His words: "in four years, you don't have to vote again. We'll have it fixed so good, you're not gonna have to vote." - explain! - https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-tells-christians-they...

Trump already explained [0]:

> It’s true, because we have to get the vote out. Christians are not known as a big voting group, they don’t vote. And I’m explaining that to them. You never vote. This time, vote. I’ll straighten out the country, you won’t have to vote any more, I won’t need your vote any more, you can go back to not voting.

It was stupid phrasing and might have been a Freudian slip, but his explanation also makes sense. "The country is on the brink of {insert terrible fears here}, but we'll fix it up this term and you won't have to worry about it for a while." The man isn't known for his well-thought-out speeches, his entire schtick is speaking off the cuff, and most voters don't hold that against him.

[0] https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/jul/30/dona...

So even when the Christians don't vote in 4 years, they still get the things they want?

What do the people who are voting get?

I'd guess they get a government that via the Supreme court, gerrymandering, voter suppression, cowed media, doesn't represent their democratic interests.

Which is a bad thing.

There's abortion votes that passed the other day at state levels that will not be put into practice because Republicans don't want to.

TLDR: In different context, but same feeling: "I need to vaccinate yourself when you are around me, but when you are no longer, I don't care". I dunno. That doesn't sound very presidential tbh...

It is a deliberate attempt to scaremonger people into voting for Kamala.

And hyperbole like this is why democrats lost in such a devastating fashion.

+ the fact that they had no brand power and marketing. Trump in a garbage truck is great marketing.

Ah, yes. Trump won because of his well-known ability for measured and rational speaking.

That's not what they said. "Measured and rational speaking" is usually terrible marketing. It barely works on college-educated adults and certainly doesn't work on the mass market.

The example they gave is Trump in a garbage truck, but that's just one way in which Trump made himself enormously appealing to the non-elite.

They can not even understand that 80% of the country does not talk like a rich, educated liberal. It is so frustrating.

Worse, they don't see that a near-majority of the country is actively put off by someone speaking like a rich, educated liberal.

The #1 exercise Democratic politicians should do over the next 4 years is to spend hours and hours and hours actually listening to working-class people in flyover country and trying to really understand them. They just don't get it yet.

Remember when all the brown people, gays, trans, blacks, and women were imprisoned in 2016? /s

I remember when he constantly inflamed a nation in turmoil and divided.

The difference was one of symmetry, not magnitude.

Biden (and Harris) have been no more "inclusive" of other political positions than Trump was.

Sure they were. Biden actively sought to pass bipartisan immigration legislation. Trump blocked it because it would hurt his chances at reelection. Neither Trump nor Vance denied this during the debates(they had multiple opportunities to do so).

We are not divided though. He overwhelmingly won the popular vote. Sure there is an opposition, but the truth is that the majority of American voters agree with Trump (currently winning by margins of 5 million according to NYT).

Yes, there's still work to be done, but the real inflamers of the nation are the mainstream media. Luckily they're slowly going away, and uniting figures like Musk, Rogan, etc are taking their place.

Also, he overwhelmingly wins with hispanic men (55-45). He is walking away with hispanics overall in many swing states. Black men are now 25% in his favor. Basically every single minority margin has shifted towards president trump (Including women). At this rate he will succesfully unite the country in a few more years as the remaining stragglers come over to see common sense.

We have never been more divided. Neither side can even agree on definitions or facts.

I'm glad the great uniters of Musk and Rogan can take the reins in delivering high-quality information to our nation. Maybe in a few years, we will all agree on which conspiracy theories we should all believe.

> Maybe in a few years, we will all agree on which conspiracy theories we should all believe.

One man's conspiracist is another man's freedom fighters. You can't honestly tell me that mainstream outlets were free of conspiracies the last few years? Remember Russia?

See, we can't even agree on a starting point. Instead of admitting Rogan and Elon pedaling in absolutely insane conspiracy theories, you pull out your whataboutisms and think we are back on a level playing field. We aren't.

Don't be coy, please enlighten us as to what this conspiracy is involving Russia that you think the MSM peddled, and what evidence you have that disproves the narrative.

The Steele dossier, which purported to contain evidence of the Trump camapign's links with Russia, turned out to actually be a Russian plant. That's what I'm talking about. People still peddle its contents as if they're anything other than fake news. That's a major problem. Same with Trump's 'very fine people' comment. You can accuse Rogan of spreading misinformation until the cows come home, but the mainstream media has also peddled its own share.

I haven't heard any mention of the dossier in years, other than as an artifact of the past. A quick search, and I can't find sources trying to claim its truth (or evidence of smoke, for which there might be a fire) in years.

I certainly didn't mention Rogan—I'm aware of his existence, but I've actually never heard him speak nor seen any transcripts of anything he's said. But trying to minimize the flood of absolute obvious shit that comes from right-wing outlets by choosing to point to Rogan specifically is a bit telling.

Anyone and everyone should be called out for lies they manufacture or spread. This includes lies on the left, lest you think I'm granting one side a pass.

Now, let's tally how many just one of the prominent right-wing figures has pushed since 2016. It should be fun.

I don't think HNs database has the free space to contain such a list.

How many have you been doxxed for or impeached for or censored from spreading. as far as I'm aware, all your conspiracy theories have been promulgated by everyone and allowed to spread everywhere. I think that's the major difference. You should create your list. Twitter/X is a great way to spread such information to the public at large! No one will censor you. You are free :)

Thanks I feel much better knowing that I am free to squash the thousands of untruths spread and believed by the masses.

I guess there isn't a problem.

Hey dude, you may be overdosing on those pills you’re taking when you start saying things like Musk is a uniter. The red ones are fine, just limit it to one or two, okay?

Of course he is. He and his companies are well loved by the American populace writ large.

The only thing he wants to unite are the dollars in your pocket with his wallet.

That makes him a uniter?

I remember when he pushed the lie that Pelosi's husband was attacked by his gay lover. Or when he pushed the lie that Democrats are stuffing voting boxes with illegal immigrants'votes, or that brown people are replacing white people.

Such a uniter, that South African emerald mine owner.

I remember when trump tried very hard to weaponize the justice department against his "enemies" (https://www.justsecurity.org/98703/chronology-trump-justice-...) but people stood up to him and refused, or just delayed acting as long as possible. Trump was very much "handled" by people all levels of government who tried their best to clean up after him, distract him away from his crazy plans, or obstruct him. Even in the the military. In the beginning it was the so-called "axis of adults" that kept things sane.

That's all changed since he's spent a considerable amount of time removing anyone who disagrees with him, threatening those who would dare to, installing people who will do what he wants including the judges who have granted him total immunity which he didn't have before. I think we can expect things this time to be very different.

Remember the Muslim ban?

Remember the children in cages?

Remember that a crook will cultivate your trust and lower your defenses before pulling a fast one on you?

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/jul/30/dona... from the man's lips to your ears.

Did you even listen to the video clip in the article?

> It’s true, because we have to get the vote out. Christians are not known as a big voting group, they don’t vote. And I’m explaining that to them. You never vote. This time, vote. I’ll straighten out the country, you won’t have to vote any more, I won’t need your vote any more, you can go back to not voting.

I hate Trump as much as anyone, but deliberately misconstruing every word he says is part of what cost Democrats the election. People saw through it.

I think that given the context that he illegally tried to retain power after losing in 2020 that many people infer something into his words about reducing the need to vote

No, I think lolinder is correct.

People don't like being told "here is what was said, here is what was MEANT because you're not educated enough and can't possibly understand" did Harris zero favors.

I'm not sure in what respects you are disagreeing with me on, since I didn't mention anyone's level of education or intelligence -- I didn't mention anything about the people who interpret the statement in a benign way at all.

I added my thoughts on why people would take that statement and infer some other meaning than his literal words, since those words are said as part of a broader context. This says nothing about the people who didn't do so.

So, you starting a comment with "No" but then not addressing any point I made is confusing to me.

Cheers.

No, what cost them the election was the fact that Kamala ran a campaign of "I'm actually just a republican so you can vote for me". She dumped any sort of policy or position that'd scare away the mythical disaffected trump voter. She paraded around Liz Cheney FFS. WTF likes the Cheneys?

> She dumped any sort of policy or position that'd scare away the mythical disaffected trump voter

We just saw a national rejection of progressive politicians. To the extent she screwed up, it was in having a numpty VP instead of Shapiro and declining to be more specific on policies that would offend the left wing of the base. We’ll probably see a midterm backlash, however, so the message isn’t “everyone tack right.”

What policy?

The only leftwing policy she adopted was abortion. Otherwise, she ran on being tough on the border, upholding the 2nd amendment, and being an awesome cop. Her platform silently dumped policies like the death penalty.

One was conciliation on Gaza, an issue inflamed by the protests and that was material in Pennsylvania, the tipping-point state she lost in. She also wasn’t “tough on the border” in any specific way—Trump channeled that anger effectively.

Another was student loan modifications. This transferred wealth from non-college taxpayers to college graduates.

Good luck with your Health Insurance: https://edition.cnn.com/2024/10/31/politics/aca-trump-repeal...

Shifting the goal posts much? Grandparent says democracy will end, parent says that's hyperbole, you bring out healthcare?

I am on disability and use Medicare. My health access has diminished to almost zero over the last four years.

What has any Democrat done fro me, the poor and suffering?

Give me a break. Obama Pulled a Lucy with Medicare for all and I hate him for it.

Obama wasn't a candidate since 2012 or president since 2016.

Presumably the person you’re replying to knows these things? Try and respond to the best interpretation of a comment instead of assuming they’re an idiot.

What's the "best interpretation" of a non-sequitur look like, to you?

A specific example for this particular comment would be ideal, as even their reply doesn't illuminate the value of mentioning Obama despite referring to it and attempting to justify it.

Obama is a Democrat. Neither Biden, nor Harris, nor AOC pushed for Medicare for all when it was probably the easiest and most helpful time to do so; during a pandemic.

I brought up Obama's actions because it was just the ongoing legacy of neoliberalism that started under Clinton. They thought they would win elections by "going to the middle", and this is what happened.

Obama was also campaigning for Harris.

The Democrats are now the part of war and corporations and I was just done with it all.

> The Democrats are now the part of war and corporations and I was just done with it all.

So you voted Green, or Libertarian?

Because if it was Trump, I have bad news on all that stuff, including healthcare…

Yes, I voted for the green party.

> What has any Democrat done fro me, the poor and suffering?

That is a very good point

Is it conceivable that Republicans will be any better?

The hold big business has on the mechanisms of state in your country, that is the problem IMO