Dr K on how Trump won the election

[Staples]

43 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

It was a huge factor. Inflation was the single most practical factor that affected ordinary, non-ideological voters. Inflation is felt every time you go to buy groceries and it made people feel the current style of government is failing them.

There are few factors as tangible as the 20% inflation we got over the last 4 years. Don't think that voters didn't feel it.

Yes, ideology is huge, but many voters just want a good economy.

I'm a millionaire and even I feel the pain of inflation when I buy my groceries. Without inflation Kamala might have easily won.

Good point. But I didn't know people seriously thought Trump was a solution to that.

His tariffs would directly increase inflation.

That problem is bigger than what a government can handle, there's no fixing inflation with an election.

Edited yesterday at 09:06 AM by Staples

[Leo Gura]

12 minutes ago, Staples said:

But I didn't know people seriously thought Trump was a solution to that.

That doesn't matter. Voters do not think causally, they just react against whatever they dislike at the moment.

Don't forget that Trump lost 2020 mostly because voters dislike the Covid situation. And it didn't matter whether Trump caused the Covid or not. People blamed it on him.

Edited yesterday at 09:18 AM by Leo Gura

[Hardkill]

55 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

It was a huge factor. Inflation was the single most practical factor that affected ordinary, non-ideological voters. Inflation is felt every time you go to buy groceries and it made people feel the current style of government is failing them.

There are few factors as tangible as the 20% inflation we got over the last 4 years. Don't think that voters didn't feel it.

Yes, ideology is huge, but many voters just want a good economy.

I'm a millionaire and even I feel the pain of inflation when I buy my groceries. Without inflation Kamala might have easily won.

I find it hard to believe that Inflation itself mattered that much, especially when inflation levels had been at normal levels for over a year and half by the 2024 election day. The economy at that time was also the strongest since the incredible 1990s boom.

Also, why did the Democrats win the 2022 midterms overall when inflation peaked at over 9% that year?

Truman and Reagan each won re-election during times when inflation was much worse and the economy was significantly weaker than it was under Biden/Harris in 2024:

Obama and George W. Bush also won re-election during times when the economy was in much weaker shape than it was under Biden/Harris in 2024.

Edited yesterday at 09:19 AM by Hardkill

[Leo Gura]

1 minute ago, Hardkill said:

I find it hard to believe that Inflation itself mattered that much

It absolutely mattered.

Inflation rate has normalized, but the pain of high prices remains every day you shop.

Inflation is a really nasty factor that cannot be swept under the rug because everyone feels it.

Edited yesterday at 09:20 AM by Leo Gura

[Hardkill]

9 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

It absolutely mattered.

Inflation rate has normalized, but the pain of high prices remains every day you shop.

I understand that, but how do you explain why Democrats won the 2022 midterms when inflation was at 9% that year?

Truman won re-election in 1948 when inflation was 20% at its peak during his first term and was at around 11% by the 1948 election year.

Reagan won re-election in 1984 when inflation was at 14% at its peak during his first term and was at around 3.5-4% by the 1984 election year.

The economy under Biden was much stronger than it was under Bush in 2004, but Bush got re-elected then. The economy under Biden was much stronger than it was under Obama in 2012, but Obama got re-elected then.

I think it was primarily because of misinformation and the internet/social media brain-rot along with racism, sexism, and xenophobia that caused Trump to win.

Edited 20 hours ago by Hardkill

[Schizophonia]

Because Trump is tall, strong, uninhibited, has a god complex in general, he is quite warm and has agreed to do interviews here and there even on famous YouTubers, he is also a liberal.

It is very attractive if you are a man, it tends to outweigh the negative polarity.

Beyond the layers of rationalizations, even intellectualization, politics is fundamentally libidinal and most people choose and stay in their political camp as soon as they are interested in it and project their survival strategies.

[Hardkill]

1 minute ago, Schizophonia said:

Because Trump is tall, strong, uninhibited, has a god complex in general, he is quite warm and has agreed to do interviews here and there even on famous YouTubers, he is also a liberal.

It is very attractive if you are a man, it tends to outweigh the negative polarity.

Beyond the layers of rationalizations, even intellectualization, politics is fundamentally libidinal and most people choose and stay in their political camp as soon as they are interested in it and project their survival strategies.

But if it wasn't for the media environment we are in then Trump never would've even come close to becoming president.

 

[Leo Gura]

9 minutes ago, Hardkill said:

but how do you explain why Democrats won the 2022 midterms when inflation was at 9% that year?

Midterms work differently than General. Midterm voters are engaged, more partisan.

It's harder to link inflation to local congressional candidates.

9 minutes ago, Hardkill said:

Truman won re-election in 1984 when inflation was 20% at its peak during his first term and was at around 11% by the 1948 election year.

Reagan won re-election in 1984 when inflation was at 14% at its peak during his first term and was at around 3.5-4% by the 1984 election year.

What matters is relative perception. How people feel about the change. Not absolute values.

[Candle]

33 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Don't forget that Trump lost 2020 mostly because voters dislike the Covid situation

Edited yesterday at 09:50 AM by Candle

[Hardkill]

1 hour ago, Leo Gura said:

Midterms work differently than General. Midterm voters are engaged, more partisan.

It's harder to link inflation to local congressional candidates.

Okay, that's what I thought and that was the argument that I made on that thread of mine even though midterms are always a referendum on the president and his party, the president's party almost always loses badly in the midterms, congressional elections have become more nationalized than ever before, and most pundits/strategists predicted that the Democrats were going to get killed in the midterms and Biden had historically low approval ratings at the time because of a number of things including the sour economy, the COVID problem still around at the time, people being very worried about the War in Ukraine when it broke out that year, and people just getting tired of Biden:

You gotta admit that Biden and his party did unbelievably well then. The only other times US History the party holding the White House did as well as the Dems did in the 2022 midterms were 1934, 1962, 1998, and 2002.

1 hour ago, Leo Gura said:

What matters is relative perception. How people feel about the change. Not absolute values.

So, why did people buy Reagan's "It's Morning in America" optimism by 1984 even though Biden's economy was actually far superior in every way according to top independent economists?

What did Truman have or do that got to win another term even though he presided over much inflation than Biden/Harris did?

I think that it was actually because of two things: 

1. During the mid to late 1900s there wasn't the kind of brain-rotting, anger, and resentment we have had in recent years caused by the rise of the internet/social media. This has greatly amplified everyone's negative perceptions on every issue to such unprecedented levels.

2. During the mid to late 1900s there wasn't historic levels of economic inequality in our country like we've had in recent years, which has further hurt so many Americans.

Edited yesterday at 10:47 AM by Hardkill

[Schizophonia]

19 minutes ago, Hardkill said:

But if it wasn't for the media environment we are in then Trump never would've even come close to becoming president.

 

But the media environment is the fractal reproduction of what is happening libidinally, energetically among Americans and by extension the universe in general. 

To be down to earth, these media exist because they receive audiences; It's like the tiktok algorithm, it only imitates the usual thought loops.

Currently the big topic is the fear of being deprived (deprived of women, money, security because of immigration, big cars because of inflation and environmentalism etc; Of losing the phallus in general as Lacan would say) and politics revolves around this game.
As the American egregor does not feel phallic, it heads (like a woman) towards a tall man, with plumpness and a big head, who seems to be permanently on ketamine, rich and neo-liberal who embodies the phallus.

When the American people are again more prosperous and therefore "yang", they will lose the phallus again by giving it (like a man who gives his sex and his sperm, and by extension in general his resources to a woman) as proof that he is yang, then tending more towards yin in the process (by generating more yin people in later generations); And this will translate into victories on the left, more socially liberal and deconstructivist policies, less power to those who hold capital, a stronger dominant state, see communist experience, etc.

If what i'm saying is clear. 

Edited yesterday at 09:52 AM by Schizophonia

[The Crocodile]

3 hours ago, Schizophonia said:

Because Trump is tall, strong, uninhibited, has a god complex in general, he is quite warm and has agreed to do interviews here and there even on famous YouTubers, he is also a liberal.

[Terell Kirby]

3 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Voters do not think causally, they just react against whatever they dislike at the moment.

Agree-My thing is-If the price of eggs moved you to vote for a neo facist with an anti democratic bend, then it’s just as worse epistemic rot from social media algorithms and populist group think.

Both actions, and rationale behind them, are politically irresponsible on the same level of coming from a low perspective.

Edited yesterday at 12:58 PM by Terell Kirby

[Leo Gura]

9 minutes ago, Terell Kirby said:

If the price of eggs moved you to vote for a neo facist with an anti democratic bend

People are too ignorant and selfish to understand what a fascist is or what democracy means.

All of your logic requires that people do serious thinking, which does not happen.

Edited yesterday at 01:06 PM by Leo Gura

[Daniel Balan]

4 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

It was a huge factor. Inflation was the single most practical factor that affected ordinary, non-ideological voters. Inflation is felt every time you go to buy groceries and it made people feel the current style of government is failing them.

There are few factors as tangible as the 20% inflation we got over the last 4 years. Don't think that voters didn't feel it.

Yes, ideology is huge, but many voters just want a good economy.

I'm a millionaire and even I feel the pain of inflation when I buy my groceries. Without inflation Kamala might have easily won.

But what caused this world wide inflation? It is severely felt here on Europe! I don't think that the Biden-Harris administration is directly responsible for it. Or were they? Please make me understand if Biden-Harris is at fault for the inflation in the US especially! What caused that inflation, what did the Biden admin do wrong in that regard? What could the Biden admin have done better to combat inflation? I have no idea.

[Schizophonia]

51 minutes ago, The Crocodile said:

You are mentally ill. I say the positive polarity which explains why people vote for him.

[The Crocodile]

1 minute ago, Schizophonia said:

You are mentally ill. I say the positive polarity which explains why people vote for him.

You explained the negative polarity that explains why idiots voted for him.

[Schizophonia]

15 minutes ago, The Crocodile said:

You explained the negative polarity that explains why idiots voted for him.

No the negative polarity would be that he is unpredictable, belligerent, more sociopathic in general, selfish etc.

Don't call those who disagree with you idiots, that's your ego talking.

There are different energy structures with different agendas.

I think @Leo Gura is wrong when he says that people do not recognize a fascist, i think that people who are moving in this direction would not be against the fascist even if it is not yet conscious, quite simply.

Edited yesterday at 01:45 PM by Schizophonia

[The Crocodile]

11 minutes ago, Schizophonia said:

No the negative polarity would be that he is unpredictable, belligerent, more sociopathic in general, selfish etc.

Don't call those who disagree with you idiots, that's your ego talking.

There are different energy structures with different agendas.

I think @Leo Gura is wrong when he says that people do not recognize a fascist, i think that people who are moving in this direction would not be against the fascist even if it is not yet conscious, quite simply.

The genuinely positive part of donald is when his own inner comes to the front to soothe or mollify some of his worse tendencies, or when he actually has some genuine emotional energy or sense of bittersweetness around his actions and context. The rest of his positive expression comes from a female guide that guides him toward ideas of wealth and beauty, which leads to the "this is the best, the greatest in the world" thoughtform he surrounds himself with, and his tacky red tie, orange paint, golden hair vanity, vulgar tasteless excess, etc., because it's all tinged with falsehood because he is pursuing the negative path, he is indeed a sociopath and a narcissist but is evolving and being an expression/progression for his soul anyhow, no matter how much he is demonically possessed or literally the Devil as Leo would say.

The positivity and warmth his supporters feel, for the most part, is a facade and a hypnotism meant to manipulate people to serve him, it's not genuine light, it's perverted by falsehood or positivity used for negative purposes. Or supporters enjoying being ignorant or enjoying being evil or being swept up in a mass movement much bigger than them their little selves don't stand a chance against, and there's no contradiction between this negativity and the genuine sweetness they could get out of it, as their souls and guides help them exist and evolve as a being whatsoever.

Think of how awesome Nazi rallies would have been if you agreed with it and fit into the pattern of unification and with everybody shouting the same shit as you, it would have been swell, for a while . . .

Edited yesterday at 01:58 PM by The Crocodile

[Salvijus]

@The Crocodile even if you're right, there's no reason to be so mean to others.