| "It's the economy, stupid" - my analysis 09:26 - Nov 6 with 4215 views | baxterbasics |
Harris was bussed in untested without any primary selection process. No particular record to boast of as a largely invisible VP.
She offered little beyond relying on women and minorities to turn out in big numbers for her.
But the female vote barely shifted. Turns out abortion rights aren't the biggest concern for most of them, and in any case, Trump successfully distanced himself from the issue in voters minds. As for other minorities, most actually moved in Trumps favour, Latinos in particular, most of whom share the concern about loose borders. Even black men, whilst still largely voting Dem, shifted slightly towards Trump. The democrats reliance on identity politics and demographics has been exposed.
How did The Donald do it? All he had to do was ask the question "Are you better off than you were four years ago?" and appear to be shot at on TV. It's unlikely he has the answers to fix that problem of course, nor is it fair to blame all of that on the outgoing team. But most voters won't think that deeply about it. Many when questioned even admitted they know he isn't a good man on any measure, but they wanted him in place nonetheless.
When 'ordinary working people' feel worse off this will trump (lol) just about any other issue. He knew that, the Dems ignored it at their peril. A lesson not just for them, but for the government here too. Regardless of his unsuitability for the job, politically he played a blinder, and now looks set to win the popular vote (which no Republican has since 2004), and control of the Senate, possibly the House of Reps too. A huge mandate and the tools to do what he wants.
I hope both parties next time round will have a long and careful look at how they select their candidates - barring any tinkering with the constitution, they should be fresh faces. Americans need better options to choose from.
There are umpteen examples I could present to back this up but I will go with this one:
|  |
| |  |
| "It's the economy, stupid" - my analysis on 23:16 - Nov 6 with 412 views | reusersfreekicks |
| "It's the economy, stupid" - my analysis on 22:25 - Nov 6 by Leaky |
Probably like here With Starmer perhaps Trump was seen as least worse candidate |
Nonsense comparison |  | | |
| "It's the economy, stupid" - my analysis on 09:17 - Nov 7 with 323 views | ElephantintheRoom |
A small minority of disaffected people in the swing states voted for change.m just as they did last time It really is that simple.
By and large the unwashed were better of under Trump than they were in under Biden. It really is that simple.
The Democrats were perfectly happy to field a demented old codger and then a vacuous invisible VP - neither of which appealed to people who switch votes. It really is that simple. |  |
| |
| "It's the economy, stupid" - my analysis on 09:29 - Nov 7 with 312 views | soupytwist |
| "It's the economy, stupid" - my analysis on 12:32 - Nov 6 by baxterbasics |
I don't know, Tulsi Gabbard might be in a good position to be the Republican candidate next time round. If they don't just coronate JD Vance. Would be a nice twist if it's their side that produces the first female pres. Albeit one that until quite recently, was a Democrat. |
It's the UK's nearest equivalent party that's produced our three female prime ministers.
Only one of which was what you'd call actually successful in election(s). |  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
