In general D's always outspend and out raise R's.
It's sort of fascinating how so many Democrats think that money-in-politics rigs the system against them even though Democrats benefit more from it.
Kamala raised 2:1 from campaign contributions (limits: https://www.fec.gov/updates/fec-announces-2023-2024-campaign...), while the inverse was true for Trump.
Source: https://www.opensecrets.org/
In politics what’s pretty consistent is it’s almost always a debate about what’s to my advantage or not, masquerading as a principled argument.
Judging from what I have seen of the foreign reach of "US" politics I am certain there is a lot of dark money and influence going around beyond any official numbers. I have doubts if those sorts of operations have any influence on the swing voters that were required for a victory. It seems more likely their needs were simply ignored.
It already seems so easy to throw money at a candidate if you wanted to, without even needing to do it behind closed doors.
I personally suspect, but can't really know, that this is what explains the dysfunctional state of US politics. It is simply too big a target for corruption for it to ever be able to operate effectively. You can see that many US states seem to have much more effective governance than the Feds despite having nominally the same two major parties. I also think this explains why Australia is better run than the USA, and why New Zealand and Norway are better run than Australia.
Thats very questionable, she was forced to drop out before the first Democratic primary for the 2020' nomination.
People are often elevated without merit for a multitude of reasons including nepotism which don't benefit anyone but them. Trump will have to reward his supporters as well. It is the spoils system. It isn't unique to US politics but the cronyism is a bit more in your face than usual in regular democracies. If Biden's spoils went to a more diverse looking bunch then that probably says more about the diversity of his supporters than anything about his judgement. As far as I can see the criticism is unfounded. And when the democrats criticize the lack of diversity in the next administration it is a similar thing. The spoils don't go to randoms picked from a color swatch regardless of party.
Thankfully the Internet and some very patient coworkers helped open my eyes to facts I was sweeping under the rug.
This is a fact: Fox News is repulsive disinformation. It does not compare to other networks, do not try. The lies and hatred it sells was key to the margin of Trump's victory last night.
Fox News is bigoted.
I think they thought Trump was a wedge that would hand them a narrow victory without having to adapt very much.
I pronounce Biden as bidet+n.
Same with Trump's habit of stressing "Barack Hussein Obama" and more broadly the insulting nicknames he had (has?) for people.
But ye, I think I agree, that pronouncing non WASP names wrong on purpose is kinda cheap.
“Party of kindness” until you step out of line. Then… vitriol, threats, getting canceled.
Oh come off it, you just elected a guy who thought it was good taste to physically mock a disabled journalist for crying out loud. You guys have absolutely no moral high ground to stand on if you are trying to favorably compare "attitudes" with the left.
I think it's absolutely horrendous to:
- make fun of a disabled person
- make fun of someone for having an immigrant surname, though less so
- cancel someone because they don't toe the line exactly on your very detailed and opinionated ideology (reminds me of Christianity a couple of decades ago)
- call someone a Nazi when they aren't one
- call someone a communist when they aren't one
Next, it must be noted that zero percent of Trump's appeal lies in his social sense of kindness. People vote for him for other reasons; certainly not because he's a nice guy. For the left, a social sense of kindness is their entire shtick.
For a long time now, we on the center and on the right felt little kindness or good intentions coming from the left, only authoritarian diktats and an oppressive social pressure to conform-or-fuck-off.
I do hope the decline of both religion and wokeism means we can all be a bit more broadminded and centered from here on out.
everyone wants to pretend they have one, while simultaneously shirking accountability for his when they cast a vote, and then claim hurt feelings and vitriol to deflect away from their enabling of such a lack of ethos.
what you're experiencing is a rejection of your worldview.
when a person does egregiously disrespectful, demeaning things -- be it you or the demographic you perceive to be so under attack -- you are not entitled to kindness back. as much as i encourage people to try to love even those they hate, respect at the end of the day is a social contract, and even somewhat socratic in its nature.
southern white conservatives used to cancel persons all the time during a rather unfortunate and embarrassing (and hard to quantify in terms of pain), recent part of human (american) history -- this has only evolved to financial segregation and other facades that attempt to convey "we've changed!", and i will steer clear of the rabbit hole that does involve violence in today's climate for the sake of this thread.
the victim mindset around the left attacking the right given america's political history is a deflection. and it really confuses me.
i would have had no respect for these personalities pre-civil rights, and i still don't have much respect for this kind of political victim mindset in modern day america. i was raised with en ethos around humanity that fundamentally rejects it and wishes for and tries to build a different way of living.
if you want kindness and perhaps humanity, demonstrate it authentically and take accountability for history you've either. participated in, been influenced by, or enabled in some manner. support for someone of this dude's ethos is certainly not an act of humanity, and in no way a signal that your worldview should be validated or reinforced.
i have lost friends due to a lack of resources that were previously available and then repealed/removed by the current conservative political machine (which has been exploiting my home state for the better part of my adult life ie decades, and explicitly taking advantage of working class persons living paycheck to paycheck comprising about approx. >= 55% of the labor force) -- and no, i am not talking abortion policy, although that's quite relevant.
so yeah, i can imagine why some people are mad. i am just confused why you cannot empathize and instead have made it about yourself.
it's almost as if a whole swath of american "patriots" completely forgot the political ethos this country was founded upon (Locke et. al).
being an american means that you are, by definition, liberal.
Meanwhile latino voters went towards trump.
https://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2024/politics/2020-2016-...
That's just you. I picked the phrase up from the New York Times:
https://www.nytimes.com/search?dropmab=false&lang=en&query=%...
It's a really apt term to describe the kind of obsessive attacks on Trump's person, often as a substitute for any kind of positive policy message (as in, Harris will do X, Y, and Z), especially ones that would resonate outside the Democratic bubble. For a notable example, see this pithy message from the NY Times Editorial Board: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/11/02/opinion/vote-... (tl;dr: "You should vote for Harris because Trump is bad." What will Harris do? Who knows.).
No to me.
To me, "orange man bad" suggests obsession, myopia, and a failure to realize criticizing Trump does not make the case for any alternative.