Lisa Lerer of The New York Times told readers what to expect after Trump’s victory.
Donald Trump told Americans exactly what he planned to do.
He would use military force against his political opponents. He would fire thousands of career public servants. He would deport millions of immigrants in military-style roundups. He would crush the independence of the Department of Justice, use government to push public health conspiracies and abandon America’s allies abroad. He would turn the government into a tool of his own grievances, a way to punish his critics and richly reward his supporters. He would be a “dictator” — if only on Day 1.
And, when asked to give him the power to do all of that, the voters said yes.
This was a conquering of the nation not by force but with a permission slip. Now, America stands on the precipice of an authoritarian style of governance never before seen in its 248-year history.
After defeating Vice President Kamala Harris, who would have become the first female U.S. president, Mr. Trump will bring his own historic firsts into the White House: the only president convicted of dozens of crimes, accused of dozens more and twice impeached.

Hello
Yes, a sad day for America and the world. I contacted our friends in Ukraine to apologize and offer our home to them: Pavlo and his family, and our “adopted daughter” Anastasiia. As Pavlo responded, “we are hostages in this situation.” Slava Ukraine!
LikeLike
American voters voted in a nincompoop and felon for potus.
This is a sad day for democracy.
I worry for our future and our Constitution.
LikeLike
“And, when asked to give him the power to do all of that, the voters said yes.”
Never let the voters forget they did so.
Never allow the voters any reason or excuse to say, “I didn’t know.”
LikeLike
absolutely. Unforgivable.
LikeLike
This blog’s host and readers would improve their understanding of Trump’s appeal by reading the linked article. America is not just one big newsroom, Hollywood studio, or faculty lounge.
https://www.spiked-online.com/2024/11/05/they-still-dont-get-it/
LikeLike
And Spiked-online talks about my elitism! They ignore the disastrous first term of Trump who caused thousands of deaths with his Covid conspiracies and promises to put a conspiracy theorist in charge of our healthcare?! Who inherited an burgeoning economy Obama left him and drove it into the ground!? who did nothing to bring manufacturing back to this country but who will claim Biden’s successes as soon as he sets foot in the White House?! Who will allow Elon Musk to sell us and our allies out to Russia? Who sold Trump Bibles to fund his own crooked lifestyle and has never read a single line from it? He is for sale and he will sell us too.
LikeLike
That has to be one of the dumbest columns I’ve read recently. It’s comparable to something that right-winger and racist Marc Thiessen would wrote at The Post.
Brendan O’Neill writes — obtusely and falsely — Trump supporters are merely “working men and women who just have a different political view..”
Um, it’s a “political view” that is expressly AGAINST the America Creed of equality and “liberty and justice for all.”
O’Neill writes that the so-called Democratic elite, “still don’t get that many working-class Americans vote Trump because they think he has a better economic plan.”
Except that he DOESN’T. As The Fiscal Times pointed out,
“23 Nobel Prize-winning economists expressed support for the policies proposed by Kamala Harris, warning that the policies of her opponent would be ‘counterproductive.’…The 23 Nobel laureates — more than half of all living recipients of the economics award — said that the Harris agenda focused on the middle class and entrepreneurship would ‘improve our nation’s health, investment, sustainability, resilience, employment opportunities, and fairness.’…By comparison, Trump’s agenda of high tariffs and regressive tax cuts would ‘lead to higher prices, larger deficits, and greater inequality.’ In addition, in their view Trump represents a threat to the rule of law and political stability, necessary components of a thriving economy.”
Brendan O’Neill writes that Trump voters ” don’t want boys on their daughters’ sports teams, or America-bashing in their kids’ schools, or crime on their streets. ” They also don’t want to be chided or corrected or made fun of for believing all of Trump’s lies, even as they believe – and repeat and recite – the lies.
O’Neill also writes that “Trump’s team came up with one of the great electoral slogans of our time. ‘Kamala is for they / them – Trump is for you’, it said. For this really is an election of ‘They / them vs us’.”
Trumpers don’t want to be rightfully accused of being racists, even as Trump runs an overtly racist “Us v. Them” campaign. Uh huh.
The closer truth is that these are some seriously sick people.
LikeLike
The “they/them” was a reference to trans stuff, not race.
LikeLike
When you’re lying that “THEY” are eating the dogs and the cats, and “THEY” are coming here and committing all the crimes and taking jobs, you’re clearly NOT talking about “trans stuff.”
C’mon man.
LikeLike
The “they/them” thing was a reference to an ad that was specifically about trans stuff.
LikeLike
The transphobia is such a phony issue. The percentage of people who identify as trans is so small, and these people just want to live their lives.
If voters are going to fall for this while Trump proposes policies that are dangerous and /or loony, that is really sad.
LikeLike
You may think it’s a phony issue on the merits. You may be right. Meanwhile the Dems are getting hammered by this phony issue in a very real way.
LikeLike
Are you being obtuse on PURPOSE? Are you really defending the indefensible?
Trump used race overtly and directly in this race and he DID – in fact – devolve it to Us (white Republicans) v. Them (people of color).
Here’s the NY Times from the 2021 Virginia governor’s election, the one in which Glenn Youngkin used RACE disguised as “parents rights” to attack public school curricula and teaching over the demonstrably false claim that Critical Race Theory was responsible for “shaming” and “guilt-tripping” white kids:
“the past half-century of American political history shows that racially coded attacks are how Republicans have been winning elections for decades…Youngkin dragged race into the election, making his vow to ‘ban critical race theory’ a centerpiece of his stump speech and repeating it over the closing weekend — Race is the elephant in the room.”
The elephant that YOU refuse to acknowledge.
LikeLike
Calm down. I don’t think you’re understanding what I’m saying.
LikeLike
This is the “they/them” ad. This ran during NFL games.
https://x.com/citizenfreepres/status/1839008340682166754?s=46&t=vV_4bJ7GuABaalzetJofQA
LikeLike
No one voted for Trump because of trans issues. I know plenty of people (flerp! included) who expressed anti-trans sentiment and even believed some of the false anti-trans misinformation, but still understood that Trump was unfit to govern. Top female athletes who were concerned about competing against trans women did NOT rush to vote for Trump.
However, some right wing anti-trans people who (and no one will be surprised at this) ALSO happened to love Trump’s ugly and hateful racist, violent rhetoric will sometimes cite the Dem’s “trans policies” as their reason for embracing Trump, because they don’t want to publicly admit what it is that draws them to an authoritarian spewing hate and white supremacy who promises retribution against the people they also hate.
LikeLike
I see you’re back to addressing your comments to me. Get some self-control.
LikeLike
Written by a gay man on WHY he isn’t voting this year…..trans issues!
https://benappel.substack.com/p/why-im-not-voting/comments
LikeLike
What a depressing string of comments. They sound like Trumpers.
LikeLike
Here’s my view on trans issues.
Same as abortion.
The question of what young people and their parents do re their gender is between them and their doctor. No one else. Not Trump. Not me. Not other politicians.
I don’t care what they choose to do. It’s their business, their body, their life.
Not my business.
Not Trump’s business.
LikeLike
I am retired career federal employee. I spent 37 years working for different administration.
Let me enlighten thr Spiked writers: career federal employees are PEOPLE. People who own homes, pay mortgages and utilities and who are part of their communities.
Spiked and other media have been dining out on this tired, lazy trope of elites for decades.
Our society now worships wealth and power. We have jettisoned any pretense of morality and ethics.
We now have the president-elect that we richly deserve.
LikeLike
I don’t agree with the Spiked article’s political position, but it is a clear description of T supporters’ point of view & — sadly — has a point about the derision many from our “moral” community address them. Who, if anyone, will make the first meaningful move (that is, one that gets a constructive response) toward reconciliation, & how can it be approached?
It’s distressing how many people who view ourselves as intelligent & educated don’t get that the way to persuade people to consider your point of view is not to open with insulting them. I include myself, more often than I’d like to believe, in this admonition.
Yes, I know many — but certainly not all — on that side behave that way. The question for us is not, “Don’t they deserve it?” but, “Do we deserve to become like them?”
LikeLike
The Las Vegas Sun published a scathing editorial on Trump…here’s the bulk of it:
“Donald Trump’s racism, sexism, xenophobia and penchant for corruption have long made him unfit for any public office, let alone the presidency. But as he continues his bid for a second term in the White House, there is an unsettling and undeniable shift that is leading many experts, observers and even some Trump supporters to conclude that the former president’s mental acuity and sharpness are also in decline, that his physical health and stamina are waning and that his frustration and anger are boiling over.
Americans from both sides of the political spectrum should be alarmed by Trump’s words and behavior. The nation must confront the fact that beyond his hateful character, he is crippled cognitively and showing clear signs of mental illness…He shambles about aimlessly, slurs his words and sometimes speaks gibberish. Always an effortless liar, now that his speeches are nothing more than a series of lies tangled in a mass inside his head, it appears he no longer even knows he’s lying.
With Trump’s fragility comes an increasing dependence on enablers who show a disturbing willingness to indulge his delusions, amplify his paranoia or steer his feeble mind toward their own goals. Among these enablers is his running mate, Sen. JD Vance of Ohio. Should Trump be deemed unfit to serve, Vance would step into power…Once a ‘Never Trump’ conservative who openly criticized Trump as a danger to the republic, Vance has since fully embraced an extremist ideology, morphing into a vocal MAGA supporter who seems eager to emulate Trump’s worst instincts.
Beyond his weird obsession with childless women whom he says are ‘deranged’ and ‘sociopathic,’ and his penchant for spreading conspiracy theories about immigrants and other marginalized communities, Vance poses a different threat to democracy than Trump. He has repeatedly demonstrated that he is little more than a puppet of his billionaire hedge fund benefactors and has openly stated he would have refused to certify the 2020 election, suggesting he would subordinate constitutional principles for personal profit and power.
As voters consider Trump’s latest bid for the presidency, it’s essential to recognize that this election is not merely a choice between policy platforms or party loyalties. It’s a test of our willingness to safeguard our nation from leaders whose fitness for office is in serious question. This election is about protecting the integrity of our democracy from those who would let it collapse in the name of power, loyalty or expedience…Donald Trump has never had the moral compass to lead this country. But even his supporters cannot afford to ignore the signs that he may no longer have the mental faculties to lead it either. The stakes are simply too high.”
https://lasvegassun.com/news/2024/oct/30/trumps-decline-has-been-alarming/
So, now the message to those who voted FOR sanity and decency and equality and “liberty and justice for all”, and for the environment, and for the rule of law and for the Constitution, are admonished to forget all that silly stuff and to sit down and break bread with and sing Kumbaya with those who embraced racism and sedition and fascism, is that it?
LikeLike
I don’t know what comment you’re responding to, but it’s not mine. If you need to make things up, rephrase in a false reductio ad absurdem, & put words in my mouth in order to respond, it suggests you don’t have a valid argument to my actual point (we need to communicate more constructively).
I did not say, or even remotely imply:
I’m not saying I find the other side’s positions agreeable or reasonable. The one thing I did say is:
The fact is: we lost what we’d claimed was a fair fight. At least, that’s how we’d describe it if we’d won. Declaring otherwise (“the only way we lose is if it’s rigged”) invalidates the system we’re trying to defend.
If this combative stance is how you respond to someone on your own side, how will we work together toward our common goal? How will you negotiate with people who are opposed to you? The scorn with which you address me is what the Spiked article is talking about; what they voted against. I don’t claim to know how to reach that group, but it’s clear our current approach isn’t working.
LikeLike
Oh, Lenny.
As I pointed out explicitly, the Spied article is chock full of lies and nonsense. It’s like saying that because white voters, especially low-income rural white voters, think that the REAL victims of racial discrimination are THEM — which isn’t true — that we should honor that and help them understand – somehow – that their deep-seated racism is, well, understandable, maybe even reasonable.
I got news. It’s not.
One element of Trump’s “coalition,” is the “Christian” evangelicals, or maybe a better term for them is the “Christian” nationalists.
Here’s how award-winning journalist Stephanie McCrummen describes them and Trump:
“He has vowed to round up and deport millions of foreign nationals…Trump has pledged huge increases in U.S. tariffs, not only on China but on friends and treaty partners, such as Mexico…Trump intends to shut down legal proceedings, state and federal, against himself…He has promised to pardon people serving sentences for the attack on Congress on January 6, 2021…A vote for Trump is a vote for international gangsterism…A second Trump administration will be even more of a snake pit of craziness, incompetence, and intrigue than the first was.”
“As FlashPoint began amplifying election-fraud conspiracy theories, the Victory Channel’s YouTube views grew from 152,000 in October 2020 to 32.4 million in January 2021. On the evening of January 6, 2021, FlashPoint covered the insurrection that its guests had helped foment…in the four years since then, the hour-long show has offered regular sustenance for Americans who believe that a great spiritual battle against demonic forces is under way, one that could culminate any moment.”
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2024/11/flashpoint-new-apostolic-reformation/680478/
Now, how – exactly – do you approach these people? What – exactly – about their position(s) do you think has merit? What “common goal” do have with these people? What “common goal” do they have with the Constitution?
Scorn is defined at Websters as “open dislike and disrespect, often mixed with indignation.”
So, yeah, I guess you can consider me scornful of those who voted FOR racism and misogyny and sedition and fascism, and those who defend it, directly or indirectly.
I dislike it, I have absolutely no respect for it, and I am appalled at the utter contempt these people have for the U.S. Constitution, for the democratic values and principles embedded in it, and for the rights and freedoms of other citizens.
LikeLike
democracy—
You’re clearly a good researcher. I appreciate the time & skill it took to find references that illustrate the points you want to establish. However, it wasn’t necessary for this discussion. I didn’t say I agree with beliefs & assumptions in the Spiked article; there’s no need to demonstrate how it’s wrong. As I said, we’re on the same side, though you keep addressing me as an adversary.
Literally from the first 2 words, the condescending, supercilious tone of your response illustrates my point. Again, I’m talking about how we communicate. What we (attempt to) communicate is secondary, considering the inherent tension present even at the start of any 2-sided political discussion these days. It doesn’t matter how many facts, references, & quotes you rattle off if you’ve already alienated the person you’re speaking to, causing them to shut down to anything you say. They’ll come away with no greater understanding of your position or affinity for you. If anything, they’re less inclined to consider your views, & more firmly entrenched in their previous convictions. The only difference is, they no longer want just to establish their policies. Now it’s personal: they want to defeat you.
If your goal is to establish a connection, that’s counterproductive. However, the spirit & nature of your response makes me question whether your intention was to enlighten me, see where we could agree, move forward. Rather, it appears your purpose was to “win,” to show everyone here you’re right & I’m wrong. Before discussing right & wrong with the other side — any other side — I need to establish a basis for communication & exchange if ideas. I’m not trying to argue facts with you. I want to collaborate with you, not conquer you. Rather than instructing the other side, I want to learn what we may have in common.
I do want to discuss your tone. Let’s get back to those first 2 words. It is a big deal; it sets the whole tone:
If we want to communicate, we have to consider how our words will be interpreted. Here’s how it looks, in my subjective view: Before I’ve even read any of your particulars, I see an image of someone shaking his head sadly, exasperated at how he has to explain the obvious to someone of my limited comprehension. What was the point of those 2 words? Think that makes me look forward to hearing your views? Did they enhance your following points? Would your presentation have been less effective without them? Or are they engineered to establish your superiority, put me on the defensive? How receptive do you think that would make someone already opposed to you, let alone someone already on your side? Would it make them inclined to consider your perspective? There are more examples in your post, but this establishes the principle. I hope I’ve given you some points to consider.
LikeLike
Thank you for the lecture, Lenny. But I think you missed the point.
LikeLike
Lenny– I agree wholeheartedly, and reject democracy’s off-point responses to you. I grew up in an unusual household: Mom Ivy-League degree, dad working class. The two worked together well as a team in our small family-owned biz. Because of their combo, our closest family friends included cohorts from both sides. But it was a college town, with a somewhat contentious town-gown relationship [due (from my perspective) to the tremendous amount of tax-free land the U [which included a famous ag school] continued to co-opt (we were in land improvement/ development).
To the point: no question my dad & our working-class friends/ partners in biz had a joking (but real) chip on the shoulder/ insecurity about lack of post-secondary ed. With my mixed background, I understood them very well. These were generally people with intelligence who could hold their own in any discussion with ‘elite’ cohort of our family friends [they all mixed]. So I totally get the point O’Neill is making in this post (tho I don’t like the way he presents it). Working class people really do get it, and resent it, when MSM/ pundit media continually present them as an “other” species whose motives need to be dissected from a learned POV.
From my POV, this “class” difference is just one of the many ways Reps/ oligarchs seek to divide us to their advantage when we are at our most susceptible to being divided: it’s about economics. We have had since end-’80s a spiraling rich-poor gap, thanks to govtl trade, economic and social policies, which created a billionaire class just during that one decade– and zero investment in trades/ high-tech ed to address the issue. Social mobility (per stats) was over as of ’89; we’re in reverse mode now. This has created longterm sense of economic insecurity/ lack of future improvement for our huge % od middle & working class population.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ginny,
You should be hired as an advisor by the DNC.
LikeLiked by 1 person
😀
LikeLike
Hi Bethree—
We’ve exchanged views here before, & I think you really get my point. Thank you for your support. It’s good to know someone understands!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Paula Goldman– My first reaction to your link was, oh this is a Brit who doesn’t understand class issues in the US. But I wasn’t satisfied so I did more research on him.
What an amazing thinker! If anyone wants to see what this guy is really like when he’s not having an off day, peruse this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lHUjZd63z9U I figured I would tune in for 10mins to get the gist. (It was a 6yo episode of the Rubin report, interviewing Brendan O’Neill, called “What is a Marxist Libertarian?” It was so interesting I stayed tune for the entire 1/2hr show. I agreed with every gd thing the guy said. [And Rubin is a terrific interviewer/ thinker whose main focus is free speech issues, I’ll be revisiting his report.]
It’s sad by comparison to read the O’Neill post you linked, where he exhibits all the broad-brush “us vs them” thinking that he criticizes. “Credentialed elites who sneer at working class men and women” sounded especially like his own particular bee in bonnet. However I will read him in future: hopefully he hasn’t devolved into some sort of populist.
LikeLike
And the media immediately talking about the fatal flaws in Kamala Harris’ campaign rather than their own complicity in the election of a convicted felon who will end the US democracy.
LikeLike
And the complicity of every voter who heard his dark vision and constant hate and absolutely terrible campaign and still voted for him. And the complicity of every voter who heard his dark vision and promise of retribution and sat back and thought “it’s not directed at me, so I won’t vote for the Dem.”
This isn’t about a “better” campaign. If someone is drawn to Trump’s hate when he offers them nothing but a tax cut and a promise to hurt the people they hate (and cuts in programs like Medicare), they aren’t going to suddenly change their mind because the Dem did something different.
Someone who didn’t want to lift a finger to resist Trump is someone who didn’t want to lift a finger to save progressive ideas or democracy itself.
We keep focusing on the failure of Dems, when Trump has wiped the floor with everyone but Biden.
The magic search for the flawless candidate continues, and yet Trump has not just been bad, he has been terrible.
And some here would rather say that Trump voters are “good people” who wouldn’t be voting for the guy giving them hate, violence, and promising retribution against their enemies, if only the Dems had given those very good people Medicare for All. Which is absurd since they voted for the guy who promises to privatize the Medicare (and Social Security) we do have! BECAUSE his dark vision of a far right country with no social programs appealed to them.
LikeLike
nycpsp– I have a far less dark view of Trump voters than you. To me, it seems rather typical of American voters over the decades. If kitchen table issues are tough, they vote for the other party, period. They figure a change is better than sticking with the same admin. Not much different than a coin toss. It doesn’t make a lot of sense to those of us here (who are very thinking people). But even in today’s crazy-ass times when each side displays in print positions that are right off the wall, with each predicting doomsday if the other side wins– results are pretty much the same as ever.
LikeLike
bethree5,
I assume you are talking only about white voters, since as far as I can tell, when kitchen table issues are tough, Black voters don’t “vote for the other party, period.” Black voters don’t figure that a change that means voting for a racist wannabe authoritarian spewing hate and fomenting violence against those who dare to challenge his lies “is better than sticking with the same admin.”
It’s not only Black voters who don’t fit your narrative. I grew up in what is now Trump central but there are plenty of white voters who come from the exact same background and also have tough kitchen table issues who don’t believe that change that means voting for a racist wannabe authoritarian spewing hate and fomenting violence “is better than sticking with the same admin.”
The Trump voters’ embrace of a wannabe dictator spewing hate and violence and racist lies and cons and promises of retribution doesn’t make a lot of sense to those other people with the same tough kitchen sink issues who see Trump as morally repugnant because Trump is morally repugnant. It doesn’t make a lot of sense to GOOD people with those same kitchen sink issues because it can’t be rationalized and it shouldn’t be. It should be condemned for what it is.
What also doesn’t make a lot of sense to some of us here is why people keep making excuses for Trump voters as if half of them weren’t doing quite well financially and if the other half were doing no worse than the millions of other people who have financial issues but don’t think embracing hate and violence is okay just because it is directed at others and not themselves.
Ever since the media has propagandized us into referring to Trump voters as good people just concerned about kitchen sink issues, they have multiplied like weeds. I doubt that is a coincidence. If you normalize Trump voters as good people just embracing racist authoritarianism for kitchen sink reasons, it is probably because you don’t realize how many Black, white Latino, Asian,etc. voters from the same backgrounds actually care about the same kitchen sink issues and yet have the moral clarity to recognize right from wrong. They definitely exist and I have never seen one of them defending their neighbors’ choice to embrace a racist authoritarian hate-monger so obviously unfit to govern. I do see “elites” doing that.
I don’t understand the difference between voting for a racist lying wannabe authoritarian who promises retribution to those who criticize him because you say you like his economic policies, and voting for a racist lying wannabe authoritarian who promises retribution to those who criticize him because you are racist yourself. We should be saying that both are unacceptable, and instead we seem to be saying that if folks have a good enough reason, it’s fine. How can economic hardship be a good enough reason when so many other people suffering the same hardships know the difference between right and wrong?
LikeLike
Plus, Trump’s economic policies did nothing for them before. If they remember “better” times, then they are remembering Trump’s riding high on Obama’s economy before Covid led to economic challenges that BIDEN has handled. Trickle down has never worked. Maybe we should suggest that they watch which of Biden’s successes they keep as their own and what Trump’s own policies do for them. We need to push what is left of real media to show us the facts. Zuckerberg, put on your big boy pants and ban the conspiracy nuts. Let’s hope Elon has trouble with a security clearance since his playing footsie with Putin has come to light. How the government ever let him near our satellite system boggles the mind. I guess it is part of the corporate greed model that allowed our industry, sensitive or not, to be sent overseas.
LikeLike
nycpsp– Nope, sorry, not buying into any of that convoluted claptrap.
Americans vote their pocketbook, period. The last time we experienced such high inflation was in 1979, and we saw the exact same paradigm. Under Jimmy Carter we experienced high inflation due to global events beyond any presidential admin’s control: already high inflation lingering from ’73 Arab oil embargo– then doubled due to Iranian revolution and Iran-Iraq war. American voters switched to the other party regardless of who was running.
Same exact thing in 2024: high inflation due to global events beyond any presidential admin’s ability to control.
Doesn’t matter we’ve recovered better than other nations thanks to Biden policies. Or that “eggs and gasoline” have nearly normalized on their own. Rental cost/ home purchase prices– housing cost– is up hugely, & represents the largest part of any middle class family’s budget. Doesn’t matter that Dem candidate had a couple of policies that addressed that and Rep candidate did not. American voters are impatient & don’t read the fine print. Just as in 1980, they express their fury by going with the other party, regardless of candidate.
LikeLike
speduktr– Very much agree with “their own complicity.”
LikeLike
I am so heartbroken. I cannot believe that people would choose to elect a liar, thief and a cheater, to be kind, rather than a woman who has paid her dues and more. I cannot believe that Latino men would choose to face Trump’s mass deportation rather than vote for (gasp) a woman who has already proven her ability to govern. I cannot believe that middle generation who voted for a few hundred dollars in tax cuts over the future of young people who are struggling to pay off student loans or buy their first homes. I am proud to be one those senior women who was shrewd enough to know that Trump has nothing to offer the majority of the country. To all of you single issue voters who chose to sit out the election (please say you didn’t vote for Trump!) rather than vote for the only path forward, shame on you. Let’s see what that gets you. I listened to Kamala Harris speak a short while ago. I’m not sure how she managed to be quite so gracious. The only reason I am not wishing that Trump would choke on his hamburger is because we would be left with the equally incompetent J. D. Vance (and his handler, Peter Thiel).
LikeLike
Will the people who will suffer from their own electoral foolishness ever learn? I fear not. They will simply shift the blame onto those still less powerful than themselves as trump and his minions run roughshod over the country / world.
LikeLike
The real question is where did 15 million Democrat voters disappear to. Poof just gone. Anyway Happy Maga Morning!
LikeLike
good question since we won’t have the totals anytime soon. The electoral college has always sucked.
LikeLike
Roughly 16 million fewer people voted for president than did in 2020. If you stop to ask yourself why that is, you’ll be on the road to understanding this year’s election results. It’s not so much that people voted for Trump (2 million fewer than in 2020 did so). It’s that 14 million people just didn’t see much of an option to vote for instead. When the people are suffering, that’s fertile ground for the rise of right-wing populism – history has shown this repeatedly. The alternative is not offering “saner” versions of right-wing policies. The alternative is offering policies that ameliorate the suffering, which Democrats steadfastly refuse to do.
I’m sure you’ll all scoff, but if you could understand this post from @jasonhickel on Twitter, you’d be on the way to preventing this from happening again:
https://x.com/jasonhickel/status/1854107107743682797
LikeLiked by 1 person
Dienne,
Of course! Kamala should have moved to the left. People voted to elect a far-right authoritarian because they wanted left wing policies.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Again, you utterly refuse to listen. And that’s what cost you the election. Enjoy the next four years. And probably eight years of Vance after that.
LikeLike
Dienne,
You have a fantasy that voters yearn for a truly left wing candidate. Where’s the evidence?
LikeLike
Oh, I dunno , maybe the fact that candidates who run left get very high support, while candidates who run right lose? Seems convincing to me.
LikeLike
Is that why only one state has a socialist Senator?
LikeLike
There’s going to be a lot of people claiming they know exactly what went wrong for the Dems this year. Reality is not simple, though. Most likely there are many factors cutting in different ways. I don’t pretend to be able to explain everything, but I do think that the Democrats are suffering from a longstanding “branding” problem, from their close association with socially liberal ideas and causes that are extremely easy and effective to use against Democrats with working and middle class voters.
The Dems are widely seen as the party that thinks the country is systemically racist; that affirmative action is a good thing and that it’s racist to oppose it; that being trans is normal and children should have access to puberty blockers and gender affirming top surgery; that we should use words like Latinx and cisgender; that it’s a good thing when cities have to pay out money in settlements to plaintiffs who failed entrance examinations for fire department, police departments, or public schools; and more.
We have to grapple with the fact that this stuff is not popular and is super easy to weaponize against Dem candidates.
Harris did a great job, in my view, running a campaign that steered clear of these divisive issues. But it wasn’t enough. The branding is deeply set.
It’s complicated, but one thing that is guaranteed to be useless is to conclude that the Dems did nothing wrong and there’s nothing to learn from this result other than that republicans are bad.
LikeLike
If people were motivated by perceptions about immigration, law and order, opposition to DEI initiatives, etc., they would have voted for the Republicans. They didn’t. They just didn’t vote for Democrats. That suggests the problem is something that neither party is offering.
LikeLike
Kamala must not have stirred enthusiasm. Did you ever watch one of her rallies?
LikeLike
Several. I never understood your enthusiasm. She rattled off a bunch of meaningless platitudes that never addressed people’s real concerns while she bragged about thing like having the world’s “most lethal” fighting force”, which I found chilling.
LikeLike
She’s correct, though, that voters didn’t seem to turn out for her.
LikeLike
FLERP!– I don’t buy that great gobs pf Reps actually believe Dems think the society is systematically racist, etc your laundry list. I expect they use that the same way many liberals use over-the-top characterizations of the right– as cheap/ easy shorthand for– “they” want us to abandon our way of life vs “they” want to turn the clock back to the 1950’s. Or [for the extremists], “they” are socialists/ communists vs “they” are authoritarians/ fascists.
The whole dialog is just a blown-out-of-proportion version of conservative vs liberal– made personal. We devolved to the personal attacks starting with Reagan & “welfare queens” & it grew from there, making it OK for public figures to say the silent part out loud, villainizing those with whom they disagreed politically via personally-characterized attacks on their cultures.
From there grows everything wrong with today’s political dialog. Once you make it cultural [rather than political], you have made it personal, and you pull the conversation from what makes pragmatic sense economically/ legally right off the track.
LikeLike
“it was insane for the Democrats to think they could win by running a soulless candidate, without a shred of progressive policy vision…”
Yeah, as if it was Kamala Harris who sounded “soulless” on the campaign trail, and it was Kamala Harris who outlined economic ideas that would benefit the richest at the expense of the poorest.
“Twenty-three Nobel Prize-winning economists endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris in a joint letter released Wednesday.The economists said Trump’s economic agenda, which includes hardline tariff proposals and a slate of aggressive tax cuts, would ‘lead to higher prices, larger deficits, and greater inequality.’…Joseph Stiglitz, who won the Nobel Prize for his market economics research in 2001, spearheaded the joint endorsement among his fellow laureates.”
https://www.cnbc.com/2024/10/23/nobel-prize-winning-economists-donald-trump-agenda-endorse-harris.html
“23 Nobel Prize-winning economists expressed support for the policies proposed by Kamala Harris, warning that the policies of her opponent would be ‘counterproductive.’…The 23 Nobel laureates — more than half of all living recipients of the economics award — said that the Harris agenda focused on the middle class and entrepreneurship would ‘improve our nation’s health, investment, sustainability, resilience, employment opportunities, and fairness.’…By comparison, Trump’s agenda of high tariffs and regressive tax cuts would ‘lead to higher prices, larger deficits, and greater inequality.’ In addition, in their view Trump represents a threat to the rule of law and political stability, necessary components of a thriving economy.”
https://www.thefiscaltimes.com/newsletter/20241023-Harris-Economic-Plan-Vastly-Superior-23-Nobel-Prize-Winners-Say
“More than 80 American Nobel Prize winners in physics, chemistry, medicine and economics have signed an open letter endorsing Vice President Kamala Harris for president…The letter praises Ms. Harris for understanding that ‘the enormous increases in living standards and life expectancies over the past two centuries are largely the result of advances in science and technology.’ Former President Donald Trump, by contrast, would ‘jeopardize any advancements in our standards of living, slow the progress of science and technology and impede our responses to climate change,’ the letter said.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/24/science/kamala-harris-nobel-winners.html
How so very heartless and soulless of Kamala Harris// big snark!
LikeLike
MOST people (many who are unable to FULLY participate in “the economy”….except for consumerism) do not want to hear from the elite, left “economists” about how the economy is really working “for” them. What most people don’t understand, is that economic policy is now driven by whatever party is in charge. $6/dozen eggs and $5 for stale white bread over the past 3-4 yrs means a lot to a lot of people.
LikeLike
Lisa,
If people were paying attention then they’d know that $6 eggs were not the fault of Joe Biden or Kamala Harris.
They’d also be aware of the fact that gas prices have dropped, lots. Or that the economy is humming–I recently asked a plumber if he could take care of removing a utility sink, and he said, sure, but he was booked up 6 weeks out. Millions of jobs have been created. Unemployment is way low.
Maybe if they were paying attention they’d know that the two main causes of inflation in the US were the pandemic — which Trump utterly failed to handle — and the war in Ukraine, which caused an oil spike.
Maybe if they were paying attention, and not watch Fox, they’d know that Biden and Democrats passed the American Rescue Act. NOT A SINGLE REPUBLICAN VOTED FOR IT. It included “$1,400 direct payments to about 85% of Americans, $360 billion for state and local governments and $242 billion in expanded unemployment benefits.”
Conservative economist Douglas Holtz-Eakin says that this added to about 2% of inflation, which over the last 3 1/2 years of the Biden administration has been about 19 percent, or a per year average of 5.5 percent. Things were much worse in the 1970s and 1980s…and recent inflation has dropped to the Fed’s target area of about 2 percent.
Did these people not KNOW any of this?
Here’s the other thing. While prices have increased about 19 percent under Biden-Harris, WAGES have gone up 18 percent, meaning that the EFFECTIVE inflation rate has been about 1/2 percent per year. They don’t KNOW this? Or is it that they just don’t like what were once $6 eggs and want to blame who Fox tells them to blame?
LikeLike
You completely miss the point!….and you usually do You are so sure that your thoughts/ideas are the correct thoughts/ideas, that you are unable to see how other people have to live and survive within the system. People who work more than 1 job don’t have the luxury of time (or $$$) to sit around and read the WSJ! NOBODY wants the “elite economists” telling them that their life is just honky dory because the stock market (they can’t afford to participate!) is soaring high and some plumber in the mid west is booked out for 4-6 weeks. MOST people DO CARE that eggs are $6 and processed white bread is going for $5 a loaf.
LikeLike
The people voting for Trump (and indeed most who voted for Harris) don’t read the WSJ. They don’t read the NYTimes. They watch tv and social media.
So many people have a hard time thinking strategically about stuff like this. You tell them “huge numbers of voters think X” and they want to argue the merits about how the voters are wrong. It doesn’t matter if they’re wrong. The question is how did they come to believe what they believe, and what is your best plan to stop that from happening in the future? Hint: the answer is not to complain about the media.
LikeLike
LisaM– $6/doz and eggs and $5/loaf for stale white bread (? never encountered that) are 2 yrs in rear-view mirror.
At my local store (in expensive NJ), large cage-free brown eggs are $3.49/doz [you can get cheaper]. Loaf of fresh white bread is $2.79.
LikeLike
Which tells me the voters you’re talking about are just obsessively PO’d about how high grocery prices were 2 yrs ago immediately post-pandemic, & haven’t noticed how they came back down to nearly-normal since? Probably not: these voters keep a very close eye on the pocketbook.
More likely they (like my millennial sons) are suffering from much higher rental & utilities– higher housing costs– which do a serious number on the budget. An issue which Harris addressed in her policy platform, but Trump did not. Trump voters think he can wave a magic wand and return pre-pandemic economy.
Which goes to my POV: voters just go with what they’re experiencing at the kitchen table, budget-wise. If it’s a stretch & a problem, they’ll try the other party in hopes that makes things better…
LikeLike
Lisa, I have no idea where you came up with the Wall Street Journal thing.
And, as usual, it’s YOU who misses the point, which is — as I made very clear — that the economy was/is good, and Kamala Harris had a FAR better economic plan to help middle- and lower-class Americans than Trump.
The Washington Post pointed out yesterday that “virtually all rich nations were hit with far higher inflation” than the US, AND the US economy is healthy with job and GDP growth and “a booming stock market, consistently low unemployment and rising output.”
Economic analysts noted “a large gap between voters’ positive perceptions of their personal financial circumstances and their negative perceptions of the country’s economic circumstances — a gap they say can only be explained by what they are being told on social media and in the press.”
That would be Fox and OAN and other right-wing media.
There were, of course, OTHER reasons NOT to vote for Trump. The overt racism and misogyny. The sexual assaults. The felony convictions. The LIES.
AND, I’d be willing to bet that even those “who work more than 1 job” were quite aware of the violent insurrection that Trump incited. It WAS major news across the country. Take a scroll through this gallery and see for yourself:
https://www.usatoday.com/picture-gallery/news/nation/2021/01/07/front-pages-capture-chaos-riots-us-capitol/6577931002/
In the end, at least SOME people, mostly men, bought into Trump’s lies about the economy, and embraced his “brazen appeals to nativism, racism and misogyny.”
By the way, according to NerdWallet the price of eggs PEAKED at $4.82 a dozen in January of 2023, nearly two YEARS ago.
According to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics, the price of white bread was about $1.50 pound in 2020, in June of 2021 it was $1 .47, in October of 2021 it was $1.52, in Feb. 2022 it was $1.58, in May, 2022 it was $1.62, in June of 2023 it was $1.93, and this summer it was $1.94.
Now, I know you don’t like facts, but the fact is — as I pointed out earlier — that while prices OVERALL increased about 19 percent under Biden-Harris, WAGES have gone up 18 percent, meaning that the EFFECTIVE inflation rate has been about 1/2 percent per year.
Did the people who cited the economy as being important NOT KNOW this? They were completely unaware of their own economic circumstances?
Or is it that they just don’t like that prices went up and they blame who Fox tells them to blame?
Get a grip, kid.
LikeLike
dienne 77– I agree with some of what you say, and with a couple of points in the link [especially the conclusion].
IMHO, the biggest stumble the Dem party took was back in early ’90s, when it was seemingly so traumatized by 12 yrs of Rep admins– afraid to even use the word ‘liberal’– that it took the Third Way neoliberal path, which was scarcely distinguishable from the neoconservative clan that surrounded Reagan 1980-1988. Effectively abandoning the decimated working class. An aspect that gets little attention: same thing was going on from late ’80s through early ’90s with next rung up (corp pink collar as well as males in lower rungs of white-collar): automation and offshoring was putting them out of work as well.
GWHB cleaned up a few messes left by Reagan, but didn’t substantially vary from that path. Nor did any admin from then on divert from neoliberalism, thus failing to improve economics for middle/ working class– not Clinton, nor GWBush, nor Obama.
Speaking as one who moved from middle to upper middle class during those years– things weren’t much different for us either. Offshoring/ advanced tech allowing remote conferencing simply meant longer & longer hours, with ZERO improvement in healthcare benefits– in fact ever higher premiums with ever lower coverage. [This was very important for our family, whose eldest from 2002-2010 was suffering from a disease requiring many dr visits & eventually multiple hospitalizations.] Meanwhile, “COLAs” [raises] sustained a 40yr pattern of stagnant wages.
I don’t know how to parse the Trump years for our family. The tax cut made little difference for us, nor for our (rather low-income) sons. There was fear Reps would manage to dump ACA, which would have been a serious problem for our 1099 sons. Then came the pandemic. Trump measures were OK, not bad– but our kids did much better in the recovery phase managed by Biden. Promotions, higher wages.
Biden/Harris may not have been great, but there was a clear beginning of nudging the cruise ship back toward support of unions, & support of middle class. I am sorry Trump-voters could not recognize this.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you for acknowledging that this pattern goes back to Reagan, Clinton, etc.
LikeLike
If you want to know why so many fewer people voted, why not consider voter suppression?
I guess the reason that the Republicans have devoted so much time and energy and money to making it as hard as possible to vote has absolutely nothing to do with why they win elections.
Dems are fighting to make it easier for people to vote. The very people that the Dem haters say would vote for a candidate who gave them what they wanted.
How about you lefties show us how it’s done. Find your perfect candidate and run him in a Democratic primary. Show us how voters will just flock when you make promises to give them all the stuff that you know they want.
AOC ran against one of the most powerful Dems in Congress, and she did it by knocking on doors and talking to people. She did the hard work, and now that she’s working to make things better in a democracy where Republicans make it near impossible, she is hated by the same folks who didn’t think stopping Trump (or having a liberal Supreme Court) was as important as “sending a message” so they could armchair quarterback without lifting a finger.
You run elitist east coast candidates like Jill Stein and RFK Jr. who are totally out of touch with working people, and you whine that the Dems just aren’t good enough, and you want everything handed to you on a plate.
Run your ideal candidates and change things and when the right wing you helped to empower destroys them, you will probably blame the Dems, too.
LikeLike
I think the outcome of this election was known for a while before the election. All the hype of Kamala and then the claims of too close to call. They knew already which shows that the billionaire class and other elites bought this all along. They never believed in democracy if it didn’t benefit them specifically. The ideology of democracy was always embraced by the lower classes as was the reality of the racism of the elite. If everyone can be bought, esp elected leaders and foreign influence seekers, we’ll have what we have now, a criminal class dismissive of the public and needs of the public. Our constitution, emasculated by SCOTUS right wingers. So for voters amused and entertain by the graft and disrespect of Trump, reap your reward.
LikeLike
Democracy doesn’t just apply to who you personally favor. It applies across the board. Citizens of the USA have democratically elected President Donald Trump to change the direction of the country. The average American wants a closed border, an end to forever wars, men out of women’s spaces, lower inflation, no censorship and ending the ridiculous focus on dividing our country with the woke agenda. Many Americans believe that more Government makes things worse not better. The fact that you refuse to even consider the real issues of people on the other side of the political spectrum as legitimate speaks volumes.
LikeLike
If voters truly believed “…believe that more Government makes things worse not better,” why would they vote for a man who thinks government should decide what a woman can do with her body? Why would they want a man who thinks that government, not doctors, should make medical decisions for you and your children?
LikeLike
Killing an unborn baby is not telling woman what they can do with their body. It is protecting the human being growing in her body. if the decision is to kill your children the government should absolutely be involved.
LikeLike
Denying women emergency care when they are having complications with their pregnancy is NOT KILLING THE BABY. It is government action that kills the mother and the baby.
LikeLike
Jim,
Did you not read the post about the 18-year-old woman in Texas who was in the midst of her baby shower when she started bleeding and convulsing. The first hospital treated her for strep throat. The second saw she was in sepsis and sent her home. The third hospital recognized she was dying but it was too late. She and the baby died.
You feel good about that, Jim?
LikeLike
The idea that a fetus is a human being or that human life begins at the moment of conception are purely religious beliefs, not scientific or medical ones.
As the Court ruled in Roe:
“There has always been strong support for the view that life does not begin until live birth. This was the belief of the Stoics. It appears to be the predominant, though not the unanimous, attitude of the Jewish faith. It may be taken to represent also the position of a large segment of the Protestant community, insofar as that can be ascertained; organized groups that have taken a formal position on the abortion issue have generally regarded abortion as a matter for the conscience of the individual and her family. As we have noted, the common law found greater significance in quickening. Physicians and their scientific colleagues have regarded that event with less interest and have tended to focus either upon conception, upon live birth, or upon the interim point at which the fetus becomes “viable,” that is, potentially able to live outside the mother’s womb, albeit with artificial aid. Viability is usually placed at about seven months (28 weeks) but may occur earlier, even at 24 weeks.”
“Christian theology and the canon law came to fix the point of animation at 40 days for a male and 80 days for a female…there was little agreement about the precise time of formation or animation. There was agreement, however, that prior to this point the fetus was to be regarded as part of the mother…The significance of quickening was echoed by later common-law scholars and found its way into the received common law in this country.”
“It is thus apparent that at common law, at the time of the adoption of our Constitution, and throughout the major portion of the 19th century, abortion was viewed with less disfavor than under most American statutes currently in effect. Phrasing it another way, a woman enjoyed a substantially broader right to terminate a pregnancy than she does in most States today.”
And, of course, Republican judges on the Court overturned Roe, forcing narrow, rigid religious ideology on women throughout America.
LikeLike
And Jim, which party has been passing laws to censor books? Trump’s party.
LikeLike
The books that have been “censored” relate to inappropriate sexual content for minors. Clearly you are not a parent if you think discussing sodomy with young children is ok. if I am wrong name one book that has been censored for any other reason other than it is not age appropriate for young children.
LikeLike
I could provide a long list of books that have been censored by rightwing legislators that have been read by young people for years.
Please explain why ANIMAL FARM is repeatedly censored?
Please explain why TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD is repeatedly censored.
Please explain why BRAVE NEW WORLD is censored.
Please explain why THE HANDMAID’sTALE has been censored.
Please tell me why THE GRAPES OF WRATH has been censored.
Please explain why THE CATCHER IN THE RYE has been censored.
Please explain why THE GREAT GATSBY has been censored.
Please tell me why some districts in Florida censored the dictionary.
LikeLike
Jim,
The sexual content on the web is far more extreme than anything in books. Have you thought about how to censor porn ?
LikeLike
I think banning porn is on the Project 2025 list. Now that would be hilarious.
LikeLike
I would agree 100% that books like animal farm should not be censored at all. I think you referring to very select instances and not a general trend. I live in a very conservative city and after looking at the school district, Animal farm or any of the others have not been censored. The book Push by Sapphire has been for good reasons. There are age appropriate limits to most books. That is not censorship. So just because there is porn on the web I should allow tax funded schools to provide the same filth? That makes zero sense. As parent I want control of what my children are exposed to.
LikeLike
The knuckleheads cast a very wide net when they censor books. There are books that are inappropriate for young children. I rely on professional librarians to judge books, not legislators who never read the books they banned.
LikeLike
I do want to thank you for allowing me to express my views. Even though we disagree on most issues it is important to keep exchanging ideas. We are all guilty of being trapped in our own echo chambers. More perspectives and ideas are for the best.
LikeLike
Thanks, Jim.
LikeLike
Jim– just adding my 2cts as someone who taught ages 2.5-6 for 20 yrs (until retired in 2020), so I have taken an interest in books targeted for banning for youngest students [Prek-2]. Have “read” every one of them (via youtube read-alouds]. There are about 10 of them. They’ve been subject to vocal/ ample protests (at least in N VA, which I follow via WaPo).
None are overtly sexual such as you describe. I “dinged” 2 of them. One. tho it’s popular, “My Rainbow,” because tho written at level of very youngest readers, introduces “autism” and “cisgender” and “transgender” terms– all right in the first couple of pages– which would be unknown to most kids that age & require considerable explanation before proceeding– concepts which I consider age-inappropriate for the very young. It’s too bad, because it’s a nice story with a good message. The author could have finessed the technical details and gotten the message across…
The other (I forget the name) had a couple of illustrations of bullying which the very young would consider alarming and upsetting– would have been better for 3rd grade & up, but was written at a younger level. So both an issue of age-inappropriate.
The other 8+ were anodyne and harmless! Including “Love, Violet,” which parents seem to think promotes lesbian lifestyle – give me a break.
LikeLike
p.s. Jim, if I didn’t make it clear. I haven’t seen/ heard of a single book that features “sodomy for young children.” [I also have spent time reviewing books for older kids targeted for banning.] There is a small handful of books some parents would really like to see off the high school library shelves. 5 or 6 of them. A couple are recommended by publisher for over 18, so high school librarians might want to forget about them [at least one author agrees]. Hard to say, as there are certainly older hischool students ready for adult-level books. But none of them should be in middle school libraries IMHO.
LikeLike
Jim– “many Americans believe that more Government makes things worse not better”– Yep. Both Dems and Reps relate to this.
Just to give you my POV (and that of many Dems): “more govt” is relative and needs context. The “more govt” we had during most of the 20th century involved reasonably regulated capitalism. Unfettered capitalism leads inevitably (history shows) to large rich-poor gap [inequality], shrinks a healthy middle/ working class, makes society vulnerable to volatile [& worse] politics; undermines democracy.
Hence anti-trust laws to avoid the inevitable pull of untrammeled capitalism toward monopoly, which kills competition thus undermining capitalism. Separation of banking from stock brokerage [to avoid speculation undermining citizens’ savings – banking stability]; laws encouraging balanced power between owners of capital & their workers [unions] – sharing productivity increase with workers; taxation of highest earners/ highest profiting corporations sufficient to support public goods of the society from whom they profit; laws that promote clean air and water and healthy food and helpful but non-harmful drugs. These are all features of the booming economy we had during most of the 20thC. Laws which Reps continually chip at and seek to repeal.
Now let’s look at “more govt” which Reps favor, as evidenced by red states particularly in the last decade: laws limiting the availability of healthcare for pregnant women; laws limiting healthcare for transgenders; laws limiting what materials may be read/ accessible to K12 students; laws limiting K12 standards/ curriculum to topics which are not “divisive” (as determined by state)– which are now moving into state college stds/ curriculum; laws that police college admissions to ensure no advantages are given to the disadvantaged; laws that police campus activities to ensure all political viewpoints are represented; laws limiting how many may gather to protest in public or on campuses before police may take action to shut them down; laws that require ever-more proofs of ID/ citizenship to vote… There are more I have not mentioned here, but all equate to a nanny state established as guardian over citizens’ private lives and how they think/ express themselves.
LikeLike
Scott Schmerelson is leading for LAUSD school board. I’m very happy about that.
SCOTT MARK SCHMERELSON
89,674
51.86%
DAN CHANG
83,256
48.14%
LikeLike
Terrific news about Scott Schmerelson!
LikeLike
Whining is not a useful response, Trump was elected by the people, how do we respond? Were democrats too far to the left, or, not far enough? Who should lead the Democratic Party?
Self pity or blame are not policies, we have to build a winning coalition, clearly we failed in this election, we have to make hard choices, we must begin the conversation
LikeLike
Hard thing to do when those in your own party call you names for suggesting common sense. Independents (consisting of mostly former Dems) have become the reining party, yet no one wants to ask “why” that is the case.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I seriously doubt that Trump was elected “by the people.” He was elected by right wing disinformation as well as the failure of mainstream media to do their job. I have talked to too many friends and family members who believed the disinformation until provided with the facts. Part of me hopes that Trump manages to totally tank the economy before the midterm elections for the little guy. I’m not sure that I want him to be able to try to destroy the Affordable Care Act and the rest of the social safety net since he won’t sign any legislation into law passed by a Democrat controlled legislature if we take the legislative branch back in two years.
LikeLike
Whether mainstream media did their job depends on what you think their job is. It seems management, at least, believes their job is to publish what will generate the most profit. In that respect, they did their job superlatively. In the interest of maximizing readership/viewership, they normalized & sanewashed T, providing a volume of free publicity no campaign could ever have afforded.
We would have liked them to see their job as presenting the truth & continually calling out falsehoods & erroneous conclusions, but individual attempts to do that were drowned out in the overall din.
LikeLike
Newspapers have always been opinionated, back in the 50s we had seven daily papers, ironically the NY Post was the most liberal, the Herald Tribune the most conservative, and, they all had great sports sections!
LikeLike
The problem in T’s case is they weren’t opinionated enough. Their coverage often treated T as if he were just another candidate, rather than the threat to democracy he is.
LikeLike
How about calling a lie a lie. That is not an opinion.Yes, newspapers have always been opinionated. Just the words used to relate the facts can be colored to suggest a bias. We all knew who was considered conservative or liberal, and what philosophy might have influenced the reporting, but at least we knew who was a hack no matter their political persuasion.
LikeLike
A great many people who voted for Trump don’t like him. Their vote was not so much a vote for him as a vote against the cultural changes that the so-called “Progressives” have forced upon them. And this is the case in all the democratic nations that have politically swung to the Right in recent years: France, Germany, Austria, Italy, Spain, Greece, Australia, and others. Culture is even more important than the economy when it comes to voting.
The Democratic Party needs to purge itself of Progressives, who should organize their own political party. U.S. politics would be better off with more than just two parties because coalition governments are more responsive to the people instead of special interests. America’s narrow two-party system has devolved into a special interest system: After researching more than 1,800 laws passed by Congress over the past 20 years, Princeton University researcher Martin Gilens and Northwestern University researcher Benjamin Page documented that the U.S. is no longer a representative republic because Congress — regardless of which political party is in power — does not represent the interests of the majority of the country’s citizens, but is instead controlled by the rich and powerful. That’s how democracies die.
As Harvard Historian Jill LePore points out, the Democratic Party is reaping the bitter crop of its abandonment of the working class, of unions, and the adoption of “identity politics” which led the Party to trying to be “all things to all people”, resulting in the Party being an amorphous nothing to most people. Will Rogers said when he was asked which political party he belongs to: “I don’t belong to any organized political party — I’m a Democrat.” The Democratic Party isn’t really a political party: It’s a loose confederacy of various progressive and identity groups, each with its own pet “cause”, most of which are out of step with the cultural standards of the majority of Americans for whom culture is of basic importance.
The Democratic Party needs to return to The Middle and to adopt a guiding policy of incremental change instead of rapid change, as espoused by Progressives. The Democratic Party needs to return to its working class/middle class roots, beginning with unwavering support for unions, which Obama betrayed, and it needs to forsake fractious identity politics.
I don’t think that the Democratic Party can do all that by the 2026 midterm elections and win back control of at least one house of Congress to rein in Trump. Only if Trump’s policies prove to be as ruinous as indications are they could be, would the Democratic Party be able to do that.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I agree the cultural stuff is huge baggage for the Dems. It’s manna from heaven to the republicans.
LikeLike
AGREE!!!! What is the biggest rule in sales?…..know your customer. The Dems have a really hard time selling their “brand” to normal, middle class folks.
LikeLiked by 1 person
In April of 2012, Norman Ornstein and Thomas Mann, two of the most respected Congressional scholars in the country, published this piece in The Washington Post:
“We have been studying Washington politics and Congress for more than 40 years, and never have we seen them this dysfunctional. In our past writings, we have criticized both parties when we believed it was warranted. Today, however, we have no choice but to acknowledge that the core of the problem lies with the Republican Party.”
“The GOP has become an insurgent outlier in American politics. It is ideologically extreme; scornful of compromise; unmoved by conventional understanding of facts, evidence and science; and dismissive of the legitimacy of its political opposition…When one party moves this far from the mainstream, it makes it nearly impossible for the political system to deal constructively with the country’s challenges.”
“‘Both sides do it’ or ‘There is plenty of blame to go around’ are the traditional refuges for an American news media intent on proving its lack of bias, while political scientists prefer generality and neutrality when discussing partisan polarization. Many self-styled bipartisan groups, in their search for common ground, propose solutions that move both sides to the center, a strategy that is simply untenable when one side is so far out of reach.”
“It is clear that the center of gravity in the Republican Party has shifted sharply to the right. ..The post-McGovern Democratic Party, by contrast, while losing the bulk of its conservative Dixiecrat contingent in the decades after the civil rights revolution, has retained a more diverse base. Since the Clinton presidency, it has hewed to the center-left on issues from welfare reform to fiscal policy. While the Democrats may have moved from their 40-yard line to their 25, the Republicans have gone from their 40 to somewhere behind their goal post.”
It has only GOTTEN MUCH WORSE since then.
It isn’t the Democrats. It’s racism, misogyny, “Christian” nationalism”, fear and hatred, all spread by Republicans, especially Trump, and by Fox, and by right-wing media, from Alex Jones and Charlie Kirk to Ben Shapiro and Joe Rogan and Tucker Carlson, and others.
Lots of Americans are willingly receptive.
We are all going to find out in the near future just what a mistake they made.
LikeLike
Please don’t tell me I have to vote for Democrats to protect LGBTQ rights when Democrats are saying they need to “purge” progressive “cultural” elements from the party. What you’re in essence saying is that protecting gay, lesbian and trans people isn’t popular, so the Democrats shouldn’t do it.
Gender affirming care is just as much medical treatment between patient and doctor as abortion is. If you don’t believe in protecting that – regardless of how you personally feel about people’s personal decisions – then you’re no better than Republicans who want to regulate people’s bodies. You don’t fight for things because they’re popular, you do it because it’s right.
LikeLike
I am so confused by this discussion, because I thought you agreed with flerp! that the Democrats need to shut up about those “divisive” culture issues like supporting parents and doctors of trans kids making decisions about their kids instead of a right wing politician.
I thought the Dems lost because they made the error of not joining the right wingers to denounce gender affirming care for minors.
Anyone who cares about trans kids voted for Democrats. So many very scared trans folks, especially teens, out there knowing that the party that does not seem to want them to exist has just been granted unprecedented power.
Democrats like Gov. Pritzger of Illinois stood up for trans kids yesterday. Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear beautifully addressed the trans hate of Republicans a while back.
I don’t understand how anyone wants the Dems to throw them under the bus to supposedly get votes from the anti-trans people who won’t vote for a dem no matter what
Dems often do the right thing and get attacked for it.
LikeLike
Now I know you’re delusional (or, more likely, plain old lying) because I’ve never said anything like that – you know perfectly well that my son is trans. In fact, just recently I pointed out that Harris’s answer of “we should follow the law” when asked about trans people having the right to gender affirming care was woefully transphobic, akin to saying “we should follow the law” if someone in 1953 were asked if Black children should have the right to go to school with white children.
I don’t oppose Democrats because they support trans rights, I oppose Democrats because they **pretend** to support trans right while simultaneously adopting right-wing narratives about trans rights.
LikeLike
Sorry, but I didn’t read your post. At one point years ago I thought you had said you had a trans kid, but when the Republicans were spewing all their anti-trans hate I decided I was wrong.
Which Dems are saying they need to purge progressive cultural elements? Did you not see that Virginia elected its first trans representative? (a Democrat)
The Democrats got hammered for being too supportive of trans rights. did you see those commercials run by Trump? Did you see how much Trump and his Republican hate-mongers were trying to gin up hate for Dems by invoking how dangerous and terrible trans rights are?
Have you seen Andy Beshear? Pritzker? Pritzker is a billionaire scion, but he’s very good on trans issues.
I was asking you a question because I was confused. Not accusing you of anything. I think we agree that Dems should not avoid taking a stand on supposedly “controversial cultural issues”, even though they are being advised by some non-politicians to do so.
I am sorry at the election results, and I’m sorry that the Democrats didn’t win and I’m sorry that the party using trans kids to get people to hate Democrats for not throwing them under the bus did win. I am sorry at how scared many trans kids are because the Democrats didn’t win.
LikeLike
JFC. Read the posts I’m responding to right there in front of your face.
LikeLike
What are the chances now of him being jailed before Jan 20th for those felony convictions?
LikeLike
He’s scheduled to be sentenced for the felony convictions in NY on Nov 26th. He can’t pardon himself after inauguration on Jan 20th since presidential pardons only apply to federal convictions, not those in states. He will appeal, though if serving a prison sentence can be suspended until after an appeal is won, that’s news to me. If he’s good at anything, it’s at creating chaos, and at convincing fools to overlook criminal behaviors and bend laws in his favor. So SCOTUS would likely rescue him. (I doubt he appreciates how, compared to everyone else, he’s gotten virtually everything his own way his whole life).
LikeLike
Trump is a spoiled brat in a fat man’s body.
LikeLike
EXACTLY!
LikeLike
OMG, he’s going to try to get the case cancelled altogether.
See “Trump to debut new argument to cancel his hush money sentencing”
https://www.rawstory.com/huge-development-trump-see/
LikeLike
Does anyone have a possible answer explaining why this morning’s total vote count is about 20 million less than the total number of votes cast in 2020, and that the convicted rapist, fraud and felon won with several million fewer votes than he lost by in 2020?
Where did all those 20 million voters go — did they all stay home?
The 2020 total was almost 158.5 million
This morning’s total was less than 139 million.
LikeLike
EFS…election fatigue syndrome!
LikeLike
The 2020 election was during the pandemic, so many if not most votes were cast with mail-in ballots then. tRump & Republicans complained about that a lot, so I can’t help but wonder if the discrepancy today has anything to do with GOP shenanigans, such as not issuing mail-in ballots to all eligible voters this time & requiring in-person voting, making it harder for college students away from home to vote while at school, reducing the number of polling places, purging of voter rolls, etc.
LikeLike
When all the data is in, it should be interesting and informative to see WHERE voting is down, such as whether or not it’s in districts with high populations of people who tend to vote for Democrats, such as people of color…
LikeLike
ECE,
I worked in ballot curing. There were all sorts of issues, including Georgia election officials not even mailing the ballots to voters until the Friday before election day, making it virtually impossible for them to be able to receive them and return them in time to arrive by election day.
The Harris campaign had so many people on the ground with volunteers pivoting to immediately deal with various suppression issues. But it was endless and I hope there is a good county by county report of how many requested ballots were received and counted.
LikeLike
What I’ve been saying all along. No one was convinced to vote for Trump beyond his cult base who were never going to do otherwise. The problem is that no one was convinced to vote for Harris either. Democrats basically told a large portion of their base to suck it – Harris is the only option and if you don’t like it, vote anyway. Obviously that was not a winning campaign strategy.
LikeLike
Or maybe voter suppression works.
Do you think that’s maybe why the Republicans and their billionaire donors have worked so hard to suppress the votes of people likely to support progressive issues?
LikeLike
Do you have evidence of voter suppression? The only voter suppression I saw was Democrats’ tireless fight to keep third parties off the ballot.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Dienne,
Are you aware that the GOP spent more money on ads attacking Kamala for supporting trans rights than on the border? This was Trump’s #1 issue because the public is so anti-trans. The closest she came to responding was Walz’s “Mind your own damn business.”
LikeLike
I’m perfectly aware of the GOP on trans issues. The GOP being bad does not make the Dems good. That’s why I didn’t vote for either.
LikeLike
You didn’t care about the Republicans inciting hate against trans kids (and adults) because the Dems weren’t good enough for you on the issue?
I really don’t get you, but I acknowledge that you are consistent about seeing no difference between “dangerous and hurtful” and “not good enough”, even when it directly affects your own family.
LikeLike
The consistent fallacy on this blog is that you think convincing people that Trump is bad is all you need to do. But I was already convinced of that, as were most people except for Trump’s base who will never be convinced. What you need to convince people of is that Democrats represent progress, not just, at best, status quo. When Democrats themselves constantly fight against progress, or at least tell us why progress isn’t possible, that’s an uphill battle. Just because Republicans are bad does not make Democrats good. In fact, Democrats are the obstacle that prevents good. Not going to keep voting for “lesser” evil when that just enables more evil.
LikeLike
I got it. You prefer the victory of evil rather than voting for a less than perfect candidate. Prepare for attacks on the rights and very existence of your son under Trump.
LikeLike
You’re basically showing that you’re as hateful as the Republicans. You don’t care about my son (or trans people in general) any more than they do. You’re just using them as political pawns. Democrats have been positively gleeful about the possibility of harm befalling marginalized people who didn’t vote for Harris. Repulsive.
LikeLike
Dienne,
Why are you obsessed with this blog? You post angry comments. You accuse me and others of bad faith. If you hate me so much, why don’t you stop reading the blog and stop obsessively posting all day?
As it happens, I support the right of people to live their lives as they wish so long as they don’t hurt others.
I support the right of LGBT people to live as they choose. And you call me as hateful as Republicans?
It’s time for you to bow out, Dienne. I don’t want to hear from you. Ever.
LikeLike
He’s a PEDDLER who got away with selling frickin snake oil to our country AGAIN! He has the ethics of a shark and he’d eat you alive (even if you don’t taste like a Big Mac), because he enjoys devouring his prey and people let him.
Most Americans are too ignorant to realize that the only real skill he has is conning people –and he’s been honing it for decades. He hasn’t always succeeded at that, but he has gotten around being accountable for it many times, though not without the help of deep pockets, sycophants and others who are also morally bankrupt.
So now America, not to mention the rest of the world, is effectively in the hands of a used car salesman who is pissed that we didn’t elect him last time, so he has a huge axe to grind. And this good-for-nothing will be getting top secret info (despite his track record with that) and the nuclear codes again…
Thanks a lot dumbf*ck voters, including tRump trolls who harass us at this blog because, like the poorly educated who he counts on so much, you fell for the many lies of a lifelong con-artist and refuse to accept truth when you hear it. Good luck with what you reap for yourselves, our nation and the earth in exchange for your blind passion and loyalty to a dictator-wannbe huckster!
LikeLike
I don’t want to be an alarmist unnecessarily, so please correct me if I’ve been misinformed, but doesn’t it look like voters have also given both the House and the Senate to the GOP? With SCOTUS in their back pocket, I think that’s the trifecta for removing the guardrails and allowing tRump’s worst impulses to go unrestrained.
Add to that their plan to take over civil service jobs that are based on merit and to return to the use of the spoils system, where positions are based on patronage, so that all federal departments are filled with and run by tRump/MAGA loyalists, and it looks to me like Democrats are being locked out of decision-making and power. So then how would our Constitutional rights and freedoms be protected from the dictator-wannabe and his ilk?
LikeLike
I don’t think the House is clear yet but GOP control looks more likely than not.
LikeLiked by 1 person
OK, thanks, Flerp! Glad to know there is still some hope –even if only a smidgen.
LikeLike
I just read that for total women votes, these were the numbers for the last three elections. Hillary +13, Gramps +15, Harris +8.
In the wake of Dobbs. Just amazing.
LikeLike
I don’t believe it.
LikeLike
While we’re at it, here’s Trump’s percentage of the vote in New York in the last three elections. 44%!
Trump 44.2%
2020 Trump 37.74%
2016 Trump 36.75%
LikeLike
I am frightened for this country. Trump’s winning by so large a margin means that he now represents America. Americans are bigoted, filled with anger and have learned to hate those who are in any way different.
I am terrified of what will happen to tax paying immigrants. Trump [lie] said that most immigrants have murdered more than one person. I saw this in a video. Undocumented immigrants contributed $96.7 BILLION in federal, state & local taxes in 2022.
Trump has won a second term. Here’s what that means for schools.
Experts expect civil rights enforcement to change and transgender students to lose new protections
On the campaign trail, Donald Trump pledged to get rid of the U.S. Department of Education, expand school choice, roll back new protections for LGBTQ students, and deport millions of undocumented immigrants…
Chalkbeat spoke to advocates, experts, and former education department officials about what to expect from the next administration. They widely agreed that President Joe Biden’s Title IX rewrite, which extended new protections for transgender students and is currently tied up in the courts, will be repealed, that civil rights enforcement will look very different, and that future education budgets will be more austere.
But they disagreed on how likely it is that Trump would actually do away with the U.S. Department of Education and how much progress he might make toward federal support for school choice.
Many said they do not expect to see federal policy focused on improving education, even as students are still struggling to recover from the wide-ranging effects of pandemic school closures, chronic absenteeism remains high, and many students graduate poorly prepared for college or skilled jobs…
“We are getting ourselves into a position where we are seriously under-educating large, large numbers of students,” said Thomas Toch, the founding director of FutureEd, a think tank based at Georgetown University. “It’s almost at a crisis point.” But Toch doesn’t expect leadership from a Trump administration…
LikeLike