As I have said previously I am not au fait on US politics so can someone tell me what happens next in the process to install Trump in office?
You were very confident in a Harris victory, but now you know fuck all about US politics?
I was, so maybe that confirms why I know little about US politics
I am amazed and like so many was blind sided maybe by Harris's hype
The initial enthusiasm for Harris was confected. Hindsight and all that.
I don’t think it was confected. I think Harris surprised on the upside as a candidate and I will stand by that view. Considering the public perception and her polling before she became the nominee, she did really well on improving her image. She also for the main part avoided her word salads and came across as warm, kind and confident.
What did for her was not her qualities as a candidate, IMHO, but the fact that she did not have enough clear answers on the economy and immigration. She got the tone broadly right, but she couldn’t seal the deal on actual policy. She was too wooly, inexact.
I said upthread, she got the feels right, but she couldn’t convert.
Yes - she is the B- candidate at national level. Not awful, but just not at the Obama & Bill Clinton level.
It's shocking to me that JD Vance is one heart attack away from being POTUS in s few months. At least last time Pence was actually an experienced politician despite not agreeing with much of his policy he wouldn't have been completely terrible.
Vance is smart. I reckon he’d be a good president
I don't see a lot of evidence for that.
Hillbilly Elegy is a fine book
You're a decent writer too; you'd be an awful President.
There's an idea for a discussion Writers. Good / bad politicians To start the column, think the good column might be quite short
Dickens. Will Self
Vaclav Havel?
Not much read these days but A.P. Herbert was a very witty writer on legal issues and a fine independent MP for Oxford University until it's abolition in 1950. Disraeli was a great politician and good novelist. Hilaire Belloc was a brilliant writer and interesting politician if you ignore his anti zionism.
Since 1941 the interests and the values of the US and the UK have been aligned based on the agreed principles of the Atlantic Charter. Those values included, but were not limited to, the value of a peaceful democratic order and a just, rules-based system of security and trade.
Trump, like his backers seems to believe that these principles are not universal and have outlived their usefulness. Instead of multilateral agreements, they argue for a more direct, unilateral approach with the immediate interests of the United States a priority at all times. It is no good arguing that the altruism of post war America allowed the recovery of (western) Europe and the emergence of a mutually enriching trade. This point of view believes that the goodwill of the US has been exploited by enemies (China) and allies (the EU) alike.
The mealy-mouthed compromises which have been the foundation of globalisation are themselves seen as morally weak and in any event led to the wholesale off-shoring of jobs and large parts of the Western economy to Asia. Again, there is no point in arguing for Ricardo´s comparative advantage when you see once prosperous factories closed and the urban blight of drugs and vice replacing it.
As for the special pleading for minorities, racial and sexual, this infuriates large numbers of straight white voters who feel that affirmative action has replaced one injustice with another, and who remain, at best, uncomfortable with the reality of gay rights activists who seem to be pushing for acceptance of ever less acceptable, even "degenerate" groups at a time when birthrates have collapsed and the demographic survival of some places seems doubtful. Abortion rights are also involved in this world view too and are not positive.
Trump and the radical right offers clear and simple solutions. That these solutions in many cases seem at best questionable, at worse dangerous and potentially authoritarian does not bother the MAGA world view at all.
The rise of general authoritarianism is a clear global trend. Today Trump, in two years time, perhaps, Le Pen. As for the UK, it doesn´t matter, our withdrawal from the EU commits us to the United States, no matter that the values of the US and the UK have always differed and may now be misaligned. The decisive power of the United States is now over, it is one amongst many. If you no longer trust the fairness of the US, China doesn´t look so bad an alternative. Europe can only be a force if Russia is defeated and then brought into the EU state system, which is now very much not the wish of the USA.
Farage offers us the Trumpian future. Those of us who still believe in a fundamental justice will need to answer this defeat. Can Britain overcome our own crisis? Can we realign? This is now a fundamental state challenge for the UK, and not just from the centre and left of our political system.
Project 2025 is coming. What is our response? What choices, if any, do we have?
"If you no longer trust the fairness of the US, China doesn´t look so bad an alternative."
You can't really believe this.
"Those of us who still believe in a fundamental justice will need to answer this defeat."
What do you mean by "a fundamental justice" as opposed to just "fundamental justice"?
It's a very long example of Trump derangement syndrome.
Is it ?
I think it might be more a reflection of just how unattractive the US might seem to Europe - and China's economic appeal, if the US imposes particularly damaging tariffs, might outweigh its obvious authoritarianism.
Germany was certainly prepared to overlook the nature of Putin's regime when doing business with it. Its trade with China is massive (though the balance of advantage has changed). And EU countries are already accepting Chinese factories.
That doesn't make adapting to China as some kind of trading alternative to the US a good thing; it isn't - but in a world where the US turns its back on Europe, it might well happen.
And what it isn't is "deranged".
I think it is deranged for Europe to make itself economically dependent on China, when China will use that power to destroy any challenge to it's attempt to achieve a global hegemony.
A Trump-led Antics is no longer a reliable ally for democracies, but It's not an active enemy to democracy in the way that China is.
What do you think happens if the US start a trade war ?
It's not an outcome I'm arguing for - I'm just saying it's at least fairly likely to happen in that case.
I think there's a chance that Europe will choose to accommodate to China as the short-term easiest option, yes.
But I would characterise it as deranged. We've seen with Russia the danger of taking the short-term easier choice and becoming economically reliant on a militarily expansionist dictatorship. Making the exact same mistake, but more so, with China is deranged.
Your enemies, enemy isn't so much a friend as someone willing to purchase your goods.
The interesting bit will be what happens to ASML - the chip manufacturer supplier given that they can't sell things to China but are a European rather than US Company..
Trump will be selling carveouts from import duties to the highest bidders.
CNN, NYT, BBC still pretending Trump hasn't clinched...
It isn't over yet. Remember that Harris dodgy phone call? What if she was ordering up a load of stuffed ballot boxes? Once they get counted Harris is guaranteed to win an EC majority of 704.
DDHQ has the US House as 218/217 to the GOP. If there is any silver lining, if that holds (or the Democrats slightly outperform and get the majority) it will be much harder for Trump to push through policy.
Ed Davey @EdwardJDavey · 39m This is a dark, dark day for people around the globe. The world’s largest economy and most powerful military will be led by a dangerous, destructive demagogue.
Smart politics from the Lib Dems. They're fishing in the pool of Trump-hating voters and he's never going to be PM and have to work with Trump.
Is hating Trump going to really drive people to vote for a political party in the UK ?
I cannot see it personally.
Ed needs to stick to dicking around in the water.
Just being a dick as normal is enough. Irrelevant pygmy politician seeking attention.
As I have said previously I am not au fait on US politics so can someone tell me what happens next in the process to install Trump in office?
You were very confident in a Harris victory, but now you know fuck all about US politics?
I was, so maybe that confirms why I know little about US politics
I am amazed and like so many was blind sided maybe by Harris's hype
The initial enthusiasm for Harris was confected. Hindsight and all that.
I don’t think it was confected. I think Harris surprised on the upside as a candidate and I will stand by that view. Considering the public perception and her polling before she became the nominee, she did really well on improving her image. She also for the main part avoided her word salads and came across as warm, kind and confident.
What did for her was not her qualities as a candidate, IMHO, but the fact that she did not have enough clear answers on the economy and immigration. She got the tone broadly right, but she couldn’t seal the deal on actual policy. She was too wooly, inexact.
I said upthread, she got the feels right, but she couldn’t convert.
Yes - she is the B- candidate at national level. Not awful, but just not at the Obama & Bill Clinton level.
But Trump is awful on multiple objective levels. Why oh why did she lose?
It's shocking to me that JD Vance is one heart attack away from being POTUS in s few months. At least last time Pence was actually an experienced politician despite not agreeing with much of his policy he wouldn't have been completely terrible.
Vance is smart. I reckon he’d be a good president
I don't see a lot of evidence for that.
Hillbilly Elegy is a fine book
You're a decent writer too; you'd be an awful President.
There's an idea for a discussion Writers. Good / bad politicians To start the column, think the good column might be quite short
As I have said previously I am not au fait on US politics so can someone tell me what happens next in the process to install Trump in office?
Lots of hot air and little else till 6th january and then Trump has the shushing stick. Be lots of crawling and grovelling in between as scraps from the table are fought over.
As I have said previously I am not au fait on US politics so can someone tell me what happens next in the process to install Trump in office?
You were very confident in a Harris victory, but now you know fuck all about US politics?
I was, so maybe that confirms why I know little about US politics
I am amazed and like so many was blind sided maybe by Harris's hype
The initial enthusiasm for Harris was confected. Hindsight and all that.
Looking back, it was sheer relief that Biden had gone - the Kamalagasm
Dreadfully misguided in retrospect. She was a painfully weak candidate who only got to where she did coz the Dems were spinelessly blind and in denial about Biden’s dementia
The candidates who could have beaten Trump chose not to stand as they favoured waiting another 4 years. Shame on them.
TF that's over. Have never understood American politics. It's almost as if it is a foreign country, thousands of miles away across an ocean.
Seems like I'm not alone though. The political and media classes and many pollsters got this horribly wrong (again), so don't worry all those PB commentators who did the same, you're in 'good' company. Wishing and hoping never predicts an outcome.
Thought I would try and get it into it last night, via Channel 4. Watched Maitlis and Guru-Murthy embarrass themselves by shouting over and berating Boris Johnson. Whatever your opinion of Johnson, he has a far better inside knowledge of Trump/Harris/Biden than these numpties. Of course they were not interested in that, just trying to score one over him. They failed. He gave up, took the p**s and resorted to plugging his book. I gave up and went to bed.
What next? Starmer hopefully will have stopped staring vacantly into space, his usual response when his scripted responses don't apply and he is required to think on this feet. God help Lammy. Another failure from this Labour government. They actually need someone like Johnson to help them engage, as I am not sure they have anyone.
For Europe, as Ben Wallace says, the answer isn't a new alliance or a European army. Just spend the damn money on defence, all NATO members.
I can only hope that Zelensky is able to charm Trump, it is a quality he has, so maybe.
It's shocking to me that JD Vance is one heart attack away from being POTUS in s few months. At least last time Pence was actually an experienced politician despite not agreeing with much of his policy he wouldn't have been completely terrible.
Vance is smart. I reckon he’d be a good president
I don't see a lot of evidence for that.
Hillbilly Elegy is a fine book
You're a decent writer too; you'd be an awful President.
There's an idea for a discussion Writers. Good / bad politicians To start the column, think the good column might be quite short
Dickens. Will Self
Vaclav Havel?
Not much read these days but A.P. Herbert was a very witty writer on legal issues and a fine independent MP for Oxford University until it's abolition in 1950. Disraeli was a great politician and good novelist. Hilaire Belloc was a brilliant writer and interesting politician if you ignore his anti zionism.
Stalin and Mao both wrote not-bad poetry, I believe
Not sure where one would place them as politicians, somewhere between Tim Farron and Sir Ed Davey in terms of achievement?
Boris is a pretty good columnist and a highly successful politician
TF that's over. Have never understood American politics. It's almost as if it is a foreign country, thousands of miles away across an ocean.
Seems like I'm not alone though. The political and media classes and many pollsters got this horribly wrong (again), so don't worry all those PB commentators who did the same, you're in 'good' company. Wishing and hoping never predicts an outcome.
Thought I would try and get it into it last night, via Channel 4. Watched Maitlis and Guru-Murthy embarrass themselves by shouting over and berating Boris Johnson. Whatever your opinion of Johnson, he has a far better inside knowledge of Trump/Harris/Biden than these numpties. Of course they were not interested in that, just trying to score one over him. They failed. He gave up, took the p**s and resorted to plugging his book. I gave up and went to bed.
What next? Starmer hopefully will have stopped staring vacantly into space, his usual response when his scripted responses don't apply and he is required to think on this feet. God help Lammy. Another failure from this Labour government. They actually need someone like Johnson to help them engage, as I am not sure they have anyone.
For Europe, as Ben Wallace says, the answer isn't a new alliance or a European army. Just spend the damn money on defence, all NATO members.
I can only hope that Zelensky is able to charm Trump, it is a quality he has, so maybe.
That Channel 4 coverage is all that’s wrong with British political TV
Pathetic no-mark journalists like Maitlis and KGM trying to berate and humiliate an actually super-successful politician - Boris - just because they don’t like the facts as they pan out. Fucking wankers
It's shocking to me that JD Vance is one heart attack away from being POTUS in s few months. At least last time Pence was actually an experienced politician despite not agreeing with much of his policy he wouldn't have been completely terrible.
Vance is smart. I reckon he’d be a good president
I don't see a lot of evidence for that.
Hillbilly Elegy is a fine book
You're a decent writer too; you'd be an awful President.
There's an idea for a discussion Writers. Good / bad politicians To start the column, think the good column might be quite short
Dickens. Will Self
Vaclav Havel?
Not much read these days but A.P. Herbert was a very witty writer on legal issues and a fine independent MP for Oxford University until it's abolition in 1950. Disraeli was a great politician and good novelist. Hilaire Belloc was a brilliant writer and interesting politician if you ignore his anti zionism.
Wasn't Belloc antisemitic (though he blew hot and cold) rather than anti zionist? Zionism was hardly a twinkle in the world's eye when Belloc was most active.
It was obvious for a while that Kamala was an inadequate candidate for the biggest job in the world. She could not speak `off the cuff` and sometimes didn`t make sense at all.
Though she has done better than expected with the campaign within a short time.
But couldn`t prevent every state in the US moving towards the Republicans.
Trump is also a wholly inadequate candidate for the presidency.
As I have said previously I am not au fait on US politics so can someone tell me what happens next in the process to install Trump in office?
You were very confident in a Harris victory, but now you know fuck all about US politics?
I was, so maybe that confirms why I know little about US politics
I am amazed and like so many was blind sided maybe by Harris's hype
The initial enthusiasm for Harris was confected. Hindsight and all that.
Looking back, it was sheer relief that Biden had gone - the Kamalagasm
Dreadfully misguided in retrospect. She was a painfully weak candidate who only got to where she did coz the Dems were spinelessly blind and in denial about Biden’s dementia
I don't think we can lay all the blame on Harris. The Dems have also lost the Senate, towards the worse end of expectations, and look like they are losing the House too.
If it was just the weakness of Harris as a candidate you might expect some better Democrat candidates to stand against the tide in the other contests.
It's shocking to me that JD Vance is one heart attack away from being POTUS in s few months. At least last time Pence was actually an experienced politician despite not agreeing with much of his policy he wouldn't have been completely terrible.
Vance is smart. I reckon he’d be a good president
I don't see a lot of evidence for that.
Hillbilly Elegy is a fine book
You're a decent writer too; you'd be an awful President.
There's an idea for a discussion Writers. Good / bad politicians To start the column, think the good column might be quite short
As I have said previously I am not au fait on US politics so can someone tell me what happens next in the process to install Trump in office?
You were very confident in a Harris victory, but now you know fuck all about US politics?
I was, so maybe that confirms why I know little about US politics
I am amazed and like so many was blind sided maybe by Harris's hype
The initial enthusiasm for Harris was confected. Hindsight and all that.
I don’t think it was confected. I think Harris surprised on the upside as a candidate and I will stand by that view. Considering the public perception and her polling before she became the nominee, she did really well on improving her image. She also for the main part avoided her word salads and came across as warm, kind and confident.
What did for her was not her qualities as a candidate, IMHO, but the fact that she did not have enough clear answers on the economy and immigration. She got the tone broadly right, but she couldn’t seal the deal on actual policy. She was too wooly, inexact.
I said upthread, she got the feels right, but she couldn’t convert.
Yes - she is the B- candidate at national level. Not awful, but just not at the Obama & Bill Clinton level.
But Trump is awful on multiple objective levels. Why oh why did she lose?
I would move to the discussion we were having about a month ago.
Trump's rhetoric was full of emotion and mythologising, and the modern Western left has allied itself to a cooler approach that is less reasonant. That was the platform thar she inherited with only a few months to go.
It was obvious for a while that Kamala was an inadequate candidate for the biggest job in the world. She could not speak `off the cuff` and sometimes didn`t make sense at all.
Though she has done better than expected with the campaign within a short time.
But couldn`t prevent every state in the US moving towards the Republicans.
Trump is also a wholly inadequate candidate for the presidency.
He may have character flaws but being able to speak spontaneously is pretty basic for a politician and she couldn`t do that. On the big stage, she had to hide away for weeks wasting precious time and didn`t do as many engagements.
She didn`t do a single press conference. Shocking.
Ed Davey @EdwardJDavey · 39m This is a dark, dark day for people around the globe. The world’s largest economy and most powerful military will be led by a dangerous, destructive demagogue.
Smart politics from the Lib Dems. They're fishing in the pool of Trump-hating voters and he's never going to be PM and have to work with Trump.
Is hating Trump going to really drive people to vote for a political party in the UK ?
I cannot see it personally.
Ed needs to stick to dicking around in the water.
Hatred of Trump is quite visceral. Several people telling me this morning they feel nauseous, despite being nowhere near the US. So it's a good marker for identity, which tribe you belong to. Starmer obviously can't attack Trump, and Badenoch probably doesn't want to, so there's a good gap here for LibDems.
I loathe Trump but just feel less irritated than when he won the first time as that was in the same year as Brexit .
I feel less irritated because we’ve all known, deep-down; that it was a possibility. I’ve had time to mentally prepare for it. 2016 was the equivalent of being punched in the stomach with no warning: most of us just all comfortably assumed there was no chance that he would make it.
We have just been punched in the stomach for the umpteenth time, and we've sadly got used to it.
Although somewhat embarassing they waited for Wisconsin to run out of votes rather than admit Alaska is not too close to call and has not been for hours.
It was obvious for a while that Kamala was an inadequate candidate for the biggest job in the world. She could not speak `off the cuff` and sometimes didn`t make sense at all.
Though she has done better than expected with the campaign within a short time.
But couldn`t prevent every state in the US moving towards the Republicans.
Trump is also a wholly inadequate candidate for the presidency.
The final proof that Kamala was shit was her refusal to do Joe Rogan
By that time it must have been obvious she was in severe danger of losing, and losing partly because she was surprisingly weak with young people, especially men
How do you solve that? Go on Joe Rogan, on his terms, do 3 hours of long chat which may be a disaster but also may charm, persuade and surprise people - esp young men. Trump had the cullions to do it (so did Elon), she did not
She could have changed the game even then, at that late stage. It would have been brave and surprising
But no, she didn’t, out of cowardice she imposed absurd terms Rogan was right to refuse, so she has rightfully lost
Although somewhat embarassing they waited for Wisconsin to run out of votes rather than admit Alaska is not too close to call and has not been for hours.
As utterly absurd Fox News is, they called it hours ago. Rightly.
The 'dream' scenario is that a Trump victory leads to the collapse of Scholz's government and his replacement with Merz who has been much tougher on Russia. We've also yet to see how far Ukraine has come in developing its own missiles.
The final proof that Kamala was shit was her refusal to do Joe Rogan
By that time it must have been obvious she was in severe danger of losing, and losing partly because she was surprisingly weak with young people, especially men
How do you solve that? Go on Joe Rogan, on his terms, do 3 hours of long chat which may be a disaster but also may charm, persuade and surprise people - esp young men. Trump had the cullions to do it (so did Elon), she did not
She could have changed the game even then, at that late stage. It would have been brave and surprising
But no, she didn’t, she imposed absurd terms Rogan was right to refuse, out of cowardice, so she has rightfully lost
Didn't do that, didn't do the Al Smith dinner, isn't doing a timely concession speech, was nearly entirely hidden from scrutiny all campaign despite no primary.
They hid her more than they hid Joe when he was openly senile - those close clearly know she's a liability.
It was obvious for a while that Kamala was an inadequate candidate for the biggest job in the world. She could not speak `off the cuff` and sometimes didn`t make sense at all.
Though she has done better than expected with the campaign within a short time.
But couldn`t prevent every state in the US moving towards the Republicans.
Trump is also a wholly inadequate candidate for the presidency.
Objectively he isn't at all.
You're confusing the ability to win an election with ability to do the job
I am genuinely surprised anyone is surprised by this result - except, perhaps, by how big it is. Trump owned the fundamentals and most American voters like what he represents. He now controls all levers of power in the US so we will get to see what Trumpism is - and whether it works.
I would be surprised if the full fat tariff plan came in because whatever its long term benefits (dubious) in the short term it will cause a lot of pain to US consumers. What's more, while the US market is very big, the plutocrats who stand behind Trump need bigger markets in order to thrive. People like Elon Musk cannot afford major trade wars.
The empowerment of Putin and the betrayal of Ukraine is different. If that happens, a new and very dangerous chapter in world history opens up. Any analysis of Europe's options that does not factor in Orbán and Fico - and the veto power they currently have inside the EU and NATO - is not worth the paper it's written on. People foolish enough to to fantasise about some sudden European awakening need to wake up. We failed to plan for the high likelihood of a Trump return, we’ll fail to react to it too. Until there’s an actual war, short-term political interest always trumps (geddit) the long-term good. In the UK and everywhere else.
Since 1941 the interests and the values of the US and the UK have been aligned based on the agreed principles of the Atlantic Charter. Those values included, but were not limited to, the value of a peaceful democratic order and a just, rules-based system of security and trade.
Trump, like his backers seems to believe that these principles are not universal and have outlived their usefulness. Instead of multilateral agreements, they argue for a more direct, unilateral approach with the immediate interests of the United States a priority at all times. It is no good arguing that the altruism of post war America allowed the recovery of (western) Europe and the emergence of a mutually enriching trade. This point of view believes that the goodwill of the US has been exploited by enemies (China) and allies (the EU) alike.
The mealy-mouthed compromises which have been the foundation of globalisation are themselves seen as morally weak and in any event led to the wholesale off-shoring of jobs and large parts of the Western economy to Asia. Again, there is no point in arguing for Ricardo´s comparative advantage when you see once prosperous factories closed and the urban blight of drugs and vice replacing it.
As for the special pleading for minorities, racial and sexual, this infuriates large numbers of straight white voters who feel that affirmative action has replaced one injustice with another, and who remain, at best, uncomfortable with the reality of gay rights activists who seem to be pushing for acceptance of ever less acceptable, even "degenerate" groups at a time when birthrates have collapsed and the demographic survival of some places seems doubtful. Abortion rights are also involved in this world view too and are not positive.
Trump and the radical right offers clear and simple solutions. That these solutions in many cases seem at best questionable, at worse dangerous and potentially authoritarian does not bother the MAGA world view at all.
The rise of general authoritarianism is a clear global trend. Today Trump, in two years time, perhaps, Le Pen. As for the UK, it doesn´t matter, our withdrawal from the EU commits us to the United States, no matter that the values of the US and the UK have always differed and may now be misaligned. The decisive power of the United States is now over, it is one amongst many. If you no longer trust the fairness of the US, China doesn´t look so bad an alternative. Europe can only be a force if Russia is defeated and then brought into the EU state system, which is now very much not the wish of the USA.
Farage offers us the Trumpian future. Those of us who still believe in a fundamental justice will need to answer this defeat. Can Britain overcome our own crisis? Can we realign? This is now a fundamental state challenge for the UK, and not just from the centre and left of our political system.
Project 2025 is coming. What is our response? What choices, if any, do we have?
"If you no longer trust the fairness of the US, China doesn´t look so bad an alternative."
You can't really believe this.
"Those of us who still believe in a fundamental justice will need to answer this defeat."
What do you mean by "a fundamental justice" as opposed to just "fundamental justice"?
It's a very long example of Trump derangement syndrome.
Is it ?
I think it might be more a reflection of just how unattractive the US might seem to Europe - and China's economic appeal, if the US imposes particularly damaging tariffs, might outweigh its obvious authoritarianism.
Germany was certainly prepared to overlook the nature of Putin's regime when doing business with it. Its trade with China is massive (though the balance of advantage has changed). And EU countries are already accepting Chinese factories.
That doesn't make adapting to China as some kind of trading alternative to the US a good thing; it isn't - but in a world where the US turns its back on Europe, it might well happen.
And what it isn't is "deranged".
I think it is deranged for Europe to make itself economically dependent on China, when China will use that power to destroy any challenge to it's attempt to achieve a global hegemony.
A Trump-led Antics is no longer a reliable ally for democracies, but It's not an active enemy to democracy in the way that China is.
What do you think happens if the US start a trade war ?
It's not an outcome I'm arguing for - I'm just saying it's at least fairly likely to happen in that case.
I think there's a chance that Europe will choose to accommodate to China as the short-term easiest option, yes.
But I would characterise it as deranged. We've seen with Russia the danger of taking the short-term easier choice and becoming economically reliant on a militarily expansionist dictatorship. Making the exact same mistake, but more so, with China is deranged.
It was Cicero being accused of Trump derangement with his predictions that I was commenting on.
As predictions they seem entirely reasonable possibilities.
Trump won Catholics by 23% after Kamala was too chicken to attend the Al Smith Dinner.
Biden would have carried the Catholics at least.
This is a election the democrats threw away. Sticking with Biden way too long, and then installing Harris as the defacto canditate when she was no where near good enough.
At least we surivied the last time Trump was president at least. We will do again.
For the democrats to reform after this. 1) Ditch the DEI/woke stuff. it turns the majority off, its as simple as that. You can't win culture wars. 2) Have a response at least for immigration 3) Actually listen to half the country rather than writing them off as racists and bigots.
It was obvious for a while that Kamala was an inadequate candidate for the biggest job in the world. She could not speak `off the cuff` and sometimes didn`t make sense at all.
Though she has done better than expected with the campaign within a short time.
But couldn`t prevent every state in the US moving towards the Republicans.
Trump is also a wholly inadequate candidate for the presidency.
He may have character flaws but being able to speak spontaneously is pretty basic for a politician and she couldn`t do that. On the big stage, she had to hide away for weeks wasting precious time and didn`t do as many engagements.
She didn`t do a single press conference. Shocking.
I suspect a reason why she chose Walz is because he's a lightweight.
If she'd picked Shapiro or Beshear then the VP candidate would have looked stronger than Harris.
TF that's over. Have never understood American politics. It's almost as if it is a foreign country, thousands of miles away across an ocean.
Seems like I'm not alone though. The political and media classes and many pollsters got this horribly wrong (again), so don't worry all those PB commentators who did the same, you're in 'good' company. Wishing and hoping never predicts an outcome.
Thought I would try and get it into it last night, via Channel 4. Watched Maitlis and Guru-Murthy embarrass themselves by shouting over and berating Boris Johnson. Whatever your opinion of Johnson, he has a far better inside knowledge of Trump/Harris/Biden than these numpties. Of course they were not interested in that, just trying to score one over him. They failed. He gave up, took the p**s and resorted to plugging his book. I gave up and went to bed.
What next? Starmer hopefully will have stopped staring vacantly into space, his usual response when his scripted responses don't apply and he is required to think on this feet. God help Lammy. Another failure from this Labour government. They actually need someone like Johnson to help them engage, as I am not sure they have anyone.
For Europe, as Ben Wallace says, the answer isn't a new alliance or a European army. Just spend the damn money on defence, all NATO members.
I can only hope that Zelensky is able to charm Trump, it is a quality he has, so maybe.
That Channel 4 coverage is all that’s wrong with British political TV
Pathetic no-mark journalists like Maitlis and KGM trying to berate and humiliate an actually super-successful politician - Boris - just because they don’t like the facts as they pan out. Fucking wankers
Caught the news on R4 at 3am doing their bad-news-good-news thing. Apparently an 'openly trans' representative has been elected somewhere or other. Light at the end of the tunnel.
It was obvious for a while that Kamala was an inadequate candidate for the biggest job in the world. She could not speak `off the cuff` and sometimes didn`t make sense at all.
Though she has done better than expected with the campaign within a short time.
But couldn`t prevent every state in the US moving towards the Republicans.
Trump is also a wholly inadequate candidate for the presidency.
Objectively he isn't at all.
You're confusing the ability to win an election with ability to do the job
It's shocking to me that JD Vance is one heart attack away from being POTUS in s few months. At least last time Pence was actually an experienced politician despite not agreeing with much of his policy he wouldn't have been completely terrible.
Vance is smart. I reckon he’d be a good president
I don't see a lot of evidence for that.
Hillbilly Elegy is a fine book
You're a decent writer too; you'd be an awful President.
There's an idea for a discussion Writers. Good / bad politicians To start the column, think the good column might be quite short
Dickens. Will Self
Disraeli
Pal of Belloc, John Buchan. Also not entirely sound on the Jewish question.
As I have said previously I am not au fait on US politics so can someone tell me what happens next in the process to install Trump in office?
You were very confident in a Harris victory, but now you know fuck all about US politics?
I was, so maybe that confirms why I know little about US politics
I am amazed and like so many was blind sided maybe by Harris's hype
The initial enthusiasm for Harris was confected. Hindsight and all that.
I don’t think it was confected. I think Harris surprised on the upside as a candidate and I will stand by that view. Considering the public perception and her polling before she became the nominee, she did really well on improving her image. She also for the main part avoided her word salads and came across as warm, kind and confident.
What did for her was not her qualities as a candidate, IMHO, but the fact that she did not have enough clear answers on the economy and immigration. She got the tone broadly right, but she couldn’t seal the deal on actual policy. She was too wooly, inexact.
I said upthread, she got the feels right, but she couldn’t convert.
Yes - she is the B- candidate at national level. Not awful, but just not at the Obama & Bill Clinton level.
But Trump is awful on multiple objective levels. Why oh why did she lose?
Because both candidacies were, to an extent, about political positions rather than the actual candidates.
Harris was the Chosen Anti MAGA
Trump was the Chosen Anti Status Quo candidate. So people were voting, not for the orange convict, but for a mythical version. See the contortions supporters go through to reconcile the Real Trump with Mythical Trump. And the ridiculous iconography this creates.
There's a long history of this in populism - look at the difference between Mythical Boulanger and the Real Boulanger, for example.
There is an *element* of this in many elections - in the UK many people voted for (and adore) The Mythical Corbyn, rather than the Real Corbyn. You still find people swearing that Corbyn was a Remainer.... Or see Boris,Truss or most recently Starmer. People project onto the candidate what they hope will be there.
The delays in bringing those cases allowed Trump the chance to run the clock down .
Morning everyone. Not really a 'Good Morning' day, is it!
What's going to happen about Trump's sentencing in New York on (IIRC) 18th November?
That seems to be a strange thing - "the Dems delayed".
The US system aiui does not do political prosecutions in theory and in general, and has separation of powers. Perhaps not so strong as we have hear, but surely it was the MoJ not "the Dems" who did the prosecutions?
I'd identify some delays around eg Jack Smith not moving against the corrupt Aileen Cannon, but most of the delays around Trump & cronies trying to spin things out interminably.
That's how Steve Bannon walked into another lamp post - he delayed and delayed to the point where he ended up in prison throughout the whole election campaign.
As I have said previously I am not au fait on US politics so can someone tell me what happens next in the process to install Trump in office?
You were very confident in a Harris victory, but now you know fuck all about US politics?
I was, so maybe that confirms why I know little about US politics
I am amazed and like so many was blind sided maybe by Harris's hype
The initial enthusiasm for Harris was confected. Hindsight and all that.
Looking back, it was sheer relief that Biden had gone - the Kamalagasm
Dreadfully misguided in retrospect. She was a painfully weak candidate who only got to where she did coz the Dems were spinelessly blind and in denial about Biden’s dementia
The candidates who could have beaten Trump chose not to stand as they favoured waiting another 4 years. Shame on them.
Not really. Would any of them have beaten Biden in a contested primary ?
And of they had, would it have made any difference ? Whatever advantages they had over Harris might have been offset by the divisions created in the party.
Once Biden decided he was running for a second term, I don't see that there was necessarily a better scenario; an alternative might have been worse.
The final proof that Kamala was shit was her refusal to do Joe Rogan
By that time it must have been obvious she was in severe danger of losing, and losing partly because she was surprisingly weak with young people, especially men
How do you solve that? Go on Joe Rogan, on his terms, do 3 hours of long chat which may be a disaster but also may charm, persuade and surprise people - esp young men. Trump had the cullions to do it (so did Elon), she did not
She could have changed the game even then, at that late stage. It would have been brave and surprising
But no, she didn’t, out of cowardice she imposed absurd terms Rogan was right to refuse, so she has rightfully lost
TF that's over. Have never understood American politics. It's almost as if it is a foreign country, thousands of miles away across an ocean.
Seems like I'm not alone though. The political and media classes and many pollsters got this horribly wrong (again), so don't worry all those PB commentators who did the same, you're in 'good' company. Wishing and hoping never predicts an outcome.
Thought I would try and get it into it last night, via Channel 4. Watched Maitlis and Guru-Murthy embarrass themselves by shouting over and berating Boris Johnson. Whatever your opinion of Johnson, he has a far better inside knowledge of Trump/Harris/Biden than these numpties. Of course they were not interested in that, just trying to score one over him. They failed. He gave up, took the p**s and resorted to plugging his book. I gave up and went to bed.
What next? Starmer hopefully will have stopped staring vacantly into space, his usual response when his scripted responses don't apply and he is required to think on this feet. God help Lammy. Another failure from this Labour government. They actually need someone like Johnson to help them engage, as I am not sure they have anyone.
For Europe, as Ben Wallace says, the answer isn't a new alliance or a European army. Just spend the damn money on defence, all NATO members.
I can only hope that Zelensky is able to charm Trump, it is a quality he has, so maybe.
That Channel 4 coverage is all that’s wrong with British political TV
Pathetic no-mark journalists like Maitlis and KGM trying to berate and humiliate an actually super-successful politician - Boris - just because they don’t like the facts as they pan out. Fucking wankers
Caught the news on R4 at 3am doing their bad-news-good-news thing. Apparently an 'openly trans' representative has been elected somewhere or other. Light at the end of the tunnel.
The final proof that Kamala was shit was her refusal to do Joe Rogan
By that time it must have been obvious she was in severe danger of losing, and losing partly because she was surprisingly weak with young people, especially men
How do you solve that? Go on Joe Rogan, on his terms, do 3 hours of long chat which may be a disaster but also may charm, persuade and surprise people - esp young men. Trump had the cullions to do it (so did Elon), she did not
She could have changed the game even then, at that late stage. It would have been brave and surprising
But no, she didn’t, out of cowardice she imposed absurd terms Rogan was right to refuse, so she has rightfully lost
What conditions did she impose?
I beleive she wanted Rogan to go to her, and then only for an hour.
It was obvious for a while that Kamala was an inadequate candidate for the biggest job in the world. She could not speak `off the cuff` and sometimes didn`t make sense at all.
Though she has done better than expected with the campaign within a short time.
But couldn`t prevent every state in the US moving towards the Republicans.
Trump is also a wholly inadequate candidate for the presidency.
Objectively he isn't at all.
You're confusing the ability to win an election with ability to do the job
That is surely the sine qua non of a "candidate"?
While true, the actual winning comes down to relative ability to win the election, not absolute.
The delays in bringing those cases allowed Trump the chance to run the clock down .
Morning everyone. Not really a 'Good Morning' day, is it!
What's going to happen about Trump's sentencing in New York on (IIRC) 18th November?
That seems to be a strange thing - "the Dems delayed".
The US system aiui does not do political prosecutions in theory and in general, and has separation of powers. Perhaps not so strong as we have hear, but surely it was the MoJ not "the Dems" who did the prosecutions?
I'd identify some delays around eg Jack Smith not moving against the corrupt Aileen Cannon, but most of the delays around Trump & cronies trying to spin things out interminably.
That's how Steve Bannon walked into another lamp post - he delayed and delayed to the point where he ended up in prison throughout the whole election campaign.
Trump got really lucky getting Aileen Cannon assigned to the secret documents case. If any other judge had had that, Trump would have been in much hotter water. That could even have swung the election.
I think part of the reason Trump won is the kind of partisan error that the Guardian is currently making in its front page today, by saying that Trump on because fear triumphed over hope.
In fact, Trump's rhetoric was divided between lashings of romantic, mythical hope, to an almost crazed extent, and on the other, conscious provocation and aggression - "owning the libs". In comparison, the Democrat platform and overall narrrative was much less emotionally laden, even with Harris herself surprising as a warm and confident person in the shortened time she had to sell herself to the American public.
I suspect for the United Kingdom, the relationship with the incoming administration will, temporarily, be as frosty as it was when the Clinton administration took over following the overt Conservative support for George W Bush in 1992.
So much will depend on who Trump has around him - who will be his Secretary of State for example, his Defence Secretary?
As we saw in 2016, however, the rhetoric of campaigning bumps into the reality of Government at all levels - draining of swamps, building of walls might all sound good at a rally but the practicalities have a habit of getting in the way. The rhetoric over tariffs this time might not be matched by the reality of the global economy.
When I used to run reviews, I would always ask two sets of questions - first, what happened and why did it happen? Then, and this is the difficult one, what might have happened and why did it not?
In this instance, the first question asks why Trump and the Republicans won - the second asks why did Harris and the Democrats lose?
There's a lot of time to discuss these and perhaps in the cold light of days after today, we can do so rationally. I'll offer the fairly trite thought Governments in power in the immediate aftermath of Covid have been like the player left holding the hand grenade in the Pass the Hand Grenade game. Many incumbent Governments of all stripes have been defeated or have defeated themselves.
Two other thoughts - immigration (obviously) and the relating conflict between the economic necessity and the cultural impact and slightly more esoterically, the ability of the Republicans to convince large numbers of relatively poor working class Americans perpetuating or even increasing the wealth of already very rich people is in the economic interests of the poor as well.
TF that's over. Have never understood American politics. It's almost as if it is a foreign country, thousands of miles away across an ocean.
Seems like I'm not alone though. The political and media classes and many pollsters got this horribly wrong (again), so don't worry all those PB commentators who did the same, you're in 'good' company. Wishing and hoping never predicts an outcome.
Thought I would try and get it into it last night, via Channel 4. Watched Maitlis and Guru-Murthy embarrass themselves by shouting over and berating Boris Johnson. Whatever your opinion of Johnson, he has a far better inside knowledge of Trump/Harris/Biden than these numpties. Of course they were not interested in that, just trying to score one over him. They failed. He gave up, took the p**s and resorted to plugging his book. I gave up and went to bed.
What next? Starmer hopefully will have stopped staring vacantly into space, his usual response when his scripted responses don't apply and he is required to think on this feet. God help Lammy. Another failure from this Labour government. They actually need someone like Johnson to help them engage, as I am not sure they have anyone.
For Europe, as Ben Wallace says, the answer isn't a new alliance or a European army. Just spend the damn money on defence, all NATO members.
I can only hope that Zelensky is able to charm Trump, it is a quality he has, so maybe.
That Channel 4 coverage is all that’s wrong with British political TV
Pathetic no-mark journalists like Maitlis and KGM trying to berate and humiliate an actually super-successful politician - Boris - just because they don’t like the facts as they pan out. Fucking wankers
Caught the news on R4 at 3am doing their bad-news-good-news thing. Apparently an 'openly trans' representative has been elected somewhere or other. Light at the end of the tunnel.
I heard that and thought, yes, that's why "you" lost.
Not because it is a bad thing in itself, but because it isn't what 99.9% of America is actually worrying about.
Trump won Catholics by 23% after Kamala was too chicken to attend the Al Smith Dinner.
Biden would have carried the Catholics at least.
This is a election the democrats threw away. Sticking with Biden way too long, and then installing Harris as the defacto canditate when she was no where near good enough.
At least we surivied the last time Trump was president at least. We will do again.
For the democrats to reform after this. 1) Ditch the DEI/woke stuff. it turns the majority off, its as simple as that. You can't win culture wars. 2) Have a response at least for immigration 3) Actually listen to half the country rather than writing them off as racists and bigots.
I expect them to do none of this.
A softer version of this prescription is simply: you have to meet people where they are. If you scold them for not using the “correct” language or having the “correct” views then all you’re actually doing is telling them that you’re not interested in representing them politically. It should not be entirely surprising when these groups end up looking elsewhere for political representation, because all you’ve actually done is tell them that you don’t want them.
You don’t even have to compromise your political principles to do this! To pick a blatantly obvious example: the use of “latinx”. Spanish speakers absolutely /hate/ it: Focus group after focus group confirms this. They’re not averse to the idea behind it, but if you want them to use a gender neutral term like this then you need to use one that at least sounds like it might be Spanish. Latinx grates on the ears of every Spanish speaker & being told that they are bad people for not using it just confirms that you don’t care about their views one iota & if you don’t care to listen to them about this, then you’re clearly not going to listen to them about anything else, are you?
As I have said previously I am not au fait on US politics so can someone tell me what happens next in the process to install Trump in office?
You were very confident in a Harris victory, but now you know fuck all about US politics?
I was, so maybe that confirms why I know little about US politics
I am amazed and like so many was blind sided maybe by Harris's hype
The initial enthusiasm for Harris was confected. Hindsight and all that.
Looking back, it was sheer relief that Biden had gone - the Kamalagasm
Dreadfully misguided in retrospect. She was a painfully weak candidate who only got to where she did coz the Dems were spinelessly blind and in denial about Biden’s dementia
The candidates who could have beaten Trump chose not to stand as they favoured waiting another 4 years. Shame on them.
Not really. Would any of them have beaten Biden in a contested primary ?
And of they had, would it have made any difference ? Whatever advantages they had over Harris might have been offset by the divisions created in the party.
Once Biden decided he was running for a second term, I don't see that there was necessarily a better scenario; an alternative might have been worse.
Inflation would still have been high. A Bernie Sanders type could have been interesting as a genuine anti-establishment rival but Bernie was too old this time. A moderate Democrat, however good, similar challenges to Harris and a similar result. The only one I can think of who I would have expected to beat Trump is Michelle Obama and she really doesn't want it.
TF that's over. Have never understood American politics. It's almost as if it is a foreign country, thousands of miles away across an ocean.
Seems like I'm not alone though. The political and media classes and many pollsters got this horribly wrong (again), so don't worry all those PB commentators who did the same, you're in 'good' company. Wishing and hoping never predicts an outcome.
Thought I would try and get it into it last night, via Channel 4. Watched Maitlis and Guru-Murthy embarrass themselves by shouting over and berating Boris Johnson. Whatever your opinion of Johnson, he has a far better inside knowledge of Trump/Harris/Biden than these numpties. Of course they were not interested in that, just trying to score one over him. They failed. He gave up, took the p**s and resorted to plugging his book. I gave up and went to bed.
What next? Starmer hopefully will have stopped staring vacantly into space, his usual response when his scripted responses don't apply and he is required to think on this feet. God help Lammy. Another failure from this Labour government. They actually need someone like Johnson to help them engage, as I am not sure they have anyone.
For Europe, as Ben Wallace says, the answer isn't a new alliance or a European army. Just spend the damn money on defence, all NATO members.
I can only hope that Zelensky is able to charm Trump, it is a quality he has, so maybe.
That Channel 4 coverage is all that’s wrong with British political TV
Pathetic no-mark journalists like Maitlis and KGM trying to berate and humiliate an actually super-successful politician - Boris - just because they don’t like the facts as they pan out. Fucking wankers
Caught the news on R4 at 3am doing their bad-news-good-news thing. Apparently an 'openly trans' representative has been elected somewhere or other. Light at the end of the tunnel.
The final proof that Kamala was shit was her refusal to do Joe Rogan
By that time it must have been obvious she was in severe danger of losing, and losing partly because she was surprisingly weak with young people, especially men
How do you solve that? Go on Joe Rogan, on his terms, do 3 hours of long chat which may be a disaster but also may charm, persuade and surprise people - esp young men. Trump had the cullions to do it (so did Elon), she did not
She could have changed the game even then, at that late stage. It would have been brave and surprising
But no, she didn’t, out of cowardice she imposed absurd terms Rogan was right to refuse, so she has rightfully lost
What conditions did she impose?
I beleive she wanted Rogan to go to her, and then only for an hour.
Yes, and he rightly said “I never do that, not for anyone, not for Trump, Elon, or Vance, so why for you?” - his whole ethos is that over 3 hours, in his studio, the real person emerges - and he is the most successful podcaster in the world
The Kamala team knew he would refuse, and now their cowardice has served them with defeat
A new day has dawned, has it not? Congratulations to people who booked winnings, commiserations to the rest of us. I thought the Don's victory speech was a bit low-energy. He looks very old. I suspect things will be a bit of a shitshow until Vance takes over.
And then it will be a high-energy shit show.
The only hope is that he does ANOTHER 180 degree turn having got power. "Surprise!!!" But I'm not holding my breath.
To the extent there was a polling failure when the polling herded around a "too close to call" - which was fair from the prespective of the actual result - that failure was around the gender gap. Specifically the extent to which the male vote went to Trump. Certainly fooled me.
I wish America well. I feel it is going to need it. Americans will either discover Trump lied about his intentions on the economy - tariffs, forced migration of the people who do the shitty jobs that make America tick over - or worse, he will be true to his word. There has to be some hope that the House goes Democrat and imposes some brake on the craziest of the crazy. But the January 6th rioters will be pardoned, the law suits against Trump dropped and there will have ultimately been no sanction for the attempted overthrow of democracy. Ironically, democracy survived to give him another chance. Which democracy delivered him.
They are a hornery bunch, those American voters. Lord knows just how hornery they will be by 2028. If they get any sort of chance to exercise meaningful democracy again - in a world where artifical intelligence will be filtering artifical truth.
The rest of the world will have to do some heavy lifting for four years. Perhaps the rest of us will come out of this experience chastend - and strengthened. Glasses will being raised in Moscow, in Beijing, in Pyongyang. But maybe the European capitals will be the ultimate beneficiaries as the brightest and the best in America give up on the place. We should certainly be prepared to welcome them into our research departments, our Universities, our manufacturing, the City.
Maybe they will go back home in four years. Or by then, home will be here.
Given that you have spent the last six months confidently telling us exactly how and why Harris would easily win, seizing on all evidence that supported your thesis, and willfully ignoring anything contrary - even when people like me told you this was nuts - you could at least begin your rehabilitation with an apology
When have you ever apologised for the many, many times you have been wrong?
And why are you so obsessed with randoms on the internet being made to apologise to you, another random on the internet? Is there some sort of score card somewhere where you get a point for each random who say sorry, Grand Master Leon, you were right and I was wrong?
I assume this was directed at Leon rather than myself.
A big win for anyone with a defined contribution pension
I have recovered all that has been lost last few weeks and a bit extra so silver lining for sure, hopefully it continues
I was wondering what this meant for my retirement plans.
Surely Tariffs and the like are going to hurt somewhere down the line? Trump has no solutions to economic problems.
Yes need to think hard where money is, looks like it will be shares up initially but need to see how Trump goes with the more crazy ideas. Will be timing as to when it starts to go downhill depending on where your money is invested.
TF that's over. Have never understood American politics. It's almost as if it is a foreign country, thousands of miles away across an ocean.
Seems like I'm not alone though. The political and media classes and many pollsters got this horribly wrong (again), so don't worry all those PB commentators who did the same, you're in 'good' company. Wishing and hoping never predicts an outcome.
Thought I would try and get it into it last night, via Channel 4. Watched Maitlis and Guru-Murthy embarrass themselves by shouting over and berating Boris Johnson. Whatever your opinion of Johnson, he has a far better inside knowledge of Trump/Harris/Biden than these numpties. Of course they were not interested in that, just trying to score one over him. They failed. He gave up, took the p**s and resorted to plugging his book. I gave up and went to bed.
What next? Starmer hopefully will have stopped staring vacantly into space, his usual response when his scripted responses don't apply and he is required to think on this feet. God help Lammy. Another failure from this Labour government. They actually need someone like Johnson to help them engage, as I am not sure they have anyone.
For Europe, as Ben Wallace says, the answer isn't a new alliance or a European army. Just spend the damn money on defence, all NATO members.
I can only hope that Zelensky is able to charm Trump, it is a quality he has, so maybe.
That Channel 4 coverage is all that’s wrong with British political TV
Pathetic no-mark journalists like Maitlis and KGM trying to berate and humiliate an actually super-successful politician - Boris - just because they don’t like the facts as they pan out. Fucking wankers
It’s more that they see themselves as players not spectators. They’re not.
I think part of the reason Trump won is the kind of partisan error that the Guardian is currently making in its front page today, by saying that Trump on because fear triumphed over hope.
In fact, Trump's rhetoric was divided between lashings of romantic, mythical hope, to an almost crazed extent, and on the other, conscious provocation and aggression - "owning the libs". In comparison, the Democrat platform and overall narrrative was much less emotionally laden, even with Harris herself surprising as a warm and confident person in the shortened time she had to sell herself to the American public.
I said the other day that if Trump won, in retrospect, it would be obvious that it was all about the economy. Trump is unique in that people can literally look back to 2016-2020 and say they were better off during his administration than they were in the following four years. So they voted to go back to a time when the dollar in their pocket went further, and there were more opportunities around.
But Trump's victory only mirrors what has happened across the globe with incumbents getting kicked out left right and centre due to the cost of living crisis.
That is felt most acutely in people's day to day spending - the price of groceries, or the price of a meal out. It is also why I think this Labour government is going to be a one term one. The increase in employer's NI and lowering of the threshold + big rise in minimum wage is going to make life's little luxuries like a meal out considerably more expensive. These things matter.
Yes, the Trump era was chaotic. But people feel materially poorer than they did four years ago. Given the revision down of growth expectations and the massive transfer of wealth from the private to public sector we've seen in their first budget, I suspect Labour will suffer the same comeuppance in 5 years time.
It's shocking to me that JD Vance is one heart attack away from being POTUS in s few months. At least last time Pence was actually an experienced politician despite not agreeing with much of his policy he wouldn't have been completely terrible.
Vance is smart. I reckon he’d be a good president
I don't see a lot of evidence for that.
Hillbilly Elegy is a fine book
You're a decent writer too; you'd be an awful President.
There's an idea for a discussion Writers. Good / bad politicians To start the column, think the good column might be quite short
My gas supply is restored, and heating is back on.
Good news.
I'm recovering from what I think is a nasty muscle pull on the side of my trunk. Coughing fit in bed - moved to spare bed so it may have been dust, followed by being unable to sit up without considerable pain. I had to go straight to maximum regime codeine/paracetamol to sleep, never mind get up.
it's sort of less painful 3 days later, but it's going to take a week to recover fully.
Last time I did one of these back in 2020 or so I was flat on my back for more than a week, and thought I had cracked a rib.
I am genuinely surprised anyone is surprised by this result - except, perhaps, by how big it is. Trump owned the fundamentals and most American voters like what he represents. He now controls all levers of power in the US so we will get to see what Trumpism is - and whether it works.
I would be surprised if the full fat tariff plan came in because whatever its long term benefits (dubious) in the short term it will cause a lot of pain to US consumers. What's more, while the US market is very big, the plutocrats who stand behind Trump need bigger markets in order to thrive. People like Elon Musk cannot afford major trade wars.
The empowerment of Putin and the betrayal of Ukraine is different. If that happens, a new and very dangerous chapter in world history opens up. Any analysis of Europe's options that does not factor in Orbán and Fico - and the veto power they currently have inside the EU and NATO - is not worth the paper it's written on. People foolish enough to to fantasise about some sudden European awakening need to wake up. We failed to plan for the high likelihood of a Trump return, we’ll fail to react to it too. Until there’s an actual war, short-term political interest always trumps (geddit) the long-term good. In the UK and everywhere else.
Then you haven't been reading PB too much as few would countenance any thoughts of Trump winning despite many people (me, @rcs1000) posting article upon article explaining Trump's appeal to the masses, usually to much opprobrium.
Given his lip-read remarks to Obama - “she’s weak, she’s not up to it” - he might be feeling quietly vindicated, and perhaps even bitter
Serves him right by eliminating almost all possible VP picks on race/sex grounds before settling on (or for) her.
There is, arguably, an alternative history where a narrow Trump win in 2020 might have been better for the US in the long run than the narrow Biden victory.
He's have had exactly the same economic woes, dealt with them worse, and probably lost the GOP the presidency and both Houses of Congress, as Biden probably has now done for the Democrats.
But he'd not have had time to assemble a team with their own plans, nor had any further Supreme Court appointments.
Of course the rest of the free world might have been screwed - but we might now be so anyway.
She's going to have to stand and grin for another few years, unless she has an opt-out clause.
Well, she was beaming with fierce and sincere delight on stage in Fla when Trump made his victory speech
How old is she? 50s? I can imagine she is genuinely overjoyed. She gets to be First Lady all over again, her kids will be the president’s kids again (with all the benefits), her husband avoids jail (inter alia), her fame and income will only multiply. Most wives in their 50s would take that very very happily, as against the alternatives
She's going to have to stand and grin for another few years, unless she has an opt-out clause.
Well, she was beaming with fierce and sincere delight on stage in Fla when Trump made his victory speech
How old is she? 50s? I can imagine she is genuinely overjoyed. She gets to be First Lady all over again, her kids will be the president’s kids again (with all the benefits), her husband avoids jail (inter alia), her fame and income will only multiply. Most wives in their 50s would take that very very happily, as against the alternatives
She's going to have to stand and grin for another few years, unless she has an opt-out clause.
Well, she was beaming with fierce and sincere delight on stage in Fla when Trump made his victory speech
How old is she? 50s? I can imagine she is genuinely overjoyed. She gets to be First Lady all over again, her kids will be the president’s kids again (with all the benefits), her husband avoids jail (inter alia), her fame and income will only multiply. Most wives in their 50s would take that very very happily, as against the alternatives
Most wives in their 50s also aren't married to a narcissist, 78 year old nappy wearing felon.
She's going to have to stand and grin for another few years, unless she has an opt-out clause.
Well, she was beaming with fierce and sincere delight on stage in Fla when Trump made his victory speech
How old is she? 50s? I can imagine she is genuinely overjoyed. She gets to be First Lady all over again, her kids will be the president’s kids again (with all the benefits), her husband avoids jail (inter alia), her fame and income will only multiply. Most wives in their 50s would take that very very happily, as against the alternatives
Most wives in their 50s also aren't married to a narcissist, 78 year old nappy wearing felon.
You have to net that against his billions of dollars.
The delays in bringing those cases allowed Trump the chance to run the clock down .
Morning everyone. Not really a 'Good Morning' day, is it!
What's going to happen about Trump's sentencing in New York on (IIRC) 18th November?
That seems to be a strange thing - "the Dems delayed".
The US system aiui does not do political prosecutions in theory and in general, and has separation of powers. Perhaps not so strong as we have hear, but surely it was the MoJ not "the Dems" who did the prosecutions?
I'd identify some delays around eg Jack Smith not moving against the corrupt Aileen Cannon, but most of the delays around Trump & cronies trying to spin things out interminably.
That's how Steve Bannon walked into another lamp post - he delayed and delayed to the point where he ended up in prison throughout the whole election campaign.
Politics does enter into prosecutions in the US. All the DAs (who decide when to prosecute) are politicians first. Lots of elected judges....
Then you get quite blatant uses of regulatory bodies to punish people you don't like. Piss off the wrong people, and you get an IRS audit.
Everything I can see initially is that it’s the economy.
I don’t see how any Democrat candidate would have been able to turn that around.
A state governor would have been more credible as a change candidate.
Credible enough? A different question - but there has to have been a chance.
But without basically saying Biden got it wrong for 4 years how do they credibly run as one? It’s exactly what happened to Sunak.
Harris was probably slightly worse being the VP but I think it’s still pretty marginal.
In future I’ll be looking initially at the economy in polling as that seems to be a much more accurate indicator as it is here.
I do think Trump will crash and burn once again though. So the Democrats have got to be in with a good chance next time assuming they choose a good candidate right?
She's going to have to stand and grin for another few years, unless she has an opt-out clause.
Well, she was beaming with fierce and sincere delight on stage in Fla when Trump made his victory speech
How old is she? 50s? I can imagine she is genuinely overjoyed. She gets to be First Lady all over again, her kids will be the president’s kids again (with all the benefits), her husband avoids jail (inter alia), her fame and income will only multiply. Most wives in their 50s would take that very very happily, as against the alternatives
Most wives in their 50s also aren't married to a narcissist, 78 year old nappy wearing felon.
Most wives in their 50s aren’t married to the most powerful man in the world with endless exciting foreign travel and glamorous engagements and loads of groveling everywhere. I bet she loves it
Why have people been so reluctant to acknowledge the cost of the covid pandemic? Perhaps the Biden team thought that the economy was so great that they didn't need to?
She's going to have to stand and grin for another few years, unless she has an opt-out clause.
Well, she was beaming with fierce and sincere delight on stage in Fla when Trump made his victory speech
How old is she? 50s? I can imagine she is genuinely overjoyed. She gets to be First Lady all over again, her kids will be the president’s kids again (with all the benefits), her husband avoids jail (inter alia), her fame and income will only multiply. Most wives in their 50s would take that very very happily, as against the alternatives
Most wives in their 50s also aren't married to a narcissist, 78 year old nappy wearing felon.
You have to net that against his billions of dollars.
I'd already netted the wealth off against the hair, physique and obnoxious personality. That what was just the remaining balance.
Lee Jones @DrLeeJones A Democrat disaster far worse than 2016, when Trump was unknown quantity & lost popular vote. Now: massive swings to Trump as known quantity; Dem vote collapsed from 2020 when Biden won pop vote by 7m; Senate flips; House may too. Why? Quick thoughts... 1/
Why have people been so reluctant to acknowledge the cost of the covid pandemic? Perhaps the Biden team thought that the economy was so great that they didn't need to?
The thing though is that the economy has been doing really well under Biden.
It just hasn’t been doing well for people that voted in this election. Harris wasn’t able to articulate a reason for that - and she probably didn’t have one.
But assuming Trump crashes and burns, I can’t see his lot not having exactly the same problem next time.
She's going to have to stand and grin for another few years, unless she has an opt-out clause.
Well, she was beaming with fierce and sincere delight on stage in Fla when Trump made his victory speech
How old is she? 50s? I can imagine she is genuinely overjoyed. She gets to be First Lady all over again, her kids will be the president’s kids again (with all the benefits), her husband avoids jail (inter alia), her fame and income will only multiply. Most wives in their 50s would take that very very happily, as against the alternatives
Most wives in their 50s also aren't married to a narcissist, 78 year old nappy wearing felon.
Most misdemeanors don't get charged as felonies for political reasons...
Comments
Adolf H.
*innocent face*
TF that's over. Have never understood American politics. It's almost as if it is a foreign country, thousands of miles away across an ocean.
Seems like I'm not alone though. The political and media classes and many pollsters got this horribly wrong (again), so don't worry all those PB commentators who did the same, you're in 'good' company. Wishing and hoping never predicts an outcome.
Thought I would try and get it into it last night, via Channel 4. Watched Maitlis and Guru-Murthy embarrass themselves by shouting over and berating Boris Johnson. Whatever your opinion of Johnson, he has a far better inside knowledge of Trump/Harris/Biden than these numpties. Of course they were not interested in that, just trying to score one over him. They failed. He gave up, took the p**s and resorted to plugging his book. I gave up and went to bed.
What next? Starmer hopefully will have stopped staring vacantly into space, his usual response when his scripted responses don't apply and he is required to think on this feet. God help Lammy. Another failure from this Labour government. They actually need someone like Johnson to help them engage, as I am not sure they have anyone.
For Europe, as Ben Wallace says, the answer isn't a new alliance or a European army. Just spend the damn money on defence, all NATO members.
I can only hope that Zelensky is able to charm Trump, it is a quality he has, so maybe.
Not sure where one would place them as politicians, somewhere between Tim Farron and Sir Ed Davey in terms of achievement?
Boris is a pretty good columnist and a highly successful politician
Pathetic no-mark journalists like Maitlis and KGM trying to berate and humiliate an actually super-successful politician - Boris - just because they don’t like the facts as they pan out. Fucking wankers
If it was just the weakness of Harris as a candidate you might expect some better Democrat candidates to stand against the tide in the other contests.
Trump's rhetoric was full of emotion and mythologising, and the modern Western left has allied itself to a cooler approach that is less reasonant. That was the platform thar she inherited with only a few months to go.
She didn`t do a single press conference. Shocking.
At least it was quick and decisive.
By that time it must have been obvious she was in severe danger of losing, and losing partly because she was surprisingly weak with young people, especially men
How do you solve that? Go on Joe Rogan, on his terms, do 3 hours of long chat which may be a disaster but also may charm, persuade and surprise people - esp young men. Trump had the cullions to do it (so did Elon), she did not
She could have changed the game even then, at that late stage. It would have been brave and surprising
But no, she didn’t, out of cowardice she imposed absurd terms Rogan was right to refuse, so she has rightfully lost
Surely Tariffs and the like are going to hurt somewhere down the line? Trump has no solutions to economic problems.
I mean, he was TOO demented this time, but you can empathise if he is bitter
They hid her more than they hid Joe when he was openly senile - those close clearly know she's a liability.
Kari Lake OTOH looks like she will fail again in AZ lol.
I *think* that proves the Dems could have won with the right candidate and campaign...
I would be surprised if the full fat tariff plan came in because whatever its long term benefits (dubious) in the short term it will cause a lot of pain to US consumers. What's more, while the US market is very big, the plutocrats who stand behind Trump need bigger markets in order to thrive. People like Elon Musk cannot afford major trade wars.
The empowerment of Putin and the betrayal of Ukraine is different. If that happens, a new and very dangerous chapter in world history opens up. Any analysis of Europe's options that does not factor in Orbán and Fico - and the veto power they currently have inside the EU and NATO - is not worth the paper it's written on. People foolish enough to to fantasise about some sudden European awakening need to wake up. We failed to plan for the high likelihood of a Trump return, we’ll fail to react to it too. Until there’s an actual war, short-term political interest always trumps (geddit) the long-term good. In the UK and everywhere else.
As predictions they seem entirely reasonable possibilities.
This is a election the democrats threw away. Sticking with Biden way too long, and then installing Harris as the defacto canditate when she was no where near good enough.
At least we surivied the last time Trump was president at least. We will do again.
For the democrats to reform after this.
1) Ditch the DEI/woke stuff. it turns the majority off, its as simple as that. You can't win culture wars.
2) Have a response at least for immigration
3) Actually listen to half the country rather than writing them off as racists and bigots.
I expect them to do none of this.
If she'd picked Shapiro or Beshear then the VP candidate would have looked stronger than Harris.
Not sure vindicated would be right - in the end the economy, inflation and the immigration narrative is his to own.
Fairly difficult to see how he would have done any better.
Would Biden have beaten Trump in 2020 without Covid ?
Doubtful
Also not entirely sound on the Jewish question.
Harris was the Chosen Anti MAGA
Trump was the Chosen Anti Status Quo candidate. So people were voting, not for the orange convict, but for a mythical version. See the contortions supporters go through to reconcile the Real Trump with Mythical Trump. And the ridiculous iconography this creates.
There's a long history of this in populism - look at the difference between Mythical Boulanger and the Real Boulanger, for example.
There is an *element* of this in many elections - in the UK many people voted for (and adore) The Mythical Corbyn, rather than the Real Corbyn. You still find people swearing that Corbyn was a Remainer.... Or see Boris,Truss or most recently Starmer. People project onto the candidate what they hope will be there.
The US system aiui does not do political prosecutions in theory and in general, and has separation of powers. Perhaps not so strong as we have hear, but surely it was the MoJ not "the Dems" who did the prosecutions?
I'd identify some delays around eg Jack Smith not moving against the corrupt Aileen Cannon, but most of the delays around Trump & cronies trying to spin things out interminably.
That's how Steve Bannon walked into another lamp post - he delayed and delayed to the point where he ended up in prison throughout the whole election campaign.
Would any of them have beaten Biden in a contested primary ?
And of they had, would it have made any difference ?
Whatever advantages they had over Harris might have been offset by the divisions created in the party.
Once Biden decided he was running for a second term, I don't see that there was necessarily a better scenario; an alternative might have been worse.
In fact, Trump's rhetoric was divided between lashings of romantic, mythical hope, to an almost crazed extent, and on the other, conscious provocation and aggression - "owning the libs". In comparison, the Democrat platform and overall narrrative was much less emotionally laden, even with Harris herself surprising as a warm and confident person in the shortened time she had to sell herself to the American public.
A lot to chew over from last night's outcome.
I suspect for the United Kingdom, the relationship with the incoming administration will, temporarily, be as frosty as it was when the Clinton administration took over following the overt Conservative support for George W Bush in 1992.
So much will depend on who Trump has around him - who will be his Secretary of State for example, his Defence Secretary?
As we saw in 2016, however, the rhetoric of campaigning bumps into the reality of Government at all levels - draining of swamps, building of walls might all sound good at a rally but the practicalities have a habit of getting in the way. The rhetoric over tariffs this time might not be matched by the reality of the global economy.
When I used to run reviews, I would always ask two sets of questions - first, what happened and why did it happen? Then, and this is the difficult one, what might have happened and why did it not?
In this instance, the first question asks why Trump and the Republicans won - the second asks why did Harris and the Democrats lose?
There's a lot of time to discuss these and perhaps in the cold light of days after today, we can do so rationally. I'll offer the fairly trite thought Governments in power in the immediate aftermath of Covid have been like the player left holding the hand grenade in the Pass the Hand Grenade game. Many incumbent Governments of all stripes have been defeated or have defeated themselves.
Two other thoughts - immigration (obviously) and the relating conflict between the economic necessity and the cultural impact and slightly more esoterically, the ability of the Republicans to convince large numbers of relatively poor working class Americans perpetuating or even increasing the wealth of already very rich people is in the economic interests of the poor as well.
Not because it is a bad thing in itself, but because it isn't what 99.9% of America is actually worrying about.
You don’t even have to compromise your political principles to do this! To pick a blatantly obvious example: the use of “latinx”. Spanish speakers absolutely /hate/ it: Focus group after focus group confirms this. They’re not averse to the idea behind it, but if you want them to use a gender neutral term like this then you need to use one that at least sounds like it might be Spanish. Latinx grates on the ears of every Spanish speaker & being told that they are bad people for not using it just confirms that you don’t care about their views one iota & if you don’t care to listen to them about this, then you’re clearly not going to listen to them about anything else, are you?
Offering some Hope to the Democrat supporters.
The Kamala team knew he would refuse, and now their cowardice has served them with defeat
She's going to have to stand and grin for another few years, unless she has an opt-out clause.
I don’t see how any Democrat candidate would have been able to turn that around.
But Trump's victory only mirrors what has happened across the globe with incumbents getting kicked out left right and centre due to the cost of living crisis.
That is felt most acutely in people's day to day spending - the price of groceries, or the price of a meal out. It is also why I think this Labour government is going to be a one term one. The increase in employer's NI and lowering of the threshold + big rise in minimum wage is going to make life's little luxuries like a meal out considerably more expensive. These things matter.
Yes, the Trump era was chaotic. But people feel materially poorer than they did four years ago. Given the revision down of growth expectations and the massive transfer of wealth from the private to public sector we've seen in their first budget, I suspect Labour will suffer the same comeuppance in 5 years time.
Feels a lot like 2019 for Labour in that respect. I’ve been burned there before…
I'm recovering from what I think is a nasty muscle pull on the side of my trunk. Coughing fit in bed - moved to spare bed so it may have been dust, followed by being unable to sit up without considerable pain. I had to go straight to maximum regime codeine/paracetamol to sleep, never mind get up.
it's sort of less painful 3 days later, but it's going to take a week to recover fully.
Last time I did one of these back in 2020 or so I was flat on my back for more than a week, and thought I had cracked a rib.
He's have had exactly the same economic woes, dealt with them worse, and probably lost the GOP the presidency and both Houses of Congress, as Biden probably has now done for the Democrats.
But he'd not have had time to assemble a team with their own plans, nor had any further Supreme Court appointments.
Of course the rest of the free world might have been screwed - but we might now be so anyway.
How old is she? 50s? I can imagine she is genuinely overjoyed. She gets to be First Lady all over again, her kids will be the president’s kids again (with all the benefits), her husband avoids jail (inter alia), her fame and income will only multiply. Most wives in their 50s would take that very very happily, as against the alternatives
Credible enough? A different question - but there has to have been a chance.
Harris have 227 already makes it one of the 3 or 4 closest results from about the last 10, with 4 States still to declare.
Then you get quite blatant uses of regulatory bodies to punish people you don't like. Piss off the wrong people, and you get an IRS audit.
Harris was probably slightly worse being the VP but I think it’s still pretty marginal.
In future I’ll be looking initially at the economy in polling as that seems to be a much more accurate indicator as it is here.
I do think Trump will crash and burn once again though. So the Democrats have got to be in with a good chance next time assuming they choose a good candidate right?
@DrLeeJones
A Democrat disaster far worse than 2016, when Trump was unknown quantity & lost popular vote. Now: massive swings to Trump as known quantity; Dem vote collapsed from 2020 when Biden won pop vote by 7m; Senate flips; House may too. Why? Quick thoughts... 1/
https://x.com/DrLeeJones/status/1854113710496711044
It just hasn’t been doing well for people that voted in this election. Harris wasn’t able to articulate a reason for that - and she probably didn’t have one.
But assuming Trump crashes and burns, I can’t see his lot not having exactly the same problem next time.