fit into rigid categories. They’re not all tuned into just one news source, nor do they simply reject or accept mainstream media based on political affiliation alone. While it’s true that some Trump supporters trust Fox News, it's a stretch to say that this defines their entire approach to information. Many of them, like voters on any side, are actually quite critical of the news, even of Fox itself, and are aware of biases within it. They might lean on conservative media as a primary source, but this doesn’t mean they trust it without question or fail to seek out other perspectives. In reality, people are bombarded with information from all sides—social media, news channels, friends, family, and the internet at large—and often try to piece together a narrative that feels consistent with their reality.

It’s also important to recognize that voters do engage with claims that go against their own views. They may not be “objective” in the purest sense, but that’s a high bar for anyone to meet, regardless of their political leaning. This skepticism toward information—whether it’s from mainstream or alternative sources—isn’t just a conservative phenomenon, nor is it something that only a few "elite" people with time on their hands are capable of. In an age where anyone can fact-check or find alternative views in seconds, voters across the spectrum are aware of media spin and are often more nuanced in their thinking than they're given credit for.

So while it’s convenient to simplify Trump supporters as low-information voters who uncritically absorb anti-establishment narratives, the reality is more complex. People often critically engage with media, even within echo chambers, and there’s a broad spectrum of skepticism and trust across different media outlets. To assume otherwise is to overlook the diverse ways people actually navigate a media landscape filled with competing voices, biases, and agendas.

[Husseinisdoingfine]

House of Representatives set to go to GOP, though not everything has been called yet.

Senate is firmly GOP.

[hundreth]

2 minutes ago, Nemra said:

How's Trump and his team going to solve that?

Do you understand who Trump is?

He's going to tap into America's oil reserves now. Are you even following what the other side is selling?

[Joshe]

It all comes down to what David Hawkins said. The public cannot discern truth from falsehood, and as a result, are subject to all sorts of manipulations and distortions. Their level of consciousness is just too low. 

Don’t listen to any of these kids who think they know what’s going on. The Dems didn’t lose because of what they stand for. The American people didn’t carefully weigh and consider their options. Their perceptions were manipulated. They were told truth was false and false was truth, and they couldn’t tell the difference. Propaganda won this election. Their propaganda machine was too strong. 

I would recommend maintaining an outward appearance of calm and not engage in any attacks or ridicule IRL. We should all pay no more thought to Trumpism. It seems to only survive because we don’t want it to. Silo yourselves off and let them do their damage.

Edited 13 hours ago by Joshe

[hundreth]

1 minute ago, Joshe said:

It all comes down to what David Hawkins said. The public cannot discern truth from falsehood, and as a result, are subject to all sorts of manipulations and distortions. Their level of consciousness is just too low. 

Don’t listen to any of these kids who think they know what’s going on. The Dems didn’t lose because of what they stand for. The American people didn’t carefully weigh and consider their options. Their perceptions were manipulated. They were told truth was false and false was truth, and they couldn’t tell the difference. Propaganda won this election. Their propaganda machine was too strong. 

I would recommend maintaining an outward appearance of calm and not engage in any attacks or ridicule IRL. We should all pay no more thought to Trumpism. It seems to only survive because we don’t want it to. 

The problem is that neither side is grounded in truth. The left has taken up ideologies which appear absurd to the majority of Americans. The right has adopted even wilder propaganda, but which appeals to common sense.

Without a solid alternative to ground us, they went with Trump.

[QandC]

9 minutes ago, Joshe said:

It all comes down to what David Hawkins said. The public cannot discern truth from falsehood, and as a result, are subject to all sorts of manipulations and distortions. Their level of consciousness is just too low. 

Don’t listen to any of these kids who think they know what’s going on. The Dems didn’t lose because of what they stand for. The American people didn’t carefully weigh and consider their options. Their perceptions were manipulated. They were told truth was false and false was truth, and they couldn’t tell the difference. Propaganda won this election. Their propaganda machine was too strong. 

I would recommend maintaining an outward appearance of calm and not engage in any attacks or ridicule IRL. We should all pay no more thought to Trumpism. It seems to only survive because we don’t want it to. 

Lol... how simplified. The notion that "the public cannot discern truth from falsehood" and that people are fundamentally incapable of discerning reality paints an overly pessimistic and, frankly, dismissive picture of voters and the complexities of democratic choice. While David Hawkins may have emphasized the vulnerability of the public to manipulation, it’s far too reductive to argue that people are simply at the mercy of propaganda due to a “low level of consciousness.” This perspective doesn’t account for the individual agency, critical thinking, and diverse motivations that shape people's decisions.

First, it’s essential to recognize that voters aren’t passive recipients of whatever message is broadcast the loudest. While propaganda and media influence are real forces, they don’t wholly dictate people's views. For many, voting is a deeply personal decision shaped by a range of factors beyond media messaging: personal values, experiences, socioeconomic realities, and conversations within their communities. To say that Americans "didn't carefully weigh and consider their options" disregards the fact that, for many, the choice was influenced by a direct experience of policies, cultural issues, or economic conditions.

Additionally, dismissing Trumpism as something that only persists because people "don’t want it to" ignores the complexity of why it resonates with so many. Trump supporters often feel their values and interests aren’t represented by mainstream political discourse, and they gravitate toward someone they believe listens to them. It’s not simply a matter of being manipulated by falsehoods; it’s about identifying with a candidate who they believe speaks to their concerns.

As for the argument that maintaining a “calm outward appearance” is the best approach, it's worth considering that genuine engagement with differing perspectives is often far more effective. Shutting down dialogue or dismissing those with whom we disagree as merely “too low in consciousness” prevents us from understanding why people think the way they do. Trumpism, and any political movement for that matter, won’t disappear because it’s ignored. It will persist and even grow when those who disagree with it choose not to engage or understand it.

In shorrrt, while manipulation and media influence are factors in any election, reducing the public to a passive, low-consciousness mass ignores the reality of democratic agency and the complex motivations behind voting. Rather than writing off entire segments of the population, a more constructive approach is to engage with them, recognize their concerns, and work toward a political environment where differing views are not simply dismissed, but understood!!

Come on, man... holistic approach. 

meow

Edited 13 hours ago by QandC

[BlackPhil]

Kamela, just like Hillary 2016 didn't even talk to her supporters waiting for her after the loss. 

Her supporters were there for her but she obviously wasn't there for them. She had some guy come up on stage and send them home.

What kind of leadership quality is that? Why would anyone want a person like that in office?

She's too prideful to concede or even speak to the people waiting for her. Instead she's probably waiting until she has some some pre-written scripts for her speech ready, as usual. Shameful behaviour.

Edited 13 hours ago by BlackPhil