Kamala Harris for Pres

Safetydan said:

I do blame the democrats. That's what I'm saying. But it's not because they dumped Biden (good!) but because they assumed it was only because he was old. I don't think Kamala sucks because she has bad vibes and says dumb ****. I think she sucks because her and her campaign have dodged a bold policy agenda, capitulated to right-wing framing on multiple issues, and significantly moderated post-DNC. This slowly killed off the momentum wave they finally had when they reluctantly listened to their base by dumping Brandon. At that time it was unclear what they were going to do, They had an opportunity to galvanize their support at that moment but cowered away.

Click to expand...

The data doesn’t support your opinion


View: https://x.com/iansams/status/1849569892258689397?s=46


And


View: https://x.com/justinwolfers/status/1849443288782131656?s=46


If Harris has erased Trump’s lead on economic issues and when given a blind survey, voters overwhelming support Democratic policies, how can you blame the Democratic policy agenda for anything?

The Thriller said:

Inflation in America has gone down over the past year. It has also been lower than literally every other industrialized country in the world. Over the course of the last four years unemployment has disappeared, the work force is at full strength, and wages have increased. This past summer saw new records for travel. Restaurants are full and consumer spending has skyrocketed. Survey after survey have shown that people believe their personal finances to be much better than they were under Trump but suspect the nation’s economy to be worse. A complete paradox that I believe has been helped by the media confusing (disinforming) viewers.

Are we basing our economic views on actual outcomes? Or are we basing them off the media narratives and social media algorithms we’re fed? Remember now, the media needs Biden’s economy to be bad because he hasn’t fed them any controversies. And social media companies need you sad and angry, because that keeps you on their sites for clicks.

Studies are now showing what I’ve long suspected; reality no longer matters for millions of Americans. It’s all about vibes.

The paradox between the macroeconomy and household sentiment

Despite indications of a strong economy by traditional metrics, consumer sentiment continues to have a negative view.

www.brookings.edu

Click to expand...

I would suggest other factors are driving economic pessimism, lack of social mobility, insecure and underemployment, unaffordable housing. Having more money means very little if you have no purchasing power for things that actually matter. Housing, education, health, a night at a restaurant is an easily justifiable expense, a large mortgage without job security and the hope of promotion is another thing.

The reality is, most people under 40 are going to have a significantly worse standard of living than their parents. And just you ****ing wait until the price of global warming really starts to **** the economy, add to that in America at some point your going to have to start paying back your colossal ****ing debt you owe the world and ill give you a tip it wont be corporations or shareholders that do the heavy lifting.

Rubashov said:

I would suggest other factors are driving economic pessimism, lack of social mobility, insecure and underemployment, unaffordable housing. Having more money means very little if you have no purchasing power for things that actually matter. Housing, education, health, a night at a restaurant is an easily justifiable expense, a large mortgage without job security and the hope of promotion is another thing.

The reality is, most people under 40 are going to have a significantly worse standard of living than their parents. And just you ****ing wait until the price of global warming really starts to **** the economy, add to that in America at some point your going to have to start paying back your colossal ****ing debt you owe the world and ill give you a tip it wont be corporations or shareholders that do the heavy lifting.

Click to expand...

But this isn’t the reality, you’re reporting on vibes. It’s a perception, fueled by boredom, untreated mental illness, social media, and entitlement.

People aren’t unemployed nor underemployed. Wages for working class people have been increasing more under Biden than they ever did under Trump.

Those most angry at democracy and fueling Trump’s campaign aren’t those who are struggling with housing or economics. If poverty is what’s fueling this anger, then we’d be seeing populists rising in poor countries when in fact, they’re rising in some of the richest. We’d be seeing poor working class people making up the bulk of Trump’s support instead of seeing the majority of his support coming from the highest economic brackets.

Rubashov said:

people don't base their vote on evidence. if they did capitalism would be profoundly different if not abolished.

Click to expand...

Yep. That’s exactly what I’m saying. I’m glad we’re in agreement.

The Thriller said:

But this isn’t the reality, you’re reporting on vibes. It’s a perception, fueled by boredom, untreated mental illness, social media, and entitlement.

People aren’t unemployed nor underemployed. Wages for working class people have been increasing more under Biden than they ever did under Trump.

Those most angry at democracy and fueling Trump’s campaign aren’t those who are struggling with housing or economics. If poverty is what’s fueling this anger, then we’d be seeing populists rising in poor countries when in fact, they’re rising in some of the richest. We’d be seeing poor working class people making up the bulk of Trump’s support instead of seeing the majority of his support coming from the highest economic brackets.

Click to expand...

My guess is, like me you're not a 30 something working a menial job with crippling school debts? demographics more than ever will have a significant impact on your outlook.

Btw, it should be noted that in credible polls, Harris is doing just fine. It’s a close race but she’s ahead in nearly all swing states. The fact is, Trump and Trump friendly media have “flooded the zone” with **** polls to accomplish three objectives:

1. Sway other polling. If they provide him with the perception of momentum, it might actually help his campaign.
2. Keeps the base loyal and charged. Especially if they need to stage another pusch if they lose.
3. The goal of 21st century autocrats isn’t to inform but to misinform. If Trump is seen as inevitable then resistance will fall (at least they hope).

RCP is owned by a known trumper. It’s polling is skewed because it takes into its average all of the crappy polling that Trump’s supporters publish.

As usual, I bring the receipts.

Rubashov said:

My guess is, like me you're not a 30 something working a menial job with crippling school debts? demographics more than ever will have a significant impact on your outlook.

Click to expand...

Sigh

It’s like nothing I write matters

It’s fine, maintain your same opinion, no matter what the evidence tells you.

Has this always happened? I seem to remember in the early to mid 2000s people actually exchanging thoughts and ideas on this website. Seems so stagnant now. I remember having some lovely discussions with posters about gay marriage and Iraq when I first joined this website and they were fantastic. People changed their minds often.

Btw, I actually do have student loans that I’m paying off. You should learn more about fellow posters before painting them in a broad brush. You should also actually read their posts too. Often, theyll provide you links answering questions or refuting pts you’ve made. It’s part of the learning process

The Liberal Party in Australia (conservatives) spent a hot minute using the term "intergenerational theft" which the quickly abandoned because everyone laughed at them for pretending they didn't drive the phenomenon. What's developed here is three economies, cash and asset rich boomers, younger couples in debt to the eyeballs but at least with some property and single people mostly incapable of progressing out of rent traps.

The Thriller said:

Sigh

It’s like nothing I write matters

It’s fine, maintain your same opinion, no matter what the evidence tells you.

Has this always happened? I seem to remember in the early to mid 2000s people actually exchanging thoughts and ideas on this website. Seems so stagnant now. I remember having some lovely discussions with posters about gay marriage and Iraq when I first joined this website and they were fantastic. People changed their minds often.

Btw, I actually do have student loans that I’m paying off. You should learn more about fellow posters before painting them in a broad brush. You should also actually read their posts too. Often, theyll provide you links answering questions or refuting pts you’ve made. It’s part of the learning process

Click to expand...

I read them i think your conclusions are wrong.

One last thing about housing affordability

When was California “affordable?” New York? Washington?

Was housing in Utah “cheap” in 2020?

The housing affordability issue is constantly bitched about yet no one can tell me when buying was the best? It certainly wasn’t in the 90s here in Utah, wages were poor and utah was transitioning from an agricultural state to a service/tech industry state. You could find homes in Orem or Sandy for under $100k, but your salary was much lower and mortgage rates were higher than they’d be in 2020.

True, housing in Utah along the wasatch front was decent in 2008-2010. But the economy and wages certainly wasn’t conducive to getting a mortgage. Especially after the banking industry raised their standards for who got loans. When my wife and I married, we rented for years in Sandy. This was under Obama then under Trump. If housing was so cheap back then, why couldn’t we purchase anything? When we purchased in 2020, the price was still pretty high. The only saving grace was the mortgage rates were lower.

So with affordability, are we talking about actual home prices or mortgage rates? Because home prices are declining in many areas, even in Utah. Mortgage rates will likely get better as interest rates ease.

When was the golden age for buying homes? I’d love to know. Every era has pros and cons. The 80s had cheaper housing but higher interest rates. The mid 2000s had screaming interest rates until the bottom fell out. The covid years had amazing interest rates, some of the lowest in record, but housing prices were through the roof. Today housing prices are lower than the covid years but the interest rates are still high. Give it a few more years and likely both the housing market will have more supply and interests rates will be lower. But there will still be expensive markets and there will likely be an economic turn that could affect interest rates. No era is perfect, unless you can name one. I’d love to know! And when housing prices are rock bottom, you’ll have people bitching that they’re underwater with their loans and that they’re not getting the equity they wanted out of the low home values. lol no era is perfect guys

Rubashov said:

I read them i think your conclusions are wrong.

Click to expand...

Well your opinion without any evidence sure is convincing.

In all seriousness, I’m tired of the opining. I’ve heard it since 2016 when people made lame *** (wrong) conclusions about why Trump won. “eCoNoMiC aNxIeTy” when in reality, it was racism and misogyny.

I’m once again being bombarded with “tHe EcOnOmY” being the reason for Trump’s popularity in 2024 despite all evidence pointing to other factors. Again, why do working class voters overwhelmingly support Harris? Can you name any policy Trump is proposing that would benefit the working class? Why aren’t poorer countries suffering from populists? Why are the richest democracies all seeing similar populist surges (France, Germany, the UK)?

If we dropped our preconceptions and looked at the evidence, I think we’d get to the bottom of some of these problems. Psss, it’s not the economics. Again, Biden has been amazing for the working class and they’re doing far better today than in 2019 or 2020.

The uncomfortable truth is that western democracies are facing a pandemic of narcissism. Studies show that between 30-40 percent of any given society is drawn to authoritarian personalities. Decades now of wealth, prosperity, peace, and ease have fueled entitlement and grievance. Without an outside enemy (poverty, disease, Cold War) they’ve turned against their own peoples and democracies. A large segment of the population is drawn to authoritarian personalities and/or parties and are looking to wage war on those who have inflicted perceived social and cultural grievances. Its why we’re seeing a Weimar Republic like collapse of America, not because of an economic and cultural depression but because of an economic and cultural boom. It’s why we’re seeing right wing authoritarianism finding similar targets; immigrants, Jews, Muslims, the LGBT community, media, education, experts and expertise, and liberal democracy itself. Western democracy is waging a war against itself. And Russia is leading the way in fueling this war.

Safetydan said:

Question for all,

If Harris loses to Trump, whose fault is it? Who do we think gets blamed?

My take: Harris and her handlers have run a terrible campaign post DNC. There were opportunities to capitalize on and none were taken advantage of. Instead, they've only further exacerbated issues that people had with them and created more along the way.

Click to expand...

If she loses I dare say there’ll be a massive pile on and eviscerating by many on the left of her and her campaign. She’s been given what a billion dollars and how many big names to help and yet things seem to get worse for her with every appearance over the last 6-7 weeks.

This is why she didn’t even make it to the first vote in 2020.

And there were so many better choices and more talented politicians

Rubashov said:

The Liberal Party in Australia (conservatives) spent a hot minute using the term "intergenerational theft" which the quickly abandoned because everyone laughed at them for pretending they didn't drive the phenomenon. What's developed here is three economies, cash and asset rich boomers, younger couples in debt to the eyeballs but at least with some property and single people mostly incapable of progressing out of rent traps.

Click to expand...

Say Liberals a few more times to confuse everyone.

fishonjazz said:

Any specifics on what the bold winning policy agenda should have looked like in your opinion?

Click to expand...

Yes Safetydan, what is does your bold winning policy agenda look like? If it makes it easier, I’ll go first.

Kamala’s bold winning policy agenda looks like exactly what she did. Kamala has run a perfect campaign and is going to be the next US President. Even with Kamala’s collapse in the polls, I give Trump no better than 1-in-5 odds of winning the election.

Kamala’s policy positions could not be anything other than what they were due to needing more than $1 billion dollars to run the campaign. That kind of money doesn’t come without strings. If Kamala had demanded M4A or any other progressive idiocy, the big corporate interests would have chosen a different Democrat to win the 2024 election.

As for the campaign, the things that don’t appear to make sense are only because almost nobody understands the election was won earlier this year. Most of the states are so lopsided in their voting habits that they are considered “safe”. There are only seven swing states. They are: Arizona, Nevada, Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and Georgia. Four of those are too small to actually swing the election. Only three states actually matter. They are Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan.

For Trump to win, he only needs to win one of the states that matter. Kamala needs to win all three. There is a fourth state that has a wildcard, which I will also detail, but that state’s wildcard has been locked up.

Pennsylvania

Pennsylvania is built perfectly for ballot harvesting to be most effective, and they passed Act 77 which put it in place. The Republicans did manage to get it thrown out, but the Democrats appealed all the way to the Pennsylvania State Supreme Court last year and won. Act 77 is the law of the land there and the ground game Pennsylvania Democrats have built around it is on point. Pennsylvania is locked up safe for the Democrats.

Wisconsin

Wisconsin also passed a version of their ballot harvesting law. Republican got it thrown out in 2022, but Democrats appealed all the way to the Wisconsin State Supreme Court, and in July of this year they managed to get it reinstated. Because Wisconsin is more rural, harvesting isn’t as effective as it is in Pennsylvania but it is still enough to likely win. Democrats are heavily advantaged but not guaranteed Wisconsin, which is why Kamala’s campaign blew off the Al Smith dinner in NYC to hold a rally in Wisconsin. She took flak but it was the correct move.

Michigan

Ballot harvesting is actually illegal in Michigan. The problem is that ballot harvesting happens a lot in Michigan and is never prosecuted. Democrat Governor Gretchen Witmer seems to have no problem looking the other way in the effort to see Democrats hold on to power. It is corrupt, but corruption is how Michigan does business. That gives the Democrats an advantage but they do have to win, so we see Kamala campaigning with Eminem and Lizzo. If Kamala isn’t in Wisconsin, she’s in Michigan.

The Big Picture

If Trump wins all of the safe Republican states, and all of the swing states except for Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan, he loses the election 268 to 270. Trump can’t win Pennsylvania which means the election is about Wisconsin and Michigan. Nothing else matters. Kamala doesn’t have to appeal to anyone other than Wisconsin and Michigan where she has a structural tailwind. Trump has run a strong campaign and he’s going to lose.

The Nebraska Wildcard

Nebraska is one of the few states that is not winner-take-all. Nebraska is a Republican dominated state but Omaha votes Democrat. Nebraska reliably give 3 electoral votes to Republicans and 1 vote to Democrats. If Nebraska were to change that policy to make Nebraska winner-take-all, then it would take 1 vote away from Kamala and give it to Trump. That change would be enough to make this election a 269 to 269 tie, which would make the US House of Representatives the tiebreaker where Speaker Mike Johnson would give the election win to Trump.
This change to Nebraska election law was stopped by three Republican State Senators. In our nation consisting of several hundred million people, the 2024 Presidential election was decided in favor of Kamala Harris by three people in Republican Nebraska.

Clearly, his mind is a garbage can…..


View: https://x.com/American_Bridge/status/1849568190176571705

Red said:

Clearly, his mind is a garbage can…..


View: https://x.com/American_Bridge/status/1849568190176571705

Click to expand...

trump sure does hate America.

Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk

View: https://x.com/VivekGRamaswamy/status/1849664421670314408

fishonjazz said:

trump sure does hate America.

Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

If he can easily demonize immigrants as garbage, why wouldn’t he do the same to women, blacks, Mormons, gays, and anyone he disagrees with? There was a time when Americans would’ve run a candidate like this out on a rail. But sadly, the right hates America too much. And Russia is happy to give them a helping hand in dividing and weakening the country.

View: https://x.com/PhilipReichert/status/1849825587310764078

The Thriller said:

If he can easily demonize immigrants as garbage, why wouldn’t he do the same to women, blacks, Mormons, gays, and anyone he disagrees with? There was a time when Americans would’ve run a candidate like this out on a rail. But sadly, the right hates America too much. And Russia is happy to give them a helping hand in dividing and weakening the country.

Click to expand...

He has definitely already done the same to women (grab'em by the *****!) and "Buh-LAck MeN" (people) in general. But it is just because he loves them so much, he says. Since he can always be believed then he must mean it.