The people lamenting the passing of hard working, low paid textile jobs in Kansas City are likely people who wouldn't have wanted one, wouldn't have lasted a week doing one and would have had a crap standard of living even if they had done so.
Similarly you get people in this country yearning after some mythic version of 1960s textile mills and coal mines.
The reality is that the low skilled have always had difficult lives and always will.
The only variants being how much wealth they were born into and how willing their country has been to subsidise them through welfare and public services.
The way to get on has always been to improve your skillset so that you can get a higher skilled job with higher pay.
There’s plenty of evidence that people who lost such jobs wanted them back and morned them for a long, long time.
Nearly none of the miners took the compensation and left the one-industry villages. The sad thing was that it had been government policy since the war to discourage other industry in the mining areas. The civil servants were worried they’d would lose the workforce… In the end they needn’t have worried.
Some people are fearful of change and yearn for 'the gold old days' after it has happened.
But lamenting for some mythic past (the reality of which was pretty horrible) which you never experienced and isn't coming back a couple of generations on does nobody any good.
And you must have a very degraded life if you're yearning for the life and 'rights' of Bob Ewell.
The 'rights' in his case being able to beat your daughter and then blame it on a black man.
It's the right question, but I've a horrible feeling that it doesn't have a stable answer.
It's the human condition to often want to contradictory things. For my job to be stable, protected and well-paid, whist the stuff I buy is cheap. Homes for me and mine, but protecting the green belt. Freedom for me to go around as I please, but control of others. To have my cake, eat it and then get my cake back (by taking theirs).
Write it down like that, and the flaw becomes obvious. As it does when the Israeli government acts to eradicate people from land that is reasonably theirs. Which is why it rarely is written down like that.
"What would the world be like if everyone acted that way?" strikes me as an excellent question, especially when coupled with "what makes you think you will always be on the winning side?" Populism, it seems to me, rests on ignoring that question. Perhaps it's a set of painful consequences that society has to go through every few generations. Though I'd rather not be around when it does.
Thanks. Fascinating. On the human condition wanting contradictory things, this is not soluble in the customary rational way. We want contradictory things for a reason. And that fundamental reason is that human existence requires both competition and cooperation. This cannot be broken down into a simpler formula.
In politics, very broadly, leftism emphasises cooperation as a fundamental concept; and rightist/populist emphasises competition as a fundamental concept. These are both nice and simple, and of course wrong, being in conflict with human nature and human needs in essential ways.
The entire of centrist politics - and this is why it's so boring and you have to read the Economist and Adam Smith (and his successors) and not the Mail/Socialist Worker to comprehend it at all - is predicated on the problem of weaving an unsteady way through that impossible contradiction.
An interesting analysis, but I'm not sure I'd describe the Economist as centrist. It completely failed to identify the weaknesses in the financial system pre-2008, and has pursued a highly ideological line for decades ; perhaps a little less so recently.
It's important to remember that the conception of centrism has diverged considerably to the left of us in several of our near neighbours since Thatcherism, and that several of these neighbours have fared better than us in multiple economic and industrial areas since then.
And how exactly will Trumps policies help the alleged downtrodden of forgotten America ?
I could understand Trumps support if he had any policies that would help the Average Joe . As it is Trump appeals to the “ its always someone else’s fault “ brigade .
Aswell as the racists and migrant haters .
Thankfully our politics here hasn’t descended to the level of hate and polarization seen in the USA and there are still lines that can’t be crossed if you want to get elected .
They won’t help. But my gut tells me the momentum is now with him and he’s going to win this one. We should be buckling up for an interesting 4 years.
European currencies the day of his victory will be interesting as they’ll tell us how seriously or otherwise the markets take his tariff threats. If he goes ahead with what he’s promised we’re talking global trade depression, given China’s economy is simultaneously buckling under.
I don't think there's much chance he will get his tariff or anything like it through the Senate.
Tariffs are an executive prerogative. They don’t need congressional approval, unlike taxes. Trump can introduce them at the strike of a pen.
And how exactly will Trumps policies help the alleged downtrodden of forgotten America ?
I could understand Trumps support if he had any policies that would help the Average Joe . As it is Trump appeals to the “ its always someone else’s fault “ brigade .
Aswell as the racists and migrant haters .
Thankfully our politics here hasn’t descended to the level of hate and polarization seen in the USA and there are still lines that can’t be crossed if you want to get elected .
They won’t help. But my gut tells me the momentum is now with him and he’s going to win this one. We should be buckling up for an interesting 4 years.
European currencies the day of his victory will be interesting as they’ll tell us how seriously or otherwise the markets take his tariff threats. If he goes ahead with what he’s promised we’re talking global trade depression, given China’s economy is simultaneously buckling under.
It’s worth noting that Biden has been pursuing a protectionist, tariff policy in various areas. To explicitly bring manufacturing back to the US.
And how exactly will Trumps policies help the alleged downtrodden of forgotten America ?
I could understand Trumps support if he had any policies that would help the Average Joe . As it is Trump appeals to the “ its always someone else’s fault “ brigade .
Aswell as the racists and migrant haters .
Thankfully our politics here hasn’t descended to the level of hate and polarization seen in the USA and there are still lines that can’t be crossed if you want to get elected .
They won’t help. But my gut tells me the momentum is now with him and he’s going to win this one. We should be buckling up for an interesting 4 years.
European currencies the day of his victory will be interesting as they’ll tell us how seriously or otherwise the markets take his tariff threats. If he goes ahead with what he’s promised we’re talking global trade depression, given China’s economy is simultaneously buckling under.
I don't think there's much chance he will get his tariff or anything like it through the Senate.
He doesn't need to, there are various provisions related to national security etc that he can abuse. He can also unilaterally give wavers to companies that pay him, it's an incredible corruption opportunity.
I have read The Butcher of the Forest, by Premee Mohamed.
At 135 pages, for many writers this would barely serve as a prologue. And there was a time when a work that length could easily be assumed to be hackwork, with no characters, just a plot that races to a conclusion. Well, this has a plot, but it also has a wondmerfully drawn central character, Veris.
Veris lives in a village, near the forest. Everyone in the village knows you don't go into the forest. If you do, you don't come back. Ever. And whatever lives in the forest and takes those who venture into its domain, likes children most. The Tyrant (it is capitalised throughout) who has invaded the valley, along with many other places, killing thousands if not millions, has built a castle near the village, because he thinks it's a safe place to raise his children away from the hazards of magic. He doesn't know about the forest. Nor do his children. Oh dear.
When his children disappear one night, the Tyrant sends for the only person known to have entered the forest and returned. That would be Veris. Long ago she went in to rescue a child, and returned successfully, sort of. The Tyrant explains to her quite clearly that she must rescue the children, both of them, and if she does not, the the village will be destroyed and everyone she knows will be killed. Veris knows in addition that she has one day. If you don't get out of the forest by nightfall, you won't get out. Veris makes her preparations, and sets off on this foolhardy errand.
This is, as you might have guessed, a fairy tale. And 135 pages is quite enough for a fairy tale. In fact, Mohamed crams enough detail in there to make many a 400-page monster look thin. It's an absolute jewel of a book, beautifully composed in its description of place and person. Veris is fully fleshed out, as we learn about her little by little. The children are real, and believable as children, not miniature adults. It has beauty and magic, and it also has horror and despair, just as every fairy tale should have. And each time there is a revelation, about the forest, or Veris, it is both entirely surprising and entirely logical.
Most importantly, it comes as close as anything can to being a _new_ fairy tale.There are recognisable elements to the sotry, but they are presented and combined in new and often exciting ways. It is quite a thrill after a lifetime of reading fairy tales, folk tales, mythology and fantasy, to read something and think, 'I've never read it that way before.'
The only strike against this book is that in hardback it's £12.99, which might seem like a lot for 135 pages. It is worth it, though. And the paperback will be out in February next year. Look out for it.
A lot of the answers listed already are partially true.
Two factors under represented on the list so far are religion and rural. The US is far more religious, and in a more evangelical way, than we comprehend or are familiar with here. And being rural here is quite different to only having a population of a couple of thousand within 50 miles of you, with that kind of lifestyle it is unsurprising urban modernity grates.
I would say Trump or Republican candidates for the presidency receive up to half their votes from religious Christians in the rust belt, deep south and other places. I am happy to be corrected if I am wrong.
There was an article posted last time round that found that Trump does well in Evangelical communities 'where the local churches have closed'
Trump is some kind of ersatz religious figure for them
Evangelicals that still have access to the 'real thing ' are less inclined to vote for the orange Jesus
And how exactly will Trumps policies help the alleged downtrodden of forgotten America ?
I could understand Trumps support if he had any policies that would help the Average Joe . As it is Trump appeals to the “ its always someone else’s fault “ brigade .
Aswell as the racists and migrant haters .
Thankfully our politics here hasn’t descended to the level of hate and polarization seen in the USA and there are still lines that can’t be crossed if you want to get elected .
They won’t help. But my gut tells me the momentum is now with him and he’s going to win this one. We should be buckling up for an interesting 4 years.
European currencies the day of his victory will be interesting as they’ll tell us how seriously or otherwise the markets take his tariff threats. If he goes ahead with what he’s promised we’re talking global trade depression, given China’s economy is simultaneously buckling under.
It’s worth noting that Biden has been pursuing a protectionist, tariff policy in various areas. To explicitly bring manufacturing back to the US.
But notably not focused on Europe except in very narrow areas. It’s 90% China policy.
Neither Trump nor Harris are great candidates and both their voters are voting against the other.
If Trump and Vance lose I doubt he runs again, he will be too old and GOP voters will either look for a more centrist candidate like Haley or evangelicals will conclude he wasn't hardline on abortion enough and look for a more socially conservative candidate like DeSantis
Trump won't run again. Imagine the farting, shitting, drooling sack of gibberish-spouting a broken body he will represent at the present rate of decline. He might get lucky: Putin's pursuit of the Elixir of Life might deliver. And Putin might repay him for Trump's gift of Covid testing machines with a small phial of the stuff. But Trump's hope of running again pretty much depend upon that scenario.
Whether Vance can pick up the smouldering embers of MAGA is questionable. With Trump beaten, we may see a rebuilding of the Replican Party. Whether the rebuild can prise the loonier end of MAGA back will partly depend upon how much Marxism Harris has delivered. It probabl won't happen by 2028 anyway. A new formal MAGA Party might get funded by MUSK, splitting the American right for couple of elections beyond that. By which time for example the composition of the Supreme Court will look very different. Rowe v Wade will be reinstated - with safeguards - in a way that takes it out of politics. Possibly even the right to bear armswill have reduced the types of arms tghat can be borne - and where.
We might return to an era when elections in the US are decided by the economy, stupid.
Apparently he's been incontinent for around 25 years, and he still got over the line in 2016 and came close in the swing states in 2020. Voters are either unaware, don't believe his frailties or don't care as the US careers headlong into a dystopian nightmare.
The problem we have is an unbridled media where absolute and unquestionable lies are left absolutely unquestioned. Newsmax just repeating Trump fiction. Jesse Watters seeing a statesmanlike performance when the rest of us see a Trump train wreck, and vice versa with Harris. Even the serious, relatively non-partisans are at it, the Washington Post fact checking Harris whilst not bothering with Trump, presumably on the expectations that every word uttered is 24 carat bullshine.
Fifty percent of US voters are gullible and whereas Biden was vilified on TV for combining genuine short term illness (probably COVID) alongside some of the age related symptoms associated with a high functioning octogenarian, Trump on the other hand is perfectly entitled to talk in utter gibberish and crap his pants without comment.
And the Beeb is just as bad. Yesterday’s piece in PM from North Carolina just puffed up the horse race, found two women to talk to with diametrically opposing views and came up with the conclusion that it’s too close to call. Superficial and stating the obvious.
Nobody makes any effort to dig into the underlying nonsense, the partisan push polling, the dodgy crosstabs, the manipulation of data, not even the poll aggregators. Only the most egregious examples are excluded.
Every single US election now has to be portrayed as too close to call, whatever the fundamentals. For this to be too close to call, they have to scrutinise Harris’s every word whilst sane washing all of Trumps.
You won’t hear anything about low energy sleepy Don Old. But that’s where he is.
Trouble is, I never hear any serious analysis of why Trump might be doing so well in the USA other than Americans are a bit thick and stupid - which obviously isn't true - and is very patronising and an insult to our intelligence.
We know why he shouldn't be doing so well, but he is.
So, why?
a. Major media sources pump out pro-Trump propaganda. It’s not that Americans are thick: Americans simply don’t get told the facts.
b. Racism is popular.
Hmmm. So your considered view is “ignorant and racist”. Got it. That worked so well in 2016 (in both the US and UK).
Americans are just as intelligent as everyone else in the world, but you ignore that there is a pro-Trump media bubble. If that’s all you hear, you form a very different view of the world.
Trump is racist. He is running a racist campaign. Pretending that’s not happening is just bizarre.
Yep. And win or lose he'll get a big vote on Nov 5th for various reasons. To list a few:
He's the GOP candidate. Loads of people always vote GOP. He's a skilful exploiter of ignorance and resentment. He's charismatic and has built a massive energetic loyal cult (MAGA). Most Americans don't feel better off despite what the stats say.
It might be enough. I don't think so but my instincts could be wrong. Soon find out anyway.
A lot of the answers listed already are partially true.
Two factors under represented on the list so far are religion and rural. The US is far more religious, and in a more evangelical way, than we comprehend or are familiar with here. And being rural here is quite different to only having a population of a couple of thousand within 50 miles of you, with that kind of lifestyle it is unsurprising urban modernity grates.
Most US states are larger geographically than England.
If Alabama or Arkansas had 10x or 15x their current population they would likely be very different economically, culturally and politically.
A lot of the answers listed already are partially true.
Two factors under represented on the list so far are religion and rural. The US is far more religious, and in a more evangelical way, than we comprehend or are familiar with here. And being rural here is quite different to only having a population of a couple of thousand within 50 miles of you, with that kind of lifestyle it is unsurprising urban modernity grates.
I would say Trump or Republican candidates for the presidency receive up to half their votes from religious Christians in the rust belt, deep south and other places. I am happy to be corrected if I am wrong.
There was an article posted last time round that found that Trump does well in Evangelical communities 'where the local churches have closed'
Trump is some kind of ersatz religious figure for them
Evangelicals that still have access to the 'real thing ' are less inclined to vote for the orange Jesus
Besides, the actual Mr Jesus said awkward things about loving your neighbour and that neighbour not just being the one like you.
For all it gets wrong, for all it fails to live up to its values, your actual church is good like that.
(Wanders off, humming That's why we build the wall; We build the wall to keep us free.)
Neither Trump nor Harris are great candidates and both their voters are voting against the other.
If Trump and Vance lose I doubt he runs again, he will be too old and GOP voters will either look for a more centrist candidate like Haley or evangelicals will conclude he wasn't hardline on abortion enough and look for a more socially conservative candidate like DeSantis
Trump won't run again. Imagine the farting, shitting, drooling sack of gibberish-spouting a broken body he will represent at the present rate of decline. He might get lucky: Putin's pursuit of the Elixir of Life might deliver. And Putin might repay him for Trump's gift of Covid testing machines with a small phial of the stuff. But Trump's hope of running again pretty much depend upon that scenario.
Whether Vance can pick up the smouldering embers of MAGA is questionable. With Trump beaten, we may see a rebuilding of the Replican Party. Whether the rebuild can prise the loonier end of MAGA back will partly depend upon how much Marxism Harris has delivered. It probabl won't happen by 2028 anyway. A new formal MAGA Party might get funded by MUSK, splitting the American right for couple of elections beyond that. By which time for example the composition of the Supreme Court will look very different. Rowe v Wade will be reinstated - with safeguards - in a way that takes it out of politics. Possibly even the right to bear armswill have reduced the types of arms tghat can be borne - and where.
We might return to an era when elections in the US are decided by the economy, stupid.
Apparently he's been incontinent for around 25 years, and he still got over the line in 2016 and came close in the swing states in 2020. Voters are either unaware, don't believe his frailties or don't care as the US careers headlong into a dystopian nightmare.
The problem we have is an unbridled media where absolute and unquestionable lies are left absolutely unquestioned. Newsmax just repeating Trump fiction. Jesse Watters seeing a statesmanlike performance when the rest of us see a Trump train wreck, and vice versa with Harris. Even the serious, relatively non-partisans are at it, the Washington Post fact checking Harris whilst not bothering with Trump, presumably on the expectations that every word uttered is 24 carat bullshine.
Fifty percent of US voters are gullible and whereas Biden was vilified on TV for combining genuine short term illness (probably COVID) alongside some of the age related symptoms associated with a high functioning octogenarian, Trump on the other hand is perfectly entitled to talk in utter gibberish and crap his pants without comment.
Yep. He gets a pass for so much stuff that would disqualify anybody else. It's quite remarkable.
It is true that the vast majority of us really cannot understand why about 45% of Americans favour Trump or why the Palestinians have put up with the catastrophically poor leadership of Hamas.
My tentative answer in both cases is a feeling of powerlessness. Americans in the flyover states see a country where the media, the money, the humour and pretty much everything else is dominated by the east and west coasts. They are ignored and so are their interests. Trump claims to be running against this elite so they follow him. They want to go back to a largely mythical time when all of America counted.
For the Palestinians the way they have been treated is far crueller than anything that has happened to the flyover states of the US. Hamas try to strike back against their oppressors. They are not particularly good at it and the price paid for their actions by other Palestinians is horrendous but at least they try to do something.
Neither of these answers is particularly satisfactory. Any casual examination of what policies Trump has, such as high tariffs, should make it obvious that this would make things more expensive for the residents of the flyover states and do nothing for their welfare. Anyone looking at the horror that is Gaza would see the consequences of Hamas's plans. But if you are desperate, truly desperate, then something just might seem better than nothing. It is a modest strike against the powers that be but just maybe it stops you being taken for granted.
How should the likes of Harris respond? She needs to show that she cares. Biden has had a pretty good record in this respect and she is trying to build on it. Israel needs to think what they are offering Palestinians going forward and to be constructive. Both will find this a challenge.
This is exactly what I'm trying to say in the header (as usual, you have put it articulately, thanks). I think Harris' challenge is that, unless you're listening carefully, her pitch just sounds like Obama-lite. But Obama, for all his rhetoric, failed in his renewal project. And most people aren't listening carefully.
I think Harris, or whoever follows her, needs more of Trump's boldness without Trump's pathological lying.
Trouble is, I never hear any serious analysis of why Trump might be doing so well in the USA other than Americans are a bit thick and stupid - which obviously isn't true - and is very patronising and an insult to our intelligence.
We know why he shouldn't be doing so well, but he is.
So, why?
a. Major media sources pump out pro-Trump propaganda. It’s not that Americans are thick: Americans simply don’t get told the facts.
b. Racism is popular.
Hmmm. So your considered view is “ignorant and racist”. Got it. That worked so well in 2016 (in both the US and UK).
Americans are just as intelligent as everyone else in the world, but you ignore that there is a pro-Trump media bubble. If that’s all you hear, you form a very different view of the world.
Trump is racist. He is running a racist campaign. Pretending that’s not happening is just bizarre.
Yep. And win or lose he'll get a big vote on Nov 5th for various reasons. To list a few:
He's the GOP candidate. Loads of people always vote GOP. He's a skilful exploiter of ignorance and resentment. He's charismatic and has built a massive energetic loyal cult (MAGA). Most Americans don't feel better off despite what the stats say.
It might be enough. I don't think so but my instincts could be wrong. Soon find out anyway.
Perhaps the interesting thing will be how well Trump does compared with the other GOP candidates down ballot.
After Pakistan contrived to lose a match in which they had accumulated 556 in their first innings, it now looks like India could win one in which they'd been bowled out for 46 in their first innings.
And how exactly will Trumps policies help the alleged downtrodden of forgotten America ?
I could understand Trumps support if he had any policies that would help the Average Joe . As it is Trump appeals to the “ its always someone else’s fault “ brigade .
Aswell as the racists and migrant haters .
Thankfully our politics here hasn’t descended to the level of hate and polarization seen in the USA and there are still lines that can’t be crossed if you want to get elected .
They won’t help. But my gut tells me the momentum is now with him and he’s going to win this one. We should be buckling up for an interesting 4 years.
European currencies the day of his victory will be interesting as they’ll tell us how seriously or otherwise the markets take his tariff threats. If he goes ahead with what he’s promised we’re talking global trade depression, given China’s economy is simultaneously buckling under.
It’s worth noting that Biden has been pursuing a protectionist, tariff policy in various areas. To explicitly bring manufacturing back to the US.
But notably not focused on Europe except in very narrow areas. It’s 90% China policy.
Yup. And Trumpian voters are not worried about French Brie undermining their jobs.
Biden’s project was to turn around the belief that outsourcing everything to China and Mexico was the way to go.
On the left, this outsourcing is seen as part and parcel of financialisarion of companies.
1) take over company 2) outsource production/workforce 3) sell the assets 4) load up with debt
The difference with Trump is the degree, and the stark violation of norms he proposes, to deal with the issue.
Dunno what you did today but this afternoon I met 3% of Japan’s entire sword-making capacity. That is to say, there are only 100 licensed samurai sword makers now active in Japan. And here are three of them, a trio of friendly young guys - now quite famous - who showed me show to make samurai swords, in remote Kyotango, on the Sea of Japan
I still think Harris will win comfortably. It seems to me that pollsters have been underestimating likely turnout, and I think both the unprecedented motivation for Dems to vote, and Harris's likely ability to make big inroads on the floating voters/ independents will see her win.
After Pakistan contrived to lose a match in which they had accumulated 556 in their first innings, it now looks like India could win one in which they'd been bowled out for 46 in their first innings.
Funny old game cricket. One of the reasons it's so addictive. Who would have thought ..... bet on ...... the finalists in the Women's T20 being other than one of Australia, England or India?
Dunno what you did today but this afternoon I met 3% of Japan’s entire sword-making capacity. That is to say, there are only 100 licensed samurai sword makers now active in Japan. And here are three of them, a trio of friendly young guys - now quite famous - who showed me show to make samurai swords, in remote Kyotango, on the Sea of Japan
£12,000 a blade and up, if you’re interested
Thanks for the pic ... it's a fascinating process.
Just in case - I think you may possibly have trouble importing a new one here from Japan; traditional manufacture *may* make a difference. But antique ones (pre-1954) should be OK, with the documentation.
I still think Harris will win comfortably. It seems to me that pollsters have been underestimating likely turnout, and I think both the unprecedented motivation for Dems to vote, and Harris's likely ability to make big inroads on the floating voters/ independents will see her win.
I really, really hope that you are right. Not only because I think Trump.... and Vance .... will be disastrous for the West, never mind the USA, but because we'll be able to enjoy the scream of frustrated rage from the losing side.
I still think Harris will win comfortably. It seems to me that pollsters have been underestimating likely turnout, and I think both the unprecedented motivation for Dems to vote, and Harris's likely ability to make big inroads on the floating voters/ independents will see her win.
When you say comfortably - EV margin? Which states?
I think it is a genuine knife edge. Probably a close result in votes. But could flip into a bigger margin of EV votes.
Maybe we should ask the PB Trump Arse Lickers about the appeal of their man? I mean, presumably they’d be able to explain it.
A large part of his appeal is in annoyance.
I remember an article against Trump, very early on, by the usually more astute Naomi Klein. She suggested a rolling campaign of something like weekly demonstrations against his treatment of women, to demonstrate that society wouldn't accept these "standards". But look at social media ; this exactly what he has thrived on .
Trouble is, I never hear any serious analysis of why Trump might be doing so well in the USA other than Americans are a bit thick and stupid - which obviously isn't true - and is very patronising and an insult to our intelligence.
We know why he shouldn't be doing so well, but he is.
So, why?
I agree. I have asked the same question here several times. I don't understand it. I have read the replies to your post and none convince me so I am still stumped.
The only rational explanation is 50% of Americans are stupid and that just can't be true.
I'll have a go:
(Tldr; not stupid, just applying their intelligence elsewhere)
Politics just isn't that important to most people. People are busy, and choose to tune out a large proportion of the politics they hear in favour of more immediate, relevant (in their perception) concerns.
When they do tune into politics most people don't engage their critical facilities nearly as much as they do, say, when choosing a school for their child or when choosing a flat to rent. In their perception choosing Trump or Harris just isn't as high stakes.
Within that environment Trump garners more attention, and few have the time or intellectual energy to do the critical analysis to see through his nonsense. So he is superficially appealing, and most people don't get beyond the superficial.
I wouldn't like to say, beyond my sense that pollsters have got turnout wrong. So that potentially brings Texas and Florida into play beyond the much discussed swing states.
After Pakistan contrived to lose a match in which they had accumulated 556 in their first innings, it now looks like India could win one in which they'd been bowled out for 46 in their first innings.
Funny old game cricket. One of the reasons it's so addictive. Who would have thought ..... bet on ...... the finalists in the Women's T20 being other than one of Australia, England or India?
1) the two largest population countries where cricket is definitely the national sport 2) in both countries women playing sport is seen as both breaking down barriers *and* is mostly accepted.
Trouble is, I never hear any serious analysis of why Trump might be doing so well in the USA other than Americans are a bit thick and stupid - which obviously isn't true - and is very patronising and an insult to our intelligence.
We know why he shouldn't be doing so well, but he is.
So, why?
I would say his underlying advantages are: 1) He's charismatic and genuinely funny 2) He sounds authentic. The magic ingredient is just to lie a lot and not care if you get caught out but it makes him sound different to other politicians who are constantly hedging everything with caveats to make sure they don't say something provably false. 3) People think he's good at the economy because he played a successful businessman on TV 4) He runs to the centre a lot, which his base let him do because he's very aggressive on the partisan axis to make up for his lack of conformity on the left-right axis. For example he ran on protecting social security, and he's letting the courts do the work on abortion instead of taking anti-abortion positions himself. 5) He's very talented at manipulating the media. He's not as good at this as he used to be but basically he can set the news agenda to any subject he likes by saying something outrageous and they'll chase after it like a cat following a laser pointer. 6) Relatedly (and this ability is also in decline) he's kind of a memetic idiot savant. He's really good at saying memorable, catchy things. They're often weird and people make fun of him, but you remember them. 7) The US is pretty polarized and the electoral college leans GOP so just being the Republican nominee gets you a good shot of winning the presidency.
Finally in this campaign he has the advantage that the voters got really mad about the post-covid inflation. This happened all over the world and pretty much every single incumbent is getting kicked around by the electorate.
That’s probably the best analysis of Trump I have seen on this site. Chapeau
That’s a genuine compliment, you summarise it perfectly, but it also shows the pitiful lack of neutral, honest analysis of the Trump Phenomenon on PB, which is quite feebly biased and histrionic on this issue
I wouldn't like to say, beyond my sense that pollsters have got turnout wrong. So that potentially brings Texas and Florida into play beyond the much discussed swing states.
Arguable position, I think.
The question is really differential turnout.
If 100% of 18-30 actually vote, then Harris would get a landslide. And a filibuster proof Senate and Congress.
But they don’t…
To me, the biggest surprise is that abortion hasn’t got the likely-to-vote numbers up.
I wouldn't like to say, beyond my sense that pollsters have got turnout wrong. So that potentially brings Texas and Florida into play beyond the much discussed swing states.
Arguable position, I think.
The question is really differential turnout.
If 100% of 18-30 actually vote, then Harris would get a landslide. And a filibuster proof Senate and Congress.
But they don’t…
To me, the biggest surprise is that abortion hasn’t got the likely-to-vote numbers up.
Well that remains to be seen. 2020 saw a massive increase in turnout, and given what's at stake here I expect it to increase even further this time round. And as in 2020 I'd expect that to be to the benefit of the Dems.
Trouble is, I never hear any serious analysis of why Trump might be doing so well in the USA other than Americans are a bit thick and stupid - which obviously isn't true - and is very patronising and an insult to our intelligence.
We know why he shouldn't be doing so well, but he is.
So, why?
I agree. I have asked the same question here several times. I don't understand it. I have read the replies to your post and none convince me so I am still stumped.
The only rational explanation is 50% of Americans are stupid and that just can't be true.
I'll have a go:
(Tldr; not stupid, just applying their intelligence elsewhere)
Politics just isn't that important to most people. People are busy, and choose to tune out a large proportion of the politics they hear in favour of more immediate, relevant (in their perception) concerns.
When they do tune into politics most people don't engage their critical facilities nearly as much as they do, say, when choosing a school for their child or when choosing a flat to rent. In their perception choosing Trump or Harris just isn't as high stakes.
Within that environment Trump garners more attention, and few have the time or intellectual energy to do the critical analysis to see through his nonsense. So he is superficially appealing, and most people don't get beyond the superficial.
I think the other crucial thing is thar beyond being superficially very empowering, to a certain group. He can transgress. say the most outrageous things, destigmatise the most taboo, and then intermittently claim this is all result of po-faced, humourless "liberals", and their attempts to maintain "standards".
This means his supporters can feel simultaneously unburdened and released from having to worry about their prejudices, but also more knowing, humorous and relaxed, fully-developed people.
Trouble is, I never hear any serious analysis of why Trump might be doing so well in the USA other than Americans are a bit thick and stupid - which obviously isn't true - and is very patronising and an insult to our intelligence.
We know why he shouldn't be doing so well, but he is.
So, why?
I agree. I have asked the same question here several times. I don't understand it. I have read the replies to your post and none convince me so I am still stumped.
The only rational explanation is 50% of Americans are stupid and that just can't be true.
I'll have a go:
(Tldr; not stupid, just applying their intelligence elsewhere)
Politics just isn't that important to most people. People are busy, and choose to tune out a large proportion of the politics they hear in favour of more immediate, relevant (in their perception) concerns.
When they do tune into politics most people don't engage their critical facilities nearly as much as they do, say, when choosing a school for their child or when choosing a flat to rent. In their perception choosing Trump or Harris just isn't as high stakes.
Within that environment Trump garners more attention, and few have the time or intellectual energy to do the critical analysis to see through his nonsense. So he is superficially appealing, and most people don't get beyond the superficial.
Yes. There are relatively high levels of ignorance stupidity and bigotry amongst his voters (no use pretending otherwise) but there is also plenty of what you describe here.
Maybe we should ask the PB Trump Arse Lickers about the appeal of their man? I mean, presumably they’d be able to explain it.
The competition is unholy appauling. Whilst Trump has a very selfish personality, his policies are neither her nor there. His competition however is monstrous with her policies and positions.
Whilst naturally Conservative and conservative, US presidents (and their opponents) of the last forty years I would happily vote for in each election:
Biden (2020) Trump (2016) Obama (2012) McCain (2008) Bush jr(2004) Bush jr (2000) Clinton (1996) Clinton (1992) Bush Snr (1988) Reagan (1988) Reagan (1980)
If I was to rank them in my personally favourability: Reagan Clinton (the first and last fiscal conservative president since the war..) Bush jr McCain Obama Trump Bush Snr Biden
I think the other crucial thing is thar beyond being superficially very empowering, to a certain group. He can transgress. say the most outrageous things, destigmatise the most taboo, and then intermittently claim this is all result of po-faced, humourless "liberals", and their attempts to maintain "standards".
This means his supporters can feel simultaneously unburdened and released from having to worry about their prejudices, but also more knowing, humorous and relaxed, fully-developed people.
This was also discussed recently; the mob mentality.
In the pub you wouldn't shout "burn down the hotel full of immigrants" but once in the mob you might
The group reduces or eliminates your personal responsibility for stupid crap
Trump expresses sentiments they wouldn't on their own
I still think Harris will win comfortably. It seems to me that pollsters have been underestimating likely turnout, and I think both the unprecedented motivation for Dems to vote, and Harris's likely ability to make big inroads on the floating voters/ independents will see her win.
Trump's vote might also be on the high side. We just don't know, for now.
Trouble is, I never hear any serious analysis of why Trump might be doing so well in the USA other than Americans are a bit thick and stupid - which obviously isn't true - and is very patronising and an insult to our intelligence.
We know why he shouldn't be doing so well, but he is.
So, why?
I agree. I have asked the same question here several times. I don't understand it. I have read the replies to your post and none convince me so I am still stumped.
The only rational explanation is 50% of Americans are stupid and that just can't be true.
I'll have a go:
(Tldr; not stupid, just applying their intelligence elsewhere)
Politics just isn't that important to most people. People are busy, and choose to tune out a large proportion of the politics they hear in favour of more immediate, relevant (in their perception) concerns.
When they do tune into politics most people don't engage their critical facilities nearly as much as they do, say, when choosing a school for their child or when choosing a flat to rent. In their perception choosing Trump or Harris just isn't as high stakes.
Within that environment Trump garners more attention, and few have the time or intellectual energy to do the critical analysis to see through his nonsense. So he is superficially appealing, and most people don't get beyond the superficial.
Yes. There are relatively high levels of ignorance stupidity and bigotry amongst his voters (no use pretending otherwise) but there is also plenty of what you describe here.
But theres also gut feelings. Many Americans think female empowerment has gone too far and Trump speaks to this at a visceral level. Even many females dont like Harris as they see her as the epitimome of the overpromoted DEI hire.
It’s a change election. Harris cannot go full change. So she ends up looking shifty. Walz didn’t help there recently. Meanwhile Trump is Trump and the message is change.
That’s the problem.
Arguably they might have been better off with a candidate with more distance to Biden.
Also many Americans dont especially like Trump but will vote for him as they see him as attacking the people they hate ie the left liberal coastal elites.
Trouble is, I never hear any serious analysis of why Trump might be doing so well in the USA other than Americans are a bit thick and stupid - which obviously isn't true - and is very patronising and an insult to our intelligence.
We know why he shouldn't be doing so well, but he is.
So, why?
I agree. I have asked the same question here several times. I don't understand it. I have read the replies to your post and none convince me so I am still stumped.
The only rational explanation is 50% of Americans are stupid and that just can't be true.
I'll have a go:
(Tldr; not stupid, just applying their intelligence elsewhere)
Politics just isn't that important to most people. People are busy, and choose to tune out a large proportion of the politics they hear in favour of more immediate, relevant (in their perception) concerns.
When they do tune into politics most people don't engage their critical facilities nearly as much as they do, say, when choosing a school for their child or when choosing a flat to rent. In their perception choosing Trump or Harris just isn't as high stakes.
Within that environment Trump garners more attention, and few have the time or intellectual energy to do the critical analysis to see through his nonsense. So he is superficially appealing, and most people don't get beyond the superficial.
Yes. There are relatively high levels of ignorance stupidity and bigotry amongst his voters (no use pretending otherwise) but there is also plenty of what you describe here.
But theres also gut feelings. Many Americans think female empowerment has gone too far and Trump speaks to this at a visceral level. Even many females dont like Harris as they see her as the epitimome of the overpromoted DEI hire.
Yep. Bigotry xenophobia and nostalgia are all very much gut feelings.
Completely off topic but I'm loving the fact that viewers of the big new Rivals adaptation have to develop a knowledge of the intricacies of ITV regional franchises in order to understand the booking
Then of course you have the likes of Musk onside spreading antisrmitic conspiracy theories such as this rally.
didn’t take long before a Trump supporter shouted to Musk that George Soros is “evil”—to which Musk responded with a clear “Yeah.”
He said Soros is “honestly misanthropic” and that “for someone who sort of claims to be doing good, but actually he is not. He is tearing down the fabric of society.¨
Trouble is, I never hear any serious analysis of why Trump might be doing so well in the USA other than Americans are a bit thick and stupid - which obviously isn't true - and is very patronising and an insult to our intelligence.
We know why he shouldn't be doing so well, but he is.
So, why?
I agree. I have asked the same question here several times. I don't understand it. I have read the replies to your post and none convince me so I am still stumped.
The only rational explanation is 50% of Americans are stupid and that just can't be true.
I'll have a go:
(Tldr; not stupid, just applying their intelligence elsewhere)
Politics just isn't that important to most people. People are busy, and choose to tune out a large proportion of the politics they hear in favour of more immediate, relevant (in their perception) concerns.
When they do tune into politics most people don't engage their critical facilities nearly as much as they do, say, when choosing a school for their child or when choosing a flat to rent. In their perception choosing Trump or Harris just isn't as high stakes.
Within that environment Trump garners more attention, and few have the time or intellectual energy to do the critical analysis to see through his nonsense. So he is superficially appealing, and most people don't get beyond the superficial.
Still not convinced. I take your point regarding peoples involvement in politics and the same happens here. It is difficult for people like us who post here to believe how little many people know or care about politics. That becomes obvious when you see interviews of people in the street.
So I get the argument and it is logical, but even so you don't have to see very much of Trump to grasp the nonsense of it all, yet 50% don't appear to have spotted that.
Other answers have been people fear the alternative more. I don't get that either. I don't see how you can. Given a choice between a political philosophy I completely disagree with and a raving gibbering lunatic who appears happy to destroy democracy I would vote for the political philosophy I completely disagree with while holding my nose.
America desperately needs to get back a proper right wing party so that sane Conservatives can vote for it. The nutters in that party should be a small minority not running it.
2% isn't enough. Harris needs to be 4% up to be sure of winning the Electoral College. A 1% Harris lead means Trump wins the Electoral College. 2 or 3% is squeaky bum time
“2% isn't enough.‘
I don’t buy that at all actually, Gareth. Because what Trump is so clearly doing in 2024 is piling up new supporters - Latino’s; working class, underclass; young men; black men - everywhere, everywhere but including where they are no use to him at all, like in New York.
This time, Trump could be close to winning the popular vote, perhaps only 1% in it, yet Kam could pip him in the college.
That’s the maths. But why Trumps greater appeal this time around DESPITE EVERYTHING? The only answer can be a mixed bag. The “Andrew Tate Trump” appeals to young Alpha Males who fear a life treading on eggshells and being bossed around by cat ladies. Plus, unscrupulous politicians, since the world began there’s nothing new about it, blame social pressures on housing, jobs, crime, health, education, on outsiders to the local community, on immigrants, and always make votes from it, even though it’s always a pack of lies, the immigrants overall tend to be very well behaved, living in squalor, doing menial jobs for pittance - yet the unscrupulous argument has always been very hard to counteract, even though armed with the statistical truth. Plus, just about everyone feels worse off in the pocket since last election. That’s a broad brush to voting day that decides votes for many people, to the bafflement of nerds living on PB. And, compared to Kam, Trump is being seen as the experienced candidate in the race, as he has done it before.
PS - but we need to keep in mind the betting chart being flashed up on here quite rightly, that often shows Trump is a winner, is being influenced by large bets from big Trump supporters.
Trouble is, I never hear any serious analysis of why Trump might be doing so well in the USA other than Americans are a bit thick and stupid - which obviously isn't true - and is very patronising and an insult to our intelligence.
We know why he shouldn't be doing so well, but he is.
So, why?
I agree. I have asked the same question here several times. I don't understand it. I have read the replies to your post and none convince me so I am still stumped.
The only rational explanation is 50% of Americans are stupid and that just can't be true.
I'll have a go:
(Tldr; not stupid, just applying their intelligence elsewhere)
Politics just isn't that important to most people. People are busy, and choose to tune out a large proportion of the politics they hear in favour of more immediate, relevant (in their perception) concerns.
When they do tune into politics most people don't engage their critical facilities nearly as much as they do, say, when choosing a school for their child or when choosing a flat to rent. In their perception choosing Trump or Harris just isn't as high stakes.
Within that environment Trump garners more attention, and few have the time or intellectual energy to do the critical analysis to see through his nonsense. So he is superficially appealing, and most people don't get beyond the superficial.
Yes. There are relatively high levels of ignorance stupidity and bigotry amongst his voters (no use pretending otherwise) but there is also plenty of what you describe here.
But theres also gut feelings. Many Americans think female empowerment has gone too far and Trump speaks to this at a visceral level. Even many females dont like Harris as they see her as the epitimome of the overpromoted DEI hire.
Yep. Bigotry xenophobia and nostalgia are all very much gut feelings.
See also: those in Russia who belive their legitimate sphere of influence extends as far west as the middle of Germany.
Then of course you have the likes of Musk onside spreading antisrmitic conspiracy theories such as this rally.
didn’t take long before a Trump supporter shouted to Musk that George Soros is “evil”—to which Musk responded with a clear “Yeah.”
He said Soros is “honestly misanthropic” and that “for someone who sort of claims to be doing good, but actually he is not. He is tearing down the fabric of society.¨
Musky Baby sells himself as a saviour of humanity; someone who will take humanity to Mars to 'save' us. In reality he is just what he accuses Soros of being. In addition, he is a liar who is only interested in himself.
He is a bigger threat to American and the world than Trump.
Also many Americans dont especially like Trump but will vote for him as they see him as attacking the people they hate ie the left liberal coastal elites.
That's a précis of a Today report this morning. Missing is the description of the French (and other EU) authorities upping their game, which is why these trials are increasing in number, while handing down custodial sentences. The numbers of boats has dropped - hence the increase in overcrowding and mass drownings.
Where it goes from here is an open question; the policing and cooperation is reportedly still improving.
Maybe we should ask the PB Trump Arse Lickers about the appeal of their man? I mean, presumably they’d be able to explain it.
The competition is unholy appauling. Whilst Trump has a very selfish personality, his policies are neither her nor there. His competition however is monstrous with her policies and positions.
Whilst naturally Conservative and conservative, US presidents (and their opponents) of the last forty years I would happily vote for in each election:
Biden (2020) Trump (2016) Obama (2012) McCain (2008) Bush jr(2004) Bush jr (2000) Clinton (1996) Clinton (1992) Bush Snr (1988) Reagan (1988) Reagan (1980)
If I was to rank them in my personally favourability: Reagan Clinton (the first and last fiscal conservative president since the war..) Bush jr McCain Obama Trump Bush Snr Biden
What's your beef with Mitt Romney out of interest?
Then of course you have the likes of Musk onside spreading antisrmitic conspiracy theories such as this rally.
didn’t take long before a Trump supporter shouted to Musk that George Soros is “evil”—to which Musk responded with a clear “Yeah.”
He said Soros is “honestly misanthropic” and that “for someone who sort of claims to be doing good, but actually he is not. He is tearing down the fabric of society.¨
Musky Baby sells himself as a saviour of humanity; someone who will take humanity to Mars to 'save' us. In reality he is just what he accuses Soros of being. In addition, he is a liar who is only interested in himself.
He is a bigger threat to American and the world than Trump.
He is in the sense hes a lot more intelligent than Trump and has a lot more money. Trump is a pauper compared to him.
It’s a change election. Harris cannot go full change. So she ends up looking shifty. Walz didn’t help there recently. Meanwhile Trump is Trump and the message is change.
That’s the problem.
Arguably they might have been better off with a candidate with more distance to Biden.
Once Biden decided to run in the primaries, that was always unlikely. Probably the biggest mistake of his presidency.
Trump is also very clever in the way that he tries to appeal a certain, more rural, not always or necessarily evangelical or Bible belt, demographic, who seek a grand narrative about goodness.
The Democrats don't really have grand narrative, so in this way he can also attract the non-metropiltans seeking something better and more mythical, as well as those already mentioned, simply wanting to annoy, destroy, or transgress.
Then of course you have the likes of Musk onside spreading antisrmitic conspiracy theories such as this rally.
didn’t take long before a Trump supporter shouted to Musk that George Soros is “evil”—to which Musk responded with a clear “Yeah.”
He said Soros is “honestly misanthropic” and that “for someone who sort of claims to be doing good, but actually he is not. He is tearing down the fabric of society.¨
But George Soros can be evil. Being jewish doesnt prevent you from being evil. Soros actively funds many organisations, he transfered 18 billion dollars to it organisations who interfere/fund civil society in 2017, and prior to that it has been his main stay for decades. Many things I'm sure could be considered very worthy and many reprehensible to some.
Just because someone is accuse of acting in a way that would be seen as stereotype/cliche/trope/meme doesnt mean he isnt.
The bombshell of the night dropped when a voter asked Elon Musk, “Do you think there is a shadow government behind the Biden-Harris administration?”
Musk replied with an awesome answer.
First off, he said, “It's not Biden. We know that for a fact. The dude has barely got two functional neurons.”
What about Kamala? Elon answered that it's not her either. “They just replaced the Biden puppet with the Kamala puppet, very obviously. If the teleprompter stops working, then the puppet breaks, and it's like, ‘Oh, the puppet just starts looping because the teleprompter broke.’”
So who is it? Musk said that he believes “There isn't any one sort of puppet master but maybe a thousand or “a lot.”
Completely off topic but I'm loving the fact that viewers of the big new Rivals adaptation have to develop a knowledge of the intricacies of ITV regional franchises in order to understand the booking
I always smile at the Thames TV graphic and sound. My local TV franchise seemed to be limited to the krankies and Mr & Mrs.
Freezing personal allowances Increasing road fuel duty Increasing air passenger tax
I would support doing all three, each is far preferable to any national insurance increase.
How about cutting expenditure and giving our overburdened taxpayers a break?
Now THAT's a question that isn't asked nearly often enough.
Well, it is... but whenever anyone looks for expenditure to cut, we end up with things like "don't repair things that aren't actually falling down", which is how we got to the state we are in, or "aid and diversity officers", which are rounding errors.
If, after fourteen years where the government was run by Cameron, May, Johnson, Truss and Sunak, and Chancellors included such free spenders as Osborne, Hammond, Sunak and Hunt... Maybe there aren't any more spending cuts that the electorate is willing to swallow.
Then of course you have the likes of Musk onside spreading antisrmitic conspiracy theories such as this rally.
didn’t take long before a Trump supporter shouted to Musk that George Soros is “evil”—to which Musk responded with a clear “Yeah.”
He said Soros is “honestly misanthropic” and that “for someone who sort of claims to be doing good, but actually he is not. He is tearing down the fabric of society.¨
But George Soros can be evil. Being jewish doesnt prevent you from being evil. Soros actively funds many organisations, he transfer 18 billion dollars to it in 2017. Many things I'm sure could be considered very worthy and many reprehensible to some.
Just because someone is accuse of acting in a way that would be seen as stereotype/cliche/trope/meme doesnt mean he isnt.
Oh, it is Saturday morning...
Your post is really stupid. You give no examples of *why* he might be 'evil'; just saying that he might be. And of all the billionaires, why pick on him?
Maybe we should ask the PB Trump Arse Lickers about the appeal of their man? I mean, presumably they’d be able to explain it.
The competition is unholy appauling. Whilst Trump has a very selfish personality, his policies are neither her nor there. His competition however is monstrous with her policies and positions.
As a matter of curiosity, which positions do you find 'monstrous' ?
Completely off topic but I'm loving the fact that viewers of the big new Rivals adaptation have to develop a knowledge of the intricacies of ITV regional franchises in order to understand the booking
I always smile at the Thames TV graphic and sound. My local TV franchise seemed to be limited to the krankies and Mr & Mrs.
The Thames logo means Dangermouse to me. My father used to work for Granada so that has a lot of nostalgia too.
Trouble is, I never hear any serious analysis of why Trump might be doing so well in the USA other than Americans are a bit thick and stupid - which obviously isn't true - and is very patronising and an insult to our intelligence.
We know why he shouldn't be doing so well, but he is.
So, why?
a. Major media sources pump out pro-Trump propaganda. It’s not that Americans are thick: Americans simply don’t get told the facts.
b. Racism is popular.
Hmmm. So your considered view is “ignorant and racist”. Got it. That worked so well in 2016 (in both the US and UK).
Americans are just as intelligent as everyone else in the world, but you ignore that there is a pro-Trump media bubble. If that’s all you hear, you form a very different view of the world.
Trump is racist. He is running a racist campaign. Pretending that’s not happening is just bizarre.
Yep. And win or lose he'll get a big vote on Nov 5th for various reasons. To list a few:
He's the GOP candidate. Loads of people always vote GOP. He's a skilful exploiter of ignorance and resentment. He's charismatic and has built a massive energetic loyal cult (MAGA). Most Americans don't feel better off despite what the stats say.
It might be enough. I don't think so but my instincts could be wrong. Soon find out anyway.
Trump is a warning to democracies everywhere of what you get if mainstream politicians ignore the legitimate concerns of a large segment of the population. Between 2000 and 2015 life was getting worse for a lot of Americans but almost the entire political class ignored it because it suited them to believe that because everything was going quite well for them it must also be going well for everyone else.
Trouble is, I never hear any serious analysis of why Trump might be doing so well in the USA other than Americans are a bit thick and stupid - which obviously isn't true - and is very patronising and an insult to our intelligence.
We know why he shouldn't be doing so well, but he is.
So, why?
I agree. I have asked the same question here several times. I don't understand it. I have read the replies to your post and none convince me so I am still stumped.
The only rational explanation is 50% of Americans are stupid and that just can't be true.
I'll have a go:
(Tldr; not stupid, just applying their intelligence elsewhere)
Politics just isn't that important to most people. People are busy, and choose to tune out a large proportion of the politics they hear in favour of more immediate, relevant (in their perception) concerns.
When they do tune into politics most people don't engage their critical facilities nearly as much as they do, say, when choosing a school for their child or when choosing a flat to rent. In their perception choosing Trump or Harris just isn't as high stakes.
Within that environment Trump garners more attention, and few have the time or intellectual energy to do the critical analysis to see through his nonsense. So he is superficially appealing, and most people don't get beyond the superficial.
Yes. There are relatively high levels of ignorance stupidity and bigotry amongst his voters (no use pretending otherwise) but there is also plenty of what you describe here.
But theres also gut feelings. Many Americans think female empowerment has gone too far and Trump speaks to this at a visceral level. Even many females dont like Harris as they see her as the epitimome of the overpromoted DEI hire.
Yep. Bigotry xenophobia and nostalgia are all very much gut feelings.
That list of why black people should vote for Kamala, business loans (100% forgivable) and a few other things really isnt any different to the claimed Conservatives slogan used about voting labour will result in a different neighbour.
If you want to be one of the good guys, Kamala aint your candidate this time.
A lot of the answers listed already are partially true.
Two factors under represented on the list so far are religion and rural. The US is far more religious, and in a more evangelical way, than we comprehend or are familiar with here. And being rural here is quite different to only having a population of a couple of thousand within 50 miles of you, with that kind of lifestyle it is unsurprising urban modernity grates.
I would say Trump or Republican candidates for the presidency receive up to half their votes from religious Christians in the rust belt, deep south and other places. I am happy to be corrected if I am wrong.
There was an article posted last time round that found that Trump does well in Evangelical communities 'where the local churches have closed'
Trump is some kind of ersatz religious figure for them
Evangelicals that still have access to the 'real thing ' are less inclined to vote for the orange Jesus
Besides, the actual Mr Jesus said awkward things about loving your neighbour and that neighbour not just being the one like you.
For all it gets wrong, for all it fails to live up to its values, your actual church is good like that.
(Wanders off, humming That's why we build the wall; We build the wall to keep us free.)
But the GOP Jesus preached that if you’re rich, it’s because you deserve it, and if you’re poor, it’s your own damn fault.
US presidents. Best ones. Obama. Clinton. George Bush junior. As for the rest since the Regan era. No thanks.
Clinton was the most intelligent I think.
Clinton was intelligent and a great politician.
Yeah, totally dodgy with him and his wife up to their neck in lots of local dodgy stuff, but still intelligent and great. A massive proponent of free markets and free trade.
President Bartlett is what American liberals wished he was. But of course he wasnt... He had the morals of an alleycat.
Completely off topic but I'm loving the fact that viewers of the big new Rivals adaptation have to develop a knowledge of the intricacies of ITV regional franchises in order to understand the booking
Can I use that as an excuse to push my "devolution to the ITV regions as they were in the 1980s" plan? TV transmission boundaries follow natural features (like the Pennines) as well as anything, it gives a reasonable spread of regional cities that people look to.
And having separate Mayors of London for weekdays and weekends (with a Friday 5.15 handover) would be amusing and possibly useful.
Then of course you have the likes of Musk onside spreading antisrmitic conspiracy theories such as this rally.
didn’t take long before a Trump supporter shouted to Musk that George Soros is “evil”—to which Musk responded with a clear “Yeah.”
He said Soros is “honestly misanthropic” and that “for someone who sort of claims to be doing good, but actually he is not. He is tearing down the fabric of society.¨
But George Soros can be evil. Being jewish doesnt prevent you from being evil. Soros actively funds many organisations, he transfer 18 billion dollars to it in 2017. Many things I'm sure could be considered very worthy and many reprehensible to some.
Just because someone is accuse of acting in a way that would be seen as stereotype/cliche/trope/meme doesnt mean he isnt.
Oh, it is Saturday morning...
Your post is really stupid. You give no examples of *why* he might be 'evil'; just saying that he might be. And of all the billionaires, why pick on him?
I'm not picking on him. He and Gates probably get it equally. If Gates was jewish some would blame that on anti-semitism.
A lot of the answers listed already are partially true.
Two factors under represented on the list so far are religion and rural. The US is far more religious, and in a more evangelical way, than we comprehend or are familiar with here. And being rural here is quite different to only having a population of a couple of thousand within 50 miles of you, with that kind of lifestyle it is unsurprising urban modernity grates.
I would say Trump or Republican candidates for the presidency receive up to half their votes from religious Christians in the rust belt, deep south and other places. I am happy to be corrected if I am wrong.
There was an article posted last time round that found that Trump does well in Evangelical communities 'where the local churches have closed'
Trump is some kind of ersatz religious figure for them
Evangelicals that still have access to the 'real thing ' are less inclined to vote for the orange Jesus
Besides, the actual Mr Jesus said awkward things about loving your neighbour and that neighbour not just being the one like you.
For all it gets wrong, for all it fails to live up to its values, your actual church is good like that.
(Wanders off, humming That's why we build the wall; We build the wall to keep us free.)
But the GOP Jesus preached that if you’re rich, it’s because you deserve it, and if you’re poor, it’s your own damn fault.
We shouldnt be complacent. This is the blurb from Tommy Robinsons best selling book manifesto.
For decades the political class have openly planned to replace the indigenous people of Europe and in Manifesto we focus on how they are doing this in the UK. To ensure no-one disturbs their plans the elite manufacture a mythical far-right, when in truth it is the elite 1% who run a Fascist system of state-control, censorship and discrimination. Whenever someone has publicly addressed what is going on, the ruling class set about to destroy that person. We show how the elitist 1% have openly manipulated democracy to subjugate the masses, their elitist discussions carried on in plain sight for over a century, while they distract the masses with unimportant nonsense. The 1% knowingly plan to bring about another global conflict and in the aftermath they will end up in control of the world's resources and financial systems: "you will own nothing and you will be happy"
After Pakistan contrived to lose a match in which they had accumulated 556 in their first innings, it now looks like India could win one in which they'd been bowled out for 46 in their first innings.
Funny old game cricket. One of the reasons it's so addictive. Who would have thought ..... bet on ...... the finalists in the Women's T20 being other than one of Australia, England or India?
1) the two largest population countries where cricket is definitely the national sport 2) in both countries women playing sport is seen as both breaking down barriers *and* is mostly accepted.
Seems inevitable, really.
Quite, but it isn't. India were, like England, knocked out in the group stages and Australia in the semi-finals. Final tomorrow is between New Zealand and South Africa.
Maybe we should ask the PB Trump Arse Lickers about the appeal of their man? I mean, presumably they’d be able to explain it.
The competition is unholy appauling. Whilst Trump has a very selfish personality, his policies are neither her nor there. His competition however is monstrous with her policies and positions.
Whilst naturally Conservative and conservative, US presidents (and their opponents) of the last forty years I would happily vote for in each election:
Biden (2020) Trump (2016) Obama (2012) McCain (2008) Bush jr(2004) Bush jr (2000) Clinton (1996) Clinton (1992) Bush Snr (1988) Reagan (1988) Reagan (1980)
If I was to rank them in my personally favourability: Reagan Clinton (the first and last fiscal conservative president since the war..) Bush jr McCain Obama Trump Bush Snr Biden
What's your beef with Mitt Romney out of interest?
I don't think I really had a beef with him, I just didnt really take much notice. Obama whilst a third rate president played the part well enough that it felt unnecessary to change him. It's like he got 15 on Black Jack, stuck on it and still won.
2% isn't enough. Harris needs to be 4% up to be sure of winning the Electoral College. A 1% Harris lead means Trump wins the Electoral College. 2 or 3% is squeaky bum time
“2% isn't enough.‘
I don’t buy that at all actually, Gareth. Because what Trump is so clearly doing in 2024 is piling up new supporters - Latino’s; working class, underclass; young men; black men - everywhere, everywhere but including where they are no use to him at all, like in New York.
This time, Trump could be close to winning the popular vote, perhaps only 1% in it, yet Kam could pip him in the college.
That’s the maths. But why Trumps greater appeal this time around DESPITE EVERYTHING? The only answer can be a mixed bag. The “Andrew Tate Trump” appeals to young Alpha Males who fear a life treading on eggshells and being bossed around by cat ladies. Plus, unscrupulous politicians, since the world began there’s nothing new about it, blame social pressures on housing, jobs, crime, health, education, on outsiders to the local community, on immigrants, and always make votes from it, even though it’s always a pack of lies, the immigrants overall tend to be very well behaved, living in squalor, doing menial jobs for pittance - yet the unscrupulous argument has always been very hard to counteract, even though armed with the statistical truth. Plus, just about everyone feels worse off in the pocket since last election. That’s a broad brush to voting day that decides votes for many people, to the bafflement of nerds living on PB. And, compared to Kam, Trump is being seen as the experienced candidate in the race, as he has done it before.
PS - but we need to keep in mind the betting chart being flashed up on here quite rightly, that often shows Trump is a winner, is being influenced by large bets from big Trump supporters.
Then of course you have the likes of Musk onside spreading antisrmitic conspiracy theories such as this rally.
didn’t take long before a Trump supporter shouted to Musk that George Soros is “evil”—to which Musk responded with a clear “Yeah.”
He said Soros is “honestly misanthropic” and that “for someone who sort of claims to be doing good, but actually he is not. He is tearing down the fabric of society.¨
But George Soros can be evil. Being jewish doesnt prevent you from being evil. Soros actively funds many organisations, he transfer 18 billion dollars to it in 2017. Many things I'm sure could be considered very worthy and many reprehensible to some.
Just because someone is accuse of acting in a way that would be seen as stereotype/cliche/trope/meme doesnt mean he isnt.
Oh, it is Saturday morning...
Your post is really stupid. You give no examples of *why* he might be 'evil'; just saying that he might be. And of all the billionaires, why pick on him?
I'm not picking on him. He and Gates probably get it equally. If Gates was jewish some would blame that on anti-semitism.
Billy Boy. The guy who is going to control us all threw jabs. Well I never.
Trouble is, I never hear any serious analysis of why Trump might be doing so well in the USA other than Americans are a bit thick and stupid - which obviously isn't true - and is very patronising and an insult to our intelligence.
We know why he shouldn't be doing so well, but he is.
So, why?
I agree. I have asked the same question here several times. I don't understand it. I have read the replies to your post and none convince me so I am still stumped.
The only rational explanation is 50% of Americans are stupid and that just can't be true.
I'll have a go:
(Tldr; not stupid, just applying their intelligence elsewhere)
Politics just isn't that important to most people. People are busy, and choose to tune out a large proportion of the politics they hear in favour of more immediate, relevant (in their perception) concerns.
When they do tune into politics most people don't engage their critical facilities nearly as much as they do, say, when choosing a school for their child or when choosing a flat to rent. In their perception choosing Trump or Harris just isn't as high stakes.
Within that environment Trump garners more attention, and few have the time or intellectual energy to do the critical analysis to see through his nonsense. So he is superficially appealing, and most people don't get beyond the superficial.
Yes. There are relatively high levels of ignorance stupidity and bigotry amongst his voters (no use pretending otherwise) but there is also plenty of what you describe here.
But theres also gut feelings. Many Americans think female empowerment has gone too far and Trump speaks to this at a visceral level. Even many females dont like Harris as they see her as the epitimome of the overpromoted DEI hire.
Yep. Bigotry xenophobia and nostalgia are all very much gut feelings.
"I dont think it's a good idea for a politician in an election to offer special grants and non repayable loans to people based solely on their skin colour"
Yes. Trumps pitch to the Latinos. No more immigrants from Mexico, Central or South America. They will not take your jobs. Playing on peoples insecurities. Pathetic.
Then of course you have the likes of Musk onside spreading antisrmitic conspiracy theories such as this rally.
didn’t take long before a Trump supporter shouted to Musk that George Soros is “evil”—to which Musk responded with a clear “Yeah.”
He said Soros is “honestly misanthropic” and that “for someone who sort of claims to be doing good, but actually he is not. He is tearing down the fabric of society.¨
But George Soros can be evil. Being jewish doesnt prevent you from being evil. Soros actively funds many organisations, he transfer 18 billion dollars to it in 2017. Many things I'm sure could be considered very worthy and many reprehensible to some.
Just because someone is accuse of acting in a way that would be seen as stereotype/cliche/trope/meme doesnt mean he isnt.
Oh, it is Saturday morning...
Your post is really stupid. You give no examples of *why* he might be 'evil'; just saying that he might be. And of all the billionaires, why pick on him?
I'm not picking on him. He and Gates probably get it equally. If Gates was jewish some would blame that on anti-semitism.
Billy Boy. The guy who is going to control us all threw jabs. Well I never.
Gates works (and criticism there of) go back way before Covid madness. Gates himself does tend to stay away from the directly political stuff. Some of his work combating malaria in the third world is genuinely impressive.
Comments
But lamenting for some mythic past (the reality of which was pretty horrible) which you never experienced and isn't coming back a couple of generations on does nobody any good.
And you must have a very degraded life if you're yearning for the life and 'rights' of Bob Ewell.
The 'rights' in his case being able to beat your daughter and then blame it on a black man.
ideological line for decades ; perhaps a little less so recently.
It's important to remember that the conception of centrism has diverged considerably to the left of us in several of our near neighbours since Thatcherism, and that several of these neighbours have fared better than us in
multiple economic and industrial areas since then.
See Trump 1.0 and indeed Biden on China.
And thanks, Mr H for starting a discussion which is rather more principle based than often happens.
At 135 pages, for many writers this would barely serve as a prologue. And there was a time when a work that length could easily be assumed to be hackwork, with no characters, just a plot that races to a conclusion. Well, this has a plot, but it also has a wondmerfully drawn central character, Veris.
Veris lives in a village, near the forest. Everyone in the village knows you don't go into the forest. If you do, you don't come back. Ever. And whatever lives in the forest and takes those who venture into its domain, likes children most. The Tyrant (it is capitalised throughout) who has invaded the valley, along with many other places, killing thousands if not millions, has built a castle near the village, because he thinks it's a safe place to raise his children away from the hazards of magic. He doesn't know about the forest. Nor do his children. Oh dear.
When his children disappear one night, the Tyrant sends for the only person known to have entered the forest and returned. That would be Veris. Long ago she went in to rescue a child, and returned successfully, sort of. The Tyrant explains to her quite clearly that she must rescue the children, both of them, and if she does not, the the village will be destroyed and everyone she knows will be killed. Veris knows in addition that she has one day. If you don't get out of the forest by nightfall, you won't get out. Veris makes her preparations, and sets off on this foolhardy errand.
This is, as you might have guessed, a fairy tale. And 135 pages is quite enough for a fairy tale. In fact, Mohamed crams enough detail in there to make many a 400-page monster look thin. It's an absolute jewel of a book, beautifully composed in its description of place and person. Veris is fully fleshed out, as we learn about her little by little. The children are real, and believable as children, not miniature adults. It has beauty and magic, and it also has horror and despair, just as every fairy tale should have. And each time there is a revelation, about the forest, or Veris, it is both entirely surprising and entirely logical.
Most importantly, it comes as close as anything can to being a _new_ fairy tale.There are recognisable elements to the sotry, but they are presented and combined in new and often exciting ways. It is quite a thrill after a lifetime of reading fairy tales, folk tales, mythology and fantasy, to read something and think, 'I've never read it that way before.'
The only strike against this book is that in hardback it's £12.99, which might seem like a lot for 135 pages. It is worth it, though. And the paperback will be out in February next year. Look out for it.
https://www.cfr.org/blog/election-2024-donald-trump-has-vowed-raise-tariffs-can-he
Trump is some kind of ersatz religious figure for them
Evangelicals that still have access to the 'real thing ' are less inclined to vote for the orange Jesus
Nobody makes any effort to dig into the underlying nonsense, the partisan push polling, the dodgy crosstabs, the manipulation of data, not even the poll aggregators. Only the most egregious examples are excluded.
Every single US election now has to be portrayed as too close to call, whatever the fundamentals. For this to be too close to call, they have to scrutinise Harris’s every word whilst sane washing all of Trumps.
You won’t hear anything about low energy sleepy Don Old. But that’s where he is.
He's the GOP candidate. Loads of people always vote GOP.
He's a skilful exploiter of ignorance and resentment.
He's charismatic and has built a massive energetic loyal cult (MAGA).
Most Americans don't feel better off despite what the stats say.
It might be enough. I don't think so but my instincts could be wrong. Soon find out anyway.
If Alabama or Arkansas had 10x or 15x their current population they would likely be very different economically, culturally and politically.
For all it gets wrong, for all it fails to live up to its values, your actual church is good like that.
(Wanders off, humming That's why we build the wall; We build the wall to keep us free.)
I think Harris, or whoever follows her, needs more of Trump's boldness without Trump's pathological lying.
Biden’s project was to turn around the belief that outsourcing everything to China and Mexico was the way to go.
On the left, this outsourcing is seen as part and parcel of financialisarion of companies.
1) take over company
2) outsource production/workforce
3) sell the assets
4) load up with debt
The difference with Trump is the degree, and the stark violation of norms he proposes, to deal with the issue.
These are the two of the reasons he gets votes.
£12,000 a blade and up, if you’re interested
Freezing personal allowances
Increasing road fuel duty
Increasing air passenger tax
I would support doing all three, each is far preferable to any national insurance increase.
There's a meme for this picture, #TrumpYourCat. My photo quota:
Instructions:
1 - Brush cat.
2 - Make toupe out of hair from brush.
3 - Apply toupe to cat.
4 - Publish photo.
Just in case - I think you may possibly have trouble importing a new one here from Japan; traditional manufacture *may* make a difference. But antique ones (pre-1954) should be OK, with the documentation.
I'm not quite sure on the detail.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cden09n621wo
I think it is a genuine knife edge. Probably a close result in votes. But could flip into a bigger margin of EV votes.
I remember an article against Trump, very early on, by the usually more astute Naomi Klein. She suggested a rolling campaign of something like weekly demonstrations against his treatment of women, to demonstrate that society wouldn't accept these "standards". But look at social media ; this exactly what he has thrived on .
(Tldr; not stupid, just applying their intelligence elsewhere)
Politics just isn't that important to most people. People are busy, and choose to tune out a large proportion of the politics they hear in favour of more immediate, relevant (in their perception) concerns.
When they do tune into politics most people don't engage their critical facilities nearly as much as they do, say, when choosing a school for their child or when choosing a flat to rent. In their perception choosing Trump or Harris just isn't as high stakes.
Within that environment Trump garners more attention, and few have the time or intellectual energy to do the critical analysis to see through his nonsense. So he is superficially appealing, and most people don't get beyond the superficial.
Sorry, this was in reply to Malmesbury.
2) in both countries women playing sport is seen as both breaking down barriers *and* is mostly accepted.
Seems inevitable, really.
That’s a genuine compliment, you summarise it perfectly, but it also shows the pitiful lack of neutral, honest analysis of the Trump Phenomenon on PB, which is quite feebly biased and histrionic on this issue
The question is really differential turnout.
If 100% of 18-30 actually vote, then Harris would get a landslide. And a filibuster proof Senate and Congress.
But they don’t…
To me, the biggest surprise is that abortion hasn’t got the likely-to-vote numbers up.
Note that further up, they point out that the gangs leadership is in third countries, outside Europe.
This means his supporters can feel simultaneously unburdened and released from having to worry about their prejudices, but also more knowing, humorous and relaxed, fully-developed people.
A Mystery $30 Million Wave of Pro-Trump Bets Has Moved a Popular Prediction Market
Whilst naturally Conservative and conservative, US presidents (and their opponents) of the last forty years I would happily vote for in each election:
Biden (2020)
Trump (2016)
Obama (2012)
McCain (2008)
Bush jr(2004)
Bush jr (2000)
Clinton (1996)
Clinton (1992)
Bush Snr (1988)
Reagan (1988)
Reagan (1980)
If I was to rank them in my personally favourability:
Reagan
Clinton (the first and last fiscal conservative president since the war..)
Bush jr
McCain
Obama
Trump
Bush Snr
Biden
In the pub you wouldn't shout "burn down the hotel full of immigrants" but once in the mob you might
The group reduces or eliminates your personal responsibility for stupid crap
Trump expresses sentiments they wouldn't on their own
We just don't know, for now.
That’s the problem.
Arguably they might have been better off with a candidate with more distance to Biden.
didn’t take long before a Trump supporter shouted to Musk that George Soros is “evil”—to which Musk responded with a clear “Yeah.”
He said Soros is “honestly misanthropic” and that “for someone who sort of claims to be doing good, but actually he is not. He is tearing down the fabric of society.¨
https://x.com/VigilantFox/status/1847093406348025868
So I get the argument and it is logical, but even so you don't have to see very much of Trump to grasp the nonsense of it all, yet 50% don't appear to have spotted that.
Other answers have been people fear the alternative more. I don't get that either. I don't see how you can. Given a choice between a political philosophy I completely disagree with and a raving gibbering lunatic who appears happy to destroy democracy I would vote for the political philosophy I completely disagree with while holding my nose.
America desperately needs to get back a proper right wing party so that sane Conservatives can vote for it. The nutters in that party should be a small minority not running it.
I don’t buy that at all actually, Gareth. Because what Trump is so clearly doing in 2024 is piling up new supporters - Latino’s; working class, underclass; young men; black men - everywhere, everywhere but including where they are no use to him at all, like in New York.
This time, Trump could be close to winning the popular vote, perhaps only 1% in it, yet Kam could pip him in the college.
That’s the maths. But why Trumps greater appeal this time around DESPITE EVERYTHING? The only answer can be a mixed bag. The “Andrew Tate Trump” appeals to young Alpha Males who fear a life treading on eggshells and being bossed around by cat ladies.
Plus, unscrupulous politicians, since the world began there’s nothing new about it, blame social pressures on housing, jobs, crime, health, education, on outsiders to the local community, on immigrants, and always make votes from it, even though it’s always a pack of lies, the immigrants overall tend to be very well behaved, living in squalor, doing menial jobs for pittance - yet the unscrupulous argument has always been very hard to counteract, even though armed with the statistical truth.
Plus, just about everyone feels worse off in the pocket since last election. That’s a broad brush to voting day that decides votes for many people, to the bafflement of nerds living on PB.
And, compared to Kam, Trump is being seen as the experienced candidate in the race, as he has done it before.
PS - but we need to keep in mind the betting chart being flashed up on here quite rightly, that often shows Trump is a winner, is being influenced by large bets from big Trump supporters.
Now THAT's a question that isn't asked nearly often enough.
He is a bigger threat to American and the world than Trump.
Missing is the description of the French (and other EU) authorities upping their game, which is why these trials are increasing in number, while handing down custodial sentences.
The numbers of boats has dropped - hence the increase in overcrowding and mass drownings.
Where it goes from here is an open question; the policing and cooperation is reportedly still improving.
Because being frank we don’t actually spend enough on a lot of things that a government needs to spend money on
The Democrats don't really have grand narrative, so in this way he can also attract the non-metropiltans seeking something better and more mythical, as well as those already mentioned, simply wanting to annoy, destroy, or transgress.
Just because someone is accuse of acting in a way that would be seen as stereotype/cliche/trope/meme doesnt mean he isnt.
Musk replied with an awesome answer.
First off, he said, “It's not Biden. We know that for a fact. The dude has barely got two functional neurons.”
What about Kamala? Elon answered that it's not her either. “They just replaced the Biden puppet with the Kamala puppet, very obviously. If the teleprompter stops working, then the puppet breaks, and it's like, ‘Oh, the puppet just starts looping because the teleprompter broke.’”
So who is it? Musk said that he believes “There isn't any one sort of puppet master but maybe a thousand or “a lot.”
https://x.com/VigilantFox/status/1847095099139780741
Its either someone's pay, someone's benefits or someone's services.
And as we see from the whining about WFA its not easy.
Girl With The Dogs"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mu7A-4ychSw
If, after fourteen years where the government was run by Cameron, May, Johnson, Truss and Sunak, and Chancellors included such free spenders as Osborne, Hammond, Sunak and Hunt... Maybe there aren't any more spending cuts that the electorate is willing to swallow.
Your post is really stupid. You give no examples of *why* he might be 'evil'; just saying that he might be. And of all the billionaires, why pick on him?
If you want to be one of the good guys, Kamala aint your candidate this time.
https://x.com/josephfcox/status/1847309798888362104
President Bartlett is what American liberals wished he was. But of course he wasnt... He had the morals of an alleycat.
And having separate Mayors of London for weekdays and weekends (with a Friday 5.15 handover) would be amusing and possibly useful.
This is the blurb from Tommy Robinsons best selling book manifesto.
For decades the political class have openly planned to replace the indigenous people of Europe and in Manifesto we focus on how they are doing this in the UK. To ensure no-one disturbs their plans the elite manufacture a mythical far-right, when in truth it is the elite 1% who run a Fascist system of state-control, censorship and discrimination. Whenever someone has publicly addressed what is going on, the ruling class set about to destroy that person. We show how the elitist 1% have openly manipulated democracy to subjugate the masses, their elitist discussions carried on in plain sight for over a century, while they distract the masses with unimportant nonsense. The 1% knowingly plan to bring about another global conflict and in the aftermath they will end up in control of the world's resources and financial systems: "you will own nothing and you will be happy"
If there’s a choice.
I think all of the above are palatable and within their promises pre election.
RACIST BIGOT!