Huh? All I saw was a candidate widening her base constantly through campaigning and beating the streets. Wasn't everyone commenting on the fact that Vance basically only existed to deepen support with existence audiences? Didn't I see Harris making fucking phone calls to voters on election night bc there wasn't much else for her to do?
Huh? All I saw was a candidate widening her base constantly through campaigning and beating the streets. Wasn't everyone commenting on the fact that Vance basically only existed to deepen support with existence audiences? Didn't I see Harris making fucking phone calls to voters on election night bc there wasn't much else for her to do?
It seems pretty definitive that the states which were heavily campaigned in and saw the most investment swung significantly less than the rest of the country. Her campaign was effective, just not enough to overcome the environment and Trump curve voters judge him on.
I'm saying she was trying to, not successful at it.So she tried finding diamonds in an oil field??
If you want diamonds you go to a diamond mine.. or to get voters, you go to where the voters are at!
Widening the base?? Are you suffering from low blood sugar?? She lost 15 million of her own base! She didn't widen her base.. she shrunk it!
Agreed.It seems pretty definitive that the states which were heavily campaigned in and saw the most investment swung significantly less than the rest of the country. Her campaign was effective, just not enough to overcome the environment and Trump curve voters judge him on.
Guys, it is very obvious the message was wrong. Majority of voters chose to vote against it. We can learn from this or keep repeating the same mistakes again and again.
Agreed! Bernie is not exactly making me happy either.With all due respect Ralph Nader can get fucked sideways. Absolutely no time for the person who gave us W.
With all due respect Ralph Nader can get fucked sideways. Absolutely no time for the person who gave us W.
Thing is these actors are going to be present every election it is time to learn from this. My takeaway is there should be troll candidates for the right and we cannot count on their voters making the right choice so those folks need to be written off.Well it's not the person.. it's the message!
Unlike Jill fucking Stein which very well might have cost dems PA!
Trump got almost identical numbers from 2020. Minus those that died off, those aren't voters specifically against Democrats, but for Republicans. You can argue that people didn't turn out for Kamala all day long, but it's really hard to convince me that there's more people voting against her message compared to Biden's when the people who voted opposite are identical.Guys, it is very obvious the message was wrong. Majority of voters chose to vote against it. We can learn from this or keep repeating the same mistakes again and again.
Then the message sucks, majority of Americans voted against it.Trump got almost identical numbers from 2020. Minus those that died off, those aren't voters specifically against Democrats, but for Republicans. You can argue that people didn't turn out for Kamala all day long, but it's really hard to convince me that there's more people voting against her message compared to Biden's when the people who voted opposite are identical.
It seems pretty definitive that the states which were heavily campaigned in and saw the most investment swung significantly less than the rest of the country. Her campaign was effective, just not enough to overcome the environment and Trump curve voters judge him on.
Who's talking about oppression? I never said oppression. Who's talking about oppression? Look I'm just saying dems are losing men because they don't really have any messaging to men. There's no discussion of issues that affect disproportionately men. You may want to couch it as oh these are general social issues but couching it that way all the time won't get men to vote for you. Also I'm not really sure what sex you are but I get the sense you don't think there are social problems that specifically affect men and which men complain about specifically. Go talk to the average guy about what it's like to go through a divorce as a man. You'll hear some bitterness a little archaic divorce courts using policies from the 1950s still to make decisions.Just because men suffer from something doesn't mean it's because it's of male oppression. That's completely logical fallacy.
But.
So please explain the systemic oppression against men specifically and then how we should message every policy which we have socioeconomically which basically benefits men just as much as anybody else. The things that won't help men per se, are usually protecting people from men, and unfortunately we shouldn't get rid of those to please men. Or maybe we should just get rid of those.
Yeah why I'm not even mad. This is democracy. People wanted trump. Let them have him. That's how democracy works and sometimes you get the wrong end of the stick.Then the message sucks, majority of Americans voted against it.
Something has to change. Per my posts here I am a huge fan of majority rule and eliminating the EC. This is what the majority wanted.
I'm still waiting to hear how you think we should message to men from a Democratic policy point of view. Give me some specific examples. Let's here some examples of what messaging to men sounds like and looks like.Who's talking about oppression? I never said oppression. Who's talking about oppression? Look I'm just saying dems are losing men because they don't really have any messaging to men. There's no discussion of issues that affect disproportionately men. You may want to couch it as oh these are general social issues but couching it that way all the time won't get men to vote for you. Also I'm not really sure what sex you are but I get the sense you don't think there are social problems that specifically affect men and which men complain about specifically. Go talk to the average guy about what it's like to go through a divorce as a man. You'll hear some bitterness a little archaic divorce courts using policies from the 1950s still to make decisions.
Yeah why I'm not even mad. This is democracy. People wanted trump. Let them have him. That's how democracy works and sometimes you get the wrong end of the stick.
That message needs to be found. Unless we're writing off a close-to-majority part of the voting population to start with, which is never a good way to go about winning elections.I'm still waiting to hear how you think we should message to men from a Democratic policy point of view. Give me some specific examples. Let's here some examples of what messaging to men sounds like and looks like.
I'm a man, in my forties. Straight, engaged once but never married.
Also divorce is a state issue, not federal. Hit me with the presidential/federal campaign messaging to the men who have been left behind by the Dems.
The Dems can offer progressive economics, stronger unions, increased paternity leave and improved mental health access. I'm not sure what else can be offered, really.Who's talking about oppression? I never said oppression. Who's talking about oppression? Look I'm just saying dems are losing men because they don't really have any messaging to men. There's no discussion of issues that affect disproportionately men. You may want to couch it as oh these are general social issues but couching it that way all the time won't get men to vote for you. Also I'm not really sure what sex you are but I get the sense you don't think there are social problems that specifically affect men and which men complain about specifically. Go talk to the average guy about what it's like to go through a divorce as a man. You'll hear some bitterness a little archaic divorce courts using policies from the 1950s still to make decisions.
But can they offer Trump's $7.50 Big Mac combo from 2019? Because that's what the voters really want...The Dems can offer progressive economics, stronger unions, increased paternity leave and improved mental health access. I'm not sure what else can be offered, really.
I'm still waiting to hear how you think we should message to men from a Democratic policy point of view. Give me some specific examples. Let's here some examples of what messaging to men sounds like and looks like.
I'm a man, in my forties. Straight, engaged once but never married.
Also divorce is a state issue, not federal. Hit me with the presidential/federal campaign messaging to the men who have been left behind by the Dems.
No offense, but what? Your list of 'demonized men hobbies' is baffling. 'Playing video games?' 'Shooting guns' and 'Hunting' when their VP candidate was a hunter with an A-rating from the NRA?I'm not a campaign strategist but this isnt what men need to hear. You also have to understand that messaging doesn't just come directly from the Harris campaign but also media. The crazy misandrist stuff that the left wing media (movies, cnn/msnbc, twitter TikTok and IG) gets away with is shocking if you're paying attention and yet they're crying tears when they lose elections because men don't vote for their party .Pretty much anything that average guys like to do is sort of demonized/villified these days. Eating meat, playing video games, shooting guns and hunting, working out, liking women and watching porn (women who watch porn are labeled as empowered, liberal and free whilst men who watch porn are incels to be shamed), watching sports, etc etc
I dunno what to do about messaging but it's not what the Harris campaign was doing for sure. There's a NYTimes opinion video on YouTube where a guy talks about voting being an education divide and progressively as a nation we've devalued and disrespected work that doesn't require a college degree, largely trade work that mostly men are doing. Maybe the messaging should start with trying to undo that cultural sentiment so a guy doesn't feel worthless for being a carpenter or an electrician instead of a college educated banker or something. The opinion piece talked about a lot of stuff but that piece made a lot of sense to me. Like I said I'm not a campaign strategist. I just clearly see how poorly the Democratic party actually tries to appeal to the average man. The average man doesn't have college degree believe it or not in this county. It's almost like the party has abandoned them.
About the divorce thing, when have dems ever been afraid to talk about something just because it's mostly been handled on the state level (like policing or abortion or marijuana)? And aren't there state level democratic politicians? There are. They aren't talking about divorce reform either. Again I'm not even pushing hard for divorce/marriage reform (though we're long overdue. 80% of marriages are failing these days). But certainly a lot of men care about it and its not a surprise to me the first state I can think of to try to pass even meager divorce reform was a red state.
I'm as liberal as they come as stated before. However I'm not blind as to why men are increasingly going right these days and I don't think it's something you can just ignore if you want to win elections.