For me the pointers are that the Trump coalition is not a winning coalition at the federal level going forwards.
The easier thing for GOP politicians is to cleave to the Trumpsters, because of their enthusiasm. But that is what has driven the ABTs out of the party and has lost the GOP most independents and thus the absolutely essential suburbs.
For me, the way back for the GOP is the painful one. Excise their most passionate supporters, the Trumpsters. Rebuild the center right, win back the suburbs. Regain the trust of women.
To me, this will take at least one more bad election cycle result (2022), which alas is not guaranteed, followed by 4-6 years of rebuilding. It could go faster than that but equally it is not guaranteed to happen at all, but it is my best bet.
This is my view too. Except I think it will not be quite such a long and difficult process. Once Trump is not POTUS, my strong sense is he'll fade quicker than most people think. And given MAGA is so wrapped up with HIM, I think that will too. I see a vibrant young Republican emerging in time for the 24 election and running on a small state, libertarian, socially "trad" ticket. He or she will have the challenge of picking up the deplorables without being deplorable. If they can, they have a decent shot.
Spot on, the Trump balloon begins to rapidly deflate at precisely 1200hrs EST on 20 January. Trump becomes a has-been schmuck and his power and potency desert him.
Nothing from you but evidence free lazy slurring, as usual.
For me the pointers are that the Trump coalition is not a winning coalition at the federal level going forwards.
The easier thing for GOP politicians is to cleave to the Trumpsters, because of their enthusiasm. But that is what has driven the ABTs out of the party and has lost the GOP most independents and thus the absolutely essential suburbs.
For me, the way back for the GOP is the painful one. Excise their most passionate supporters, the Trumpsters. Rebuild the center right, win back the suburbs. Regain the trust of women.
To me, this will take at least one more bad election cycle result (2022), which alas is not guaranteed, followed by 4-6 years of rebuilding. It could go faster than that but equally it is not guaranteed to happen at all, but it is my best bet.
On topic: I gaze into the future of the Republican party - not too far, just a couple of years - and I see no Trump or Trumpdom there. What I do see, however and alas, are elements of the MAGA agenda still in the mix.
The million $ puzzle which imo must be solved in order to predict where the party goes is as follows - Of the 73m who voted for Donald Trump what are the approx weightings (adjusted for overlap) for the 4 main categories?
1. Love Trump. Lucky to have him. Helluva guy and a total one off. Just so into everything about the man. 2. Always vote Republican. It's what I am - a Republican. Cut me and I bleed tax cuts & voter suppression. 3. Not big on politics. Only care about the economy. Thought he'd done ok on that. Why change. 4. Trump? Can take him or leave him but I like his hard right national populist rhetoric and policies.
No particular order there except that I've put the last one last for a reason. I think it's the smallest.
Very rough guesses:
1. 10 2. 50 3. 8 4. 5
Although 1 and 4 are largely the same category, if we're being honest.
Much obliged. This is what I'm looking for. Unadorned numbers that I can crunch thro the "Predict the Near Term Future of the GOP" model I've developed (mainly for betting purposes but also to aid my superforecasting and related punditry).
- No bright future for MAGA without Trump. - Republican party v Trump is a mismatch. Party prevails.
Much easier to split the 73, so: 1. 20 2. 45 3. 6 4. 2
That's an interesting one, thanks.
Think we might be saying that the MAGA element - voters who love a bit of hardcore nativist nationalism but are indifferent to the Trump delivery mechanism - is negligible.
So let's drop it and merge me, you, pulpstar, BluestBlue et alia to get -
1. I'm a Republican stupid - 65 2. I'm a Trumpster and I AM stupid - 25 3. It's the economy obvs - 10
Nice clear pointers emerging now.
But what are they?
The problem with that approach of going back to the suburbanites is that (a) they are increasing socially liberal due to college education, (b) are more fickle and so (c) you would have to blow up your base by switching to a more socially liberal / economically right-wing stance in the hope - and it would be no more than a hope - that you can persuade people who deserted you to switch back.
There is another thing here as well. Hispanics, Asian-Americans and Black people, on the whole, tend to be socially conservative. If the Republicans continue to make inroads into the HIspanic vote, then that more than outweighs their losses in the suburbs. Ditch the socially conservative agenda to appeal to suburban types and you have lost that.
If you abandon the cities and the suburbs, you cannot take the House. Period.
Well, the Republicans nearly did.
The tragedy is that the 'rebels' were so exercised at the growing inequalities in income and wealth - and the growing distance between politicians and the people they are supposed to represent - that they turned to a brand of extreme Republicanism that was never likely to want to deliver them any sort of relief.
The big question of our era is why centre-left politicians have proved so unable to put forward a comprehensive platform to rectify the egregious distortions of 21st century society in a way that can carry a majority of sensibly minded voters in the centre of political opinion?
Within our lifetimes, if the centre-left doesn't rise to the challenge of our times, then the future will be left to the extremes.
The simple explanation is that centre-left politicians now spend most of their energy and efforts prioritising culturally liberal stances than the economic concerns that concern most people. I've pointed out here to those that scream racist at Trump voters that a good chunk of them would have voted for Obama in 2008. They didn't care he was Black but they did care about their economic conditions. However, the Democrat party became so embroiled in cultural issues that it dropped the ball on the economic front.
This line of attack might have worked in the past, but it has lost much of its potency given the Democrats' clean sweep in the world's second-largest democracy. And your boy, a poster child for the opposite approach, getting his backside handed to him.
He didn't really get his backside handed to him though did he? Biden won the election by the same number of EV votes as Trump, a victory that we were told at the time was minimal because if only 70K voters had switched sides, Clinton would have won. Only this time, if only 44K (if I remember correctly) had switched sides, Trump would have won. The Democrats nearly lost control of the House. And you have a 50/50 Senate.
And, no, the attack lines are still relevant. It was stupid of Biden et al to use the BLM line last night because it had no relevance in the scheme of things and was done in response to the post on social media showing the response to BLM protests. I pointed out pre-election that the focus on BLM risked driving Hispanics to the GOP, which is one of the few things I got right about November
For me the pointers are that the Trump coalition is not a winning coalition at the federal level going forwards.
The easier thing for GOP politicians is to cleave to the Trumpsters, because of their enthusiasm. But that is what has driven the ABTs out of the party and has lost the GOP most independents and thus the absolutely essential suburbs.
For me, the way back for the GOP is the painful one. Excise their most passionate supporters, the Trumpsters. Rebuild the center right, win back the suburbs. Regain the trust of women.
To me, this will take at least one more bad election cycle result (2022), which alas is not guaranteed, followed by 4-6 years of rebuilding. It could go faster than that but equally it is not guaranteed to happen at all, but it is my best bet.
This is my view too. Except I think it will not be quite such a long and difficult process. Once Trump is not POTUS, my strong sense is he'll fade quicker than most people think. And given MAGA is so wrapped up with HIM, I think that will too. I see a vibrant young Republican emerging in time for the 24 election and running on a small state, libertarian, socially "trad" ticket. He or she will have the challenge of picking up the deplorables without being deplorable. If they can, they have a decent shot.
Spot on, the Trump balloon begins to rapidly deflate at precisely 1200hrs EST on 20 January. Trump becomes a has-been schmuck and his power and potency desert him.
The trick will be to ensure a steady, continuous deflation and then dragging the remains to a quiet dump somewhere.
Don't try and pop the balloon in one go. Danger of a bang....
For me the pointers are that the Trump coalition is not a winning coalition at the federal level going forwards.
The easier thing for GOP politicians is to cleave to the Trumpsters, because of their enthusiasm. But that is what has driven the ABTs out of the party and has lost the GOP most independents and thus the absolutely essential suburbs.
For me, the way back for the GOP is the painful one. Excise their most passionate supporters, the Trumpsters. Rebuild the center right, win back the suburbs. Regain the trust of women.
To me, this will take at least one more bad election cycle result (2022), which alas is not guaranteed, followed by 4-6 years of rebuilding. It could go faster than that but equally it is not guaranteed to happen at all, but it is my best bet.
On topic: I gaze into the future of the Republican party - not too far, just a couple of years - and I see no Trump or Trumpdom there. What I do see, however and alas, are elements of the MAGA agenda still in the mix.
The million $ puzzle which imo must be solved in order to predict where the party goes is as follows - Of the 73m who voted for Donald Trump what are the approx weightings (adjusted for overlap) for the 4 main categories?
1. Love Trump. Lucky to have him. Helluva guy and a total one off. Just so into everything about the man. 2. Always vote Republican. It's what I am - a Republican. Cut me and I bleed tax cuts & voter suppression. 3. Not big on politics. Only care about the economy. Thought he'd done ok on that. Why change. 4. Trump? Can take him or leave him but I like his hard right national populist rhetoric and policies.
No particular order there except that I've put the last one last for a reason. I think it's the smallest.
Very rough guesses:
1. 10 2. 50 3. 8 4. 5
Although 1 and 4 are largely the same category, if we're being honest.
Much obliged. This is what I'm looking for. Unadorned numbers that I can crunch thro the "Predict the Near Term Future of the GOP" model I've developed (mainly for betting purposes but also to aid my superforecasting and related punditry).
- No bright future for MAGA without Trump. - Republican party v Trump is a mismatch. Party prevails.
Much easier to split the 73, so: 1. 20 2. 45 3. 6 4. 2
That's an interesting one, thanks.
Think we might be saying that the MAGA element - voters who love a bit of hardcore nativist nationalism but are indifferent to the Trump delivery mechanism - is negligible.
So let's drop it and merge me, you, pulpstar, BluestBlue et alia to get -
1. I'm a Republican stupid - 65 2. I'm a Trumpster and I AM stupid - 25 3. It's the economy obvs - 10
Nice clear pointers emerging now.
But what are they?
The problem with that approach of going back to the suburbanites is that (a) they are increasing socially liberal due to college education, (b) are more fickle and so (c) you would have to blow up your base by switching to a more socially liberal / economically right-wing stance in the hope - and it would be no more than a hope - that you can persuade people who deserted you to switch back.
There is another thing here as well. Hispanics, Asian-Americans and Black people, on the whole, tend to be socially conservative. If the Republicans continue to make inroads into the HIspanic vote, then that more than outweighs their losses in the suburbs. Ditch the socially conservative agenda to appeal to suburban types and you have lost that.
If you abandon the cities and the suburbs, you cannot take the House. Period.
Well, the Republicans nearly did.
The tragedy is that the 'rebels' were so exercised at the growing inequalities in income and wealth - and the growing distance between politicians and the people they are supposed to represent - that they turned to a brand of extreme Republicanism that was never likely to want to deliver them any sort of relief.
The big question of our era is why centre-left politicians have proved so unable to put forward a comprehensive platform to rectify the egregious distortions of 21st century society in a way that can carry a majority of sensibly minded voters in the centre of political opinion?
Within our lifetimes, if the centre-left doesn't rise to the challenge of our times, then the future will be left to the extremes.
Indeed, one of the most powerful pieces of evidence available to the GOP in elections is the abject failure of cities that have been in the hands of Democratic politicians for decades. Now, it may be that the GOP would have failed equally, because the issues have to do with the concept of cities themselves, rather than with who is in power. But it is still a very strong selling point for the GOP.
By what metric are you measuring "failure"? Cities tend to be much more economically successful than rural areas, for reasons that are quite beyond which party is in control of either.
Maybe you meant something different to the economy, though.
I did not say all cities. I said "the abject failure of cities that have been in the hands of Democratic politicians for decades", so not even all cities that have been in Democratic hands throughout, but the ones that have failed. Detroit, Cleveland, Baltimore (although some recent improvements here), for example, are all cited frequently, and gain traction as examples. In some respects, Chicago.
While some major cities can claim to have been successful economically on a macro level, that is to hide the vast disparity of how that wealth is distributed, both socially and geographically within the cities. Just because a city's economic numbers are doing well, does not mean that all is well. In some areas of NYC, you cannot find fresh fruit and vegetables to buy. Is that you idea of success?
I should perhaps add that the Dems could make the same argument about the failure of GOP policies in the Appalachias and the Deep South, where the GOP has held all the levers of power for some time.
For me the pointers are that the Trump coalition is not a winning coalition at the federal level going forwards.
The easier thing for GOP politicians is to cleave to the Trumpsters, because of their enthusiasm. But that is what has driven the ABTs out of the party and has lost the GOP most independents and thus the absolutely essential suburbs.
For me, the way back for the GOP is the painful one. Excise their most passionate supporters, the Trumpsters. Rebuild the center right, win back the suburbs. Regain the trust of women.
To me, this will take at least one more bad election cycle result (2022), which alas is not guaranteed, followed by 4-6 years of rebuilding. It could go faster than that but equally it is not guaranteed to happen at all, but it is my best bet.
On topic: I gaze into the future of the Republican party - not too far, just a couple of years - and I see no Trump or Trumpdom there. What I do see, however and alas, are elements of the MAGA agenda still in the mix.
The million $ puzzle which imo must be solved in order to predict where the party goes is as follows - Of the 73m who voted for Donald Trump what are the approx weightings (adjusted for overlap) for the 4 main categories?
1. Love Trump. Lucky to have him. Helluva guy and a total one off. Just so into everything about the man. 2. Always vote Republican. It's what I am - a Republican. Cut me and I bleed tax cuts & voter suppression. 3. Not big on politics. Only care about the economy. Thought he'd done ok on that. Why change. 4. Trump? Can take him or leave him but I like his hard right national populist rhetoric and policies.
No particular order there except that I've put the last one last for a reason. I think it's the smallest.
Very rough guesses:
1. 10 2. 50 3. 8 4. 5
Although 1 and 4 are largely the same category, if we're being honest.
Much obliged. This is what I'm looking for. Unadorned numbers that I can crunch thro the "Predict the Near Term Future of the GOP" model I've developed (mainly for betting purposes but also to aid my superforecasting and related punditry).
- No bright future for MAGA without Trump. - Republican party v Trump is a mismatch. Party prevails.
Much easier to split the 73, so: 1. 20 2. 45 3. 6 4. 2
That's an interesting one, thanks.
Think we might be saying that the MAGA element - voters who love a bit of hardcore nativist nationalism but are indifferent to the Trump delivery mechanism - is negligible.
So let's drop it and merge me, you, pulpstar, BluestBlue et alia to get -
1. I'm a Republican stupid - 65 2. I'm a Trumpster and I AM stupid - 25 3. It's the economy obvs - 10
Nice clear pointers emerging now.
But what are they?
The problem with that approach of going back to the suburbanites is that (a) they are increasing socially liberal due to college education, (b) are more fickle and so (c) you would have to blow up your base by switching to a more socially liberal / economically right-wing stance in the hope - and it would be no more than a hope - that you can persuade people who deserted you to switch back.
There is another thing here as well. Hispanics, Asian-Americans and Black people, on the whole, tend to be socially conservative. If the Republicans continue to make inroads into the HIspanic vote, then that more than outweighs their losses in the suburbs. Ditch the socially conservative agenda to appeal to suburban types and you have lost that.
Citation required.
I didn't know you were such a disciple of citation, @Anabobazina, I must have missed that in your posts.
A quick scan of that shows it seems to be talking about immigrants, when your original claim was about Hispanics, Asian-Americans and Black people. That conflation may raise an eyebrow. Is it worth me reading the page more closely, or have you sent the wrong link?
I haven't send the wrong link and the article is about Hispanic voters, a significant chunk of whom would be immigrants. The report references 18.6m immigrant Hispanic citizens, and that was for 2014. The US Census data for 2014 shows 53.2m Hispanics in the US, of which 20m were under 19. It's unclear whether their definition of citizen includes or excludes minors. If it does, that's well over half the Hispanic population in the US, if not, it is well over a third.
But please, I am interested in any facts and figures you have to the opposite.
I am not making any claims about racial differences in politics, I'm merely assessing yours. So far, I'm finding your claims to be dubious in more than one sense.
Yes, Trump got his timing and positioning absolutely right in 2016. The Republican voting base has moved more into that top left quadrant. Now, it may be you get a reversal of things where the contenders overcrowd the top left and leave the bottom right free for one who breaks through but I doubt it.
Both parties though face a problem, this is not just a Republican issue. Look at the Democrats. Why did Biden and Harris need to make the remarks yesterday about, if this was a BLM riot, matters would have been handled differently? Tactically, it risked diverting the headlines from focusing on the Republicans rioting to BLM as well as raising the obvious retort of "well, would you have condemned it if it was a BLM riot?".
Surely that statement is right though - the BLM protests in Washington were policed in a very different way to Wednesday's protest.
Wednesday's protestors wouldn't have gone anywhere near the Capitol if it had been guarded the way it had been in the summer.
Yes, it is right. Lots of wishful thinking going on in MrEd's head I'm afraid.
Not at all. @Gardenwalker made the same point yesterday. Why bring it up?
For me the pointers are that the Trump coalition is not a winning coalition at the federal level going forwards.
The easier thing for GOP politicians is to cleave to the Trumpsters, because of their enthusiasm. But that is what has driven the ABTs out of the party and has lost the GOP most independents and thus the absolutely essential suburbs.
For me, the way back for the GOP is the painful one. Excise their most passionate supporters, the Trumpsters. Rebuild the center right, win back the suburbs. Regain the trust of women.
To me, this will take at least one more bad election cycle result (2022), which alas is not guaranteed, followed by 4-6 years of rebuilding. It could go faster than that but equally it is not guaranteed to happen at all, but it is my best bet.
This is my view too. Except I think it will not be quite such a long and difficult process. Once Trump is not POTUS, my strong sense is he'll fade quicker than most people think. And given MAGA is so wrapped up with HIM, I think that will too. I see a vibrant young Republican emerging in time for the 24 election and running on a small state, libertarian, socially "trad" ticket. He or she will have the challenge of picking up the deplorables without being deplorable. If they can, they have a decent shot.
Spot on, the Trump balloon begins to rapidly deflate at precisely 1200hrs EST on 20 January. Trump becomes a has-been schmuck and his power and potency desert him.
The trick will be to ensure a steady, continuous deflation and then dragging the remains to a quiet dump somewhere.
Don't try and pop the balloon in one go. Danger of a bang....
Absolutely agreed, hence why I oppose impeachment/25th. Ride out the last 12 days and let history judge Trump and, perhaps, the courts if he is found to be guilty of criminal behaviour.
FPT - nuclear weapons exist to level the playing field against those with massive conventional forces, that we couldn't hope to match, and to deter nuclear blackmail against us by nuclear armed powers.
I know others have equally strong views on this, but count me out from the unilateralists please. It's an ultimate insurance policy that I'm happy to have - and pay for - and helps me sleep soundly at night.
You could sleep soundly at night if you'd paid to be surrounded by a battalion of Grenadier Guards to keep burglars out. But if it meant your children went hungry....?
There is a huge amount of "whataboutery" supporting the UK having nuclear weapons. Would someone like to give me an actual, real life, certifiable example of when they have given me cause to sleep more soundly at night?
Where my slumbers are qualitatively better is the knowledge that some ISIS commander or some Al Qaeda financier is being lit up for delivery of a smart bomb by a special forces guy in the shadows, who has the use of the latest array of technology to call upon.
I'd be very happy for the UK to be known as providing those people the bad guys should lose sleep over. Be the go-to place for the brightest and best fighting men in the world. Hell, I'd pay top dollar to recruit some of the Foreign Legion special forces guys into the team. They were some of the best close protection I've used (and that includes having used a guy from the Bravo 2 Zero patrol).
The ability to insert these into any country - and then safely extract them - would be an ultimate expression of power. And a much more effective use of defence money than the umpteen billions spent having no more than one Trident submarine on patrol at any one time.
Well, our children aren't going hungry. The cost of a few billion a year is easily absorbable within our massive government budget of many hundreds of billions. So I don't think that's a real choice. And I think the safety payback we get for it (in terms of a safe and secure space for economic growth and trade) is worth it.
I can't speak for how you sleep at night but I certainly think they are deterring Russia from taking more serious action over the Baltic States (NATO members) and also China over Taiwan. They were also useful in the first Gulf War in convincing Saddam Hussein not to use chemical or biological weapons. Of course it's difficult to prove a counterfactual where they made *the* difference - the decisive difference - because they are a strategic deterrent, not a tactical one, and such confrontations are rare precisely because they do exist. When that fails they are part of a diplomatic and military deterrent toolkit of why things don't escalate as far as they could.
I agree with you on special forces and on smart weapons. They are essential too. But I wouldn't eliminate our strategic deterrent. I think that'd be dangerous.
I'm more in the @Casino_Royale camp here. I would not wanting to be relying on the "goodwill" of China and Russia not to use their nuclear weapons against a non-nuclear UK in the case of a dispute.
But here we enter the realms of whether we would be allowed to use Trident in that event, or whether we'd find that the system had been (wisely imho) disabled by a higher power.
If you were America, and Britain got itself into a nuclear conflict with a third party, and you had the ability to shut the system down, would you do it? Or would you just let them go ahead with it in case they asked for a refund? It isn't an independent deterrent. Everyone (including Russia and China) is aware of that fact.
It'sd not as if they were Blue Streak missiles launched from North Norfolk silos which could be traced back to the perpetrators. A SLBM is by definition untraceable and launchable from any wet bit on the map within range, and what's a chap to think if Trident-type trajectories come at him?
There is no US "off switch" for Trident. The claims that there are seem to be of the "but there must be" variety.
And claims that there is no 'off switch' are of the 'but there couldn't be' variety. I respect your experience in various fields, but by definition, being party to US nuclear secrets isn't one of them. So logic is really all we have to go on.
Which ally of Britain would you sell independent strategic nukes to by the way? Which country would you happily sell the ability to use British technology to wipe out other countries at will? - Exactly.
Is your point that - certainly at the time Trident was set up - the answer was "the United States of America"?
No. My point is that there is no other country, however loyal, however much a staunch ally, to which one Government could sensibly give/sell/or rent the ability to destroy other countries at a button press, on 'free-for-all' basis. You would need appropriate checks and balances.
It is a matter of public record that without American support, Trident would be out of commission within weeks. I also believe that we could not use it independently in the immediate term without America's express permission. The fact that the last time we tried to hit a target 'off the West coast of Africa', the missile veered off course and went in the direction of America, if it doesn't provide corroboration for this, at least indicates that once a target is identified and put in by UK forces firing it, the missile has the ability to change its course and follow an alternative route.
What on earth is your argument here? That we performed a routine test fire, forgot to warn the US, and the Pentagon panicked and hit the emergency override button?
Seems much more likely it was a genuine malfunction, no?
On topic: I gaze into the future of the Republican party - not too far, just a couple of years - and I see no Trump or Trumpdom there. What I do see, however and alas, are elements of the MAGA agenda still in the mix.
The million $ puzzle which imo must be solved in order to predict where the party goes is as follows - Of the 73m who voted for Donald Trump what are the approx weightings (adjusted for overlap) for the 4 main categories?
1. Love Trump. Lucky to have him. Helluva guy and a total one off. Just so into everything about the man. 2. Always vote Republican. It's what I am - a Republican. Cut me and I bleed tax cuts & voter suppression. 3. Not big on politics. Only care about the economy. Thought he'd done ok on that. Why change. 4. Trump? Can take him or leave him but I like his hard right national populist rhetoric and policies.
No particular order there except that I've put the last one last for a reason. I think it's the smallest.
Very rough guesses:
1. 10 2. 50 3. 8 4. 5
Although 1 and 4 are largely the same category, if we're being honest.
Much obliged. This is what I'm looking for. Unadorned numbers that I can crunch thro the "Predict the Near Term Future of the GOP" model I've developed (mainly for betting purposes but also to aid my superforecasting and related punditry).
- No bright future for MAGA without Trump. - Republican party v Trump is a mismatch. Party prevails.
MAGA and Trump are interchangeable, a distinction without a difference.
I would say:
Republican 63 million MAGA/Trump 9 million Economy 1 million
Ah, Philip. Thank goodness. Can't finalize anything without your input. I was starting to worry I'd have to beg for it.
Interesting too because it's an outlier, which is great news. But just to double check. You think only 1m of the 73m who voted Trump were apolitical floater types who just figured he'd done ok on the economy and so were minded not to change?
For me the pointers are that the Trump coalition is not a winning coalition at the federal level going forwards.
The easier thing for GOP politicians is to cleave to the Trumpsters, because of their enthusiasm. But that is what has driven the ABTs out of the party and has lost the GOP most independents and thus the absolutely essential suburbs.
For me, the way back for the GOP is the painful one. Excise their most passionate supporters, the Trumpsters. Rebuild the center right, win back the suburbs. Regain the trust of women.
To me, this will take at least one more bad election cycle result (2022), which alas is not guaranteed, followed by 4-6 years of rebuilding. It could go faster than that but equally it is not guaranteed to happen at all, but it is my best bet.
On topic: I gaze into the future of the Republican party - not too far, just a couple of years - and I see no Trump or Trumpdom there. What I do see, however and alas, are elements of the MAGA agenda still in the mix.
The million $ puzzle which imo must be solved in order to predict where the party goes is as follows - Of the 73m who voted for Donald Trump what are the approx weightings (adjusted for overlap) for the 4 main categories?
1. Love Trump. Lucky to have him. Helluva guy and a total one off. Just so into everything about the man. 2. Always vote Republican. It's what I am - a Republican. Cut me and I bleed tax cuts & voter suppression. 3. Not big on politics. Only care about the economy. Thought he'd done ok on that. Why change. 4. Trump? Can take him or leave him but I like his hard right national populist rhetoric and policies.
No particular order there except that I've put the last one last for a reason. I think it's the smallest.
Very rough guesses:
1. 10 2. 50 3. 8 4. 5
Although 1 and 4 are largely the same category, if we're being honest.
Much obliged. This is what I'm looking for. Unadorned numbers that I can crunch thro the "Predict the Near Term Future of the GOP" model I've developed (mainly for betting purposes but also to aid my superforecasting and related punditry).
- No bright future for MAGA without Trump. - Republican party v Trump is a mismatch. Party prevails.
Much easier to split the 73, so: 1. 20 2. 45 3. 6 4. 2
That's an interesting one, thanks.
Think we might be saying that the MAGA element - voters who love a bit of hardcore nativist nationalism but are indifferent to the Trump delivery mechanism - is negligible.
So let's drop it and merge me, you, pulpstar, BluestBlue et alia to get -
1. I'm a Republican stupid - 65 2. I'm a Trumpster and I AM stupid - 25 3. It's the economy obvs - 10
Nice clear pointers emerging now.
But what are they?
The problem with that approach of going back to the suburbanites is that (a) they are increasing socially liberal due to college education, (b) are more fickle and so (c) you would have to blow up your base by switching to a more socially liberal / economically right-wing stance in the hope - and it would be no more than a hope - that you can persuade people who deserted you to switch back.
There is another thing here as well. Hispanics, Asian-Americans and Black people, on the whole, tend to be socially conservative. If the Republicans continue to make inroads into the HIspanic vote, then that more than outweighs their losses in the suburbs. Ditch the socially conservative agenda to appeal to suburban types and you have lost that.
Citation required.
I didn't know you were such a disciple of citation, @Anabobazina, I must have missed that in your posts.
A quick scan of that shows it seems to be talking about immigrants, when your original claim was about Hispanics, Asian-Americans and Black people. That conflation may raise an eyebrow. Is it worth me reading the page more closely, or have you sent the wrong link?
I haven't send the wrong link and the article is about Hispanic voters, a significant chunk of whom would be immigrants. The report references 18.6m immigrant Hispanic citizens, and that was for 2014. The US Census data for 2014 shows 53.2m Hispanics in the US, of which 20m were under 19. It's unclear whether their definition of citizen includes or excludes minors. If it does, that's well over half the Hispanic population in the US, if not, it is well over a third.
But please, I am interested in any facts and figures you have to the opposite.
I am not making any claims about racial differences in politics, I'm merely assessing yours. So far, I'm finding your claims to be dubious in more than one sense.
Ok, well then please show your evidence and your rationale as to why it is dubious. All you have done so if make an assertion with no contrary facts. Anyone can do that, including the bots and zombies you referred to earlier.
For me the pointers are that the Trump coalition is not a winning coalition at the federal level going forwards.
The easier thing for GOP politicians is to cleave to the Trumpsters, because of their enthusiasm. But that is what has driven the ABTs out of the party and has lost the GOP most independents and thus the absolutely essential suburbs.
For me, the way back for the GOP is the painful one. Excise their most passionate supporters, the Trumpsters. Rebuild the center right, win back the suburbs. Regain the trust of women.
To me, this will take at least one more bad election cycle result (2022), which alas is not guaranteed, followed by 4-6 years of rebuilding. It could go faster than that but equally it is not guaranteed to happen at all, but it is my best bet.
On topic: I gaze into the future of the Republican party - not too far, just a couple of years - and I see no Trump or Trumpdom there. What I do see, however and alas, are elements of the MAGA agenda still in the mix.
The million $ puzzle which imo must be solved in order to predict where the party goes is as follows - Of the 73m who voted for Donald Trump what are the approx weightings (adjusted for overlap) for the 4 main categories?
1. Love Trump. Lucky to have him. Helluva guy and a total one off. Just so into everything about the man. 2. Always vote Republican. It's what I am - a Republican. Cut me and I bleed tax cuts & voter suppression. 3. Not big on politics. Only care about the economy. Thought he'd done ok on that. Why change. 4. Trump? Can take him or leave him but I like his hard right national populist rhetoric and policies.
No particular order there except that I've put the last one last for a reason. I think it's the smallest.
Very rough guesses:
1. 10 2. 50 3. 8 4. 5
Although 1 and 4 are largely the same category, if we're being honest.
Much obliged. This is what I'm looking for. Unadorned numbers that I can crunch thro the "Predict the Near Term Future of the GOP" model I've developed (mainly for betting purposes but also to aid my superforecasting and related punditry).
- No bright future for MAGA without Trump. - Republican party v Trump is a mismatch. Party prevails.
Much easier to split the 73, so: 1. 20 2. 45 3. 6 4. 2
That's an interesting one, thanks.
Think we might be saying that the MAGA element - voters who love a bit of hardcore nativist nationalism but are indifferent to the Trump delivery mechanism - is negligible.
So let's drop it and merge me, you, pulpstar, BluestBlue et alia to get -
1. I'm a Republican stupid - 65 2. I'm a Trumpster and I AM stupid - 25 3. It's the economy obvs - 10
Nice clear pointers emerging now.
But what are they?
The problem with that approach of going back to the suburbanites is that (a) they are increasing socially liberal due to college education, (b) are more fickle and so (c) you would have to blow up your base by switching to a more socially liberal / economically right-wing stance in the hope - and it would be no more than a hope - that you can persuade people who deserted you to switch back.
There is another thing here as well. Hispanics, Asian-Americans and Black people, on the whole, tend to be socially conservative. If the Republicans continue to make inroads into the HIspanic vote, then that more than outweighs their losses in the suburbs. Ditch the socially conservative agenda to appeal to suburban types and you have lost that.
If you abandon the cities and the suburbs, you cannot take the House. Period.
Well, the Republicans nearly did.
The tragedy is that the 'rebels' were so exercised at the growing inequalities in income and wealth - and the growing distance between politicians and the people they are supposed to represent - that they turned to a brand of extreme Republicanism that was never likely to want to deliver them any sort of relief.
The big question of our era is why centre-left politicians have proved so unable to put forward a comprehensive platform to rectify the egregious distortions of 21st century society in a way that can carry a majority of sensibly minded voters in the centre of political opinion?
Within our lifetimes, if the centre-left doesn't rise to the challenge of our times, then the future will be left to the extremes.
The simple explanation is that centre-left politicians now spend most of their energy and efforts prioritising culturally liberal stances than the economic concerns that concern most people. I've pointed out here to those that scream racist at Trump voters that a good chunk of them would have voted for Obama in 2008. They didn't care he was Black but they did care about their economic conditions. However, the Democrat party became so embroiled in cultural issues that it dropped the ball on the economic front.
This line of attack might have worked in the past, but it has lost much of its potency given the Democrats' clean sweep in the world's second-largest democracy. And your boy, a poster child for the opposite approach, getting his backside handed to him.
He didn't really get his backside handed to him though did he? Biden won the election by the same number of EV votes as Trump, a victory that we were told at the time was minimal because if only 70K voters had switched sides, Clinton would have won. Only this time, if only 44K (if I remember correctly) had switched sides, Trump would have won. The Democrats nearly lost control of the House. And you have a 50/50 Senate.
And, no, the attack lines are still relevant. It was stupid of Biden et al to use the BLM line last night because it had no relevance in the scheme of things and was done in response to the post on social media showing the response to BLM protests. I pointed out pre-election that the focus on BLM risked driving Hispanics to the GOP, which is one of the few things I got right about November
Denial. Sheer denial.
He was comprehensively and soundly beaten.
In 2016, the GOP held the House, Senate and Presidency.
After four years of Trump, they hold none of them.
Researchers at the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) say more than half of all Covid infections are transmitted by people who do not show any symptoms of the virus.
According to their scientific model, which was described in the Journal of American Medicine Association on Thursday, 59% of transmissions come from asymptomatic carriers.
Of that figure, 35% come from people who are pre-symptomatic, and 24% are transmitted by people who never show any sign of infection.
There is an obvious and understandable temptation to just let him go away, hopefully far away. The US has precedence for this in the way it dealt with the losing side in the Civil War.
Personally, I think that would be a mistake. His conduct this last month has been completely unacceptable and dangerous to a democracy. Locking up 50 or 500 or 5000 of those naïve fools who did his bidding is not enough. It needs to be made crystal clear than even the President is not above the law and will suffer the consequences of criminal incitement and sedition. If that, in passing, destroys the political career of Ted Cruz then that is a win win for me.
You are absolutely right, but I fear not enough Republicans agree to make it easy (pinning everything on the legalities).
Heck, part of the justification for the Nixon pardon was he had been punished enough by giving up the presidency, you can easily see a lot of people saying its not worth the aggravation as Trump has been punished by losing the election.
Obviously trials will come, but in several areas I don't know how he could have avoided committing crimes. But the cases will probably be still going on bt 2024.
I love it when people who are implacably opposed to the Republican Party try to give it lessons. Presumably to maintain the notion that everything is alright in the West and its business as usual, and what you are seeing is not a hologram.
But here's the thing. It really isn't all right.
The right is completely split in America. The party elite and the Trumpist base despise each other totally. The latter will not turn out for the former, as Georgia showed, and what follows is a hugely bitter primaries battle between the two factions ahead of 2022. When millions will not turn out again and the democrat hegemony intensifies.
Meanwhile, the Democrats will be deliberating just how much of a Jihad they want to declare on the many millions of Americans who turned out for Trump and now have zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions.
Trump showed his millions of supporters a glimpse of an America they were comfortable with and where they were welcome and valuable citizens.
They are not going back to the likes of Romney. Not now. Not ever.
Trouble is, their "zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions" is based on delusion. How to cleanse this?
Making the left-behind feel "welcome and valuable citizens". Absolutely.
"A glimpse of an America they were comfortable with". A lot to unpack in that statement. What America was that exactly. Because judging by the comments of Trump and many of his supporters it was an America where blacks could be shot or killed by the police with impunity or denied the vote or where demonstrators could go on marches shouting anti-Semitic slogans and be praised as "fine people".
That sort of America is a horrible one and if that is the vision that these people want then we absolutely should not be pandering to them. There are limits. There are boundaries of decent behaviour. And we don't accept behaviour which breaches those boundaries just because it's the left-behind or the white working-class doing the demanding. They don't get excused from complying with decent civilised behaviour just because they're poor or uneducated or unemployed.
Trump appealed to peoples' basest instincts. The best thing we can do for people who feel ignored is make life better for them not act on their worst instincts.
Cyclefree likes an evidence free moral high horse rant sometimes.
Black employment was at a record high under Trump. Lets see how Biden does. The early signs aren't good. Look at the democrat dominated states already.
Examples where blacks could be shot or killing with impunity? Last I looked the killers of Floyd and others were subject to due process. Did Trump try to interrupt that process or change the laws of due process?
And as for making life better for any American, well, the democrats were already out of ideas for that before the election. Again look at the states and the cities where they have held sway for decades. If this election was fought on the pre-covid economy, Trump won hands down.
I'm guessing everyone looks like they're on a moral high horse, when you're lying in the moral gutter.
FWIW, opposing antisemitism isn't moralising, it's a basic entry requirement for being a civilised human. Try it.
Such shrill, emotional, evidence free b'llocks it is untrue.
We know from the Corbynites here where the real anti-semites are matey. We'll take no lessons from the left on that score.
Trump was a huge supporter of Israel's right to exist (as opposed to the more radical democrats you support), and even managed to broker ground breaking middle east peace agreements between Jew and Arab.
Those are real, tangible achievements, not airy fairy claims about what some redneck may or may not have said at some stupid rally or other.
Yes, Trump got his timing and positioning absolutely right in 2016. The Republican voting base has moved more into that top left quadrant. Now, it may be you get a reversal of things where the contenders overcrowd the top left and leave the bottom right free for one who breaks through but I doubt it.
Both parties though face a problem, this is not just a Republican issue. Look at the Democrats. Why did Biden and Harris need to make the remarks yesterday about, if this was a BLM riot, matters would have been handled differently? Tactically, it risked diverting the headlines from focusing on the Republicans rioting to BLM as well as raising the obvious retort of "well, would you have condemned it if it was a BLM riot?".
Surely that statement is right though - the BLM protests in Washington were policed in a very different way to Wednesday's protest.
"In Washington" is a pretty important qualifier, and the differences in approach there can perhaps be partially attributed to who is currently in control of the levers of political power.
However, every single one of the Trump 2020 voters I know cited Democrat failure to properly police BLM rioters in Democrat-run places like Portland as their primary reason for not voting for Biden. The logic seems to be simply that if the Democrat party aren't interested in keeping law and order in the parts of the country they already ran, they would have similarly little interest in retaining order nationwide if they ran that.
Do those people actually live in Portland or do they live elsewhere and so voted on the basis of media reporting?
About half in the UK and the rest in not-Portland. The former group are working mostly on the basis of the BBC and the Times reporting though, not Fox News and Alex Jones.
For me the pointers are that the Trump coalition is not a winning coalition at the federal level going forwards.
The easier thing for GOP politicians is to cleave to the Trumpsters, because of their enthusiasm. But that is what has driven the ABTs out of the party and has lost the GOP most independents and thus the absolutely essential suburbs.
For me, the way back for the GOP is the painful one. Excise their most passionate supporters, the Trumpsters. Rebuild the center right, win back the suburbs. Regain the trust of women.
To me, this will take at least one more bad election cycle result (2022), which alas is not guaranteed, followed by 4-6 years of rebuilding. It could go faster than that but equally it is not guaranteed to happen at all, but it is my best bet.
On topic: I gaze into the future of the Republican party - not too far, just a couple of years - and I see no Trump or Trumpdom there. What I do see, however and alas, are elements of the MAGA agenda still in the mix.
The million $ puzzle which imo must be solved in order to predict where the party goes is as follows - Of the 73m who voted for Donald Trump what are the approx weightings (adjusted for overlap) for the 4 main categories?
1. Love Trump. Lucky to have him. Helluva guy and a total one off. Just so into everything about the man. 2. Always vote Republican. It's what I am - a Republican. Cut me and I bleed tax cuts & voter suppression. 3. Not big on politics. Only care about the economy. Thought he'd done ok on that. Why change. 4. Trump? Can take him or leave him but I like his hard right national populist rhetoric and policies.
No particular order there except that I've put the last one last for a reason. I think it's the smallest.
Very rough guesses:
1. 10 2. 50 3. 8 4. 5
Although 1 and 4 are largely the same category, if we're being honest.
Much obliged. This is what I'm looking for. Unadorned numbers that I can crunch thro the "Predict the Near Term Future of the GOP" model I've developed (mainly for betting purposes but also to aid my superforecasting and related punditry).
- No bright future for MAGA without Trump. - Republican party v Trump is a mismatch. Party prevails.
Much easier to split the 73, so: 1. 20 2. 45 3. 6 4. 2
That's an interesting one, thanks.
Think we might be saying that the MAGA element - voters who love a bit of hardcore nativist nationalism but are indifferent to the Trump delivery mechanism - is negligible.
So let's drop it and merge me, you, pulpstar, BluestBlue et alia to get -
1. I'm a Republican stupid - 65 2. I'm a Trumpster and I AM stupid - 25 3. It's the economy obvs - 10
Nice clear pointers emerging now.
But what are they?
The problem with that approach of going back to the suburbanites is that (a) they are increasing socially liberal due to college education, (b) are more fickle and so (c) you would have to blow up your base by switching to a more socially liberal / economically right-wing stance in the hope - and it would be no more than a hope - that you can persuade people who deserted you to switch back.
There is another thing here as well. Hispanics, Asian-Americans and Black people, on the whole, tend to be socially conservative. If the Republicans continue to make inroads into the HIspanic vote, then that more than outweighs their losses in the suburbs. Ditch the socially conservative agenda to appeal to suburban types and you have lost that.
Citation required.
I didn't know you were such a disciple of citation, @Anabobazina, I must have missed that in your posts.
A quick scan of that shows it seems to be talking about immigrants, when your original claim was about Hispanics, Asian-Americans and Black people. That conflation may raise an eyebrow. Is it worth me reading the page more closely, or have you sent the wrong link?
I haven't send the wrong link and the article is about Hispanic voters, a significant chunk of whom would be immigrants. The report references 18.6m immigrant Hispanic citizens, and that was for 2014. The US Census data for 2014 shows 53.2m Hispanics in the US, of which 20m were under 19. It's unclear whether their definition of citizen includes or excludes minors. If it does, that's well over half the Hispanic population in the US, if not, it is well over a third.
But please, I am interested in any facts and figures you have to the opposite.
I am not making any claims about racial differences in politics, I'm merely assessing yours. So far, I'm finding your claims to be dubious in more than one sense.
Ok, well then please show your evidence and your rationale as to why it is dubious. All you have done so if make an assertion with no contrary facts. Anyone can do that, including the bots and zombies you referred to earlier.
Once again, I made no assertion. I haven't said you're wrong, I think it's likelier you're just confused.
"The Prime Minister knows that to lose Scotland would be a resigning matter. And there’s a chance he wouldn’t even be allowed to get that far: his party might not keep a leader who looked close to losing the union.
Rishi Sunak is viewed by Tory strategists as the cabinet minister with the best appeal, outranking both Starmer and Gordon Brown among Scottish swing voters."
Michael Gove isn't mentioned in quite the same way ...
PS Also interesting (given current wisdomn on PB) is that the Tories seem quite worried by an indicative referendum - ie not at all dismissive of it.
But of course! We had an indicative referendum here a few months ago, but it was only indicative or advisory, so the Electoral Commission gave the green light to it. If it had been a binding referendum, the Electoral Commission would never have allowed it to go ahead in the shapre it was.
Once the votes were in, the government of the day declared that it was, after all, binding; and then set about removing many of our constitutional safeguards in order to "get Brexit done". That is why we are now being dictated to by a gang of incompetents, who have no idea of the British sense of fair play.
I am sure that our Conservative friends realise that, if they can get away with holding a shabby referendum over the EU, then the SNP could do the same thing over Scottish independence. So they are now worried by the prospect of a referendum on the issue. Quite understandable.
Brexit and the UK leaving the EU was allowed by Article 50 of the EU constitution.
Scexit and Scotland leaving the UK however is illegal without Westminster approval under our unwritten constitution
So why are your Tory bosses privately accepting otherwise, if that article is correct? And it is in the Speccy not the Graun.
I presume that any sign of weakness from the Tories on the ghastly Natz issue means HYUFD resigning from the party of appeasement. Exciting times!
It is well worth a read if you haven't. Somehow, also, Mr Gove is no longer frontperson in the struggle against freedom. And the comparison used to demonstrate Mr Sunak's ultrapopularity is, tactfully, Mr Brown. Still need to see who the front gal or guy for Better Together Mk 2 is going to be.
This is worth reading too, lads. Alex Bell, former spinner for Big Alex. Maybe Boris will just say no. Why would he say yes?
I read that today. It makes a number of familiar and obvious points about how difficult the roads to independence would likely be. What I wasn't entirely clear on, having got to the end, is why the 5 years is so critical?
For me the pointers are that the Trump coalition is not a winning coalition at the federal level going forwards.
The easier thing for GOP politicians is to cleave to the Trumpsters, because of their enthusiasm. But that is what has driven the ABTs out of the party and has lost the GOP most independents and thus the absolutely essential suburbs.
For me, the way back for the GOP is the painful one. Excise their most passionate supporters, the Trumpsters. Rebuild the center right, win back the suburbs. Regain the trust of women.
To me, this will take at least one more bad election cycle result (2022), which alas is not guaranteed, followed by 4-6 years of rebuilding. It could go faster than that but equally it is not guaranteed to happen at all, but it is my best bet.
On topic: I gaze into the future of the Republican party - not too far, just a couple of years - and I see no Trump or Trumpdom there. What I do see, however and alas, are elements of the MAGA agenda still in the mix.
The million $ puzzle which imo must be solved in order to predict where the party goes is as follows - Of the 73m who voted for Donald Trump what are the approx weightings (adjusted for overlap) for the 4 main categories?
1. Love Trump. Lucky to have him. Helluva guy and a total one off. Just so into everything about the man. 2. Always vote Republican. It's what I am - a Republican. Cut me and I bleed tax cuts & voter suppression. 3. Not big on politics. Only care about the economy. Thought he'd done ok on that. Why change. 4. Trump? Can take him or leave him but I like his hard right national populist rhetoric and policies.
No particular order there except that I've put the last one last for a reason. I think it's the smallest.
Very rough guesses:
1. 10 2. 50 3. 8 4. 5
Although 1 and 4 are largely the same category, if we're being honest.
Much obliged. This is what I'm looking for. Unadorned numbers that I can crunch thro the "Predict the Near Term Future of the GOP" model I've developed (mainly for betting purposes but also to aid my superforecasting and related punditry).
- No bright future for MAGA without Trump. - Republican party v Trump is a mismatch. Party prevails.
Much easier to split the 73, so: 1. 20 2. 45 3. 6 4. 2
That's an interesting one, thanks.
Think we might be saying that the MAGA element - voters who love a bit of hardcore nativist nationalism but are indifferent to the Trump delivery mechanism - is negligible.
So let's drop it and merge me, you, pulpstar, BluestBlue et alia to get -
1. I'm a Republican stupid - 65 2. I'm a Trumpster and I AM stupid - 25 3. It's the economy obvs - 10
Nice clear pointers emerging now.
But what are they?
The problem with that approach of going back to the suburbanites is that (a) they are increasing socially liberal due to college education, (b) are more fickle and so (c) you would have to blow up your base by switching to a more socially liberal / economically right-wing stance in the hope - and it would be no more than a hope - that you can persuade people who deserted you to switch back.
There is another thing here as well. Hispanics, Asian-Americans and Black people, on the whole, tend to be socially conservative. If the Republicans continue to make inroads into the HIspanic vote, then that more than outweighs their losses in the suburbs. Ditch the socially conservative agenda to appeal to suburban types and you have lost that.
Citation required.
I didn't know you were such a disciple of citation, @Anabobazina, I must have missed that in your posts.
A quick scan of that shows it seems to be talking about immigrants, when your original claim was about Hispanics, Asian-Americans and Black people. That conflation may raise an eyebrow. Is it worth me reading the page more closely, or have you sent the wrong link?
I haven't send the wrong link and the article is about Hispanic voters, a significant chunk of whom would be immigrants. The report references 18.6m immigrant Hispanic citizens, and that was for 2014. The US Census data for 2014 shows 53.2m Hispanics in the US, of which 20m were under 19. It's unclear whether their definition of citizen includes or excludes minors. If it does, that's well over half the Hispanic population in the US, if not, it is well over a third.
But please, I am interested in any facts and figures you have to the opposite.
Er, what percentage of African Americans are immigrants, do you think?
Very few on the Black voters, the piece was about Hispanics.
I love it when people who are implacably opposed to the Republican Party try to give it lessons. Presumably to maintain the notion that everything is alright in the West and its business as usual, and what you are seeing is not a hologram.
But here's the thing. It really isn't all right.
The right is completely split in America. The party elite and the Trumpist base despise each other totally. The latter will not turn out for the former, as Georgia showed, and what follows is a hugely bitter primaries battle between the two factions ahead of 2022. When millions will not turn out again and the democrat hegemony intensifies.
Meanwhile, the Democrats will be deliberating just how much of a Jihad they want to declare on the many millions of Americans who turned out for Trump and now have zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions.
Trump showed his millions of supporters a glimpse of an America they were comfortable with and where they were welcome and valuable citizens.
They are not going back to the likes of Romney. Not now. Not ever.
Trouble is, their "zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions" is based on delusion. How to cleanse this?
Making the left-behind feel "welcome and valuable citizens". Absolutely.
"A glimpse of an America they were comfortable with". A lot to unpack in that statement. What America was that exactly. Because judging by the comments of Trump and many of his supporters it was an America where blacks could be shot or killed by the police with impunity or denied the vote or where demonstrators could go on marches shouting anti-Semitic slogans and be praised as "fine people".
That sort of America is a horrible one and if that is the vision that these people want then we absolutely should not be pandering to them. There are limits. There are boundaries of decent behaviour. And we don't accept behaviour which breaches those boundaries just because it's the left-behind or the white working-class doing the demanding. They don't get excused from complying with decent civilised behaviour just because they're poor or uneducated or unemployed.
Trump appealed to peoples' basest instincts. The best thing we can do for people who feel ignored is make life better for them not act on their worst instincts.
Cyclefree likes an evidence free moral high horse rant sometimes.
Black employment was at a record high under Trump. Lets see how Biden does. The early signs aren't good. Look at the democrat dominated states already.
Examples where blacks could be shot or killing with impunity? Last I looked the killers of Floyd and others were subject to due process. Did Trump try to interrupt that process or change the laws of due process?
And as for making life better for any American, well, the democrats were already out of ideas for that before the election. Again look at the states and the cities where they have held sway for decades. If this election was fought on the pre-covid economy, Trump won hands down.
That Trump did not have the fancy footwork to see what Covid could do to his chances has spared us four more years.
But I also think Biden will disappoint those who voted for him. Nor will he carry those who didn't. Not a great time ahead for the USA, I fear.
I love it when people who are implacably opposed to the Republican Party try to give it lessons. Presumably to maintain the notion that everything is alright in the West and its business as usual, and what you are seeing is not a hologram.
But here's the thing. It really isn't all right.
The right is completely split in America. The party elite and the Trumpist base despise each other totally. The latter will not turn out for the former, as Georgia showed, and what follows is a hugely bitter primaries battle between the two factions ahead of 2022. When millions will not turn out again and the democrat hegemony intensifies.
Meanwhile, the Democrats will be deliberating just how much of a Jihad they want to declare on the many millions of Americans who turned out for Trump and now have zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions.
Trump showed his millions of supporters a glimpse of an America they were comfortable with and where they were welcome and valuable citizens.
They are not going back to the likes of Romney. Not now. Not ever.
Trouble is, their "zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions" is based on delusion. How to cleanse this?
Making the left-behind feel "welcome and valuable citizens". Absolutely.
"A glimpse of an America they were comfortable with". A lot to unpack in that statement. What America was that exactly. Because judging by the comments of Trump and many of his supporters it was an America where blacks could be shot or killed by the police with impunity or denied the vote or where demonstrators could go on marches shouting anti-Semitic slogans and be praised as "fine people".
That sort of America is a horrible one and if that is the vision that these people want then we absolutely should not be pandering to them. There are limits. There are boundaries of decent behaviour. And we don't accept behaviour which breaches those boundaries just because it's the left-behind or the white working-class doing the demanding. They don't get excused from complying with decent civilised behaviour just because they're poor or uneducated or unemployed.
Trump appealed to peoples' basest instincts. The best thing we can do for people who feel ignored is make life better for them not act on their worst instincts.
Cyclefree likes an evidence free moral high horse rant sometimes.
Black employment was at a record high under Trump. Lets see how Biden does. The early signs aren't good. Look at the democrat dominated states already.
Examples where blacks could be shot or killing with impunity? Last I looked the killers of Floyd and others were subject to due process. Did Trump try to interrupt that process or change the laws of due process?
And as for making life better for any American, well, the democrats were already out of ideas for that before the election. Again look at the states and the cities where they have held sway for decades. If this election was fought on the pre-covid economy, Trump won hands down.
That Trump did not have the fancy footwork to see what Covid could do to his chances has spared us four more years.
But I also think Biden will disappoint those who voted for him. Nor will he carry those who didn't. Not a great time ahead for the USA, I fear.
It's a mystery to me that Trump did not tackle the virus crisis head-on. It was made for him - a bold, charismatic, mould-breaking leader prepared to defy convention and carry his fanatical supporters with him. He could have locked down the country. It would have accepted his lead and followed his every word through lockdown. Tens of thousands of lives would have been saved and he would have gone into the election a hero. He might have won all fifty states.
Instead he chose denial, even though he must have known what was in store.
I love it when people who are implacably opposed to the Republican Party try to give it lessons. Presumably to maintain the notion that everything is alright in the West and its business as usual, and what you are seeing is not a hologram.
But here's the thing. It really isn't all right.
The right is completely split in America. The party elite and the Trumpist base despise each other totally. The latter will not turn out for the former, as Georgia showed, and what follows is a hugely bitter primaries battle between the two factions ahead of 2022. When millions will not turn out again and the democrat hegemony intensifies.
Meanwhile, the Democrats will be deliberating just how much of a Jihad they want to declare on the many millions of Americans who turned out for Trump and now have zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions.
Trump showed his millions of supporters a glimpse of an America they were comfortable with and where they were welcome and valuable citizens.
They are not going back to the likes of Romney. Not now. Not ever.
Trump is a symptom not a cause, and the cause is still very much there, if not more so than previously.
Agreed. But I don;t know if anyone can harness it like Trump. I quite like Kristi Noem.
Noem is a homophobic religious bigot. What is it you like about her?
I like her videos promoting SD as a tourist destination. I had a great time there in 2019
Next, Hitler was a decentish bloke, as evidenced by him doing a promo to "come visit the pretty town of Berchtesgaden..."
You can’t argue that it’s not located at a truly fine spot.
One of the benefits of being Fuhrer was not being troubled by nimby's.....for long.
One of Philip Kerr's rather good Dritten Reich noir novels is based in part on exactly that theme - nimbys at Berchtesgaden.
I liked them from the start (much more than his more airporty thrillers) but it's gratifying to see how the whole series has grown in stature, particularly since Kerr's death. They've even earned the ultimate accolade of having (fairly mediocre) copyists.
The Berlin Noir books & sequels must be ripe for a film or televisualisation - I'm thinking Philip Glenister for Bernie might be good casting?
Edit: just did a check & apparently there is an HBO movie proposal floating about. Kerr himself liked Michael Fassbinder for the role, also not a bad choice.
Ooh, now that is not a bad thought (Fassbinder).
BTW what did you make of Burgessian's spot of the latest Alex Bell?
FPT - nuclear weapons exist to level the playing field against those with massive conventional forces, that we couldn't hope to match, and to deter nuclear blackmail against us by nuclear armed powers.
I know others have equally strong views on this, but count me out from the unilateralists please. It's an ultimate insurance policy that I'm happy to have - and pay for - and helps me sleep soundly at night.
You could sleep soundly at night if you'd paid to be surrounded by a battalion of Grenadier Guards to keep burglars out. But if it meant your children went hungry....?
There is a huge amount of "whataboutery" supporting the UK having nuclear weapons. Would someone like to give me an actual, real life, certifiable example of when they have given me cause to sleep more soundly at night?
Where my slumbers are qualitatively better is the knowledge that some ISIS commander or some Al Qaeda financier is being lit up for delivery of a smart bomb by a special forces guy in the shadows, who has the use of the latest array of technology to call upon.
I'd be very happy for the UK to be known as providing those people the bad guys should lose sleep over. Be the go-to place for the brightest and best fighting men in the world. Hell, I'd pay top dollar to recruit some of the Foreign Legion special forces guys into the team. They were some of the best close protection I've used (and that includes having used a guy from the Bravo 2 Zero patrol).
The ability to insert these into any country - and then safely extract them - would be an ultimate expression of power. And a much more effective use of defence money than the umpteen billions spent having no more than one Trident submarine on patrol at any one time.
Well, our children aren't going hungry. The cost of a few billion a year is easily absorbable within our massive government budget of many hundreds of billions. So I don't think that's a real choice. And I think the safety payback we get for it (in terms of a safe and secure space for economic growth and trade) is worth it.
I can't speak for how you sleep at night but I certainly think they are deterring Russia from taking more serious action over the Baltic States (NATO members) and also China over Taiwan. They were also useful in the first Gulf War in convincing Saddam Hussein not to use chemical or biological weapons. Of course it's difficult to prove a counterfactual where they made *the* difference - the decisive difference - because they are a strategic deterrent, not a tactical one, and such confrontations are rare precisely because they do exist. When that fails they are part of a diplomatic and military deterrent toolkit of why things don't escalate as far as they could.
I agree with you on special forces and on smart weapons. They are essential too. But I wouldn't eliminate our strategic deterrent. I think that'd be dangerous.
I'm more in the @Casino_Royale camp here. I would not wanting to be relying on the "goodwill" of China and Russia not to use their nuclear weapons against a non-nuclear UK in the case of a dispute.
But here we enter the realms of whether we would be allowed to use Trident in that event, or whether we'd find that the system had been (wisely imho) disabled by a higher power.
If you were America, and Britain got itself into a nuclear conflict with a third party, and you had the ability to shut the system down, would you do it? Or would you just let them go ahead with it in case they asked for a refund? It isn't an independent deterrent. Everyone (including Russia and China) is aware of that fact.
It'sd not as if they were Blue Streak missiles launched from North Norfolk silos which could be traced back to the perpetrators. A SLBM is by definition untraceable and launchable from any wet bit on the map within range, and what's a chap to think if Trident-type trajectories come at him?
There is no US "off switch" for Trident. The claims that there are seem to be of the "but there must be" variety.
And claims that there is no 'off switch' are of the 'but there couldn't be' variety. I respect your experience in various fields, but by definition, being party to US nuclear secrets isn't one of them. So logic is really all we have to go on.
Which ally of Britain would you sell independent strategic nukes to by the way? Which country would you happily sell the ability to use British technology to wipe out other countries at will? - Exactly.
Is your point that - certainly at the time Trident was set up - the answer was "the United States of America"?
No. My point is that there is no other country, however loyal, however much a staunch ally, to which one Government could sensibly give/sell/or rent the ability to destroy other countries at a button press, on 'free-for-all' basis. You would need appropriate checks and balances.
It is a matter of public record that without American support, Trident would be out of commission within weeks. I also believe that we could not use it independently in the immediate term without America's express permission. The fact that the last time we tried to hit a target 'off the West coast of Africa', the missile veered off course and went in the direction of America, if it doesn't provide corroboration for this, at least indicates that once a target is identified and put in by UK forces firing it, the missile has the ability to change its course and follow an alternative route.
What on earth is your argument here? That we performed a routine test fire, forgot to warn the US, and the Pentagon panicked and hit the emergency override button?
Seems much more likely it was a genuine malfunction, no?
I would prefer to leave theories to one side and stick to what we can conclusively prove from the event - that the missile can change its course mid-flight, regardless of the instructions given it when fired.
On topic: I gaze into the future of the Republican party - not too far, just a couple of years - and I see no Trump or Trumpdom there. What I do see, however and alas, are elements of the MAGA agenda still in the mix.
The million $ puzzle which imo must be solved in order to predict where the party goes is as follows - Of the 73m who voted for Donald Trump what are the approx weightings (adjusted for overlap) for the 4 main categories?
1. Love Trump. Lucky to have him. Helluva guy and a total one off. Just so into everything about the man. 2. Always vote Republican. It's what I am - a Republican. Cut me and I bleed tax cuts & voter suppression. 3. Not big on politics. Only care about the economy. Thought he'd done ok on that. Why change. 4. Trump? Can take him or leave him but I like his hard right national populist rhetoric and policies.
No particular order there except that I've put the last one last for a reason. I think it's the smallest.
Very rough guesses:
1. 10 2. 50 3. 8 4. 5
Although 1 and 4 are largely the same category, if we're being honest.
Much obliged. This is what I'm looking for. Unadorned numbers that I can crunch thro the "Predict the Near Term Future of the GOP" model I've developed (mainly for betting purposes but also to aid my superforecasting and related punditry).
- No bright future for MAGA without Trump. - Republican party v Trump is a mismatch. Party prevails.
MAGA and Trump are interchangeable, a distinction without a difference.
I would say:
Republican 63 million MAGA/Trump 9 million Economy 1 million
Ah, Philip. Thank goodness. Can't finalize anything without your input. I was starting to worry I'd have to beg for it.
Interesting too because it's an outlier, which is great news. But just to double check. You think only 1m of the 73m who voted Trump were apolitical floater types who just figured he'd done ok on the economy and so were minded not to change?
Really?
Weren't there detailed polls during the election that had serious numbers of people backing Trump because of the economy? On the I-can't-stand-him-but-my-401k basis?
For me the pointers are that the Trump coalition is not a winning coalition at the federal level going forwards.
The easier thing for GOP politicians is to cleave to the Trumpsters, because of their enthusiasm. But that is what has driven the ABTs out of the party and has lost the GOP most independents and thus the absolutely essential suburbs.
For me, the way back for the GOP is the painful one. Excise their most passionate supporters, the Trumpsters. Rebuild the center right, win back the suburbs. Regain the trust of women.
To me, this will take at least one more bad election cycle result (2022), which alas is not guaranteed, followed by 4-6 years of rebuilding. It could go faster than that but equally it is not guaranteed to happen at all, but it is my best bet.
On topic: I gaze into the future of the Republican party - not too far, just a couple of years - and I see no Trump or Trumpdom there. What I do see, however and alas, are elements of the MAGA agenda still in the mix.
The million $ puzzle which imo must be solved in order to predict where the party goes is as follows - Of the 73m who voted for Donald Trump what are the approx weightings (adjusted for overlap) for the 4 main categories?
1. Love Trump. Lucky to have him. Helluva guy and a total one off. Just so into everything about the man. 2. Always vote Republican. It's what I am - a Republican. Cut me and I bleed tax cuts & voter suppression. 3. Not big on politics. Only care about the economy. Thought he'd done ok on that. Why change. 4. Trump? Can take him or leave him but I like his hard right national populist rhetoric and policies.
No particular order there except that I've put the last one last for a reason. I think it's the smallest.
Very rough guesses:
1. 10 2. 50 3. 8 4. 5
Although 1 and 4 are largely the same category, if we're being honest.
Much obliged. This is what I'm looking for. Unadorned numbers that I can crunch thro the "Predict the Near Term Future of the GOP" model I've developed (mainly for betting purposes but also to aid my superforecasting and related punditry).
- No bright future for MAGA without Trump. - Republican party v Trump is a mismatch. Party prevails.
Much easier to split the 73, so: 1. 20 2. 45 3. 6 4. 2
That's an interesting one, thanks.
Think we might be saying that the MAGA element - voters who love a bit of hardcore nativist nationalism but are indifferent to the Trump delivery mechanism - is negligible.
So let's drop it and merge me, you, pulpstar, BluestBlue et alia to get -
1. I'm a Republican stupid - 65 2. I'm a Trumpster and I AM stupid - 25 3. It's the economy obvs - 10
Nice clear pointers emerging now.
But what are they?
The problem with that approach of going back to the suburbanites is that (a) they are increasing socially liberal due to college education, (b) are more fickle and so (c) you would have to blow up your base by switching to a more socially liberal / economically right-wing stance in the hope - and it would be no more than a hope - that you can persuade people who deserted you to switch back.
There is another thing here as well. Hispanics, Asian-Americans and Black people, on the whole, tend to be socially conservative. If the Republicans continue to make inroads into the HIspanic vote, then that more than outweighs their losses in the suburbs. Ditch the socially conservative agenda to appeal to suburban types and you have lost that.
Citation required.
I didn't know you were such a disciple of citation, @Anabobazina, I must have missed that in your posts.
A quick scan of that shows it seems to be talking about immigrants, when your original claim was about Hispanics, Asian-Americans and Black people. That conflation may raise an eyebrow. Is it worth me reading the page more closely, or have you sent the wrong link?
I haven't send the wrong link and the article is about Hispanic voters, a significant chunk of whom would be immigrants. The report references 18.6m immigrant Hispanic citizens, and that was for 2014. The US Census data for 2014 shows 53.2m Hispanics in the US, of which 20m were under 19. It's unclear whether their definition of citizen includes or excludes minors. If it does, that's well over half the Hispanic population in the US, if not, it is well over a third.
But please, I am interested in any facts and figures you have to the opposite.
I am not making any claims about racial differences in politics, I'm merely assessing yours. So far, I'm finding your claims to be dubious in more than one sense.
Ok, well then please show your evidence and your rationale as to why it is dubious. All you have done so if make an assertion with no contrary facts. Anyone can do that, including the bots and zombies you referred to earlier.
Once again, I made no assertion. I haven't said you're wrong, I think it's likelier you're just confused.
I don't think so but please tell me where I am confused. If I'm wrong, happy to admit it.
I love it when people who are implacably opposed to the Republican Party try to give it lessons. Presumably to maintain the notion that everything is alright in the West and its business as usual, and what you are seeing is not a hologram.
But here's the thing. It really isn't all right.
The right is completely split in America. The party elite and the Trumpist base despise each other totally. The latter will not turn out for the former, as Georgia showed, and what follows is a hugely bitter primaries battle between the two factions ahead of 2022. When millions will not turn out again and the democrat hegemony intensifies.
Meanwhile, the Democrats will be deliberating just how much of a Jihad they want to declare on the many millions of Americans who turned out for Trump and now have zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions.
Trump showed his millions of supporters a glimpse of an America they were comfortable with and where they were welcome and valuable citizens.
They are not going back to the likes of Romney. Not now. Not ever.
Trouble is, their "zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions" is based on delusion. How to cleanse this?
Making the left-behind feel "welcome and valuable citizens". Absolutely.
"A glimpse of an America they were comfortable with". A lot to unpack in that statement. What America was that exactly. Because judging by the comments of Trump and many of his supporters it was an America where blacks could be shot or killed by the police with impunity or denied the vote or where demonstrators could go on marches shouting anti-Semitic slogans and be praised as "fine people".
That sort of America is a horrible one and if that is the vision that these people want then we absolutely should not be pandering to them. There are limits. There are boundaries of decent behaviour. And we don't accept behaviour which breaches those boundaries just because it's the left-behind or the white working-class doing the demanding. They don't get excused from complying with decent civilised behaviour just because they're poor or uneducated or unemployed.
Trump appealed to peoples' basest instincts. The best thing we can do for people who feel ignored is make life better for them not act on their worst instincts.
Cyclefree likes an evidence free moral high horse rant sometimes.
Black employment was at a record high under Trump. Lets see how Biden does. The early signs aren't good. Look at the democrat dominated states already.
Examples where blacks could be shot or killing with impunity? Last I looked the killers of Floyd and others were subject to due process. Did Trump try to interrupt that process or change the laws of due process?
And as for making life better for any American, well, the democrats were already out of ideas for that before the election. Again look at the states and the cities where they have held sway for decades. If this election was fought on the pre-covid economy, Trump won hands down.
Try reading my post properly. I gave you specific examples. If you want evidence, look at what the Republican Party under Trump was doing to stop black people voting. Look at what Trump himself said about marchers spouting anti-Semitic slogans.
So again when you said "A glimpse of an America they were comfortable with" what did you mean? What sort of America do you think they want? Let's have some specifics and evidence from you rather than generalities about wanting to be valued with which no-one will disagree.
For me the pointers are that the Trump coalition is not a winning coalition at the federal level going forwards.
The easier thing for GOP politicians is to cleave to the Trumpsters, because of their enthusiasm. But that is what has driven the ABTs out of the party and has lost the GOP most independents and thus the absolutely essential suburbs.
For me, the way back for the GOP is the painful one. Excise their most passionate supporters, the Trumpsters. Rebuild the center right, win back the suburbs. Regain the trust of women.
To me, this will take at least one more bad election cycle result (2022), which alas is not guaranteed, followed by 4-6 years of rebuilding. It could go faster than that but equally it is not guaranteed to happen at all, but it is my best bet.
On topic: I gaze into the future of the Republican party - not too far, just a couple of years - and I see no Trump or Trumpdom there. What I do see, however and alas, are elements of the MAGA agenda still in the mix.
The million $ puzzle which imo must be solved in order to predict where the party goes is as follows - Of the 73m who voted for Donald Trump what are the approx weightings (adjusted for overlap) for the 4 main categories?
1. Love Trump. Lucky to have him. Helluva guy and a total one off. Just so into everything about the man. 2. Always vote Republican. It's what I am - a Republican. Cut me and I bleed tax cuts & voter suppression. 3. Not big on politics. Only care about the economy. Thought he'd done ok on that. Why change. 4. Trump? Can take him or leave him but I like his hard right national populist rhetoric and policies.
No particular order there except that I've put the last one last for a reason. I think it's the smallest.
Very rough guesses:
1. 10 2. 50 3. 8 4. 5
Although 1 and 4 are largely the same category, if we're being honest.
Much obliged. This is what I'm looking for. Unadorned numbers that I can crunch thro the "Predict the Near Term Future of the GOP" model I've developed (mainly for betting purposes but also to aid my superforecasting and related punditry).
- No bright future for MAGA without Trump. - Republican party v Trump is a mismatch. Party prevails.
Much easier to split the 73, so: 1. 20 2. 45 3. 6 4. 2
That's an interesting one, thanks.
Think we might be saying that the MAGA element - voters who love a bit of hardcore nativist nationalism but are indifferent to the Trump delivery mechanism - is negligible.
So let's drop it and merge me, you, pulpstar, BluestBlue et alia to get -
1. I'm a Republican stupid - 65 2. I'm a Trumpster and I AM stupid - 25 3. It's the economy obvs - 10
Nice clear pointers emerging now.
But what are they?
The problem with that approach of going back to the suburbanites is that (a) they are increasing socially liberal due to college education, (b) are more fickle and so (c) you would have to blow up your base by switching to a more socially liberal / economically right-wing stance in the hope - and it would be no more than a hope - that you can persuade people who deserted you to switch back.
There is another thing here as well. Hispanics, Asian-Americans and Black people, on the whole, tend to be socially conservative. If the Republicans continue to make inroads into the HIspanic vote, then that more than outweighs their losses in the suburbs. Ditch the socially conservative agenda to appeal to suburban types and you have lost that.
If you abandon the cities and the suburbs, you cannot take the House. Period.
Well, the Republicans nearly did.
The tragedy is that the 'rebels' were so exercised at the growing inequalities in income and wealth - and the growing distance between politicians and the people they are supposed to represent - that they turned to a brand of extreme Republicanism that was never likely to want to deliver them any sort of relief.
The big question of our era is why centre-left politicians have proved so unable to put forward a comprehensive platform to rectify the egregious distortions of 21st century society in a way that can carry a majority of sensibly minded voters in the centre of political opinion?
Within our lifetimes, if the centre-left doesn't rise to the challenge of our times, then the future will be left to the extremes.
The simple explanation is that centre-left politicians now spend most of their energy and efforts prioritising culturally liberal stances than the economic concerns that concern most people. I've pointed out here to those that scream racist at Trump voters that a good chunk of them would have voted for Obama in 2008. They didn't care he was Black but they did care about their economic conditions. However, the Democrat party became so embroiled in cultural issues that it dropped the ball on the economic front.
This line of attack might have worked in the past, but it has lost much of its potency given the Democrats' clean sweep in the world's second-largest democracy. And your boy, a poster child for the opposite approach, getting his backside handed to him.
I don't think the Democrats have built any durable electoral coalition as yet, though. A huge amount of these votes were anyone-but-Trump votes, which will subside as he disappears from the scene. One more hopeful sign of the Democrats reconnecting with a working-class base looks to be Biden's choice of Labour Secretary, who I think Bernie Sanders endorses.
I would argue that the Democrat Senate success in Georgia shows that there isn't that many anyone but Trump voters rather there is a percent of voters that Trump reached that no-one else currently can.
For me the pointers are that the Trump coalition is not a winning coalition at the federal level going forwards.
The easier thing for GOP politicians is to cleave to the Trumpsters, because of their enthusiasm. But that is what has driven the ABTs out of the party and has lost the GOP most independents and thus the absolutely essential suburbs.
For me, the way back for the GOP is the painful one. Excise their most passionate supporters, the Trumpsters. Rebuild the center right, win back the suburbs. Regain the trust of women.
To me, this will take at least one more bad election cycle result (2022), which alas is not guaranteed, followed by 4-6 years of rebuilding. It could go faster than that but equally it is not guaranteed to happen at all, but it is my best bet.
This is my view too. Except I think it will not be quite such a long and difficult process. Once Trump is not POTUS, my strong sense is he'll fade quicker than most people think. And given MAGA is so wrapped up with HIM, I think that will too. I see a vibrant young Republican emerging in time for the 24 election and running on a small state, libertarian, socially "trad" ticket. He or she will have the challenge of picking up the deplorables without being deplorable. If they can, they have a decent shot.
Spot on, the Trump balloon begins to rapidly deflate at precisely 1200hrs EST on 20 January. Trump becomes a has-been schmuck and his power and potency desert him.
Nothing from you but evidence free lazy slurring, as usual.
My thoughts with you at this difficult time.
And again. You have no arguments, no evidence and you are not interested in a discussion. Simply yelling shrill rubbish at people who disagree with you.
Yes, Trump got his timing and positioning absolutely right in 2016. The Republican voting base has moved more into that top left quadrant. Now, it may be you get a reversal of things where the contenders overcrowd the top left and leave the bottom right free for one who breaks through but I doubt it.
Both parties though face a problem, this is not just a Republican issue. Look at the Democrats. Why did Biden and Harris need to make the remarks yesterday about, if this was a BLM riot, matters would have been handled differently? Tactically, it risked diverting the headlines from focusing on the Republicans rioting to BLM as well as raising the obvious retort of "well, would you have condemned it if it was a BLM riot?".
Surely that statement is right though - the BLM protests in Washington were policed in a very different way to Wednesday's protest.
"In Washington" is a pretty important qualifier, and the differences in approach there can perhaps be partially attributed to who is currently in control of the levers of political power.
However, every single one of the Trump 2020 voters I know cited Democrat failure to properly police BLM rioters in Democrat-run places like Portland as their primary reason for not voting for Biden. The logic seems to be simply that if the Democrat party aren't interested in keeping law and order in the parts of the country they already ran, they would have similarly little interest in retaining order nationwide if they ran that.
Do those people actually live in Portland or do they live elsewhere and so voted on the basis of media reporting?
About half in the UK and the rest in not-Portland. The former group are working mostly on the basis of the BBC and the Times reporting though, not Fox News and Alex Jones.
On vaccine choice, if I was given one I'd go for Moderna, but since I won't I'll take whatever I'm given.
The interesting part about the mRNA vaccines is that if a booster is needed then it could conceivably be an identical one to whatever you got last time as a single jab. With the others you may need two jabs in a new vector.
I think as time passes the two main mRNA vaccines will become dominant in the developed world while the vector ones will dominate in the developing world. It's a huge win for USA Inc. to have both major mRNA vaccines and such a huge missed opportunity for UK PLC to not have pursued the Imperial mRNA one.
Not so fast. It really depends on the efficacy of the Oxford jab. Which is uncertain.
There are hints it might be as good as, or nearly as good as, the mRNAs, in which case Oxford’s cheapness and ease of storage will make it a winner everywhere.
@MaxPB are you sure Imperial is not being developed? A post I saw here indicated that this wasn't the case.
Miles off anything for market.
Vaccine collaboration could overcome cold chain issues for RNA-based vaccines - 07 January 2021
Imperial vaccine researchers are collaborating with industry partners to develop RNA vaccines stable at temperatures up to 40C.
The project, which will see Imperial researchers partner with UK biotech company Enesi, has the potential to overcome current cold-chain issues associated with RNA vaccines, eliminating the need to keep doses frozen at temperatures well below 0C.
Following the latest round of mandated Covid-19 tests, the EFL can confirm that 3507 players and Club staff from 66 EFL Clubs were tested over the course of the past week with 112 individuals testing positive.
Thats about 3,192 cases per 100,000, which is three times the London figure, which means the EFL is buggered.
And plenty of Premier League clubs are playing EFL clubs this weekend.
For me the pointers are that the Trump coalition is not a winning coalition at the federal level going forwards.
The easier thing for GOP politicians is to cleave to the Trumpsters, because of their enthusiasm. But that is what has driven the ABTs out of the party and has lost the GOP most independents and thus the absolutely essential suburbs.
For me, the way back for the GOP is the painful one. Excise their most passionate supporters, the Trumpsters. Rebuild the center right, win back the suburbs. Regain the trust of women.
To me, this will take at least one more bad election cycle result (2022), which alas is not guaranteed, followed by 4-6 years of rebuilding. It could go faster than that but equally it is not guaranteed to happen at all, but it is my best bet.
On topic: I gaze into the future of the Republican party - not too far, just a couple of years - and I see no Trump or Trumpdom there. What I do see, however and alas, are elements of the MAGA agenda still in the mix.
The million $ puzzle which imo must be solved in order to predict where the party goes is as follows - Of the 73m who voted for Donald Trump what are the approx weightings (adjusted for overlap) for the 4 main categories?
1. Love Trump. Lucky to have him. Helluva guy and a total one off. Just so into everything about the man. 2. Always vote Republican. It's what I am - a Republican. Cut me and I bleed tax cuts & voter suppression. 3. Not big on politics. Only care about the economy. Thought he'd done ok on that. Why change. 4. Trump? Can take him or leave him but I like his hard right national populist rhetoric and policies.
No particular order there except that I've put the last one last for a reason. I think it's the smallest.
Very rough guesses:
1. 10 2. 50 3. 8 4. 5
Although 1 and 4 are largely the same category, if we're being honest.
Much obliged. This is what I'm looking for. Unadorned numbers that I can crunch thro the "Predict the Near Term Future of the GOP" model I've developed (mainly for betting purposes but also to aid my superforecasting and related punditry).
- No bright future for MAGA without Trump. - Republican party v Trump is a mismatch. Party prevails.
Much easier to split the 73, so: 1. 20 2. 45 3. 6 4. 2
That's an interesting one, thanks.
Think we might be saying that the MAGA element - voters who love a bit of hardcore nativist nationalism but are indifferent to the Trump delivery mechanism - is negligible.
So let's drop it and merge me, you, pulpstar, BluestBlue et alia to get -
1. I'm a Republican stupid - 65 2. I'm a Trumpster and I AM stupid - 25 3. It's the economy obvs - 10
Nice clear pointers emerging now.
But what are they?
The problem with that approach of going back to the suburbanites is that (a) they are increasing socially liberal due to college education, (b) are more fickle and so (c) you would have to blow up your base by switching to a more socially liberal / economically right-wing stance in the hope - and it would be no more than a hope - that you can persuade people who deserted you to switch back.
There is another thing here as well. Hispanics, Asian-Americans and Black people, on the whole, tend to be socially conservative. If the Republicans continue to make inroads into the HIspanic vote, then that more than outweighs their losses in the suburbs. Ditch the socially conservative agenda to appeal to suburban types and you have lost that.
If you abandon the cities and the suburbs, you cannot take the House. Period.
Well, the Republicans nearly did.
The tragedy is that the 'rebels' were so exercised at the growing inequalities in income and wealth - and the growing distance between politicians and the people they are supposed to represent - that they turned to a brand of extreme Republicanism that was never likely to want to deliver them any sort of relief.
The big question of our era is why centre-left politicians have proved so unable to put forward a comprehensive platform to rectify the egregious distortions of 21st century society in a way that can carry a majority of sensibly minded voters in the centre of political opinion?
Within our lifetimes, if the centre-left doesn't rise to the challenge of our times, then the future will be left to the extremes.
The simple explanation is that centre-left politicians now spend most of their energy and efforts prioritising culturally liberal stances than the economic concerns that concern most people. I've pointed out here to those that scream racist at Trump voters that a good chunk of them would have voted for Obama in 2008. They didn't care he was Black but they did care about their economic conditions. However, the Democrat party became so embroiled in cultural issues that it dropped the ball on the economic front.
This line of attack might have worked in the past, but it has lost much of its potency given the Democrats' clean sweep in the world's second-largest democracy. And your boy, a poster child for the opposite approach, getting his backside handed to him.
He didn't really get his backside handed to him though did he? Biden won the election by the same number of EV votes as Trump, a victory that we were told at the time was minimal because if only 70K voters had switched sides, Clinton would have won. Only this time, if only 44K (if I remember correctly) had switched sides, Trump would have won. The Democrats nearly lost control of the House. And you have a 50/50 Senate.
And, no, the attack lines are still relevant. It was stupid of Biden et al to use the BLM line last night because it had no relevance in the scheme of things and was done in response to the post on social media showing the response to BLM protests. I pointed out pre-election that the focus on BLM risked driving Hispanics to the GOP, which is one of the few things I got right about November
Denial. Sheer denial.
He was comprehensively and soundly beaten.
In 2016, the GOP held the House, Senate and Presidency.
After four years of Trump, they hold none of them.
He has taken the L on a grand scale.
Try to accept the truth.
On that basis, the Democrats in 2016 were comprehensively and soundly beaten as the GOP held all three.
Yet you were the ones who continually stated that Trump had little of a mandate given the slimness of his win.
So which is it? Was it a comprehensive thrashing or not?
I love it when people who are implacably opposed to the Republican Party try to give it lessons. Presumably to maintain the notion that everything is alright in the West and its business as usual, and what you are seeing is not a hologram.
But here's the thing. It really isn't all right.
The right is completely split in America. The party elite and the Trumpist base despise each other totally. The latter will not turn out for the former, as Georgia showed, and what follows is a hugely bitter primaries battle between the two factions ahead of 2022. When millions will not turn out again and the democrat hegemony intensifies.
Meanwhile, the Democrats will be deliberating just how much of a Jihad they want to declare on the many millions of Americans who turned out for Trump and now have zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions.
Trump showed his millions of supporters a glimpse of an America they were comfortable with and where they were welcome and valuable citizens.
They are not going back to the likes of Romney. Not now. Not ever.
Trouble is, their "zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions" is based on delusion. How to cleanse this?
Making the left-behind feel "welcome and valuable citizens". Absolutely.
"A glimpse of an America they were comfortable with". A lot to unpack in that statement. What America was that exactly. Because judging by the comments of Trump and many of his supporters it was an America where blacks could be shot or killed by the police with impunity or denied the vote or where demonstrators could go on marches shouting anti-Semitic slogans and be praised as "fine people".
That sort of America is a horrible one and if that is the vision that these people want then we absolutely should not be pandering to them. There are limits. There are boundaries of decent behaviour. And we don't accept behaviour which breaches those boundaries just because it's the left-behind or the white working-class doing the demanding. They don't get excused from complying with decent civilised behaviour just because they're poor or uneducated or unemployed.
Trump appealed to peoples' basest instincts. The best thing we can do for people who feel ignored is make life better for them not act on their worst instincts.
Cyclefree likes an evidence free moral high horse rant sometimes.
Black employment was at a record high under Trump. Lets see how Biden does. The early signs aren't good. Look at the democrat dominated states already.
Examples where blacks could be shot or killing with impunity? Last I looked the killers of Floyd and others were subject to due process. Did Trump try to interrupt that process or change the laws of due process?
And as for making life better for any American, well, the democrats were already out of ideas for that before the election. Again look at the states and the cities where they have held sway for decades. If this election was fought on the pre-covid economy, Trump won hands down.
I'm guessing everyone looks like they're on a moral high horse, when you're lying in the moral gutter.
FWIW, opposing antisemitism isn't moralising, it's a basic entry requirement for being a civilised human. Try it.
Such shrill, emotional, evidence free b'llocks it is untrue.
We know from the Corbynites here where the real anti-semites are matey. We'll take no lessons from the left on that score.
Trump was a huge supporter of Israel's right to exist (as opposed to the more radical democrats you support), and even managed to broker ground breaking middle east peace agreements between Jew and Arab.
Those are real, tangible achievements, not airy fairy claims about what some redneck may or may not have said at some stupid rally or other.
Rarely heard such pile of cr*p
"airy fairy claims about what some redneck may or may not have said at some stupid rally or other" is a little way short of "I condemn all antisemitism"
I wonder how many people on here are truly shocked you couldn't manage it.
It's a mystery to me that Trump did not tackle the virus crisis head-on. It was made for him - a bold, charismatic, mould-breaking leader prepared to defy convention and carry his fanatical supporters with him. He could have locked down the country. It would have accepted his lead and followed his every word through lockdown. Tens of thousands of lives would have been saved and he would have gone into the election a hero. He might have won all fifty states.
Instead he chose denial, even though he must have known what was in store.
Why?
What confused me is why Trump discouraged people from voting anyway they could vote.
If Trump had got his supporters to use postal votes I do believe he would have won re-election.
On topic: I gaze into the future of the Republican party - not too far, just a couple of years - and I see no Trump or Trumpdom there. What I do see, however and alas, are elements of the MAGA agenda still in the mix.
The million $ puzzle which imo must be solved in order to predict where the party goes is as follows - Of the 73m who voted for Donald Trump what are the approx weightings (adjusted for overlap) for the 4 main categories?
1. Love Trump. Lucky to have him. Helluva guy and a total one off. Just so into everything about the man. 2. Always vote Republican. It's what I am - a Republican. Cut me and I bleed tax cuts & voter suppression. 3. Not big on politics. Only care about the economy. Thought he'd done ok on that. Why change. 4. Trump? Can take him or leave him but I like his hard right national populist rhetoric and policies.
No particular order there except that I've put the last one last for a reason. I think it's the smallest.
Very rough guesses:
1. 10 2. 50 3. 8 4. 5
Although 1 and 4 are largely the same category, if we're being honest.
Much obliged. This is what I'm looking for. Unadorned numbers that I can crunch thro the "Predict the Near Term Future of the GOP" model I've developed (mainly for betting purposes but also to aid my superforecasting and related punditry).
- No bright future for MAGA without Trump. - Republican party v Trump is a mismatch. Party prevails.
MAGA and Trump are interchangeable, a distinction without a difference.
I would say:
Republican 63 million MAGA/Trump 9 million Economy 1 million
Ah, Philip. Thank goodness. Can't finalize anything without your input. I was starting to worry I'd have to beg for it.
Interesting too because it's an outlier, which is great news. But just to double check. You think only 1m of the 73m who voted Trump were apolitical floater types who just figured he'd done ok on the economy and so were minded not to change?
Really?
Weren't there detailed polls during the election that had serious numbers of people backing Trump because of the economy? On the I-can't-stand-him-but-my-401k basis?
Ah but ... Weren't they just saying that to avoid the social stigma of their real views? (not an entirely serious post)
"The Prime Minister knows that to lose Scotland would be a resigning matter. And there’s a chance he wouldn’t even be allowed to get that far: his party might not keep a leader who looked close to losing the union.
Rishi Sunak is viewed by Tory strategists as the cabinet minister with the best appeal, outranking both Starmer and Gordon Brown among Scottish swing voters."
Michael Gove isn't mentioned in quite the same way ...
PS Also interesting (given current wisdomn on PB) is that the Tories seem quite worried by an indicative referendum - ie not at all dismissive of it.
But of course! We had an indicative referendum here a few months ago, but it was only indicative or advisory, so the Electoral Commission gave the green light to it. If it had been a binding referendum, the Electoral Commission would never have allowed it to go ahead in the shapre it was.
Once the votes were in, the government of the day declared that it was, after all, binding; and then set about removing many of our constitutional safeguards in order to "get Brexit done". That is why we are now being dictated to by a gang of incompetents, who have no idea of the British sense of fair play.
I am sure that our Conservative friends realise that, if they can get away with holding a shabby referendum over the EU, then the SNP could do the same thing over Scottish independence. So they are now worried by the prospect of a referendum on the issue. Quite understandable.
Brexit and the UK leaving the EU was allowed by Article 50 of the EU constitution.
Scexit and Scotland leaving the UK however is illegal without Westminster approval under our unwritten constitution
So why are your Tory bosses privately accepting otherwise, if that article is correct? And it is in the Speccy not the Graun.
I presume that any sign of weakness from the Tories on the ghastly Natz issue means HYUFD resigning from the party of appeasement. Exciting times!
It is well worth a read if you haven't. Somehow, also, Mr Gove is no longer frontperson in the struggle against freedom. And the comparison used to demonstrate Mr Sunak's ultrapopularity is, tactfully, Mr Brown. Still need to see who the front gal or guy for Better Together Mk 2 is going to be.
This is worth reading too, lads. Alex Bell, former spinner for Big Alex. Maybe Boris will just say no. Why would he say yes?
I read that today. It makes a number of familiar and obvious points about how difficult the roads to independence would likely be. What I wasn't entirely clear on, having got to the end, is why the 5 years is so critical?
Indeed, it seemed the same old Bell stuff (he's not being paid by Mr Salmond or the taxpayer but a Unionist newspaper). 5 years dunno. Maybe he assumes the SNP will lose the next but one Holyrood election?
Following the latest round of mandated Covid-19 tests, the EFL can confirm that 3507 players and Club staff from 66 EFL Clubs were tested over the course of the past week with 112 individuals testing positive.
Thats about 3,192 cases per 100,000, which is three times the London figure, which means the EFL is buggered.
And plenty of Premier League clubs are playing EFL clubs this weekend.
Can't be long until they have herd immunity.
Football has been a total and utter failure when it comes to running their business under COVID.
For me the pointers are that the Trump coalition is not a winning coalition at the federal level going forwards.
The easier thing for GOP politicians is to cleave to the Trumpsters, because of their enthusiasm. But that is what has driven the ABTs out of the party and has lost the GOP most independents and thus the absolutely essential suburbs.
For me, the way back for the GOP is the painful one. Excise their most passionate supporters, the Trumpsters. Rebuild the center right, win back the suburbs. Regain the trust of women.
To me, this will take at least one more bad election cycle result (2022), which alas is not guaranteed, followed by 4-6 years of rebuilding. It could go faster than that but equally it is not guaranteed to happen at all, but it is my best bet.
This is my view too. Except I think it will not be quite such a long and difficult process. Once Trump is not POTUS, my strong sense is he'll fade quicker than most people think. And given MAGA is so wrapped up with HIM, I think that will too. I see a vibrant young Republican emerging in time for the 24 election and running on a small state, libertarian, socially "trad" ticket. He or she will have the challenge of picking up the deplorables without being deplorable. If they can, they have a decent shot.
Spot on, the Trump balloon begins to rapidly deflate at precisely 1200hrs EST on 20 January. Trump becomes a has-been schmuck and his power and potency desert him.
Nothing from you but evidence free lazy slurring, as usual.
My thoughts with you at this difficult time.
And again. You have no arguments, no evidence and you are not interested in a discussion. Simply yelling shrill rubbish at people who disagree with you.
Says the guy who told Ydeothur to go f*ck himself the other day.
It's a mystery to me that Trump did not tackle the virus crisis head-on. It was made for him - a bold, charismatic, mould-breaking leader prepared to defy convention and carry his fanatical supporters with him. He could have locked down the country. It would have accepted his lead and followed his every word through lockdown. Tens of thousands of lives would have been saved and he would have gone into the election a hero. He might have won all fifty states.
Instead he chose denial, even though he must have known what was in store.
Why?
What confused me is why Trump discouraged people from voting anyway they could vote.
If Trump had got his supporters to use postal votes I do believe he would have won re-election.
Is that not because he would have had to admit the virus was a real and present threat to people?
Following the latest round of mandated Covid-19 tests, the EFL can confirm that 3507 players and Club staff from 66 EFL Clubs were tested over the course of the past week with 112 individuals testing positive.
Thats about 3,192 cases per 100,000, which is three times the London figure, which means the EFL is buggered.
And plenty of Premier League clubs are playing EFL clubs this weekend.
Can't be long until they have herd immunity.
Football has been a total and utter failure when it comes to running their business under COVID.
The EFL I'm a bit more forgiving off considering they couldn't afford to pay for regular tests, they only carried out tests if people had symptoms.
For me the pointers are that the Trump coalition is not a winning coalition at the federal level going forwards.
The easier thing for GOP politicians is to cleave to the Trumpsters, because of their enthusiasm. But that is what has driven the ABTs out of the party and has lost the GOP most independents and thus the absolutely essential suburbs.
For me, the way back for the GOP is the painful one. Excise their most passionate supporters, the Trumpsters. Rebuild the center right, win back the suburbs. Regain the trust of women.
To me, this will take at least one more bad election cycle result (2022), which alas is not guaranteed, followed by 4-6 years of rebuilding. It could go faster than that but equally it is not guaranteed to happen at all, but it is my best bet.
This is my view too. Except I think it will not be quite such a long and difficult process. Once Trump is not POTUS, my strong sense is he'll fade quicker than most people think. And given MAGA is so wrapped up with HIM, I think that will too. I see a vibrant young Republican emerging in time for the 24 election and running on a small state, libertarian, socially "trad" ticket. He or she will have the challenge of picking up the deplorables without being deplorable. If they can, they have a decent shot.
Spot on, the Trump balloon begins to rapidly deflate at precisely 1200hrs EST on 20 January. Trump becomes a has-been schmuck and his power and potency desert him.
The trick will be to ensure a steady, continuous deflation and then dragging the remains to a quiet dump somewhere.
Don't try and pop the balloon in one go. Danger of a bang....
That's very good imagery. But I think we've had the bang. Post 20 Jan, I think one of the following, where I root for the 1st but expect the 2nd - or at a pinch the 3rd.
Jail & Bankruptcy. Deal to avoid the above. Price, avoid Politics & Media. Flee to tax & legal haven.
I love it when people who are implacably opposed to the Republican Party try to give it lessons. Presumably to maintain the notion that everything is alright in the West and its business as usual, and what you are seeing is not a hologram.
But here's the thing. It really isn't all right.
The right is completely split in America. The party elite and the Trumpist base despise each other totally. The latter will not turn out for the former, as Georgia showed, and what follows is a hugely bitter primaries battle between the two factions ahead of 2022. When millions will not turn out again and the democrat hegemony intensifies.
Meanwhile, the Democrats will be deliberating just how much of a Jihad they want to declare on the many millions of Americans who turned out for Trump and now have zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions.
Trump showed his millions of supporters a glimpse of an America they were comfortable with and where they were welcome and valuable citizens.
They are not going back to the likes of Romney. Not now. Not ever.
Trouble is, their "zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions" is based on delusion. How to cleanse this?
Making the left-behind feel "welcome and valuable citizens". Absolutely.
"A glimpse of an America they were comfortable with". A lot to unpack in that statement. What America was that exactly. Because judging by the comments of Trump and many of his supporters it was an America where blacks could be shot or killed by the police with impunity or denied the vote or where demonstrators could go on marches shouting anti-Semitic slogans and be praised as "fine people".
That sort of America is a horrible one and if that is the vision that these people want then we absolutely should not be pandering to them. There are limits. There are boundaries of decent behaviour. And we don't accept behaviour which breaches those boundaries just because it's the left-behind or the white working-class doing the demanding. They don't get excused from complying with decent civilised behaviour just because they're poor or uneducated or unemployed.
Trump appealed to peoples' basest instincts. The best thing we can do for people who feel ignored is make life better for them not act on their worst instincts.
Cyclefree likes an evidence free moral high horse rant sometimes.
Black employment was at a record high under Trump. Lets see how Biden does. The early signs aren't good. Look at the democrat dominated states already.
Examples where blacks could be shot or killing with impunity? Last I looked the killers of Floyd and others were subject to due process. Did Trump try to interrupt that process or change the laws of due process?
And as for making life better for any American, well, the democrats were already out of ideas for that before the election. Again look at the states and the cities where they have held sway for decades. If this election was fought on the pre-covid economy, Trump won hands down.
Following the latest round of mandated Covid-19 tests, the EFL can confirm that 3507 players and Club staff from 66 EFL Clubs were tested over the course of the past week with 112 individuals testing positive.
Thats about 3,192 cases per 100,000, which is three times the London figure, which means the EFL is buggered.
And plenty of Premier League clubs are playing EFL clubs this weekend.
Can't be long until they have herd immunity.
Football has been a total and utter failure when it comes to running their business under COVID.
The EFL I'm a bit more forgiving off considering they couldn't afford to pay for regular tests, they only carried out tests if people had symptoms.
But their job is outside, doesn't really require them to be that close to one another in confined spaces, etc.
But if you watch Ben Fosters YouTube videos, he isn't exactly being careful. He is regularly meeting up with other non-footballers, little sign of mask wearing and regular embracing of staff. You wouldn't really know there is a pandemic on, other than the fact no fans in the stands.
I love it when people who are implacably opposed to the Republican Party try to give it lessons. Presumably to maintain the notion that everything is alright in the West and its business as usual, and what you are seeing is not a hologram.
But here's the thing. It really isn't all right.
The right is completely split in America. The party elite and the Trumpist base despise each other totally. The latter will not turn out for the former, as Georgia showed, and what follows is a hugely bitter primaries battle between the two factions ahead of 2022. When millions will not turn out again and the democrat hegemony intensifies.
Meanwhile, the Democrats will be deliberating just how much of a Jihad they want to declare on the many millions of Americans who turned out for Trump and now have zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions.
Trump showed his millions of supporters a glimpse of an America they were comfortable with and where they were welcome and valuable citizens.
They are not going back to the likes of Romney. Not now. Not ever.
Trouble is, their "zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions" is based on delusion. How to cleanse this?
Making the left-behind feel "welcome and valuable citizens". Absolutely.
"A glimpse of an America they were comfortable with". A lot to unpack in that statement. What America was that exactly. Because judging by the comments of Trump and many of his supporters it was an America where blacks could be shot or killed by the police with impunity or denied the vote or where demonstrators could go on marches shouting anti-Semitic slogans and be praised as "fine people".
That sort of America is a horrible one and if that is the vision that these people want then we absolutely should not be pandering to them. There are limits. There are boundaries of decent behaviour. And we don't accept behaviour which breaches those boundaries just because it's the left-behind or the white working-class doing the demanding. They don't get excused from complying with decent civilised behaviour just because they're poor or uneducated or unemployed.
Trump appealed to peoples' basest instincts. The best thing we can do for people who feel ignored is make life better for them not act on their worst instincts.
Cyclefree likes an evidence free moral high horse rant sometimes.
Black employment was at a record high under Trump. Lets see how Biden does. The early signs aren't good. Look at the democrat dominated states already.
Examples where blacks could be shot or killing with impunity? Last I looked the killers of Floyd and others were subject to due process. Did Trump try to interrupt that process or change the laws of due process?
And as for making life better for any American, well, the democrats were already out of ideas for that before the election. Again look at the states and the cities where they have held sway for decades. If this election was fought on the pre-covid economy, Trump won hands down.
That Trump did not have the fancy footwork to see what Covid could do to his chances has spared us four more years.
But I also think Biden will disappoint those who voted for him. Nor will he carry those who didn't. Not a great time ahead for the USA, I fear.
I love it when people who are implacably opposed to the Republican Party try to give it lessons. Presumably to maintain the notion that everything is alright in the West and its business as usual, and what you are seeing is not a hologram.
But here's the thing. It really isn't all right.
The right is completely split in America. The party elite and the Trumpist base despise each other totally. The latter will not turn out for the former, as Georgia showed, and what follows is a hugely bitter primaries battle between the two factions ahead of 2022. When millions will not turn out again and the democrat hegemony intensifies.
Meanwhile, the Democrats will be deliberating just how much of a Jihad they want to declare on the many millions of Americans who turned out for Trump and now have zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions.
Trump showed his millions of supporters a glimpse of an America they were comfortable with and where they were welcome and valuable citizens.
They are not going back to the likes of Romney. Not now. Not ever.
Trouble is, their "zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions" is based on delusion. How to cleanse this?
Making the left-behind feel "welcome and valuable citizens". Absolutely.
"A glimpse of an America they were comfortable with". A lot to unpack in that statement. What America was that exactly. Because judging by the comments of Trump and many of his supporters it was an America where blacks could be shot or killed by the police with impunity or denied the vote or where demonstrators could go on marches shouting anti-Semitic slogans and be praised as "fine people".
That sort of America is a horrible one and if that is the vision that these people want then we absolutely should not be pandering to them. There are limits. There are boundaries of decent behaviour. And we don't accept behaviour which breaches those boundaries just because it's the left-behind or the white working-class doing the demanding. They don't get excused from complying with decent civilised behaviour just because they're poor or uneducated or unemployed.
Trump appealed to peoples' basest instincts. The best thing we can do for people who feel ignored is make life better for them not act on their worst instincts.
Cyclefree likes an evidence free moral high horse rant sometimes.
Black employment was at a record high under Trump. Lets see how Biden does. The early signs aren't good. Look at the democrat dominated states already.
Examples where blacks could be shot or killing with impunity? Last I looked the killers of Floyd and others were subject to due process. Did Trump try to interrupt that process or change the laws of due process?
And as for making life better for any American, well, the democrats were already out of ideas for that before the election. Again look at the states and the cities where they have held sway for decades. If this election was fought on the pre-covid economy, Trump won hands down.
That Trump did not have the fancy footwork to see what Covid could do to his chances has spared us four more years.
But I also think Biden will disappoint those who voted for him. Nor will he carry those who didn't. Not a great time ahead for the USA, I fear.
It's a mystery to me that Trump did not tackle the virus crisis head-on. It was made for him - a bold, charismatic, mould-breaking leader prepared to defy convention and carry his fanatical supporters with him. He could have locked down the country. It would have accepted his lead and followed his every word through lockdown. Tens of thousands of lives would have been saved and he would have gone into the election a hero. He might have won all fifty states.
Instead he chose denial, even though he must have known what was in store.
Why?
Weird indeed. On one level, it was tailor made for his brand of nationalism:
"Don't let Chinese flu kill good American's. Do your bit. Wear a mask. Stop their evil virus in its tracks."
On topic: I gaze into the future of the Republican party - not too far, just a couple of years - and I see no Trump or Trumpdom there. What I do see, however and alas, are elements of the MAGA agenda still in the mix.
The million $ puzzle which imo must be solved in order to predict where the party goes is as follows - Of the 73m who voted for Donald Trump what are the approx weightings (adjusted for overlap) for the 4 main categories?
1. Love Trump. Lucky to have him. Helluva guy and a total one off. Just so into everything about the man. 2. Always vote Republican. It's what I am - a Republican. Cut me and I bleed tax cuts & voter suppression. 3. Not big on politics. Only care about the economy. Thought he'd done ok on that. Why change. 4. Trump? Can take him or leave him but I like his hard right national populist rhetoric and policies.
No particular order there except that I've put the last one last for a reason. I think it's the smallest.
Very rough guesses:
1. 10 2. 50 3. 8 4. 5
Although 1 and 4 are largely the same category, if we're being honest.
Much obliged. This is what I'm looking for. Unadorned numbers that I can crunch thro the "Predict the Near Term Future of the GOP" model I've developed (mainly for betting purposes but also to aid my superforecasting and related punditry).
- No bright future for MAGA without Trump. - Republican party v Trump is a mismatch. Party prevails.
MAGA and Trump are interchangeable, a distinction without a difference.
I would say:
Republican 63 million MAGA/Trump 9 million Economy 1 million
Ah, Philip. Thank goodness. Can't finalize anything without your input. I was starting to worry I'd have to beg for it.
Interesting too because it's an outlier, which is great news. But just to double check. You think only 1m of the 73m who voted Trump were apolitical floater types who just figured he'd done ok on the economy and so were minded not to change?
Really?
Weren't there detailed polls during the election that had serious numbers of people backing Trump because of the economy? On the I-can't-stand-him-but-my-401k basis?
Yes, the 'Are you better off now than four years ago?' figure popped up before the election and was strikingly positive for Trump (56% to 32%). It's probably what prevented him being wiped out rather than just defeated.
For me the pointers are that the Trump coalition is not a winning coalition at the federal level going forwards.
The easier thing for GOP politicians is to cleave to the Trumpsters, because of their enthusiasm. But that is what has driven the ABTs out of the party and has lost the GOP most independents and thus the absolutely essential suburbs.
For me, the way back for the GOP is the painful one. Excise their most passionate supporters, the Trumpsters. Rebuild the center right, win back the suburbs. Regain the trust of women.
To me, this will take at least one more bad election cycle result (2022), which alas is not guaranteed, followed by 4-6 years of rebuilding. It could go faster than that but equally it is not guaranteed to happen at all, but it is my best bet.
This is my view too. Except I think it will not be quite such a long and difficult process. Once Trump is not POTUS, my strong sense is he'll fade quicker than most people think. And given MAGA is so wrapped up with HIM, I think that will too. I see a vibrant young Republican emerging in time for the 24 election and running on a small state, libertarian, socially "trad" ticket. He or she will have the challenge of picking up the deplorables without being deplorable. If they can, they have a decent shot.
You cannot be both libertarian and socially conservative, that is logically impossible
I love it when people who are implacably opposed to the Republican Party try to give it lessons. Presumably to maintain the notion that everything is alright in the West and its business as usual, and what you are seeing is not a hologram.
But here's the thing. It really isn't all right.
The right is completely split in America. The party elite and the Trumpist base despise each other totally. The latter will not turn out for the former, as Georgia showed, and what follows is a hugely bitter primaries battle between the two factions ahead of 2022. When millions will not turn out again and the democrat hegemony intensifies.
Meanwhile, the Democrats will be deliberating just how much of a Jihad they want to declare on the many millions of Americans who turned out for Trump and now have zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions.
Trump showed his millions of supporters a glimpse of an America they were comfortable with and where they were welcome and valuable citizens.
They are not going back to the likes of Romney. Not now. Not ever.
Trouble is, their "zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions" is based on delusion. How to cleanse this?
Making the left-behind feel "welcome and valuable citizens". Absolutely.
"A glimpse of an America they were comfortable with". A lot to unpack in that statement. What America was that exactly. Because judging by the comments of Trump and many of his supporters it was an America where blacks could be shot or killed by the police with impunity or denied the vote or where demonstrators could go on marches shouting anti-Semitic slogans and be praised as "fine people".
That sort of America is a horrible one and if that is the vision that these people want then we absolutely should not be pandering to them. There are limits. There are boundaries of decent behaviour. And we don't accept behaviour which breaches those boundaries just because it's the left-behind or the white working-class doing the demanding. They don't get excused from complying with decent civilised behaviour just because they're poor or uneducated or unemployed.
Trump appealed to peoples' basest instincts. The best thing we can do for people who feel ignored is make life better for them not act on their worst instincts.
Cyclefree likes an evidence free moral high horse rant sometimes.
Black employment was at a record high under Trump. Lets see how Biden does. The early signs aren't good. Look at the democrat dominated states already.
Examples where blacks could be shot or killing with impunity? Last I looked the killers of Floyd and others were subject to due process. Did Trump try to interrupt that process or change the laws of due process?
And as for making life better for any American, well, the democrats were already out of ideas for that before the election. Again look at the states and the cities where they have held sway for decades. If this election was fought on the pre-covid economy, Trump won hands down.
That Trump did not have the fancy footwork to see what Covid could do to his chances has spared us four more years.
But I also think Biden will disappoint those who voted for him. Nor will he carry those who didn't. Not a great time ahead for the USA, I fear.
I love it when people who are implacably opposed to the Republican Party try to give it lessons. Presumably to maintain the notion that everything is alright in the West and its business as usual, and what you are seeing is not a hologram.
But here's the thing. It really isn't all right.
The right is completely split in America. The party elite and the Trumpist base despise each other totally. The latter will not turn out for the former, as Georgia showed, and what follows is a hugely bitter primaries battle between the two factions ahead of 2022. When millions will not turn out again and the democrat hegemony intensifies.
Meanwhile, the Democrats will be deliberating just how much of a Jihad they want to declare on the many millions of Americans who turned out for Trump and now have zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions.
Trump showed his millions of supporters a glimpse of an America they were comfortable with and where they were welcome and valuable citizens.
They are not going back to the likes of Romney. Not now. Not ever.
Trouble is, their "zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions" is based on delusion. How to cleanse this?
Making the left-behind feel "welcome and valuable citizens". Absolutely.
"A glimpse of an America they were comfortable with". A lot to unpack in that statement. What America was that exactly. Because judging by the comments of Trump and many of his supporters it was an America where blacks could be shot or killed by the police with impunity or denied the vote or where demonstrators could go on marches shouting anti-Semitic slogans and be praised as "fine people".
That sort of America is a horrible one and if that is the vision that these people want then we absolutely should not be pandering to them. There are limits. There are boundaries of decent behaviour. And we don't accept behaviour which breaches those boundaries just because it's the left-behind or the white working-class doing the demanding. They don't get excused from complying with decent civilised behaviour just because they're poor or uneducated or unemployed.
Trump appealed to peoples' basest instincts. The best thing we can do for people who feel ignored is make life better for them not act on their worst instincts.
Cyclefree likes an evidence free moral high horse rant sometimes.
Black employment was at a record high under Trump. Lets see how Biden does. The early signs aren't good. Look at the democrat dominated states already.
Examples where blacks could be shot or killing with impunity? Last I looked the killers of Floyd and others were subject to due process. Did Trump try to interrupt that process or change the laws of due process?
And as for making life better for any American, well, the democrats were already out of ideas for that before the election. Again look at the states and the cities where they have held sway for decades. If this election was fought on the pre-covid economy, Trump won hands down.
That Trump did not have the fancy footwork to see what Covid could do to his chances has spared us four more years.
But I also think Biden will disappoint those who voted for him. Nor will he carry those who didn't. Not a great time ahead for the USA, I fear.
It's a mystery to me that Trump did not tackle the virus crisis head-on. It was made for him - a bold, charismatic, mould-breaking leader prepared to defy convention and carry his fanatical supporters with him. He could have locked down the country. It would have accepted his lead and followed his every word through lockdown. Tens of thousands of lives would have been saved and he would have gone into the election a hero. He might have won all fifty states.
Instead he chose denial, even though he must have known what was in store.
I love it when people who are implacably opposed to the Republican Party try to give it lessons. Presumably to maintain the notion that everything is alright in the West and its business as usual, and what you are seeing is not a hologram.
But here's the thing. It really isn't all right.
The right is completely split in America. The party elite and the Trumpist base despise each other totally. The latter will not turn out for the former, as Georgia showed, and what follows is a hugely bitter primaries battle between the two factions ahead of 2022. When millions will not turn out again and the democrat hegemony intensifies.
Meanwhile, the Democrats will be deliberating just how much of a Jihad they want to declare on the many millions of Americans who turned out for Trump and now have zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions.
Trump showed his millions of supporters a glimpse of an America they were comfortable with and where they were welcome and valuable citizens.
They are not going back to the likes of Romney. Not now. Not ever.
Trouble is, their "zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions" is based on delusion. How to cleanse this?
Making the left-behind feel "welcome and valuable citizens". Absolutely.
"A glimpse of an America they were comfortable with". A lot to unpack in that statement. What America was that exactly. Because judging by the comments of Trump and many of his supporters it was an America where blacks could be shot or killed by the police with impunity or denied the vote or where demonstrators could go on marches shouting anti-Semitic slogans and be praised as "fine people".
That sort of America is a horrible one and if that is the vision that these people want then we absolutely should not be pandering to them. There are limits. There are boundaries of decent behaviour. And we don't accept behaviour which breaches those boundaries just because it's the left-behind or the white working-class doing the demanding. They don't get excused from complying with decent civilised behaviour just because they're poor or uneducated or unemployed.
Trump appealed to peoples' basest instincts. The best thing we can do for people who feel ignored is make life better for them not act on their worst instincts.
Cyclefree likes an evidence free moral high horse rant sometimes.
Black employment was at a record high under Trump. Lets see how Biden does. The early signs aren't good. Look at the democrat dominated states already.
Examples where blacks could be shot or killing with impunity? Last I looked the killers of Floyd and others were subject to due process. Did Trump try to interrupt that process or change the laws of due process?
And as for making life better for any American, well, the democrats were already out of ideas for that before the election. Again look at the states and the cities where they have held sway for decades. If this election was fought on the pre-covid economy, Trump won hands down.
That Trump did not have the fancy footwork to see what Covid could do to his chances has spared us four more years.
But I also think Biden will disappoint those who voted for him. Nor will he carry those who didn't. Not a great time ahead for the USA, I fear.
I love it when people who are implacably opposed to the Republican Party try to give it lessons. Presumably to maintain the notion that everything is alright in the West and its business as usual, and what you are seeing is not a hologram.
But here's the thing. It really isn't all right.
The right is completely split in America. The party elite and the Trumpist base despise each other totally. The latter will not turn out for the former, as Georgia showed, and what follows is a hugely bitter primaries battle between the two factions ahead of 2022. When millions will not turn out again and the democrat hegemony intensifies.
Meanwhile, the Democrats will be deliberating just how much of a Jihad they want to declare on the many millions of Americans who turned out for Trump and now have zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions.
Trump showed his millions of supporters a glimpse of an America they were comfortable with and where they were welcome and valuable citizens.
They are not going back to the likes of Romney. Not now. Not ever.
Trouble is, their "zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions" is based on delusion. How to cleanse this?
Making the left-behind feel "welcome and valuable citizens". Absolutely.
"A glimpse of an America they were comfortable with". A lot to unpack in that statement. What America was that exactly. Because judging by the comments of Trump and many of his supporters it was an America where blacks could be shot or killed by the police with impunity or denied the vote or where demonstrators could go on marches shouting anti-Semitic slogans and be praised as "fine people".
That sort of America is a horrible one and if that is the vision that these people want then we absolutely should not be pandering to them. There are limits. There are boundaries of decent behaviour. And we don't accept behaviour which breaches those boundaries just because it's the left-behind or the white working-class doing the demanding. They don't get excused from complying with decent civilised behaviour just because they're poor or uneducated or unemployed.
Trump appealed to peoples' basest instincts. The best thing we can do for people who feel ignored is make life better for them not act on their worst instincts.
Cyclefree likes an evidence free moral high horse rant sometimes.
Black employment was at a record high under Trump. Lets see how Biden does. The early signs aren't good. Look at the democrat dominated states already.
Examples where blacks could be shot or killing with impunity? Last I looked the killers of Floyd and others were subject to due process. Did Trump try to interrupt that process or change the laws of due process?
And as for making life better for any American, well, the democrats were already out of ideas for that before the election. Again look at the states and the cities where they have held sway for decades. If this election was fought on the pre-covid economy, Trump won hands down.
That Trump did not have the fancy footwork to see what Covid could do to his chances has spared us four more years.
But I also think Biden will disappoint those who voted for him. Nor will he carry those who didn't. Not a great time ahead for the USA, I fear.
It's a mystery to me that Trump did not tackle the virus crisis head-on. It was made for him - a bold, charismatic, mould-breaking leader prepared to defy convention and carry his fanatical supporters with him. He could have locked down the country. It would have accepted his lead and followed his every word through lockdown. Tens of thousands of lives would have been saved and he would have gone into the election a hero. He might have won all fifty states.
Instead he chose denial, even though he must have known what was in store.
Why?
Weird indeed. On one level, it was tailor made for his brand of nationalism:
"Don't let Chinese flu kill good American's. Do your bit. Wear a mask. Stop their evil virus in its tracks."
Maybe he shares Boris’ deep personal moral objections.
CNN - Assistant House Speaker will move next week to impeach Trump if Pence does not invoke the 25th Amendment.
I’m still undecided whether this is a good idea or not.
Agreed. But he really does seem to have committed impeachable offences. It may not help, but his actions should be recognised for what they are. The Senate wouldn't convict anyway.
I love it when people who are implacably opposed to the Republican Party try to give it lessons. Presumably to maintain the notion that everything is alright in the West and its business as usual, and what you are seeing is not a hologram.
But here's the thing. It really isn't all right.
The right is completely split in America. The party elite and the Trumpist base despise each other totally. The latter will not turn out for the former, as Georgia showed, and what follows is a hugely bitter primaries battle between the two factions ahead of 2022. When millions will not turn out again and the democrat hegemony intensifies.
Meanwhile, the Democrats will be deliberating just how much of a Jihad they want to declare on the many millions of Americans who turned out for Trump and now have zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions.
Trump showed his millions of supporters a glimpse of an America they were comfortable with and where they were welcome and valuable citizens.
They are not going back to the likes of Romney. Not now. Not ever.
Trouble is, their "zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions" is based on delusion. How to cleanse this?
Making the left-behind feel "welcome and valuable citizens". Absolutely.
"A glimpse of an America they were comfortable with". A lot to unpack in that statement. What America was that exactly. Because judging by the comments of Trump and many of his supporters it was an America where blacks could be shot or killed by the police with impunity or denied the vote or where demonstrators could go on marches shouting anti-Semitic slogans and be praised as "fine people".
That sort of America is a horrible one and if that is the vision that these people want then we absolutely should not be pandering to them. There are limits. There are boundaries of decent behaviour. And we don't accept behaviour which breaches those boundaries just because it's the left-behind or the white working-class doing the demanding. They don't get excused from complying with decent civilised behaviour just because they're poor or uneducated or unemployed.
Trump appealed to peoples' basest instincts. The best thing we can do for people who feel ignored is make life better for them not act on their worst instincts.
Cyclefree likes an evidence free moral high horse rant sometimes.
Black employment was at a record high under Trump. Lets see how Biden does. The early signs aren't good. Look at the democrat dominated states already.
Examples where blacks could be shot or killing with impunity? Last I looked the killers of Floyd and others were subject to due process. Did Trump try to interrupt that process or change the laws of due process?
And as for making life better for any American, well, the democrats were already out of ideas for that before the election. Again look at the states and the cities where they have held sway for decades. If this election was fought on the pre-covid economy, Trump won hands down.
That Trump did not have the fancy footwork to see what Covid could do to his chances has spared us four more years.
But I also think Biden will disappoint those who voted for him. Nor will he carry those who didn't. Not a great time ahead for the USA, I fear.
I love it when people who are implacably opposed to the Republican Party try to give it lessons. Presumably to maintain the notion that everything is alright in the West and its business as usual, and what you are seeing is not a hologram.
But here's the thing. It really isn't all right.
The right is completely split in America. The party elite and the Trumpist base despise each other totally. The latter will not turn out for the former, as Georgia showed, and what follows is a hugely bitter primaries battle between the two factions ahead of 2022. When millions will not turn out again and the democrat hegemony intensifies.
Meanwhile, the Democrats will be deliberating just how much of a Jihad they want to declare on the many millions of Americans who turned out for Trump and now have zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions.
Trump showed his millions of supporters a glimpse of an America they were comfortable with and where they were welcome and valuable citizens.
They are not going back to the likes of Romney. Not now. Not ever.
Trouble is, their "zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions" is based on delusion. How to cleanse this?
Making the left-behind feel "welcome and valuable citizens". Absolutely.
"A glimpse of an America they were comfortable with". A lot to unpack in that statement. What America was that exactly. Because judging by the comments of Trump and many of his supporters it was an America where blacks could be shot or killed by the police with impunity or denied the vote or where demonstrators could go on marches shouting anti-Semitic slogans and be praised as "fine people".
That sort of America is a horrible one and if that is the vision that these people want then we absolutely should not be pandering to them. There are limits. There are boundaries of decent behaviour. And we don't accept behaviour which breaches those boundaries just because it's the left-behind or the white working-class doing the demanding. They don't get excused from complying with decent civilised behaviour just because they're poor or uneducated or unemployed.
Trump appealed to peoples' basest instincts. The best thing we can do for people who feel ignored is make life better for them not act on their worst instincts.
Cyclefree likes an evidence free moral high horse rant sometimes.
Black employment was at a record high under Trump. Lets see how Biden does. The early signs aren't good. Look at the democrat dominated states already.
Examples where blacks could be shot or killing with impunity? Last I looked the killers of Floyd and others were subject to due process. Did Trump try to interrupt that process or change the laws of due process?
And as for making life better for any American, well, the democrats were already out of ideas for that before the election. Again look at the states and the cities where they have held sway for decades. If this election was fought on the pre-covid economy, Trump won hands down.
That Trump did not have the fancy footwork to see what Covid could do to his chances has spared us four more years.
But I also think Biden will disappoint those who voted for him. Nor will he carry those who didn't. Not a great time ahead for the USA, I fear.
It's a mystery to me that Trump did not tackle the virus crisis head-on. It was made for him - a bold, charismatic, mould-breaking leader prepared to defy convention and carry his fanatical supporters with him. He could have locked down the country. It would have accepted his lead and followed his every word through lockdown. Tens of thousands of lives would have been saved and he would have gone into the election a hero. He might have won all fifty states.
Instead he chose denial, even though he must have known what was in store.
Why?
Weird indeed. On one level, it was tailor made for his brand of nationalism:
"Don't let Chinese flu kill good American's. Do your bit. Wear a mask. Stop their evil virus in its tracks."
Yep - many of his followers would have been delighted to wear masks. It fucks up the big state's surveillance programme for a start. Bizarre how non-mask wearing became a badge of honour for them.
For me the pointers are that the Trump coalition is not a winning coalition at the federal level going forwards.
The easier thing for GOP politicians is to cleave to the Trumpsters, because of their enthusiasm. But that is what has driven the ABTs out of the party and has lost the GOP most independents and thus the absolutely essential suburbs.
For me, the way back for the GOP is the painful one. Excise their most passionate supporters, the Trumpsters. Rebuild the center right, win back the suburbs. Regain the trust of women.
To me, this will take at least one more bad election cycle result (2022), which alas is not guaranteed, followed by 4-6 years of rebuilding. It could go faster than that but equally it is not guaranteed to happen at all, but it is my best bet.
On topic: I gaze into the future of the Republican party - not too far, just a couple of years - and I see no Trump or Trumpdom there. What I do see, however and alas, are elements of the MAGA agenda still in the mix.
The million $ puzzle which imo must be solved in order to predict where the party goes is as follows - Of the 73m who voted for Donald Trump what are the approx weightings (adjusted for overlap) for the 4 main categories?
1. Love Trump. Lucky to have him. Helluva guy and a total one off. Just so into everything about the man. 2. Always vote Republican. It's what I am - a Republican. Cut me and I bleed tax cuts & voter suppression. 3. Not big on politics. Only care about the economy. Thought he'd done ok on that. Why change. 4. Trump? Can take him or leave him but I like his hard right national populist rhetoric and policies.
No particular order there except that I've put the last one last for a reason. I think it's the smallest.
Very rough guesses:
1. 10 2. 50 3. 8 4. 5
Although 1 and 4 are largely the same category, if we're being honest.
Much obliged. This is what I'm looking for. Unadorned numbers that I can crunch thro the "Predict the Near Term Future of the GOP" model I've developed (mainly for betting purposes but also to aid my superforecasting and related punditry).
- No bright future for MAGA without Trump. - Republican party v Trump is a mismatch. Party prevails.
Much easier to split the 73, so: 1. 20 2. 45 3. 6 4. 2
That's an interesting one, thanks.
Think we might be saying that the MAGA element - voters who love a bit of hardcore nativist nationalism but are indifferent to the Trump delivery mechanism - is negligible.
So let's drop it and merge me, you, pulpstar, BluestBlue et alia to get -
1. I'm a Republican stupid - 65 2. I'm a Trumpster and I AM stupid - 25 3. It's the economy obvs - 10
Nice clear pointers emerging now.
But what are they?
To win the GOP needs to win both the suburbs and rural areas.
In 2004, the biggest GOP victory in 3 decades, Bush won 50.7% of the vote and 286 EC votes and Bush won the suburbs by 52% to 47% for Kerry as well as winning rural areas by a resounding 57% to 42% for Kerry
It's a mystery to me that Trump did not tackle the virus crisis head-on. It was made for him - a bold, charismatic, mould-breaking leader prepared to defy convention and carry his fanatical supporters with him. He could have locked down the country. It would have accepted his lead and followed his every word through lockdown. Tens of thousands of lives would have been saved and he would have gone into the election a hero. He might have won all fifty states.
Instead he chose denial, even though he must have known what was in store.
Why?
What confused me is why Trump discouraged people from voting anyway they could vote.
If Trump had got his supporters to use postal votes I do believe he would have won re-election.
For me the pointers are that the Trump coalition is not a winning coalition at the federal level going forwards.
The easier thing for GOP politicians is to cleave to the Trumpsters, because of their enthusiasm. But that is what has driven the ABTs out of the party and has lost the GOP most independents and thus the absolutely essential suburbs.
For me, the way back for the GOP is the painful one. Excise their most passionate supporters, the Trumpsters. Rebuild the center right, win back the suburbs. Regain the trust of women.
To me, this will take at least one more bad election cycle result (2022), which alas is not guaranteed, followed by 4-6 years of rebuilding. It could go faster than that but equally it is not guaranteed to happen at all, but it is my best bet.
On topic: I gaze into the future of the Republican party - not too far, just a couple of years - and I see no Trump or Trumpdom there. What I do see, however and alas, are elements of the MAGA agenda still in the mix.
The million $ puzzle which imo must be solved in order to predict where the party goes is as follows - Of the 73m who voted for Donald Trump what are the approx weightings (adjusted for overlap) for the 4 main categories?
1. Love Trump. Lucky to have him. Helluva guy and a total one off. Just so into everything about the man. 2. Always vote Republican. It's what I am - a Republican. Cut me and I bleed tax cuts & voter suppression. 3. Not big on politics. Only care about the economy. Thought he'd done ok on that. Why change. 4. Trump? Can take him or leave him but I like his hard right national populist rhetoric and policies.
No particular order there except that I've put the last one last for a reason. I think it's the smallest.
Very rough guesses:
1. 10 2. 50 3. 8 4. 5
Although 1 and 4 are largely the same category, if we're being honest.
Much obliged. This is what I'm looking for. Unadorned numbers that I can crunch thro the "Predict the Near Term Future of the GOP" model I've developed (mainly for betting purposes but also to aid my superforecasting and related punditry).
- No bright future for MAGA without Trump. - Republican party v Trump is a mismatch. Party prevails.
Much easier to split the 73, so: 1. 20 2. 45 3. 6 4. 2
That's an interesting one, thanks.
Think we might be saying that the MAGA element - voters who love a bit of hardcore nativist nationalism but are indifferent to the Trump delivery mechanism - is negligible.
So let's drop it and merge me, you, pulpstar, BluestBlue et alia to get -
1. I'm a Republican stupid - 65 2. I'm a Trumpster and I AM stupid - 25 3. It's the economy obvs - 10
Nice clear pointers emerging now.
But what are they?
The problem with that approach of going back to the suburbanites is that (a) they are increasing socially liberal due to college education, (b) are more fickle and so (c) you would have to blow up your base by switching to a more socially liberal / economically right-wing stance in the hope - and it would be no more than a hope - that you can persuade people who deserted you to switch back.
There is another thing here as well. Hispanics, Asian-Americans and Black people, on the whole, tend to be socially conservative. If the Republicans continue to make inroads into the HIspanic vote, then that more than outweighs their losses in the suburbs. Ditch the socially conservative agenda to appeal to suburban types and you have lost that.
If you abandon the cities and the suburbs, you cannot take the House. Period.
Well, the Republicans nearly did.
The tragedy is that the 'rebels' were so exercised at the growing inequalities in income and wealth - and the growing distance between politicians and the people they are supposed to represent - that they turned to a brand of extreme Republicanism that was never likely to want to deliver them any sort of relief.
The big question of our era is why centre-left politicians have proved so unable to put forward a comprehensive platform to rectify the egregious distortions of 21st century society in a way that can carry a majority of sensibly minded voters in the centre of political opinion?
Within our lifetimes, if the centre-left doesn't rise to the challenge of our times, then the future will be left to the extremes.
The simple explanation is that centre-left politicians now spend most of their energy and efforts prioritising culturally liberal stances than the economic concerns that concern most people. I've pointed out here to those that scream racist at Trump voters that a good chunk of them would have voted for Obama in 2008. They didn't care he was Black but they did care about their economic conditions. However, the Democrat party became so embroiled in cultural issues that it dropped the ball on the economic front.
This line of attack might have worked in the past, but it has lost much of its potency given the Democrats' clean sweep in the world's second-largest democracy. And your boy, a poster child for the opposite approach, getting his backside handed to him.
He didn't really get his backside handed to him though did he? Biden won the election by the same number of EV votes as Trump, a victory that we were told at the time was minimal because if only 70K voters had switched sides, Clinton would have won. Only this time, if only 44K (if I remember correctly) had switched sides, Trump would have won. The Democrats nearly lost control of the House. And you have a 50/50 Senate.
And, no, the attack lines are still relevant. It was stupid of Biden et al to use the BLM line last night because it had no relevance in the scheme of things and was done in response to the post on social media showing the response to BLM protests. I pointed out pre-election that the focus on BLM risked driving Hispanics to the GOP, which is one of the few things I got right about November
Surely the argument about Clinton coming close didn't rely so much on the Electoral College vote, which wasn't particularly close as you say and ironically the same as Biden-Trump (ignoring faithless electors), but the popular vote?
So the point is that Clinton had a 3 million vote margin over Trump, but it was very inefficiently distributed so she lost (partly unfortunate for her, partly poor tactics). Whereas Trump had a 7 million vote deficit, which was very efficiently distributed but still left him as far off as Clinton in the Electoral College vote.
It surely isn't controversial that winning the popular vote by 3 million but losing the Electoral College vote by 74 is annoying but provides a reasonably good base for next time, whereas LOSING the popular vote by 7 million and the Electoral College vote by 74 is much more problematic. The illusion is that Trump lost in a squeaker because he scweamed and scweamed and scweamed about it... but that's somewhat misleading.
Now that isn't to say Democrats don't have a problem with how their votes are distributed - they do. But it does mean they were in striking distance in 2016 in a way Republicans aren't now.
It also isn't getting better for the Republicans at the moment in terms of the states they will need to win back in 2024. Georgia is a fairly large state that does now look rather purple and the trends aren't good. Arizona is also now looking pretty blue across the board. The Georgia run-offs means Puerto Rico is quite likely to become a reliably blue state. The rust belt looks better, but arguably Trump had a special blue collar white appeal that it's quite hard to replicate (and, as a reminder, he lost there).
FPT - nuclear weapons exist to level the playing field against those with massive conventional forces, that we couldn't hope to match, and to deter nuclear blackmail against us by nuclear armed powers.
I know others have equally strong views on this, but count me out from the unilateralists please. It's an ultimate insurance policy that I'm happy to have - and pay for - and helps me sleep soundly at night.
You could sleep soundly at night if you'd paid to be surrounded by a battalion of Grenadier Guards to keep burglars out. But if it meant your children went hungry....?
There is a huge amount of "whataboutery" supporting the UK having nuclear weapons. Would someone like to give me an actual, real life, certifiable example of when they have given me cause to sleep more soundly at night?
Where my slumbers are qualitatively better is the knowledge that some ISIS commander or some Al Qaeda financier is being lit up for delivery of a smart bomb by a special forces guy in the shadows, who has the use of the latest array of technology to call upon.
I'd be very happy for the UK to be known as providing those people the bad guys should lose sleep over. Be the go-to place for the brightest and best fighting men in the world. Hell, I'd pay top dollar to recruit some of the Foreign Legion special forces guys into the team. They were some of the best close protection I've used (and that includes having used a guy from the Bravo 2 Zero patrol).
The ability to insert these into any country - and then safely extract them - would be an ultimate expression of power. And a much more effective use of defence money than the umpteen billions spent having no more than one Trident submarine on patrol at any one time.
Well, our children aren't going hungry. The cost of a few billion a year is easily absorbable within our massive government budget of many hundreds of billions. So I don't think that's a real choice. And I think the safety payback we get for it (in terms of a safe and secure space for economic growth and trade) is worth it.
I can't speak for how you sleep at night but I certainly think they are deterring Russia from taking more serious action over the Baltic States (NATO members) and also China over Taiwan. They were also useful in the first Gulf War in convincing Saddam Hussein not to use chemical or biological weapons. Of course it's difficult to prove a counterfactual where they made *the* difference - the decisive difference - because they are a strategic deterrent, not a tactical one, and such confrontations are rare precisely because they do exist. When that fails they are part of a diplomatic and military deterrent toolkit of why things don't escalate as far as they could.
I agree with you on special forces and on smart weapons. They are essential too. But I wouldn't eliminate our strategic deterrent. I think that'd be dangerous.
I'm more in the @Casino_Royale camp here. I would not wanting to be relying on the "goodwill" of China and Russia not to use their nuclear weapons against a non-nuclear UK in the case of a dispute.
But here we enter the realms of whether we would be allowed to use Trident in that event, or whether we'd find that the system had been (wisely imho) disabled by a higher power.
If you were America, and Britain got itself into a nuclear conflict with a third party, and you had the ability to shut the system down, would you do it? Or would you just let them go ahead with it in case they asked for a refund? It isn't an independent deterrent. Everyone (including Russia and China) is aware of that fact.
It'sd not as if they were Blue Streak missiles launched from North Norfolk silos which could be traced back to the perpetrators. A SLBM is by definition untraceable and launchable from any wet bit on the map within range, and what's a chap to think if Trident-type trajectories come at him?
There is no US "off switch" for Trident. The claims that there are seem to be of the "but there must be" variety.
And claims that there is no 'off switch' are of the 'but there couldn't be' variety. I respect your experience in various fields, but by definition, being party to US nuclear secrets isn't one of them. So logic is really all we have to go on.
Which ally of Britain would you sell independent strategic nukes to by the way? Which country would you happily sell the ability to use British technology to wipe out other countries at will? - Exactly.
Is your point that - certainly at the time Trident was set up - the answer was "the United States of America"?
No. My point is that there is no other country, however loyal, however much a staunch ally, to which one Government could sensibly give/sell/or rent the ability to destroy other countries at a button press, on 'free-for-all' basis. You would need appropriate checks and balances.
It is a matter of public record that without American support, Trident would be out of commission within weeks. I also believe that we could not use it independently in the immediate term without America's express permission. The fact that the last time we tried to hit a target 'off the West coast of Africa', the missile veered off course and went in the direction of America, if it doesn't provide corroboration for this, at least indicates that once a target is identified and put in by UK forces firing it, the missile has the ability to change its course and follow an alternative route.
What on earth is your argument here? That we performed a routine test fire, forgot to warn the US, and the Pentagon panicked and hit the emergency override button?
Seems much more likely it was a genuine malfunction, no?
I would prefer to leave theories to one side and stick to what we can conclusively prove from the event - that the missile can change its course mid-flight, regardless of the instructions given it when fired.
It didn't "change course". It went off course. There is a huge difference.
I love it when people who are implacably opposed to the Republican Party try to give it lessons. Presumably to maintain the notion that everything is alright in the West and its business as usual, and what you are seeing is not a hologram.
But here's the thing. It really isn't all right.
The right is completely split in America. The party elite and the Trumpist base despise each other totally. The latter will not turn out for the former, as Georgia showed, and what follows is a hugely bitter primaries battle between the two factions ahead of 2022. When millions will not turn out again and the democrat hegemony intensifies.
Meanwhile, the Democrats will be deliberating just how much of a Jihad they want to declare on the many millions of Americans who turned out for Trump and now have zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions.
Trump showed his millions of supporters a glimpse of an America they were comfortable with and where they were welcome and valuable citizens.
They are not going back to the likes of Romney. Not now. Not ever.
Trouble is, their "zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions" is based on delusion. How to cleanse this?
Making the left-behind feel "welcome and valuable citizens". Absolutely.
"A glimpse of an America they were comfortable with". A lot to unpack in that statement. What America was that exactly. Because judging by the comments of Trump and many of his supporters it was an America where blacks could be shot or killed by the police with impunity or denied the vote or where demonstrators could go on marches shouting anti-Semitic slogans and be praised as "fine people".
That sort of America is a horrible one and if that is the vision that these people want then we absolutely should not be pandering to them. There are limits. There are boundaries of decent behaviour. And we don't accept behaviour which breaches those boundaries just because it's the left-behind or the white working-class doing the demanding. They don't get excused from complying with decent civilised behaviour just because they're poor or uneducated or unemployed.
Trump appealed to peoples' basest instincts. The best thing we can do for people who feel ignored is make life better for them not act on their worst instincts.
Cyclefree likes an evidence free moral high horse rant sometimes.
Black employment was at a record high under Trump. Lets see how Biden does. The early signs aren't good. Look at the democrat dominated states already.
Examples where blacks could be shot or killing with impunity? Last I looked the killers of Floyd and others were subject to due process. Did Trump try to interrupt that process or change the laws of due process?
And as for making life better for any American, well, the democrats were already out of ideas for that before the election. Again look at the states and the cities where they have held sway for decades. If this election was fought on the pre-covid economy, Trump won hands down.
That Trump did not have the fancy footwork to see what Covid could do to his chances has spared us four more years.
But I also think Biden will disappoint those who voted for him. Nor will he carry those who didn't. Not a great time ahead for the USA, I fear.
I love it when people who are implacably opposed to the Republican Party try to give it lessons. Presumably to maintain the notion that everything is alright in the West and its business as usual, and what you are seeing is not a hologram.
But here's the thing. It really isn't all right.
The right is completely split in America. The party elite and the Trumpist base despise each other totally. The latter will not turn out for the former, as Georgia showed, and what follows is a hugely bitter primaries battle between the two factions ahead of 2022. When millions will not turn out again and the democrat hegemony intensifies.
Meanwhile, the Democrats will be deliberating just how much of a Jihad they want to declare on the many millions of Americans who turned out for Trump and now have zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions.
Trump showed his millions of supporters a glimpse of an America they were comfortable with and where they were welcome and valuable citizens.
They are not going back to the likes of Romney. Not now. Not ever.
Trouble is, their "zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions" is based on delusion. How to cleanse this?
Making the left-behind feel "welcome and valuable citizens". Absolutely.
"A glimpse of an America they were comfortable with". A lot to unpack in that statement. What America was that exactly. Because judging by the comments of Trump and many of his supporters it was an America where blacks could be shot or killed by the police with impunity or denied the vote or where demonstrators could go on marches shouting anti-Semitic slogans and be praised as "fine people".
That sort of America is a horrible one and if that is the vision that these people want then we absolutely should not be pandering to them. There are limits. There are boundaries of decent behaviour. And we don't accept behaviour which breaches those boundaries just because it's the left-behind or the white working-class doing the demanding. They don't get excused from complying with decent civilised behaviour just because they're poor or uneducated or unemployed.
Trump appealed to peoples' basest instincts. The best thing we can do for people who feel ignored is make life better for them not act on their worst instincts.
Cyclefree likes an evidence free moral high horse rant sometimes.
Black employment was at a record high under Trump. Lets see how Biden does. The early signs aren't good. Look at the democrat dominated states already.
Examples where blacks could be shot or killing with impunity? Last I looked the killers of Floyd and others were subject to due process. Did Trump try to interrupt that process or change the laws of due process?
And as for making life better for any American, well, the democrats were already out of ideas for that before the election. Again look at the states and the cities where they have held sway for decades. If this election was fought on the pre-covid economy, Trump won hands down.
That Trump did not have the fancy footwork to see what Covid could do to his chances has spared us four more years.
But I also think Biden will disappoint those who voted for him. Nor will he carry those who didn't. Not a great time ahead for the USA, I fear.
It's a mystery to me that Trump did not tackle the virus crisis head-on. It was made for him - a bold, charismatic, mould-breaking leader prepared to defy convention and carry his fanatical supporters with him. He could have locked down the country. It would have accepted his lead and followed his every word through lockdown. Tens of thousands of lives would have been saved and he would have gone into the election a hero. He might have won all fifty states.
Instead he chose denial, even though he must have known what was in store.
Why?
Weird indeed. On one level, it was tailor made for his brand of nationalism:
"Don't let Chinese flu kill good American's. Do your bit. Wear a mask. Stop their evil virus in its tracks."
In some ways that was a much easier path for him than the denial of science route he took.
I'm left with little choice but to infer that he just made a stupid decision and lacked the flexibilty to change it once its shortcomings had become apparent.
"We have already secured an amount of doses that we need to vaccinate 380 million Europeans, and this is more than 80% of the European population [of 450 million people]," Mrs von der Leyen said.
She said other vaccine authorisations were expected in the coming weeks and months, so "Europe will have more than enough vaccine within a reliable timeframe".
She said the commission had taken the right course of action on vaccines.
"I'm convinced that when we look back at this one day we'll see, well yes, at the beginning, there was a bumpy road [but] well, that's always the case."
It's just ridiculous. They got it wrong, they should just admit it.
In her 380 million doses is she counting vaccines like Sanofi that haven't completed PIII trials and may not even end up getting approval?
No I think they now have deals in place with Pfizer and Moderna for that many. But they are back of the queue....well not front of it. So a lot of it is coming Q2, Q3, Q4 and beyond.
That's right: the EU started incredibly slowly, but has improved. (And it is very important not to "count chickens" here, until we know final results...)
But, my gut is that Israel and a few small states really knocked the ball out of the park.
The UK, Japan and Canada did an excellent job.
The US has been reasonably good, the EU has been worse than the US (albeit not by a huge margin).
And developing countries have been an utter disaster zone.
I love it when people who are implacably opposed to the Republican Party try to give it lessons. Presumably to maintain the notion that everything is alright in the West and its business as usual, and what you are seeing is not a hologram.
But here's the thing. It really isn't all right.
The right is completely split in America. The party elite and the Trumpist base despise each other totally. The latter will not turn out for the former, as Georgia showed, and what follows is a hugely bitter primaries battle between the two factions ahead of 2022. When millions will not turn out again and the democrat hegemony intensifies.
Meanwhile, the Democrats will be deliberating just how much of a Jihad they want to declare on the many millions of Americans who turned out for Trump and now have zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions.
Trump showed his millions of supporters a glimpse of an America they were comfortable with and where they were welcome and valuable citizens.
They are not going back to the likes of Romney. Not now. Not ever.
Trouble is, their "zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions" is based on delusion. How to cleanse this?
Making the left-behind feel "welcome and valuable citizens". Absolutely.
"A glimpse of an America they were comfortable with". A lot to unpack in that statement. What America was that exactly. Because judging by the comments of Trump and many of his supporters it was an America where blacks could be shot or killed by the police with impunity or denied the vote or where demonstrators could go on marches shouting anti-Semitic slogans and be praised as "fine people".
That sort of America is a horrible one and if that is the vision that these people want then we absolutely should not be pandering to them. There are limits. There are boundaries of decent behaviour. And we don't accept behaviour which breaches those boundaries just because it's the left-behind or the white working-class doing the demanding. They don't get excused from complying with decent civilised behaviour just because they're poor or uneducated or unemployed.
Trump appealed to peoples' basest instincts. The best thing we can do for people who feel ignored is make life better for them not act on their worst instincts.
Cyclefree likes an evidence free moral high horse rant sometimes.
Black employment was at a record high under Trump. Lets see how Biden does. The early signs aren't good. Look at the democrat dominated states already.
Examples where blacks could be shot or killing with impunity? Last I looked the killers of Floyd and others were subject to due process. Did Trump try to interrupt that process or change the laws of due process?
And as for making life better for any American, well, the democrats were already out of ideas for that before the election. Again look at the states and the cities where they have held sway for decades. If this election was fought on the pre-covid economy, Trump won hands down.
That Trump did not have the fancy footwork to see what Covid could do to his chances has spared us four more years.
But I also think Biden will disappoint those who voted for him. Nor will he carry those who didn't. Not a great time ahead for the USA, I fear.
I love it when people who are implacably opposed to the Republican Party try to give it lessons. Presumably to maintain the notion that everything is alright in the West and its business as usual, and what you are seeing is not a hologram.
But here's the thing. It really isn't all right.
The right is completely split in America. The party elite and the Trumpist base despise each other totally. The latter will not turn out for the former, as Georgia showed, and what follows is a hugely bitter primaries battle between the two factions ahead of 2022. When millions will not turn out again and the democrat hegemony intensifies.
Meanwhile, the Democrats will be deliberating just how much of a Jihad they want to declare on the many millions of Americans who turned out for Trump and now have zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions.
Trump showed his millions of supporters a glimpse of an America they were comfortable with and where they were welcome and valuable citizens.
They are not going back to the likes of Romney. Not now. Not ever.
Trouble is, their "zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions" is based on delusion. How to cleanse this?
Making the left-behind feel "welcome and valuable citizens". Absolutely.
"A glimpse of an America they were comfortable with". A lot to unpack in that statement. What America was that exactly. Because judging by the comments of Trump and many of his supporters it was an America where blacks could be shot or killed by the police with impunity or denied the vote or where demonstrators could go on marches shouting anti-Semitic slogans and be praised as "fine people".
That sort of America is a horrible one and if that is the vision that these people want then we absolutely should not be pandering to them. There are limits. There are boundaries of decent behaviour. And we don't accept behaviour which breaches those boundaries just because it's the left-behind or the white working-class doing the demanding. They don't get excused from complying with decent civilised behaviour just because they're poor or uneducated or unemployed.
Trump appealed to peoples' basest instincts. The best thing we can do for people who feel ignored is make life better for them not act on their worst instincts.
Cyclefree likes an evidence free moral high horse rant sometimes.
Black employment was at a record high under Trump. Lets see how Biden does. The early signs aren't good. Look at the democrat dominated states already.
Examples where blacks could be shot or killing with impunity? Last I looked the killers of Floyd and others were subject to due process. Did Trump try to interrupt that process or change the laws of due process?
And as for making life better for any American, well, the democrats were already out of ideas for that before the election. Again look at the states and the cities where they have held sway for decades. If this election was fought on the pre-covid economy, Trump won hands down.
That Trump did not have the fancy footwork to see what Covid could do to his chances has spared us four more years.
But I also think Biden will disappoint those who voted for him. Nor will he carry those who didn't. Not a great time ahead for the USA, I fear.
It's a mystery to me that Trump did not tackle the virus crisis head-on. It was made for him - a bold, charismatic, mould-breaking leader prepared to defy convention and carry his fanatical supporters with him. He could have locked down the country. It would have accepted his lead and followed his every word through lockdown. Tens of thousands of lives would have been saved and he would have gone into the election a hero. He might have won all fifty states.
Instead he chose denial, even though he must have known what was in store.
Why?
Someone linked to an article months ago that I think nailed this.
Trump's success has all been about remaking reality. Creating an image of the successful businessman, despite all his real business failings. Convincing his supporters that he was on their side, when he did nothing to help them.
So when Covid came along he tried to bargain with reality again, and finally met something that couldn't be denied.
Accepting the reality of the emergency was not an option because it would have meant admitting he had made mistakes early on, and it would have damaged the stock market.
I love it when people who are implacably opposed to the Republican Party try to give it lessons. Presumably to maintain the notion that everything is alright in the West and its business as usual, and what you are seeing is not a hologram.
But here's the thing. It really isn't all right.
The right is completely split in America. The party elite and the Trumpist base despise each other totally. The latter will not turn out for the former, as Georgia showed, and what follows is a hugely bitter primaries battle between the two factions ahead of 2022. When millions will not turn out again and the democrat hegemony intensifies.
Meanwhile, the Democrats will be deliberating just how much of a Jihad they want to declare on the many millions of Americans who turned out for Trump and now have zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions.
Trump showed his millions of supporters a glimpse of an America they were comfortable with and where they were welcome and valuable citizens.
They are not going back to the likes of Romney. Not now. Not ever.
Trouble is, their "zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions" is based on delusion. How to cleanse this?
Making the left-behind feel "welcome and valuable citizens". Absolutely.
"A glimpse of an America they were comfortable with". A lot to unpack in that statement. What America was that exactly. Because judging by the comments of Trump and many of his supporters it was an America where blacks could be shot or killed by the police with impunity or denied the vote or where demonstrators could go on marches shouting anti-Semitic slogans and be praised as "fine people".
That sort of America is a horrible one and if that is the vision that these people want then we absolutely should not be pandering to them. There are limits. There are boundaries of decent behaviour. And we don't accept behaviour which breaches those boundaries just because it's the left-behind or the white working-class doing the demanding. They don't get excused from complying with decent civilised behaviour just because they're poor or uneducated or unemployed.
Trump appealed to peoples' basest instincts. The best thing we can do for people who feel ignored is make life better for them not act on their worst instincts.
Cyclefree likes an evidence free moral high horse rant sometimes.
Black employment was at a record high under Trump. Lets see how Biden does. The early signs aren't good. Look at the democrat dominated states already.
Examples where blacks could be shot or killing with impunity? Last I looked the killers of Floyd and others were subject to due process. Did Trump try to interrupt that process or change the laws of due process?
And as for making life better for any American, well, the democrats were already out of ideas for that before the election. Again look at the states and the cities where they have held sway for decades. If this election was fought on the pre-covid economy, Trump won hands down.
Try reading my post properly. I gave you specific examples. If you want evidence, look at what the Republican Party under Trump was doing to stop black people voting. Look at what Trump himself said about marchers spouting anti-Semitic slogans.
So again when you said "A glimpse of an America they were comfortable with" what did you mean? What sort of America do you think they want? Let's have some specifics and evidence from you rather than generalities about wanting to be valued with which no-one will disagree.
Fighting America's corner on trade.
At least questioning a rapacious green lobby that threatened to put millions dependent on energy jobs out of business.
Recognising that millions Americans in small isolated towns feel safer owning a gun, because the police aint an option.
Understanding that international commitments often have adverse outcomes for ordinary Americans, and trying to negotiate more with them in mind
Understanding that the foreign war cheques so favoured by liberals are written with the blood of Americans in small towns.
Understanding that being descended from a confederate soldier is not a lifestyle choice and nothing can be done about it.
accepting that Eating at Appleby's, drinking Jack Daniel's and driving a pick up are not offences and do not make you an inferior person.
Accepting America has done some bad things in the world, but done a lot of good things too.
Following the latest round of mandated Covid-19 tests, the EFL can confirm that 3507 players and Club staff from 66 EFL Clubs were tested over the course of the past week with 112 individuals testing positive.
Thats about 3,192 cases per 100,000, which is three times the London figure, which means the EFL is buggered.
And plenty of Premier League clubs are playing EFL clubs this weekend.
Football appears to be at the pinnacle of those entitled twats who think rules apply to others and not to them. Same with speeding, drink-driving, foisting their attentions on women. And these are role models of "celebrity culture".
Fuck it, we might as well all go skiing and play beer pong. Get herd immunity and damn the cost.
I love it when people who are implacably opposed to the Republican Party try to give it lessons. Presumably to maintain the notion that everything is alright in the West and its business as usual, and what you are seeing is not a hologram.
But here's the thing. It really isn't all right.
The right is completely split in America. The party elite and the Trumpist base despise each other totally. The latter will not turn out for the former, as Georgia showed, and what follows is a hugely bitter primaries battle between the two factions ahead of 2022. When millions will not turn out again and the democrat hegemony intensifies.
Meanwhile, the Democrats will be deliberating just how much of a Jihad they want to declare on the many millions of Americans who turned out for Trump and now have zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions.
Trump showed his millions of supporters a glimpse of an America they were comfortable with and where they were welcome and valuable citizens.
They are not going back to the likes of Romney. Not now. Not ever.
Trouble is, their "zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions" is based on delusion. How to cleanse this?
Making the left-behind feel "welcome and valuable citizens". Absolutely.
"A glimpse of an America they were comfortable with". A lot to unpack in that statement. What America was that exactly. Because judging by the comments of Trump and many of his supporters it was an America where blacks could be shot or killed by the police with impunity or denied the vote or where demonstrators could go on marches shouting anti-Semitic slogans and be praised as "fine people".
That sort of America is a horrible one and if that is the vision that these people want then we absolutely should not be pandering to them. There are limits. There are boundaries of decent behaviour. And we don't accept behaviour which breaches those boundaries just because it's the left-behind or the white working-class doing the demanding. They don't get excused from complying with decent civilised behaviour just because they're poor or uneducated or unemployed.
Trump appealed to peoples' basest instincts. The best thing we can do for people who feel ignored is make life better for them not act on their worst instincts.
Cyclefree likes an evidence free moral high horse rant sometimes.
Black employment was at a record high under Trump. Lets see how Biden does. The early signs aren't good. Look at the democrat dominated states already.
Examples where blacks could be shot or killing with impunity? Last I looked the killers of Floyd and others were subject to due process. Did Trump try to interrupt that process or change the laws of due process?
And as for making life better for any American, well, the democrats were already out of ideas for that before the election. Again look at the states and the cities where they have held sway for decades. If this election was fought on the pre-covid economy, Trump won hands down.
That Trump did not have the fancy footwork to see what Covid could do to his chances has spared us four more years.
But I also think Biden will disappoint those who voted for him. Nor will he carry those who didn't. Not a great time ahead for the USA, I fear.
I love it when people who are implacably opposed to the Republican Party try to give it lessons. Presumably to maintain the notion that everything is alright in the West and its business as usual, and what you are seeing is not a hologram.
But here's the thing. It really isn't all right.
The right is completely split in America. The party elite and the Trumpist base despise each other totally. The latter will not turn out for the former, as Georgia showed, and what follows is a hugely bitter primaries battle between the two factions ahead of 2022. When millions will not turn out again and the democrat hegemony intensifies.
Meanwhile, the Democrats will be deliberating just how much of a Jihad they want to declare on the many millions of Americans who turned out for Trump and now have zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions.
Trump showed his millions of supporters a glimpse of an America they were comfortable with and where they were welcome and valuable citizens.
They are not going back to the likes of Romney. Not now. Not ever.
Trouble is, their "zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions" is based on delusion. How to cleanse this?
Making the left-behind feel "welcome and valuable citizens". Absolutely.
"A glimpse of an America they were comfortable with". A lot to unpack in that statement. What America was that exactly. Because judging by the comments of Trump and many of his supporters it was an America where blacks could be shot or killed by the police with impunity or denied the vote or where demonstrators could go on marches shouting anti-Semitic slogans and be praised as "fine people".
That sort of America is a horrible one and if that is the vision that these people want then we absolutely should not be pandering to them. There are limits. There are boundaries of decent behaviour. And we don't accept behaviour which breaches those boundaries just because it's the left-behind or the white working-class doing the demanding. They don't get excused from complying with decent civilised behaviour just because they're poor or uneducated or unemployed.
Trump appealed to peoples' basest instincts. The best thing we can do for people who feel ignored is make life better for them not act on their worst instincts.
Cyclefree likes an evidence free moral high horse rant sometimes.
Black employment was at a record high under Trump. Lets see how Biden does. The early signs aren't good. Look at the democrat dominated states already.
Examples where blacks could be shot or killing with impunity? Last I looked the killers of Floyd and others were subject to due process. Did Trump try to interrupt that process or change the laws of due process?
And as for making life better for any American, well, the democrats were already out of ideas for that before the election. Again look at the states and the cities where they have held sway for decades. If this election was fought on the pre-covid economy, Trump won hands down.
That Trump did not have the fancy footwork to see what Covid could do to his chances has spared us four more years.
But I also think Biden will disappoint those who voted for him. Nor will he carry those who didn't. Not a great time ahead for the USA, I fear.
It's a mystery to me that Trump did not tackle the virus crisis head-on. It was made for him - a bold, charismatic, mould-breaking leader prepared to defy convention and carry his fanatical supporters with him. He could have locked down the country. It would have accepted his lead and followed his every word through lockdown. Tens of thousands of lives would have been saved and he would have gone into the election a hero. He might have won all fifty states.
Instead he chose denial, even though he must have known what was in store.
Why?
Because it wasn't in his script. He doesn't want what is best for America, he wants what is best for Trump. Listening to experts who know what they are talking about isn't his style. If there's a big problem just wish it away - Climate Change is a Chinese hoax, Covid will "magically vanish".
In some ways that was a much easier path for him than the denial of science route he took.
I'm left with little choice but to infer that he just made a stupid decision and lacked the flexibilty to change it once its shortcomings had become apparent.
I think you have to ask what did his heroes do?
If Putin and Kim Jong Il didn't declare it a National emergency and mandate masks Trump wouldn't either
On topic: I gaze into the future of the Republican party - not too far, just a couple of years - and I see no Trump or Trumpdom there. What I do see, however and alas, are elements of the MAGA agenda still in the mix.
The million $ puzzle which imo must be solved in order to predict where the party goes is as follows - Of the 73m who voted for Donald Trump what are the approx weightings (adjusted for overlap) for the 4 main categories?
1. Love Trump. Lucky to have him. Helluva guy and a total one off. Just so into everything about the man. 2. Always vote Republican. It's what I am - a Republican. Cut me and I bleed tax cuts & voter suppression. 3. Not big on politics. Only care about the economy. Thought he'd done ok on that. Why change. 4. Trump? Can take him or leave him but I like his hard right national populist rhetoric and policies.
No particular order there except that I've put the last one last for a reason. I think it's the smallest.
Very rough guesses:
1. 10 2. 50 3. 8 4. 5
Although 1 and 4 are largely the same category, if we're being honest.
Much obliged. This is what I'm looking for. Unadorned numbers that I can crunch thro the "Predict the Near Term Future of the GOP" model I've developed (mainly for betting purposes but also to aid my superforecasting and related punditry).
- No bright future for MAGA without Trump. - Republican party v Trump is a mismatch. Party prevails.
MAGA and Trump are interchangeable, a distinction without a difference.
I would say:
Republican 63 million MAGA/Trump 9 million Economy 1 million
Ah, Philip. Thank goodness. Can't finalize anything without your input. I was starting to worry I'd have to beg for it.
Interesting too because it's an outlier, which is great news. But just to double check. You think only 1m of the 73m who voted Trump were apolitical floater types who just figured he'd done ok on the economy and so were minded not to change?
Really?
Weren't there detailed polls during the election that had serious numbers of people backing Trump because of the economy? On the I-can't-stand-him-but-my-401k basis?
That is my understanding, yes. I have Economy with a 15 weighting. Reduced it to 10, from feedback to date, but if Philip is right it would be so small I could drop it all together and we'd get only 2 significant drivers for a Trump vote on 3/11 - Him or Party. That is great for a model, saves a lot of battery power, but it feels too simple to me. Still, this was Philip, he's not bad on US stuff, so let's see how he explains and clarifies. Perhaps he'll change his mind, or if not change my mind.
For me the pointers are that the Trump coalition is not a winning coalition at the federal level going forwards.
The easier thing for GOP politicians is to cleave to the Trumpsters, because of their enthusiasm. But that is what has driven the ABTs out of the party and has lost the GOP most independents and thus the absolutely essential suburbs.
For me, the way back for the GOP is the painful one. Excise their most passionate supporters, the Trumpsters. Rebuild the center right, win back the suburbs. Regain the trust of women.
To me, this will take at least one more bad election cycle result (2022), which alas is not guaranteed, followed by 4-6 years of rebuilding. It could go faster than that but equally it is not guaranteed to happen at all, but it is my best bet.
This is my view too. Except I think it will not be quite such a long and difficult process. Once Trump is not POTUS, my strong sense is he'll fade quicker than most people think. And given MAGA is so wrapped up with HIM, I think that will too. I see a vibrant young Republican emerging in time for the 24 election and running on a small state, libertarian, socially "trad" ticket. He or she will have the challenge of picking up the deplorables without being deplorable. If they can, they have a decent shot.
Spot on, the Trump balloon begins to rapidly deflate at precisely 1200hrs EST on 20 January. Trump becomes a has-been schmuck and his power and potency desert him.
Nothing from you but evidence free lazy slurring, as usual.
My thoughts with you at this difficult time.
And again. You have no arguments, no evidence and you are not interested in a discussion. Simply yelling shrill rubbish at people who disagree with you.
Says the guy who told Ydeothur to go f*ck himself the other day.
Only because, again, he had no arguments. But fair enough. I will not be doing that again.
CNN - Assistant House Speaker will move next week to impeach Trump if Pence does not invoke the 25th Amendment.
I’m still undecided whether this is a good idea or not.
Agreed. But he really does seem to have committed impeachable offences. It may not help, but his actions should be recognised for what they are. The Senate wouldn't convict anyway.
I am in two minds about impeachment - I don't think it can be done fast enough to make a difference, but then if he is impeached and found guilty by the Senate, he is excluded from running of office again. That would be a worthwhile win. But it would also come at a price of not healing the wounds. And then, can the wounds be healed at this point by Biden anyway?
I love it when people who are implacably opposed to the Republican Party try to give it lessons. Presumably to maintain the notion that everything is alright in the West and its business as usual, and what you are seeing is not a hologram.
But here's the thing. It really isn't all right.
The right is completely split in America. The party elite and the Trumpist base despise each other totally. The latter will not turn out for the former, as Georgia showed, and what follows is a hugely bitter primaries battle between the two factions ahead of 2022. When millions will not turn out again and the democrat hegemony intensifies.
Meanwhile, the Democrats will be deliberating just how much of a Jihad they want to declare on the many millions of Americans who turned out for Trump and now have zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions.
Trump showed his millions of supporters a glimpse of an America they were comfortable with and where they were welcome and valuable citizens.
They are not going back to the likes of Romney. Not now. Not ever.
Trouble is, their "zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions" is based on delusion. How to cleanse this?
Making the left-behind feel "welcome and valuable citizens". Absolutely.
"A glimpse of an America they were comfortable with". A lot to unpack in that statement. What America was that exactly. Because judging by the comments of Trump and many of his supporters it was an America where blacks could be shot or killed by the police with impunity or denied the vote or where demonstrators could go on marches shouting anti-Semitic slogans and be praised as "fine people".
That sort of America is a horrible one and if that is the vision that these people want then we absolutely should not be pandering to them. There are limits. There are boundaries of decent behaviour. And we don't accept behaviour which breaches those boundaries just because it's the left-behind or the white working-class doing the demanding. They don't get excused from complying with decent civilised behaviour just because they're poor or uneducated or unemployed.
Trump appealed to peoples' basest instincts. The best thing we can do for people who feel ignored is make life better for them not act on their worst instincts.
Cyclefree likes an evidence free moral high horse rant sometimes.
Black employment was at a record high under Trump. Lets see how Biden does. The early signs aren't good. Look at the democrat dominated states already.
Examples where blacks could be shot or killing with impunity? Last I looked the killers of Floyd and others were subject to due process. Did Trump try to interrupt that process or change the laws of due process?
And as for making life better for any American, well, the democrats were already out of ideas for that before the election. Again look at the states and the cities where they have held sway for decades. If this election was fought on the pre-covid economy, Trump won hands down.
Try reading my post properly. I gave you specific examples. If you want evidence, look at what the Republican Party under Trump was doing to stop black people voting. Look at what Trump himself said about marchers spouting anti-Semitic slogans.
So again when you said "A glimpse of an America they were comfortable with" what did you mean? What sort of America do you think they want? Let's have some specifics and evidence from you rather than generalities about wanting to be valued with which no-one will disagree.
Fighting America's corner on trade.
At least questioning a rapacious green lobby that threatened to put millions dependent on energy jobs out of business.
Recognising that millions Americans in small isolated towns feel safer owning a gun, because the police aint an option.
Understanding that international commitments often have adverse outcomes for ordinary Americans, and trying to negotiate more with them in mind
Understanding that the foreign war cheques so favoured by liberals are written with the blood of Americans in small towns.
Understanding that being descended from a confederate soldier is not a lifestyle choice and nothing can be done about it.
accepting that Eating at Appleby's, drinking Jack Daniel's and driving a pick up are not offences and do not make you an inferior person.
Accepting America has done some bad things in the world, but done a lot of good things too.
drinking Jack Daniel's then driving a pick up probably does make you a bad person
I love it when people who are implacably opposed to the Republican Party try to give it lessons. Presumably to maintain the notion that everything is alright in the West and its business as usual, and what you are seeing is not a hologram.
But here's the thing. It really isn't all right.
The right is completely split in America. The party elite and the Trumpist base despise each other totally. The latter will not turn out for the former, as Georgia showed, and what follows is a hugely bitter primaries battle between the two factions ahead of 2022. When millions will not turn out again and the democrat hegemony intensifies.
Meanwhile, the Democrats will be deliberating just how much of a Jihad they want to declare on the many millions of Americans who turned out for Trump and now have zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions.
Trump showed his millions of supporters a glimpse of an America they were comfortable with and where they were welcome and valuable citizens.
They are not going back to the likes of Romney. Not now. Not ever.
Trouble is, their "zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions" is based on delusion. How to cleanse this?
Making the left-behind feel "welcome and valuable citizens". Absolutely.
"A glimpse of an America they were comfortable with". A lot to unpack in that statement. What America was that exactly. Because judging by the comments of Trump and many of his supporters it was an America where blacks could be shot or killed by the police with impunity or denied the vote or where demonstrators could go on marches shouting anti-Semitic slogans and be praised as "fine people".
That sort of America is a horrible one and if that is the vision that these people want then we absolutely should not be pandering to them. There are limits. There are boundaries of decent behaviour. And we don't accept behaviour which breaches those boundaries just because it's the left-behind or the white working-class doing the demanding. They don't get excused from complying with decent civilised behaviour just because they're poor or uneducated or unemployed.
Trump appealed to peoples' basest instincts. The best thing we can do for people who feel ignored is make life better for them not act on their worst instincts.
Cyclefree likes an evidence free moral high horse rant sometimes.
Black employment was at a record high under Trump. Lets see how Biden does. The early signs aren't good. Look at the democrat dominated states already.
Examples where blacks could be shot or killing with impunity? Last I looked the killers of Floyd and others were subject to due process. Did Trump try to interrupt that process or change the laws of due process?
And as for making life better for any American, well, the democrats were already out of ideas for that before the election. Again look at the states and the cities where they have held sway for decades. If this election was fought on the pre-covid economy, Trump won hands down.
You know Trump is still in charge right?
And ran up a massive deficit.
He absolutely did, hands up.
Unfortunately fiscal restraint is out of fashion everywhere
For me the pointers are that the Trump coalition is not a winning coalition at the federal level going forwards.
The easier thing for GOP politicians is to cleave to the Trumpsters, because of their enthusiasm. But that is what has driven the ABTs out of the party and has lost the GOP most independents and thus the absolutely essential suburbs.
For me, the way back for the GOP is the painful one. Excise their most passionate supporters, the Trumpsters. Rebuild the center right, win back the suburbs. Regain the trust of women.
To me, this will take at least one more bad election cycle result (2022), which alas is not guaranteed, followed by 4-6 years of rebuilding. It could go faster than that but equally it is not guaranteed to happen at all, but it is my best bet.
On topic: I gaze into the future of the Republican party - not too far, just a couple of years - and I see no Trump or Trumpdom there. What I do see, however and alas, are elements of the MAGA agenda still in the mix.
The million $ puzzle which imo must be solved in order to predict where the party goes is as follows - Of the 73m who voted for Donald Trump what are the approx weightings (adjusted for overlap) for the 4 main categories?
1. Love Trump. Lucky to have him. Helluva guy and a total one off. Just so into everything about the man. 2. Always vote Republican. It's what I am - a Republican. Cut me and I bleed tax cuts & voter suppression. 3. Not big on politics. Only care about the economy. Thought he'd done ok on that. Why change. 4. Trump? Can take him or leave him but I like his hard right national populist rhetoric and policies.
No particular order there except that I've put the last one last for a reason. I think it's the smallest.
Very rough guesses:
1. 10 2. 50 3. 8 4. 5
Although 1 and 4 are largely the same category, if we're being honest.
Much obliged. This is what I'm looking for. Unadorned numbers that I can crunch thro the "Predict the Near Term Future of the GOP" model I've developed (mainly for betting purposes but also to aid my superforecasting and related punditry).
- No bright future for MAGA without Trump. - Republican party v Trump is a mismatch. Party prevails.
Much easier to split the 73, so: 1. 20 2. 45 3. 6 4. 2
That's an interesting one, thanks.
Think we might be saying that the MAGA element - voters who love a bit of hardcore nativist nationalism but are indifferent to the Trump delivery mechanism - is negligible.
So let's drop it and merge me, you, pulpstar, BluestBlue et alia to get -
1. I'm a Republican stupid - 65 2. I'm a Trumpster and I AM stupid - 25 3. It's the economy obvs - 10
Nice clear pointers emerging now.
But what are they?
The problem with that approach of going back to the suburbanites is that (a) they are increasing socially liberal due to college education, (b) are more fickle and so (c) you would have to blow up your base by switching to a more socially liberal / economically right-wing stance in the hope - and it would be no more than a hope - that you can persuade people who deserted you to switch back.
There is another thing here as well. Hispanics, Asian-Americans and Black people, on the whole, tend to be socially conservative. If the Republicans continue to make inroads into the HIspanic vote, then that more than outweighs their losses in the suburbs. Ditch the socially conservative agenda to appeal to suburban types and you have lost that.
If you abandon the cities and the suburbs, you cannot take the House. Period.
Well, the Republicans nearly did.
The tragedy is that the 'rebels' were so exercised at the growing inequalities in income and wealth - and the growing distance between politicians and the people they are supposed to represent - that they turned to a brand of extreme Republicanism that was never likely to want to deliver them any sort of relief.
The big question of our era is why centre-left politicians have proved so unable to put forward a comprehensive platform to rectify the egregious distortions of 21st century society in a way that can carry a majority of sensibly minded voters in the centre of political opinion?
Within our lifetimes, if the centre-left doesn't rise to the challenge of our times, then the future will be left to the extremes.
The simple explanation is that centre-left politicians now spend most of their energy and efforts prioritising culturally liberal stances than the economic concerns that concern most people. I've pointed out here to those that scream racist at Trump voters that a good chunk of them would have voted for Obama in 2008. They didn't care he was Black but they did care about their economic conditions. However, the Democrat party became so embroiled in cultural issues that it dropped the ball on the economic front.
This line of attack might have worked in the past, but it has lost much of its potency given the Democrats' clean sweep in the world's second-largest democracy. And your boy, a poster child for the opposite approach, getting his backside handed to him.
He didn't really get his backside handed to him though did he? Biden won the election by the same number of EV votes as Trump, a victory that we were told at the time was minimal because if only 70K voters had switched sides, Clinton would have won. Only this time, if only 44K (if I remember correctly) had switched sides, Trump would have won. The Democrats nearly lost control of the House. And you have a 50/50 Senate.
And, no, the attack lines are still relevant. It was stupid of Biden et al to use the BLM line last night because it had no relevance in the scheme of things and was done in response to the post on social media showing the response to BLM protests. I pointed out pre-election that the focus on BLM risked driving Hispanics to the GOP, which is one of the few things I got right about November
Surely the argument about Clinton coming close didn't rely so much on the Electoral College vote, which wasn't particularly close as you say and ironically the same as Biden-Trump (ignoring faithless electors), but the popular vote?
So the point is that Clinton had a 3 million vote margin over Trump, but it was very inefficiently distributed so she lost (partly unfortunate for her, partly poor tactics). Whereas Trump had a 7 million vote deficit, which was very efficiently distributed but still left him as far off as Clinton in the Electoral College vote.
It surely isn't controversial that winning the popular vote by 3 million but losing the Electoral College vote by 74 is annoying but provides a reasonably good base for next time, whereas LOSING the popular vote by 7 million and the Electoral College vote by 74 is much more problematic. The illusion is that Trump lost in a squeaker because he scweamed and scweamed and scweamed about it... but that's somewhat misleading.
Now that isn't to say Democrats don't have a problem with how their votes are distributed - they do. But it does mean they were in striking distance in 2016 in a way Republicans aren't now.
It also isn't getting better for the Republicans at the moment in terms of the states they will need to win back in 2024. Georgia is a fairly large state that does now look rather purple and the trends aren't good. Arizona is also now looking pretty blue across the board. The Georgia run-offs means Puerto Rico is quite likely to become a reliably blue state. The rust belt looks better, but arguably Trump had a special blue collar white appeal that it's quite hard to replicate (and, as a reminder, he lost there).
"The illusion is that Trump lost in a squeaker because he scweamed and scweamed and scweamed about it... but that's somewhat misleading."
Indeed, Sir Norfolk, that same point was made by Mitch McConnell in a rather less distinguished forum than this. In the end, the result really wasn't all that close.
For me the pointers are that the Trump coalition is not a winning coalition at the federal level going forwards.
The easier thing for GOP politicians is to cleave to the Trumpsters, because of their enthusiasm. But that is what has driven the ABTs out of the party and has lost the GOP most independents and thus the absolutely essential suburbs.
For me, the way back for the GOP is the painful one. Excise their most passionate supporters, the Trumpsters. Rebuild the center right, win back the suburbs. Regain the trust of women.
To me, this will take at least one more bad election cycle result (2022), which alas is not guaranteed, followed by 4-6 years of rebuilding. It could go faster than that but equally it is not guaranteed to happen at all, but it is my best bet.
On topic: I gaze into the future of the Republican party - not too far, just a couple of years - and I see no Trump or Trumpdom there. What I do see, however and alas, are elements of the MAGA agenda still in the mix.
The million $ puzzle which imo must be solved in order to predict where the party goes is as follows - Of the 73m who voted for Donald Trump what are the approx weightings (adjusted for overlap) for the 4 main categories?
1. Love Trump. Lucky to have him. Helluva guy and a total one off. Just so into everything about the man. 2. Always vote Republican. It's what I am - a Republican. Cut me and I bleed tax cuts & voter suppression. 3. Not big on politics. Only care about the economy. Thought he'd done ok on that. Why change. 4. Trump? Can take him or leave him but I like his hard right national populist rhetoric and policies.
No particular order there except that I've put the last one last for a reason. I think it's the smallest.
Very rough guesses:
1. 10 2. 50 3. 8 4. 5
Although 1 and 4 are largely the same category, if we're being honest.
Much obliged. This is what I'm looking for. Unadorned numbers that I can crunch thro the "Predict the Near Term Future of the GOP" model I've developed (mainly for betting purposes but also to aid my superforecasting and related punditry).
- No bright future for MAGA without Trump. - Republican party v Trump is a mismatch. Party prevails.
Much easier to split the 73, so: 1. 20 2. 45 3. 6 4. 2
That's an interesting one, thanks.
Think we might be saying that the MAGA element - voters who love a bit of hardcore nativist nationalism but are indifferent to the Trump delivery mechanism - is negligible.
So let's drop it and merge me, you, pulpstar, BluestBlue et alia to get -
1. I'm a Republican stupid - 65 2. I'm a Trumpster and I AM stupid - 25 3. It's the economy obvs - 10
Nice clear pointers emerging now.
But what are they?
The problem with that approach of going back to the suburbanites is that (a) they are increasing socially liberal due to college education, (b) are more fickle and so (c) you would have to blow up your base by switching to a more socially liberal / economically right-wing stance in the hope - and it would be no more than a hope - that you can persuade people who deserted you to switch back.
There is another thing here as well. Hispanics, Asian-Americans and Black people, on the whole, tend to be socially conservative. If the Republicans continue to make inroads into the HIspanic vote, then that more than outweighs their losses in the suburbs. Ditch the socially conservative agenda to appeal to suburban types and you have lost that.
Citation required.
I didn't know you were such a disciple of citation, @Anabobazina, I must have missed that in your posts.
A quick scan of that shows it seems to be talking about immigrants, when your original claim was about Hispanics, Asian-Americans and Black people. That conflation may raise an eyebrow. Is it worth me reading the page more closely, or have you sent the wrong link?
I haven't send the wrong link and the article is about Hispanic voters, a significant chunk of whom would be immigrants. The report references 18.6m immigrant Hispanic citizens, and that was for 2014. The US Census data for 2014 shows 53.2m Hispanics in the US, of which 20m were under 19. It's unclear whether their definition of citizen includes or excludes minors. If it does, that's well over half the Hispanic population in the US, if not, it is well over a third.
But please, I am interested in any facts and figures you have to the opposite.
I am not making any claims about racial differences in politics, I'm merely assessing yours. So far, I'm finding your claims to be dubious in more than one sense.
Ok, well then please show your evidence and your rationale as to why it is dubious. All you have done so if make an assertion with no contrary facts. Anyone can do that, including the bots and zombies you referred to earlier.
Once again, I made no assertion. I haven't said you're wrong, I think it's likelier you're just confused.
I don't think so but please tell me where I am confused. If I'm wrong, happy to admit it.
According to Pew, Blacks are less likely to be conservative than whites.
Trump's success has all been about remaking reality. Creating an image of the successful businessman, despite all his real business failings. Convincing his supporters that he was on their side, when he did nothing to help them.
So when Covid came along he tried to bargain with reality again, and finally met something that couldn't be denied.
Accepting the reality of the emergency was not an option because it would have meant admitting he had made mistakes early on, and it would have damaged the stock market.
FPT - nuclear weapons exist to level the playing field against those with massive conventional forces, that we couldn't hope to match, and to deter nuclear blackmail against us by nuclear armed powers.
I know others have equally strong views on this, but count me out from the unilateralists please. It's an ultimate insurance policy that I'm happy to have - and pay for - and helps me sleep soundly at night.
You could sleep soundly at night if you'd paid to be surrounded by a battalion of Grenadier Guards to keep burglars out. But if it meant your children went hungry....?
There is a huge amount of "whataboutery" supporting the UK having nuclear weapons. Would someone like to give me an actual, real life, certifiable example of when they have given me cause to sleep more soundly at night?
Where my slumbers are qualitatively better is the knowledge that some ISIS commander or some Al Qaeda financier is being lit up for delivery of a smart bomb by a special forces guy in the shadows, who has the use of the latest array of technology to call upon.
I'd be very happy for the UK to be known as providing those people the bad guys should lose sleep over. Be the go-to place for the brightest and best fighting men in the world. Hell, I'd pay top dollar to recruit some of the Foreign Legion special forces guys into the team. They were some of the best close protection I've used (and that includes having used a guy from the Bravo 2 Zero patrol).
The ability to insert these into any country - and then safely extract them - would be an ultimate expression of power. And a much more effective use of defence money than the umpteen billions spent having no more than one Trident submarine on patrol at any one time.
Well, our children aren't going hungry. The cost of a few billion a year is easily absorbable within our massive government budget of many hundreds of billions. So I don't think that's a real choice. And I think the safety payback we get for it (in terms of a safe and secure space for economic growth and trade) is worth it.
I can't speak for how you sleep at night but I certainly think they are deterring Russia from taking more serious action over the Baltic States (NATO members) and also China over Taiwan. They were also useful in the first Gulf War in convincing Saddam Hussein not to use chemical or biological weapons. Of course it's difficult to prove a counterfactual where they made *the* difference - the decisive difference - because they are a strategic deterrent, not a tactical one, and such confrontations are rare precisely because they do exist. When that fails they are part of a diplomatic and military deterrent toolkit of why things don't escalate as far as they could.
I agree with you on special forces and on smart weapons. They are essential too. But I wouldn't eliminate our strategic deterrent. I think that'd be dangerous.
I'm more in the @Casino_Royale camp here. I would not wanting to be relying on the "goodwill" of China and Russia not to use their nuclear weapons against a non-nuclear UK in the case of a dispute.
But here we enter the realms of whether we would be allowed to use Trident in that event, or whether we'd find that the system had been (wisely imho) disabled by a higher power.
If you were America, and Britain got itself into a nuclear conflict with a third party, and you had the ability to shut the system down, would you do it? Or would you just let them go ahead with it in case they asked for a refund? It isn't an independent deterrent. Everyone (including Russia and China) is aware of that fact.
It'sd not as if they were Blue Streak missiles launched from North Norfolk silos which could be traced back to the perpetrators. A SLBM is by definition untraceable and launchable from any wet bit on the map within range, and what's a chap to think if Trident-type trajectories come at him?
There is no US "off switch" for Trident. The claims that there are seem to be of the "but there must be" variety.
And claims that there is no 'off switch' are of the 'but there couldn't be' variety. I respect your experience in various fields, but by definition, being party to US nuclear secrets isn't one of them. So logic is really all we have to go on.
Which ally of Britain would you sell independent strategic nukes to by the way? Which country would you happily sell the ability to use British technology to wipe out other countries at will? - Exactly.
Is your point that - certainly at the time Trident was set up - the answer was "the United States of America"?
No. My point is that there is no other country, however loyal, however much a staunch ally, to which one Government could sensibly give/sell/or rent the ability to destroy other countries at a button press, on 'free-for-all' basis. You would need appropriate checks and balances.
It is a matter of public record that without American support, Trident would be out of commission within weeks. I also believe that we could not use it independently in the immediate term without America's express permission. The fact that the last time we tried to hit a target 'off the West coast of Africa', the missile veered off course and went in the direction of America, if it doesn't provide corroboration for this, at least indicates that once a target is identified and put in by UK forces firing it, the missile has the ability to change its course and follow an alternative route.
What on earth is your argument here? That we performed a routine test fire, forgot to warn the US, and the Pentagon panicked and hit the emergency override button?
Seems much more likely it was a genuine malfunction, no?
I would prefer to leave theories to one side and stick to what we can conclusively prove from the event - that the missile can change its course mid-flight, regardless of the instructions given it when fired.
It didn't "change course". It went off course. There is a huge difference.
Actually there is no difference at all between those two statements. When something goes off course, by definition it changes its course.
'Veering' and 'going off course' is just a way of expressing this that makes it sound like it blew a gasket or got hit by a stray seagull, and was a comforting British cock up (if a nuclear cock up can be comforting). All we actually know, is that it changed its course - that where we asked it to go, was not where it went.
CNN - Assistant House Speaker will move next week to impeach Trump if Pence does not invoke the 25th Amendment.
I’m still undecided whether this is a good idea or not.
Agreed. But he really does seem to have committed impeachable offences. It may not help, but his actions should be recognised for what they are. The Senate wouldn't convict anyway.
I am in two minds about impeachment - I don't think it can be done fast enough to make a difference, but then if he is impeached and found guilty by the Senate, he is excluded from running of office again. That would be a worthwhile win. But it would also come at a price of not healing the wounds. And then, can the wounds be healed at this point by Biden anyway?
Not an easy question.
There's no point even trying to "heal the wounds" with the Trump lot, they're quite simply bad news for the republic. The GOP can still down the Mike Pence/Mitch McConnell route that's still extremely conservative but not facist. Best not to indulge the MAGAs further - treat them like adults.
For me the pointers are that the Trump coalition is not a winning coalition at the federal level going forwards.
The easier thing for GOP politicians is to cleave to the Trumpsters, because of their enthusiasm. But that is what has driven the ABTs out of the party and has lost the GOP most independents and thus the absolutely essential suburbs.
For me, the way back for the GOP is the painful one. Excise their most passionate supporters, the Trumpsters. Rebuild the center right, win back the suburbs. Regain the trust of women.
To me, this will take at least one more bad election cycle result (2022), which alas is not guaranteed, followed by 4-6 years of rebuilding. It could go faster than that but equally it is not guaranteed to happen at all, but it is my best bet.
On topic: I gaze into the future of the Republican party - not too far, just a couple of years - and I see no Trump or Trumpdom there. What I do see, however and alas, are elements of the MAGA agenda still in the mix.
The million $ puzzle which imo must be solved in order to predict where the party goes is as follows - Of the 73m who voted for Donald Trump what are the approx weightings (adjusted for overlap) for the 4 main categories?
1. Love Trump. Lucky to have him. Helluva guy and a total one off. Just so into everything about the man. 2. Always vote Republican. It's what I am - a Republican. Cut me and I bleed tax cuts & voter suppression. 3. Not big on politics. Only care about the economy. Thought he'd done ok on that. Why change. 4. Trump? Can take him or leave him but I like his hard right national populist rhetoric and policies.
No particular order there except that I've put the last one last for a reason. I think it's the smallest.
Very rough guesses:
1. 10 2. 50 3. 8 4. 5
Although 1 and 4 are largely the same category, if we're being honest.
Much obliged. This is what I'm looking for. Unadorned numbers that I can crunch thro the "Predict the Near Term Future of the GOP" model I've developed (mainly for betting purposes but also to aid my superforecasting and related punditry).
- No bright future for MAGA without Trump. - Republican party v Trump is a mismatch. Party prevails.
Much easier to split the 73, so: 1. 20 2. 45 3. 6 4. 2
That's an interesting one, thanks.
Think we might be saying that the MAGA element - voters who love a bit of hardcore nativist nationalism but are indifferent to the Trump delivery mechanism - is negligible.
So let's drop it and merge me, you, pulpstar, BluestBlue et alia to get -
1. I'm a Republican stupid - 65 2. I'm a Trumpster and I AM stupid - 25 3. It's the economy obvs - 10
Nice clear pointers emerging now.
But what are they?
The problem with that approach of going back to the suburbanites is that (a) they are increasing socially liberal due to college education, (b) are more fickle and so (c) you would have to blow up your base by switching to a more socially liberal / economically right-wing stance in the hope - and it would be no more than a hope - that you can persuade people who deserted you to switch back.
There is another thing here as well. Hispanics, Asian-Americans and Black people, on the whole, tend to be socially conservative. If the Republicans continue to make inroads into the HIspanic vote, then that more than outweighs their losses in the suburbs. Ditch the socially conservative agenda to appeal to suburban types and you have lost that.
If you abandon the cities and the suburbs, you cannot take the House. Period.
Well, the Republicans nearly did.
The tragedy is that the 'rebels' were so exercised at the growing inequalities in income and wealth - and the growing distance between politicians and the people they are supposed to represent - that they turned to a brand of extreme Republicanism that was never likely to want to deliver them any sort of relief.
The big question of our era is why centre-left politicians have proved so unable to put forward a comprehensive platform to rectify the egregious distortions of 21st century society in a way that can carry a majority of sensibly minded voters in the centre of political opinion?
Within our lifetimes, if the centre-left doesn't rise to the challenge of our times, then the future will be left to the extremes.
The simple explanation is that centre-left politicians now spend most of their energy and efforts prioritising culturally liberal stances than the economic concerns that concern most people. I've pointed out here to those that scream racist at Trump voters that a good chunk of them would have voted for Obama in 2008. They didn't care he was Black but they did care about their economic conditions. However, the Democrat party became so embroiled in cultural issues that it dropped the ball on the economic front.
This line of attack might have worked in the past, but it has lost much of its potency given the Democrats' clean sweep in the world's second-largest democracy. And your boy, a poster child for the opposite approach, getting his backside handed to him.
He didn't really get his backside handed to him though did he? Biden won the election by the same number of EV votes as Trump, a victory that we were told at the time was minimal because if only 70K voters had switched sides, Clinton would have won. Only this time, if only 44K (if I remember correctly) had switched sides, Trump would have won. The Democrats nearly lost control of the House. And you have a 50/50 Senate.
And, no, the attack lines are still relevant. It was stupid of Biden et al to use the BLM line last night because it had no relevance in the scheme of things and was done in response to the post on social media showing the response to BLM protests. I pointed out pre-election that the focus on BLM risked driving Hispanics to the GOP, which is one of the few things I got right about November
Denial. Sheer denial.
He was comprehensively and soundly beaten.
In 2016, the GOP held the House, Senate and Presidency.
After four years of Trump, they hold none of them.
He has taken the L on a grand scale.
Try to accept the truth.
On that basis, the Democrats in 2016 were comprehensively and soundly beaten as the GOP held all three.
Yet you were the ones who continually stated that Trump had little of a mandate given the slimness of his win.
So which is it? Was it a comprehensive thrashing or not?
A comprehensive thrashing where she won the popular vote.
Equally, had Hillary contested the Election result and incited an angry mob to ransack the Capitol Building, she should have been locked up. Lock her up! Lock her up!
I love it when people who are implacably opposed to the Republican Party try to give it lessons. Presumably to maintain the notion that everything is alright in the West and its business as usual, and what you are seeing is not a hologram.
But here's the thing. It really isn't all right.
The right is completely split in America. The party elite and the Trumpist base despise each other totally. The latter will not turn out for the former, as Georgia showed, and what follows is a hugely bitter primaries battle between the two factions ahead of 2022. When millions will not turn out again and the democrat hegemony intensifies.
Meanwhile, the Democrats will be deliberating just how much of a Jihad they want to declare on the many millions of Americans who turned out for Trump and now have zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions.
Trump showed his millions of supporters a glimpse of an America they were comfortable with and where they were welcome and valuable citizens.
They are not going back to the likes of Romney. Not now. Not ever.
Trump is a symptom not a cause, and the cause is still very much there, if not more so than previously.
Agreed. But I don;t know if anyone can harness it like Trump. I quite like Kristi Noem.
Noem is a homophobic religious bigot. What is it you like about her?
I like her videos promoting SD as a tourist destination. I had a great time there in 2019
Next, Hitler was a decentish bloke, as evidenced by him doing a promo to "come visit the pretty town of Berchtesgaden..."
You can’t argue that it’s not located at a truly fine spot.
One of the benefits of being Fuhrer was not being troubled by nimby's.....for long.
One of Philip Kerr's rather good Dritten Reich noir novels is based in part on exactly that theme - nimbys at Berchtesgaden.
I liked them from the start (much more than his more airporty thrillers) but it's gratifying to see how the whole series has grown in stature, particularly since Kerr's death. They've even earned the ultimate accolade of having (fairly mediocre) copyists.
The Berlin Noir books & sequels must be ripe for a film or televisualisation - I'm thinking Philip Glenister for Bernie might be good casting?
Edit: just did a check & apparently there is an HBO movie proposal floating about. Kerr himself liked Michael Fassbinder for the role, also not a bad choice.
Ooh, now that is not a bad thought (Fassbinder).
BTW what did you make of Burgessian's spot of the latest Alex Bell?
More a regurgitation than anything new.
Telling that he uses terms like 'the Nats' & 'Nat Nostrodamus' quite happily, presumably why Unionists invariably feel the need to put former advisor to Alex Samond next to his name, as if this was some guarantee of objective insight. Says quite a lot that referring to something that he hasn't been for 10 years is his USP.
I love it when people who are implacably opposed to the Republican Party try to give it lessons. Presumably to maintain the notion that everything is alright in the West and its business as usual, and what you are seeing is not a hologram.
But here's the thing. It really isn't all right.
The right is completely split in America. The party elite and the Trumpist base despise each other totally. The latter will not turn out for the former, as Georgia showed, and what follows is a hugely bitter primaries battle between the two factions ahead of 2022. When millions will not turn out again and the democrat hegemony intensifies.
Meanwhile, the Democrats will be deliberating just how much of a Jihad they want to declare on the many millions of Americans who turned out for Trump and now have zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions.
Trump showed his millions of supporters a glimpse of an America they were comfortable with and where they were welcome and valuable citizens.
They are not going back to the likes of Romney. Not now. Not ever.
Trouble is, their "zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions" is based on delusion. How to cleanse this?
Making the left-behind feel "welcome and valuable citizens". Absolutely.
"A glimpse of an America they were comfortable with". A lot to unpack in that statement. What America was that exactly. Because judging by the comments of Trump and many of his supporters it was an America where blacks could be shot or killed by the police with impunity or denied the vote or where demonstrators could go on marches shouting anti-Semitic slogans and be praised as "fine people".
That sort of America is a horrible one and if that is the vision that these people want then we absolutely should not be pandering to them. There are limits. There are boundaries of decent behaviour. And we don't accept behaviour which breaches those boundaries just because it's the left-behind or the white working-class doing the demanding. They don't get excused from complying with decent civilised behaviour just because they're poor or uneducated or unemployed.
Trump appealed to peoples' basest instincts. The best thing we can do for people who feel ignored is make life better for them not act on their worst instincts.
Cyclefree likes an evidence free moral high horse rant sometimes.
Black employment was at a record high under Trump. Lets see how Biden does. The early signs aren't good. Look at the democrat dominated states already.
Examples where blacks could be shot or killing with impunity? Last I looked the killers of Floyd and others were subject to due process. Did Trump try to interrupt that process or change the laws of due process?
And as for making life better for any American, well, the democrats were already out of ideas for that before the election. Again look at the states and the cities where they have held sway for decades. If this election was fought on the pre-covid economy, Trump won hands down.
That Trump did not have the fancy footwork to see what Covid could do to his chances has spared us four more years.
But I also think Biden will disappoint those who voted for him. Nor will he carry those who didn't. Not a great time ahead for the USA, I fear.
I love it when people who are implacably opposed to the Republican Party try to give it lessons. Presumably to maintain the notion that everything is alright in the West and its business as usual, and what you are seeing is not a hologram.
But here's the thing. It really isn't all right.
The right is completely split in America. The party elite and the Trumpist base despise each other totally. The latter will not turn out for the former, as Georgia showed, and what follows is a hugely bitter primaries battle between the two factions ahead of 2022. When millions will not turn out again and the democrat hegemony intensifies.
Meanwhile, the Democrats will be deliberating just how much of a Jihad they want to declare on the many millions of Americans who turned out for Trump and now have zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions.
Trump showed his millions of supporters a glimpse of an America they were comfortable with and where they were welcome and valuable citizens.
They are not going back to the likes of Romney. Not now. Not ever.
Trouble is, their "zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions" is based on delusion. How to cleanse this?
Making the left-behind feel "welcome and valuable citizens". Absolutely.
"A glimpse of an America they were comfortable with". A lot to unpack in that statement. What America was that exactly. Because judging by the comments of Trump and many of his supporters it was an America where blacks could be shot or killed by the police with impunity or denied the vote or where demonstrators could go on marches shouting anti-Semitic slogans and be praised as "fine people".
That sort of America is a horrible one and if that is the vision that these people want then we absolutely should not be pandering to them. There are limits. There are boundaries of decent behaviour. And we don't accept behaviour which breaches those boundaries just because it's the left-behind or the white working-class doing the demanding. They don't get excused from complying with decent civilised behaviour just because they're poor or uneducated or unemployed.
Trump appealed to peoples' basest instincts. The best thing we can do for people who feel ignored is make life better for them not act on their worst instincts.
Cyclefree likes an evidence free moral high horse rant sometimes.
Black employment was at a record high under Trump. Lets see how Biden does. The early signs aren't good. Look at the democrat dominated states already.
Examples where blacks could be shot or killing with impunity? Last I looked the killers of Floyd and others were subject to due process. Did Trump try to interrupt that process or change the laws of due process?
And as for making life better for any American, well, the democrats were already out of ideas for that before the election. Again look at the states and the cities where they have held sway for decades. If this election was fought on the pre-covid economy, Trump won hands down.
That Trump did not have the fancy footwork to see what Covid could do to his chances has spared us four more years.
But I also think Biden will disappoint those who voted for him. Nor will he carry those who didn't. Not a great time ahead for the USA, I fear.
It's a mystery to me that Trump did not tackle the virus crisis head-on. It was made for him - a bold, charismatic, mould-breaking leader prepared to defy convention and carry his fanatical supporters with him. He could have locked down the country. It would have accepted his lead and followed his every word through lockdown. Tens of thousands of lives would have been saved and he would have gone into the election a hero. He might have won all fifty states.
Instead he chose denial, even though he must have known what was in store.
Why?
Because it wasn't in his script. He doesn't want what is best for America, he wants what is best for Trump. Listening to experts who know what they are talking about isn't his style. If there's a big problem just wish it away - Climate Change is a Chinese hoax, Covid will "magically vanish".
@PtP Why? Because he is not that mentally agile. His self-image is one of the economic miracle worker. Therefore his lens for COVID was the economy. Ergo, no lockdowns as they are bad for the economy. Ergo, arguments that align with lockdown logic are also inadmissible, so social distancing and mask wearing are bad.
I love it when people who are implacably opposed to the Republican Party try to give it lessons. Presumably to maintain the notion that everything is alright in the West and its business as usual, and what you are seeing is not a hologram.
But here's the thing. It really isn't all right.
The right is completely split in America. The party elite and the Trumpist base despise each other totally. The latter will not turn out for the former, as Georgia showed, and what follows is a hugely bitter primaries battle between the two factions ahead of 2022. When millions will not turn out again and the democrat hegemony intensifies.
Meanwhile, the Democrats will be deliberating just how much of a Jihad they want to declare on the many millions of Americans who turned out for Trump and now have zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions.
Trump showed his millions of supporters a glimpse of an America they were comfortable with and where they were welcome and valuable citizens.
They are not going back to the likes of Romney. Not now. Not ever.
Trouble is, their "zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions" is based on delusion. How to cleanse this?
Making the left-behind feel "welcome and valuable citizens". Absolutely.
"A glimpse of an America they were comfortable with". A lot to unpack in that statement. What America was that exactly. Because judging by the comments of Trump and many of his supporters it was an America where blacks could be shot or killed by the police with impunity or denied the vote or where demonstrators could go on marches shouting anti-Semitic slogans and be praised as "fine people".
That sort of America is a horrible one and if that is the vision that these people want then we absolutely should not be pandering to them. There are limits. There are boundaries of decent behaviour. And we don't accept behaviour which breaches those boundaries just because it's the left-behind or the white working-class doing the demanding. They don't get excused from complying with decent civilised behaviour just because they're poor or uneducated or unemployed.
Trump appealed to peoples' basest instincts. The best thing we can do for people who feel ignored is make life better for them not act on their worst instincts.
Cyclefree likes an evidence free moral high horse rant sometimes.
Black employment was at a record high under Trump. Lets see how Biden does. The early signs aren't good. Look at the democrat dominated states already.
Examples where blacks could be shot or killing with impunity? Last I looked the killers of Floyd and others were subject to due process. Did Trump try to interrupt that process or change the laws of due process?
And as for making life better for any American, well, the democrats were already out of ideas for that before the election. Again look at the states and the cities where they have held sway for decades. If this election was fought on the pre-covid economy, Trump won hands down.
I'm guessing everyone looks like they're on a moral high horse, when you're lying in the moral gutter.
FWIW, opposing antisemitism isn't moralising, it's a basic entry requirement for being a civilised human. Try it.
Such shrill, emotional, evidence free b'llocks it is untrue.
We know from the Corbynites here where the real anti-semites are matey. We'll take no lessons from the left on that score.
Trump was a huge supporter of Israel's right to exist (as opposed to the more radical democrats you support), and even managed to broker ground breaking middle east peace agreements between Jew and Arab.
Those are real, tangible achievements, not airy fairy claims about what some redneck may or may not have said at some stupid rally or other.
Rarely heard such pile of cr*p
"airy fairy claims about what some redneck may or may not have said at some stupid rally or other" is a little way short of "I condemn all antisemitism"
I wonder how many people on here are truly shocked you couldn't manage it.
OK fine, I zoned out of the whole proud boys thing because it clearly was not Trump's finest hour. Of course I condemn anti-semitism. Do you? Do you recognise it in the very radical part of the democrat party and condemn it? Do you recognise Israels right to exist?
It's a mystery to me that Trump did not tackle the virus crisis head-on. It was made for him - a bold, charismatic, mould-breaking leader prepared to defy convention and carry his fanatical supporters with him. He could have locked down the country. It would have accepted his lead and followed his every word through lockdown. Tens of thousands of lives would have been saved and he would have gone into the election a hero. He might have won all fifty states.
Instead he chose denial, even though he must have known what was in store.
Why?
What confused me is why Trump discouraged people from voting anyway they could vote.
If Trump had got his supporters to use postal votes I do believe he would have won re-election.
I think Trump was setting up the "it was rigged" scenario right from the start: his instinct is always to take the other side to court when he doesn't get his way. He just assumed that the judges he appointed would act to help him rather than uphold the law.
For me the pointers are that the Trump coalition is not a winning coalition at the federal level going forwards.
The easier thing for GOP politicians is to cleave to the Trumpsters, because of their enthusiasm. But that is what has driven the ABTs out of the party and has lost the GOP most independents and thus the absolutely essential suburbs.
For me, the way back for the GOP is the painful one. Excise their most passionate supporters, the Trumpsters. Rebuild the center right, win back the suburbs. Regain the trust of women.
To me, this will take at least one more bad election cycle result (2022), which alas is not guaranteed, followed by 4-6 years of rebuilding. It could go faster than that but equally it is not guaranteed to happen at all, but it is my best bet.
On topic: I gaze into the future of the Republican party - not too far, just a couple of years - and I see no Trump or Trumpdom there. What I do see, however and alas, are elements of the MAGA agenda still in the mix.
The million $ puzzle which imo must be solved in order to predict where the party goes is as follows - Of the 73m who voted for Donald Trump what are the approx weightings (adjusted for overlap) for the 4 main categories?
1. Love Trump. Lucky to have him. Helluva guy and a total one off. Just so into everything about the man. 2. Always vote Republican. It's what I am - a Republican. Cut me and I bleed tax cuts & voter suppression. 3. Not big on politics. Only care about the economy. Thought he'd done ok on that. Why change. 4. Trump? Can take him or leave him but I like his hard right national populist rhetoric and policies.
No particular order there except that I've put the last one last for a reason. I think it's the smallest.
Very rough guesses:
1. 10 2. 50 3. 8 4. 5
Although 1 and 4 are largely the same category, if we're being honest.
Much obliged. This is what I'm looking for. Unadorned numbers that I can crunch thro the "Predict the Near Term Future of the GOP" model I've developed (mainly for betting purposes but also to aid my superforecasting and related punditry).
- No bright future for MAGA without Trump. - Republican party v Trump is a mismatch. Party prevails.
Much easier to split the 73, so: 1. 20 2. 45 3. 6 4. 2
That's an interesting one, thanks.
Think we might be saying that the MAGA element - voters who love a bit of hardcore nativist nationalism but are indifferent to the Trump delivery mechanism - is negligible.
So let's drop it and merge me, you, pulpstar, BluestBlue et alia to get -
1. I'm a Republican stupid - 65 2. I'm a Trumpster and I AM stupid - 25 3. It's the economy obvs - 10
Nice clear pointers emerging now.
But what are they?
The problem with that approach of going back to the suburbanites is that (a) they are increasing socially liberal due to college education, (b) are more fickle and so (c) you would have to blow up your base by switching to a more socially liberal / economically right-wing stance in the hope - and it would be no more than a hope - that you can persuade people who deserted you to switch back.
There is another thing here as well. Hispanics, Asian-Americans and Black people, on the whole, tend to be socially conservative. If the Republicans continue to make inroads into the HIspanic vote, then that more than outweighs their losses in the suburbs. Ditch the socially conservative agenda to appeal to suburban types and you have lost that.
If you abandon the cities and the suburbs, you cannot take the House. Period.
Well, the Republicans nearly did.
The tragedy is that the 'rebels' were so exercised at the growing inequalities in income and wealth - and the growing distance between politicians and the people they are supposed to represent - that they turned to a brand of extreme Republicanism that was never likely to want to deliver them any sort of relief.
The big question of our era is why centre-left politicians have proved so unable to put forward a comprehensive platform to rectify the egregious distortions of 21st century society in a way that can carry a majority of sensibly minded voters in the centre of political opinion?
Within our lifetimes, if the centre-left doesn't rise to the challenge of our times, then the future will be left to the extremes.
The simple explanation is that centre-left politicians now spend most of their energy and efforts prioritising culturally liberal stances than the economic concerns that concern most people. I've pointed out here to those that scream racist at Trump voters that a good chunk of them would have voted for Obama in 2008. They didn't care he was Black but they did care about their economic conditions. However, the Democrat party became so embroiled in cultural issues that it dropped the ball on the economic front.
This line of attack might have worked in the past, but it has lost much of its potency given the Democrats' clean sweep in the world's second-largest democracy. And your boy, a poster child for the opposite approach, getting his backside handed to him.
He didn't really get his backside handed to him though did he? Biden won the election by the same number of EV votes as Trump, a victory that we were told at the time was minimal because if only 70K voters had switched sides, Clinton would have won. Only this time, if only 44K (if I remember correctly) had switched sides, Trump would have won. The Democrats nearly lost control of the House. And you have a 50/50 Senate.
And, no, the attack lines are still relevant. It was stupid of Biden et al to use the BLM line last night because it had no relevance in the scheme of things and was done in response to the post on social media showing the response to BLM protests. I pointed out pre-election that the focus on BLM risked driving Hispanics to the GOP, which is one of the few things I got right about November
Denial. Sheer denial.
He was comprehensively and soundly beaten.
In 2016, the GOP held the House, Senate and Presidency.
After four years of Trump, they hold none of them.
He has taken the L on a grand scale.
Try to accept the truth.
On that basis, the Democrats in 2016 were comprehensively and soundly beaten as the GOP held all three.
Yet you were the ones who continually stated that Trump had little of a mandate given the slimness of his win.
So which is it? Was it a comprehensive thrashing or not?
Well he won all three, but lost the popular vote. Unlike Biden, who won it by a cool 7 million votes! Not too shabby.
I love it when people who are implacably opposed to the Republican Party try to give it lessons. Presumably to maintain the notion that everything is alright in the West and its business as usual, and what you are seeing is not a hologram.
But here's the thing. It really isn't all right.
The right is completely split in America. The party elite and the Trumpist base despise each other totally. The latter will not turn out for the former, as Georgia showed, and what follows is a hugely bitter primaries battle between the two factions ahead of 2022. When millions will not turn out again and the democrat hegemony intensifies.
Meanwhile, the Democrats will be deliberating just how much of a Jihad they want to declare on the many millions of Americans who turned out for Trump and now have zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions.
Trump showed his millions of supporters a glimpse of an America they were comfortable with and where they were welcome and valuable citizens.
They are not going back to the likes of Romney. Not now. Not ever.
Trouble is, their "zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions" is based on delusion. How to cleanse this?
Making the left-behind feel "welcome and valuable citizens". Absolutely.
"A glimpse of an America they were comfortable with". A lot to unpack in that statement. What America was that exactly. Because judging by the comments of Trump and many of his supporters it was an America where blacks could be shot or killed by the police with impunity or denied the vote or where demonstrators could go on marches shouting anti-Semitic slogans and be praised as "fine people".
That sort of America is a horrible one and if that is the vision that these people want then we absolutely should not be pandering to them. There are limits. There are boundaries of decent behaviour. And we don't accept behaviour which breaches those boundaries just because it's the left-behind or the white working-class doing the demanding. They don't get excused from complying with decent civilised behaviour just because they're poor or uneducated or unemployed.
Trump appealed to peoples' basest instincts. The best thing we can do for people who feel ignored is make life better for them not act on their worst instincts.
Cyclefree likes an evidence free moral high horse rant sometimes.
Black employment was at a record high under Trump. Lets see how Biden does. The early signs aren't good. Look at the democrat dominated states already.
Examples where blacks could be shot or killing with impunity? Last I looked the killers of Floyd and others were subject to due process. Did Trump try to interrupt that process or change the laws of due process?
And as for making life better for any American, well, the democrats were already out of ideas for that before the election. Again look at the states and the cities where they have held sway for decades. If this election was fought on the pre-covid economy, Trump won hands down.
That Trump did not have the fancy footwork to see what Covid could do to his chances has spared us four more years.
But I also think Biden will disappoint those who voted for him. Nor will he carry those who didn't. Not a great time ahead for the USA, I fear.
I love it when people who are implacably opposed to the Republican Party try to give it lessons. Presumably to maintain the notion that everything is alright in the West and its business as usual, and what you are seeing is not a hologram.
But here's the thing. It really isn't all right.
The right is completely split in America. The party elite and the Trumpist base despise each other totally. The latter will not turn out for the former, as Georgia showed, and what follows is a hugely bitter primaries battle between the two factions ahead of 2022. When millions will not turn out again and the democrat hegemony intensifies.
Meanwhile, the Democrats will be deliberating just how much of a Jihad they want to declare on the many millions of Americans who turned out for Trump and now have zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions.
Trump showed his millions of supporters a glimpse of an America they were comfortable with and where they were welcome and valuable citizens.
They are not going back to the likes of Romney. Not now. Not ever.
Trouble is, their "zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions" is based on delusion. How to cleanse this?
Making the left-behind feel "welcome and valuable citizens". Absolutely.
"A glimpse of an America they were comfortable with". A lot to unpack in that statement. What America was that exactly. Because judging by the comments of Trump and many of his supporters it was an America where blacks could be shot or killed by the police with impunity or denied the vote or where demonstrators could go on marches shouting anti-Semitic slogans and be praised as "fine people".
That sort of America is a horrible one and if that is the vision that these people want then we absolutely should not be pandering to them. There are limits. There are boundaries of decent behaviour. And we don't accept behaviour which breaches those boundaries just because it's the left-behind or the white working-class doing the demanding. They don't get excused from complying with decent civilised behaviour just because they're poor or uneducated or unemployed.
Trump appealed to peoples' basest instincts. The best thing we can do for people who feel ignored is make life better for them not act on their worst instincts.
Cyclefree likes an evidence free moral high horse rant sometimes.
Black employment was at a record high under Trump. Lets see how Biden does. The early signs aren't good. Look at the democrat dominated states already.
Examples where blacks could be shot or killing with impunity? Last I looked the killers of Floyd and others were subject to due process. Did Trump try to interrupt that process or change the laws of due process?
And as for making life better for any American, well, the democrats were already out of ideas for that before the election. Again look at the states and the cities where they have held sway for decades. If this election was fought on the pre-covid economy, Trump won hands down.
That Trump did not have the fancy footwork to see what Covid could do to his chances has spared us four more years.
But I also think Biden will disappoint those who voted for him. Nor will he carry those who didn't. Not a great time ahead for the USA, I fear.
It's a mystery to me that Trump did not tackle the virus crisis head-on. It was made for him - a bold, charismatic, mould-breaking leader prepared to defy convention and carry his fanatical supporters with him. He could have locked down the country. It would have accepted his lead and followed his every word through lockdown. Tens of thousands of lives would have been saved and he would have gone into the election a hero. He might have won all fifty states.
Instead he chose denial, even though he must have known what was in store.
Why?
Someone linked to an article months ago that I think nailed this.
Trump's success has all been about remaking reality. Creating an image of the successful businessman, despite all his real business failings. Convincing his supporters that he was on their side, when he did nothing to help them.
So when Covid came along he tried to bargain with reality again, and finally met something that couldn't be denied.
Accepting the reality of the emergency was not an option because it would have meant admitting he had made mistakes early on, and it would have damaged the stock market.
But even Wile E. Coyote can only run on air above a canyon for so long, before gravity comes into play. And for Trump, gravity came into play well before the election. As it was always going to.
Trump's ultimate problem seems to be either that there was nobody in his inner circle who could tell him Certain Inalienable Truths....or else, his ego had already weeded them out long before Covid struck.
If you are going to have a war with all the other Mafia families at once, you're going to need a damn good consigliere.
Good to see that the entry policy for England and Scotland is universal and doesn't make an exception for citizens or long term residents. The virus doesn't discriminate by nationality. Doesn't seem clear that this policy extends to Wales. We know that NI aren't doing it.
For me the pointers are that the Trump coalition is not a winning coalition at the federal level going forwards.
The easier thing for GOP politicians is to cleave to the Trumpsters, because of their enthusiasm. But that is what has driven the ABTs out of the party and has lost the GOP most independents and thus the absolutely essential suburbs.
For me, the way back for the GOP is the painful one. Excise their most passionate supporters, the Trumpsters. Rebuild the center right, win back the suburbs. Regain the trust of women.
To me, this will take at least one more bad election cycle result (2022), which alas is not guaranteed, followed by 4-6 years of rebuilding. It could go faster than that but equally it is not guaranteed to happen at all, but it is my best bet.
On topic: I gaze into the future of the Republican party - not too far, just a couple of years - and I see no Trump or Trumpdom there. What I do see, however and alas, are elements of the MAGA agenda still in the mix.
The million $ puzzle which imo must be solved in order to predict where the party goes is as follows - Of the 73m who voted for Donald Trump what are the approx weightings (adjusted for overlap) for the 4 main categories?
1. Love Trump. Lucky to have him. Helluva guy and a total one off. Just so into everything about the man. 2. Always vote Republican. It's what I am - a Republican. Cut me and I bleed tax cuts & voter suppression. 3. Not big on politics. Only care about the economy. Thought he'd done ok on that. Why change. 4. Trump? Can take him or leave him but I like his hard right national populist rhetoric and policies.
No particular order there except that I've put the last one last for a reason. I think it's the smallest.
Very rough guesses:
1. 10 2. 50 3. 8 4. 5
Although 1 and 4 are largely the same category, if we're being honest.
Much obliged. This is what I'm looking for. Unadorned numbers that I can crunch thro the "Predict the Near Term Future of the GOP" model I've developed (mainly for betting purposes but also to aid my superforecasting and related punditry).
- No bright future for MAGA without Trump. - Republican party v Trump is a mismatch. Party prevails.
Much easier to split the 73, so: 1. 20 2. 45 3. 6 4. 2
That's an interesting one, thanks.
Think we might be saying that the MAGA element - voters who love a bit of hardcore nativist nationalism but are indifferent to the Trump delivery mechanism - is negligible.
So let's drop it and merge me, you, pulpstar, BluestBlue et alia to get -
1. I'm a Republican stupid - 65 2. I'm a Trumpster and I AM stupid - 25 3. It's the economy obvs - 10
Nice clear pointers emerging now.
But what are they?
The problem with that approach of going back to the suburbanites is that (a) they are increasing socially liberal due to college education, (b) are more fickle and so (c) you would have to blow up your base by switching to a more socially liberal / economically right-wing stance in the hope - and it would be no more than a hope - that you can persuade people who deserted you to switch back.
There is another thing here as well. Hispanics, Asian-Americans and Black people, on the whole, tend to be socially conservative. If the Republicans continue to make inroads into the HIspanic vote, then that more than outweighs their losses in the suburbs. Ditch the socially conservative agenda to appeal to suburban types and you have lost that.
If you abandon the cities and the suburbs, you cannot take the House. Period.
Well, the Republicans nearly did.
The tragedy is that the 'rebels' were so exercised at the growing inequalities in income and wealth - and the growing distance between politicians and the people they are supposed to represent - that they turned to a brand of extreme Republicanism that was never likely to want to deliver them any sort of relief.
The big question of our era is why centre-left politicians have proved so unable to put forward a comprehensive platform to rectify the egregious distortions of 21st century society in a way that can carry a majority of sensibly minded voters in the centre of political opinion?
Within our lifetimes, if the centre-left doesn't rise to the challenge of our times, then the future will be left to the extremes.
The simple explanation is that centre-left politicians now spend most of their energy and efforts prioritising culturally liberal stances than the economic concerns that concern most people. I've pointed out here to those that scream racist at Trump voters that a good chunk of them would have voted for Obama in 2008. They didn't care he was Black but they did care about their economic conditions. However, the Democrat party became so embroiled in cultural issues that it dropped the ball on the economic front.
This line of attack might have worked in the past, but it has lost much of its potency given the Democrats' clean sweep in the world's second-largest democracy. And your boy, a poster child for the opposite approach, getting his backside handed to him.
He didn't really get his backside handed to him though did he? Biden won the election by the same number of EV votes as Trump, a victory that we were told at the time was minimal because if only 70K voters had switched sides, Clinton would have won. Only this time, if only 44K (if I remember correctly) had switched sides, Trump would have won. The Democrats nearly lost control of the House. And you have a 50/50 Senate.
And, no, the attack lines are still relevant. It was stupid of Biden et al to use the BLM line last night because it had no relevance in the scheme of things and was done in response to the post on social media showing the response to BLM protests. I pointed out pre-election that the focus on BLM risked driving Hispanics to the GOP, which is one of the few things I got right about November
Denial. Sheer denial.
He was comprehensively and soundly beaten.
In 2016, the GOP held the House, Senate and Presidency.
After four years of Trump, they hold none of them.
He has taken the L on a grand scale.
Try to accept the truth.
On that basis, the Democrats in 2016 were comprehensively and soundly beaten as the GOP held all three.
Yet you were the ones who continually stated that Trump had little of a mandate given the slimness of his win.
So which is it? Was it a comprehensive thrashing or not?
Well he won all three, but lost the popular vote. Unlike Biden, who won it by a cool 7 million votes! Not too shabby.
Following the latest round of mandated Covid-19 tests, the EFL can confirm that 3507 players and Club staff from 66 EFL Clubs were tested over the course of the past week with 112 individuals testing positive.
Thats about 3,192 cases per 100,000, which is three times the London figure, which means the EFL is buggered.
And plenty of Premier League clubs are playing EFL clubs this weekend.
That's because they tested everyone. It's estimated that 1 in 30 people in London currently have covid, so if you tested everyone in London you would expect a higher case rate. The figures are not comparable.
I think Trump was setting up the "it was rigged" scenario right from the start: his instinct is always to take the other side to court when he doesn't get his way. He just assumed that the judges he appointed would act to help him rather than uphold the law.
I suspect that is true. He was thinking transactionally as always.
I appoint you to the Supreme Court for life. You give me the election.
I love it when people who are implacably opposed to the Republican Party try to give it lessons. Presumably to maintain the notion that everything is alright in the West and its business as usual, and what you are seeing is not a hologram.
But here's the thing. It really isn't all right.
The right is completely split in America. The party elite and the Trumpist base despise each other totally. The latter will not turn out for the former, as Georgia showed, and what follows is a hugely bitter primaries battle between the two factions ahead of 2022. When millions will not turn out again and the democrat hegemony intensifies.
Meanwhile, the Democrats will be deliberating just how much of a Jihad they want to declare on the many millions of Americans who turned out for Trump and now have zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions.
Trump showed his millions of supporters a glimpse of an America they were comfortable with and where they were welcome and valuable citizens.
They are not going back to the likes of Romney. Not now. Not ever.
Trouble is, their "zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions" is based on delusion. How to cleanse this?
Making the left-behind feel "welcome and valuable citizens". Absolutely.
"A glimpse of an America they were comfortable with". A lot to unpack in that statement. What America was that exactly. Because judging by the comments of Trump and many of his supporters it was an America where blacks could be shot or killed by the police with impunity or denied the vote or where demonstrators could go on marches shouting anti-Semitic slogans and be praised as "fine people".
That sort of America is a horrible one and if that is the vision that these people want then we absolutely should not be pandering to them. There are limits. There are boundaries of decent behaviour. And we don't accept behaviour which breaches those boundaries just because it's the left-behind or the white working-class doing the demanding. They don't get excused from complying with decent civilised behaviour just because they're poor or uneducated or unemployed.
Trump appealed to peoples' basest instincts. The best thing we can do for people who feel ignored is make life better for them not act on their worst instincts.
Cyclefree likes an evidence free moral high horse rant sometimes.
Black employment was at a record high under Trump. Lets see how Biden does. The early signs aren't good. Look at the democrat dominated states already.
Examples where blacks could be shot or killing with impunity? Last I looked the killers of Floyd and others were subject to due process. Did Trump try to interrupt that process or change the laws of due process?
And as for making life better for any American, well, the democrats were already out of ideas for that before the election. Again look at the states and the cities where they have held sway for decades. If this election was fought on the pre-covid economy, Trump won hands down.
You know Trump is still in charge right?
And ran up a massive deficit.
He absolutely did, hands up.
Unfortunately fiscal restraint is out of fashion everywhere
Majored on "no more foreign wars" yet ramped up spending on the military.
That's a head scratcher, why he did that. Or is it?
It's a mystery to me that Trump did not tackle the virus crisis head-on. It was made for him - a bold, charismatic, mould-breaking leader prepared to defy convention and carry his fanatical supporters with him. He could have locked down the country. It would have accepted his lead and followed his every word through lockdown. Tens of thousands of lives would have been saved and he would have gone into the election a hero. He might have won all fifty states.
Instead he chose denial, even though he must have known what was in store.
Why?
What confused me is why Trump discouraged people from voting anyway they could vote.
If Trump had got his supporters to use postal votes I do believe he would have won re-election.
I think Trump was setting up the "it was rigged" scenario right from the start: his instinct is always to take the other side to court when he doesn't get his way. He just assumed that the judges he appointed would act to help him rather than uphold the law.
But it is also underpinned by the notion that he knew he was going to lose! Whereas, given it was so close, there must have been an easy strategy that pulled him over the line?
CNN - Assistant House Speaker will move next week to impeach Trump if Pence does not invoke the 25th Amendment.
I’m still undecided whether this is a good idea or not.
Agreed. But he really does seem to have committed impeachable offences. It may not help, but his actions should be recognised for what they are. The Senate wouldn't convict anyway.
An impeachable offence is anything that congress wants it to be: if you have enough votes in both houses it could be dropping a sweet wrapper. Equally if you have a senate determined not to convict you could literally get away with murder.
Trump's success has all been about remaking reality. Creating an image of the successful businessman, despite all his real business failings. Convincing his supporters that he was on their side, when he did nothing to help them.
So when Covid came along he tried to bargain with reality again, and finally met something that couldn't be denied.
Accepting the reality of the emergency was not an option because it would have meant admitting he had made mistakes early on, and it would have damaged the stock market.
And people say he is nothing like BoZo...
There are some obvious similarities but they shouldn't be overstated.
They both got Covid wrong at first but BoZo did realise that and swiftly changed tack. (I'm told that thirty minutes of Macron yelling down the phone at him did the trick but even if that is a myth he did at least do the right thing eventually.)
Trump appeared unable to acknowledge an error publicly, even if in private he knew how much of a mistake he had made.
For me the pointers are that the Trump coalition is not a winning coalition at the federal level going forwards.
The easier thing for GOP politicians is to cleave to the Trumpsters, because of their enthusiasm. But that is what has driven the ABTs out of the party and has lost the GOP most independents and thus the absolutely essential suburbs.
For me, the way back for the GOP is the painful one. Excise their most passionate supporters, the Trumpsters. Rebuild the center right, win back the suburbs. Regain the trust of women.
To me, this will take at least one more bad election cycle result (2022), which alas is not guaranteed, followed by 4-6 years of rebuilding. It could go faster than that but equally it is not guaranteed to happen at all, but it is my best bet.
On topic: I gaze into the future of the Republican party - not too far, just a couple of years - and I see no Trump or Trumpdom there. What I do see, however and alas, are elements of the MAGA agenda still in the mix.
The million $ puzzle which imo must be solved in order to predict where the party goes is as follows - Of the 73m who voted for Donald Trump what are the approx weightings (adjusted for overlap) for the 4 main categories?
1. Love Trump. Lucky to have him. Helluva guy and a total one off. Just so into everything about the man. 2. Always vote Republican. It's what I am - a Republican. Cut me and I bleed tax cuts & voter suppression. 3. Not big on politics. Only care about the economy. Thought he'd done ok on that. Why change. 4. Trump? Can take him or leave him but I like his hard right national populist rhetoric and policies.
No particular order there except that I've put the last one last for a reason. I think it's the smallest.
Very rough guesses:
1. 10 2. 50 3. 8 4. 5
Although 1 and 4 are largely the same category, if we're being honest.
Much obliged. This is what I'm looking for. Unadorned numbers that I can crunch thro the "Predict the Near Term Future of the GOP" model I've developed (mainly for betting purposes but also to aid my superforecasting and related punditry).
- No bright future for MAGA without Trump. - Republican party v Trump is a mismatch. Party prevails.
Much easier to split the 73, so: 1. 20 2. 45 3. 6 4. 2
That's an interesting one, thanks.
Think we might be saying that the MAGA element - voters who love a bit of hardcore nativist nationalism but are indifferent to the Trump delivery mechanism - is negligible.
So let's drop it and merge me, you, pulpstar, BluestBlue et alia to get -
1. I'm a Republican stupid - 65 2. I'm a Trumpster and I AM stupid - 25 3. It's the economy obvs - 10
Nice clear pointers emerging now.
But what are they?
The problem with that approach of going back to the suburbanites is that (a) they are increasing socially liberal due to college education, (b) are more fickle and so (c) you would have to blow up your base by switching to a more socially liberal / economically right-wing stance in the hope - and it would be no more than a hope - that you can persuade people who deserted you to switch back.
There is another thing here as well. Hispanics, Asian-Americans and Black people, on the whole, tend to be socially conservative. If the Republicans continue to make inroads into the HIspanic vote, then that more than outweighs their losses in the suburbs. Ditch the socially conservative agenda to appeal to suburban types and you have lost that.
If you abandon the cities and the suburbs, you cannot take the House. Period.
Well, the Republicans nearly did.
The tragedy is that the 'rebels' were so exercised at the growing inequalities in income and wealth - and the growing distance between politicians and the people they are supposed to represent - that they turned to a brand of extreme Republicanism that was never likely to want to deliver them any sort of relief.
The big question of our era is why centre-left politicians have proved so unable to put forward a comprehensive platform to rectify the egregious distortions of 21st century society in a way that can carry a majority of sensibly minded voters in the centre of political opinion?
Within our lifetimes, if the centre-left doesn't rise to the challenge of our times, then the future will be left to the extremes.
The simple explanation is that centre-left politicians now spend most of their energy and efforts prioritising culturally liberal stances than the economic concerns that concern most people. I've pointed out here to those that scream racist at Trump voters that a good chunk of them would have voted for Obama in 2008. They didn't care he was Black but they did care about their economic conditions. However, the Democrat party became so embroiled in cultural issues that it dropped the ball on the economic front.
This line of attack might have worked in the past, but it has lost much of its potency given the Democrats' clean sweep in the world's second-largest democracy. And your boy, a poster child for the opposite approach, getting his backside handed to him.
He didn't really get his backside handed to him though did he? Biden won the election by the same number of EV votes as Trump, a victory that we were told at the time was minimal because if only 70K voters had switched sides, Clinton would have won. Only this time, if only 44K (if I remember correctly) had switched sides, Trump would have won. The Democrats nearly lost control of the House. And you have a 50/50 Senate.
And, no, the attack lines are still relevant. It was stupid of Biden et al to use the BLM line last night because it had no relevance in the scheme of things and was done in response to the post on social media showing the response to BLM protests. I pointed out pre-election that the focus on BLM risked driving Hispanics to the GOP, which is one of the few things I got right about November
Denial. Sheer denial.
He was comprehensively and soundly beaten.
In 2016, the GOP held the House, Senate and Presidency.
After four years of Trump, they hold none of them.
He has taken the L on a grand scale.
Try to accept the truth.
On that basis, the Democrats in 2016 were comprehensively and soundly beaten as the GOP held all three.
Yet you were the ones who continually stated that Trump had little of a mandate given the slimness of his win.
So which is it? Was it a comprehensive thrashing or not?
A comprehensive thrashing where she won the popular vote.
Equally, had Hillary contested the Election result and incited an angry mob to ransack the Capitol Building, she should have been locked up. Lock her up! Lock her up!
Yes but she lost the election...anyway, I didn't claim it was a comprehensive thrashing, I just used @Anabobazina's definition of a thrashing...
I love it when people who are implacably opposed to the Republican Party try to give it lessons. Presumably to maintain the notion that everything is alright in the West and its business as usual, and what you are seeing is not a hologram.
But here's the thing. It really isn't all right.
The right is completely split in America. The party elite and the Trumpist base despise each other totally. The latter will not turn out for the former, as Georgia showed, and what follows is a hugely bitter primaries battle between the two factions ahead of 2022. When millions will not turn out again and the democrat hegemony intensifies.
Meanwhile, the Democrats will be deliberating just how much of a Jihad they want to declare on the many millions of Americans who turned out for Trump and now have zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions.
Trump showed his millions of supporters a glimpse of an America they were comfortable with and where they were welcome and valuable citizens.
They are not going back to the likes of Romney. Not now. Not ever.
Trouble is, their "zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions" is based on delusion. How to cleanse this?
Making the left-behind feel "welcome and valuable citizens". Absolutely.
"A glimpse of an America they were comfortable with". A lot to unpack in that statement. What America was that exactly. Because judging by the comments of Trump and many of his supporters it was an America where blacks could be shot or killed by the police with impunity or denied the vote or where demonstrators could go on marches shouting anti-Semitic slogans and be praised as "fine people".
That sort of America is a horrible one and if that is the vision that these people want then we absolutely should not be pandering to them. There are limits. There are boundaries of decent behaviour. And we don't accept behaviour which breaches those boundaries just because it's the left-behind or the white working-class doing the demanding. They don't get excused from complying with decent civilised behaviour just because they're poor or uneducated or unemployed.
Trump appealed to peoples' basest instincts. The best thing we can do for people who feel ignored is make life better for them not act on their worst instincts.
Cyclefree likes an evidence free moral high horse rant sometimes.
Black employment was at a record high under Trump. Lets see how Biden does. The early signs aren't good. Look at the democrat dominated states already.
Examples where blacks could be shot or killing with impunity? Last I looked the killers of Floyd and others were subject to due process. Did Trump try to interrupt that process or change the laws of due process?
And as for making life better for any American, well, the democrats were already out of ideas for that before the election. Again look at the states and the cities where they have held sway for decades. If this election was fought on the pre-covid economy, Trump won hands down.
I'm guessing everyone looks like they're on a moral high horse, when you're lying in the moral gutter.
FWIW, opposing antisemitism isn't moralising, it's a basic entry requirement for being a civilised human. Try it.
Such shrill, emotional, evidence free b'llocks it is untrue.
We know from the Corbynites here where the real anti-semites are matey. We'll take no lessons from the left on that score.
Trump was a huge supporter of Israel's right to exist (as opposed to the more radical democrats you support), and even managed to broker ground breaking middle east peace agreements between Jew and Arab.
Those are real, tangible achievements, not airy fairy claims about what some redneck may or may not have said at some stupid rally or other.
Rarely heard such pile of cr*p
"airy fairy claims about what some redneck may or may not have said at some stupid rally or other" is a little way short of "I condemn all antisemitism"
I wonder how many people on here are truly shocked you couldn't manage it.
OK fine, I zoned out of the whole proud boys thing because it clearly was not Trump's finest hour. Of course I condemn anti-semitism. Do you? Do you recognise it in the very radical part of the democrat party and condemn it? Do you recognise Israels right to exist?
Yes, of course I do, no matter where I see it. Israel's right to exist? Naturally.
Humanity before political affiliation, it's not hard.
For me the pointers are that the Trump coalition is not a winning coalition at the federal level going forwards.
The easier thing for GOP politicians is to cleave to the Trumpsters, because of their enthusiasm. But that is what has driven the ABTs out of the party and has lost the GOP most independents and thus the absolutely essential suburbs.
For me, the way back for the GOP is the painful one. Excise their most passionate supporters, the Trumpsters. Rebuild the center right, win back the suburbs. Regain the trust of women.
To me, this will take at least one more bad election cycle result (2022), which alas is not guaranteed, followed by 4-6 years of rebuilding. It could go faster than that but equally it is not guaranteed to happen at all, but it is my best bet.
This is my view too. Except I think it will not be quite such a long and difficult process. Once Trump is not POTUS, my strong sense is he'll fade quicker than most people think. And given MAGA is so wrapped up with HIM, I think that will too. I see a vibrant young Republican emerging in time for the 24 election and running on a small state, libertarian, socially "trad" ticket. He or she will have the challenge of picking up the deplorables without being deplorable. If they can, they have a decent shot.
You cannot be both libertarian and socially conservative, that is logically impossible
Agreed, though practical politics isn't always logical!
There is a current of thinking that assumes that social conservatism is a state of nature and that all the stuff the liberal left argues for is the aberration, only possible with massive state control. Make that assumption and it's not too hard to marry up "state bad, social conservatism good" in a package. Kind of Singapore, or Thatcherism, if you've only read the Ladybird Book on either topic.
Whether it works well enough for the Republicans to win an election is another matter. But without the votes that Trump uniquely reached, they need to try something...
It's a mystery to me that Trump did not tackle the virus crisis head-on. It was made for him - a bold, charismatic, mould-breaking leader prepared to defy convention and carry his fanatical supporters with him. He could have locked down the country. It would have accepted his lead and followed his every word through lockdown. Tens of thousands of lives would have been saved and he would have gone into the election a hero. He might have won all fifty states.
Instead he chose denial, even though he must have known what was in store.
Why?
What confused me is why Trump discouraged people from voting anyway they could vote.
If Trump had got his supporters to use postal votes I do believe he would have won re-election.
I think Trump was setting up the "it was rigged" scenario right from the start: his instinct is always to take the other side to court when he doesn't get his way. He just assumed that the judges he appointed would act to help him rather than uphold the law.
But it is also underpinned by the notion that he knew he was going to lose! Whereas, given it was so close, there must have been an easy strategy that pulled him over the line?
For me the pointers are that the Trump coalition is not a winning coalition at the federal level going forwards.
The easier thing for GOP politicians is to cleave to the Trumpsters, because of their enthusiasm. But that is what has driven the ABTs out of the party and has lost the GOP most independents and thus the absolutely essential suburbs.
For me, the way back for the GOP is the painful one. Excise their most passionate supporters, the Trumpsters. Rebuild the center right, win back the suburbs. Regain the trust of women.
To me, this will take at least one more bad election cycle result (2022), which alas is not guaranteed, followed by 4-6 years of rebuilding. It could go faster than that but equally it is not guaranteed to happen at all, but it is my best bet.
On topic: I gaze into the future of the Republican party - not too far, just a couple of years - and I see no Trump or Trumpdom there. What I do see, however and alas, are elements of the MAGA agenda still in the mix.
The million $ puzzle which imo must be solved in order to predict where the party goes is as follows - Of the 73m who voted for Donald Trump what are the approx weightings (adjusted for overlap) for the 4 main categories?
1. Love Trump. Lucky to have him. Helluva guy and a total one off. Just so into everything about the man. 2. Always vote Republican. It's what I am - a Republican. Cut me and I bleed tax cuts & voter suppression. 3. Not big on politics. Only care about the economy. Thought he'd done ok on that. Why change. 4. Trump? Can take him or leave him but I like his hard right national populist rhetoric and policies.
No particular order there except that I've put the last one last for a reason. I think it's the smallest.
Very rough guesses:
1. 10 2. 50 3. 8 4. 5
Although 1 and 4 are largely the same category, if we're being honest.
Much obliged. This is what I'm looking for. Unadorned numbers that I can crunch thro the "Predict the Near Term Future of the GOP" model I've developed (mainly for betting purposes but also to aid my superforecasting and related punditry).
- No bright future for MAGA without Trump. - Republican party v Trump is a mismatch. Party prevails.
Much easier to split the 73, so: 1. 20 2. 45 3. 6 4. 2
That's an interesting one, thanks.
Think we might be saying that the MAGA element - voters who love a bit of hardcore nativist nationalism but are indifferent to the Trump delivery mechanism - is negligible.
So let's drop it and merge me, you, pulpstar, BluestBlue et alia to get -
1. I'm a Republican stupid - 65 2. I'm a Trumpster and I AM stupid - 25 3. It's the economy obvs - 10
Nice clear pointers emerging now.
But what are they?
The problem with that approach of going back to the suburbanites is that (a) they are increasing socially liberal due to college education, (b) are more fickle and so (c) you would have to blow up your base by switching to a more socially liberal / economically right-wing stance in the hope - and it would be no more than a hope - that you can persuade people who deserted you to switch back.
There is another thing here as well. Hispanics, Asian-Americans and Black people, on the whole, tend to be socially conservative. If the Republicans continue to make inroads into the HIspanic vote, then that more than outweighs their losses in the suburbs. Ditch the socially conservative agenda to appeal to suburban types and you have lost that.
If you abandon the cities and the suburbs, you cannot take the House. Period.
Well, the Republicans nearly did.
The tragedy is that the 'rebels' were so exercised at the growing inequalities in income and wealth - and the growing distance between politicians and the people they are supposed to represent - that they turned to a brand of extreme Republicanism that was never likely to want to deliver them any sort of relief.
The big question of our era is why centre-left politicians have proved so unable to put forward a comprehensive platform to rectify the egregious distortions of 21st century society in a way that can carry a majority of sensibly minded voters in the centre of political opinion?
Within our lifetimes, if the centre-left doesn't rise to the challenge of our times, then the future will be left to the extremes.
The simple explanation is that centre-left politicians now spend most of their energy and efforts prioritising culturally liberal stances than the economic concerns that concern most people. I've pointed out here to those that scream racist at Trump voters that a good chunk of them would have voted for Obama in 2008. They didn't care he was Black but they did care about their economic conditions. However, the Democrat party became so embroiled in cultural issues that it dropped the ball on the economic front.
This line of attack might have worked in the past, but it has lost much of its potency given the Democrats' clean sweep in the world's second-largest democracy. And your boy, a poster child for the opposite approach, getting his backside handed to him.
He didn't really get his backside handed to him though did he? Biden won the election by the same number of EV votes as Trump, a victory that we were told at the time was minimal because if only 70K voters had switched sides, Clinton would have won. Only this time, if only 44K (if I remember correctly) had switched sides, Trump would have won. The Democrats nearly lost control of the House. And you have a 50/50 Senate.
And, no, the attack lines are still relevant. It was stupid of Biden et al to use the BLM line last night because it had no relevance in the scheme of things and was done in response to the post on social media showing the response to BLM protests. I pointed out pre-election that the focus on BLM risked driving Hispanics to the GOP, which is one of the few things I got right about November
Surely the argument about Clinton coming close didn't rely so much on the Electoral College vote, which wasn't particularly close as you say and ironically the same as Biden-Trump (ignoring faithless electors), but the popular vote?
So the point is that Clinton had a 3 million vote margin over Trump, but it was very inefficiently distributed so she lost (partly unfortunate for her, partly poor tactics). Whereas Trump had a 7 million vote deficit, which was very efficiently distributed but still left him as far off as Clinton in the Electoral College vote.
It surely isn't controversial that winning the popular vote by 3 million but losing the Electoral College vote by 74 is annoying but provides a reasonably good base for next time, whereas LOSING the popular vote by 7 million and the Electoral College vote by 74 is much more problematic. The illusion is that Trump lost in a squeaker because he scweamed and scweamed and scweamed about it... but that's somewhat misleading.
Now that isn't to say Democrats don't have a problem with how their votes are distributed - they do. But it does mean they were in striking distance in 2016 in a way Republicans aren't now.
It also isn't getting better for the Republicans at the moment in terms of the states they will need to win back in 2024. Georgia is a fairly large state that does now look rather purple and the trends aren't good. Arizona is also now looking pretty blue across the board. The Georgia run-offs means Puerto Rico is quite likely to become a reliably blue state. The rust belt looks better, but arguably Trump had a special blue collar white appeal that it's quite hard to replicate (and, as a reminder, he lost there).
"The illusion is that Trump lost in a squeaker because he scweamed and scweamed and scweamed about it... but that's somewhat misleading."
Indeed, Sir Norfolk, that same point was made by Mitch McConnell in a rather less distinguished forum than this. In the end, the result really wasn't all that close.
Yes, a normal election night choreography would have seen it all over quite quickly.
Which would have saved you the early hours covering and thus £££.
"We have already secured an amount of doses that we need to vaccinate 380 million Europeans, and this is more than 80% of the European population [of 450 million people]," Mrs von der Leyen said.
She said other vaccine authorisations were expected in the coming weeks and months, so "Europe will have more than enough vaccine within a reliable timeframe".
She said the commission had taken the right course of action on vaccines.
"I'm convinced that when we look back at this one day we'll see, well yes, at the beginning, there was a bumpy road [but] well, that's always the case."
It's just ridiculous. They got it wrong, they should just admit it.
In her 380 million doses is she counting vaccines like Sanofi that haven't completed PIII trials and may not even end up getting approval?
No I think they now have deals in place with Pfizer and Moderna for that many. But they are back of the queue....well not front of it. So a lot of it is coming Q2, Q3, Q4 and beyond.
That's right: the EU started incredibly slowly, but has improved. (And it is very important not to "count chickens" here, until we know final results...)
But, my gut is that Israel and a few small states really knocked the ball out of the park.
The UK, Japan and Canada did an excellent job.
The US has been reasonably good, the EU has been worse than the US (albeit not by a huge margin).
And developing countries have been an utter disaster zone.
There's a lot of variation within the EU. Germany is doing good and France is doing bad, as we all know, but it goes deeper than that. Take Ireland, for instance. They've vaccinated just 15,000 people. Poor start. And as for the Dutch...
The video actually only shows the NY guy (who is absolutely right) forcefully arguing for a painful dose of realism. There are some quiet ones, and maybe they agree with NY guy... but we don't know that and they may (as NY guy directly says) be drinking the Kool Aid.
And he's not a swing voter, of course. The Republicans couldn't give a damn if nobody in NY votes GOP.
What matters is how far NY guy speaks for Republicans in Georgia or Pennsylvania or Arizona where they have to choose Senate candidates to bring it home for the GOP in 2022, and how far he's an unrepresentative, east coast elitist who just happens to vote Republican (because he wants low tax and so on).
I love it when people who are implacably opposed to the Republican Party try to give it lessons. Presumably to maintain the notion that everything is alright in the West and its business as usual, and what you are seeing is not a hologram.
But here's the thing. It really isn't all right.
The right is completely split in America. The party elite and the Trumpist base despise each other totally. The latter will not turn out for the former, as Georgia showed, and what follows is a hugely bitter primaries battle between the two factions ahead of 2022. When millions will not turn out again and the democrat hegemony intensifies.
Meanwhile, the Democrats will be deliberating just how much of a Jihad they want to declare on the many millions of Americans who turned out for Trump and now have zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions.
Trump showed his millions of supporters a glimpse of an America they were comfortable with and where they were welcome and valuable citizens.
They are not going back to the likes of Romney. Not now. Not ever.
Trouble is, their "zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions" is based on delusion. How to cleanse this?
Making the left-behind feel "welcome and valuable citizens". Absolutely.
"A glimpse of an America they were comfortable with". A lot to unpack in that statement. What America was that exactly. Because judging by the comments of Trump and many of his supporters it was an America where blacks could be shot or killed by the police with impunity or denied the vote or where demonstrators could go on marches shouting anti-Semitic slogans and be praised as "fine people".
That sort of America is a horrible one and if that is the vision that these people want then we absolutely should not be pandering to them. There are limits. There are boundaries of decent behaviour. And we don't accept behaviour which breaches those boundaries just because it's the left-behind or the white working-class doing the demanding. They don't get excused from complying with decent civilised behaviour just because they're poor or uneducated or unemployed.
Trump appealed to peoples' basest instincts. The best thing we can do for people who feel ignored is make life better for them not act on their worst instincts.
Cyclefree likes an evidence free moral high horse rant sometimes.
Black employment was at a record high under Trump. Lets see how Biden does. The early signs aren't good. Look at the democrat dominated states already.
Examples where blacks could be shot or killing with impunity? Last I looked the killers of Floyd and others were subject to due process. Did Trump try to interrupt that process or change the laws of due process?
And as for making life better for any American, well, the democrats were already out of ideas for that before the election. Again look at the states and the cities where they have held sway for decades. If this election was fought on the pre-covid economy, Trump won hands down.
That Trump did not have the fancy footwork to see what Covid could do to his chances has spared us four more years.
But I also think Biden will disappoint those who voted for him. Nor will he carry those who didn't. Not a great time ahead for the USA, I fear.
I love it when people who are implacably opposed to the Republican Party try to give it lessons. Presumably to maintain the notion that everything is alright in the West and its business as usual, and what you are seeing is not a hologram.
But here's the thing. It really isn't all right.
The right is completely split in America. The party elite and the Trumpist base despise each other totally. The latter will not turn out for the former, as Georgia showed, and what follows is a hugely bitter primaries battle between the two factions ahead of 2022. When millions will not turn out again and the democrat hegemony intensifies.
Meanwhile, the Democrats will be deliberating just how much of a Jihad they want to declare on the many millions of Americans who turned out for Trump and now have zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions.
Trump showed his millions of supporters a glimpse of an America they were comfortable with and where they were welcome and valuable citizens.
They are not going back to the likes of Romney. Not now. Not ever.
Trouble is, their "zero faith in their country, its electoral system and its institutions" is based on delusion. How to cleanse this?
Making the left-behind feel "welcome and valuable citizens". Absolutely.
"A glimpse of an America they were comfortable with". A lot to unpack in that statement. What America was that exactly. Because judging by the comments of Trump and many of his supporters it was an America where blacks could be shot or killed by the police with impunity or denied the vote or where demonstrators could go on marches shouting anti-Semitic slogans and be praised as "fine people".
That sort of America is a horrible one and if that is the vision that these people want then we absolutely should not be pandering to them. There are limits. There are boundaries of decent behaviour. And we don't accept behaviour which breaches those boundaries just because it's the left-behind or the white working-class doing the demanding. They don't get excused from complying with decent civilised behaviour just because they're poor or uneducated or unemployed.
Trump appealed to peoples' basest instincts. The best thing we can do for people who feel ignored is make life better for them not act on their worst instincts.
Cyclefree likes an evidence free moral high horse rant sometimes.
Black employment was at a record high under Trump. Lets see how Biden does. The early signs aren't good. Look at the democrat dominated states already.
Examples where blacks could be shot or killing with impunity? Last I looked the killers of Floyd and others were subject to due process. Did Trump try to interrupt that process or change the laws of due process?
And as for making life better for any American, well, the democrats were already out of ideas for that before the election. Again look at the states and the cities where they have held sway for decades. If this election was fought on the pre-covid economy, Trump won hands down.
That Trump did not have the fancy footwork to see what Covid could do to his chances has spared us four more years.
But I also think Biden will disappoint those who voted for him. Nor will he carry those who didn't. Not a great time ahead for the USA, I fear.
It's a mystery to me that Trump did not tackle the virus crisis head-on. It was made for him - a bold, charismatic, mould-breaking leader prepared to defy convention and carry his fanatical supporters with him. He could have locked down the country. It would have accepted his lead and followed his every word through lockdown. Tens of thousands of lives would have been saved and he would have gone into the election a hero. He might have won all fifty states.
Instead he chose denial, even though he must have known what was in store.
Why?
Someone linked to an article months ago that I think nailed this.
Trump's success has all been about remaking reality. Creating an image of the successful businessman, despite all his real business failings. Convincing his supporters that he was on their side, when he did nothing to help them.
So when Covid came along he tried to bargain with reality again, and finally met something that couldn't be denied.
Accepting the reality of the emergency was not an option because it would have meant admitting he had made mistakes early on, and it would have damaged the stock market.
A problem that Johnson and Trump share is that they are good at selling a distorted reality to their supporters because they have a shaky grasp on it themselves. Note how both are frequently caught lying about seemingly trivial things. You only do that if you have no real concept of objective reality. A cynical liar who was trying to sell something he didn't believe would actually lie less frequently. I have only spoken to Johnson once. When I asked him about the economic costs of a no deal Brexit, he airily assured me that these were hugely overstated, with the absolute certainty of somebody who had given the subject absolutely zero thought. I've never met Trump but have spoken to one of his lieutenants, Corey Lewandowski, who informed me with absolute certainty that global warming is a fraud. These guys don't do reality. It makes them great at campaigning, especially in an era of cheap internet propaganda. It also makes them absolutely terrible at governing.
Comments
And, no, the attack lines are still relevant. It was stupid of Biden et al to use the BLM line last night because it had no relevance in the scheme of things and was done in response to the post on social media showing the response to BLM protests. I pointed out pre-election that the focus on BLM risked driving Hispanics to the GOP, which is one of the few things I got right about November
Don't try and pop the balloon in one go. Danger of a bang....
While some major cities can claim to have been successful economically on a macro level, that is to hide the vast disparity of how that wealth is distributed, both socially and geographically within the cities. Just because a city's economic numbers are doing well, does not mean that all is well. In some areas of NYC, you cannot find fresh fruit and vegetables to buy. Is that you idea of success?
I should perhaps add that the Dems could make the same argument about the failure of GOP policies in the Appalachias and the Deep South, where the GOP has held all the levers of power for some time.
Try to be slightly more objective...
Seems much more likely it was a genuine malfunction, no?
Interesting too because it's an outlier, which is great news. But just to double check. You think only 1m of the 73m who voted Trump were apolitical floater types who just figured he'd done ok on the economy and so were minded not to change?
Really?
He was comprehensively and soundly beaten.
In 2016, the GOP held the House, Senate and Presidency.
After four years of Trump, they hold none of them.
He has taken the L on a grand scale.
Try to accept the truth.
According to their scientific model, which was described in the Journal of American Medicine Association on Thursday, 59% of transmissions come from asymptomatic carriers.
Of that figure, 35% come from people who are pre-symptomatic, and 24% are transmitted by people who never show any sign of infection.
Heck, part of the justification for the Nixon pardon was he had been punished enough by giving up the presidency, you can easily see a lot of people saying its not worth the aggravation as Trump has been punished by losing the election.
Obviously trials will come, but in several areas I don't know how he could have avoided committing crimes. But the cases will probably be still going on bt 2024.
We know from the Corbynites here where the real anti-semites are matey. We'll take no lessons from the left on that score.
Trump was a huge supporter of Israel's right to exist (as opposed to the more radical democrats you support), and even managed to broker ground breaking middle east peace agreements between Jew and Arab.
Those are real, tangible achievements, not airy fairy claims about what some redneck may or may not have said at some stupid rally or other.
Rarely heard such pile of cr*p
I haven't said you're wrong, I think it's likelier you're just confused.
But here's a piece on conservatism in Black voters - https://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/erbe/2008/11/07/blacks-are-more-socially-conservative-than-barack-obama
Now, off you go and bring back the contrary facts.
Instead he chose denial, even though he must have known what was in store.
Why?
BTW what did you make of Burgessian's spot of the latest Alex Bell?
So again when you said "A glimpse of an America they were comfortable with" what did you mean? What sort of America do you think they want? Let's have some specifics and evidence from you rather than generalities about wanting to be valued with which no-one will disagree.
Following the latest round of mandated Covid-19 tests, the EFL can confirm that 3507 players and Club staff from 66 EFL Clubs were tested over the course of the past week with 112 individuals testing positive.
Thats about 3,192 cases per 100,000, which is three times the London figure, which means the EFL is buggered.
And plenty of Premier League clubs are playing EFL clubs this weekend.
Yet you were the ones who continually stated that Trump had little of a mandate given the slimness of his win.
So which is it? Was it a comprehensive thrashing or not?
is a little way short of
"I condemn all antisemitism"
I wonder how many people on here are truly shocked you couldn't manage it.
If Trump had got his supporters to use postal votes I do believe he would have won re-election.
Football has been a total and utter failure when it comes to running their business under COVID.
Jail & Bankruptcy.
Deal to avoid the above. Price, avoid Politics & Media.
Flee to tax & legal haven.
And ran up a massive deficit.
But if you watch Ben Fosters YouTube videos, he isn't exactly being careful. He is regularly meeting up with other non-footballers, little sign of mask wearing and regular embracing of staff. You wouldn't really know there is a pandemic on, other than the fact no fans in the stands.
"Don't let Chinese flu kill good American's. Do your bit. Wear a mask. Stop their evil virus in its tracks."
Hence my 8.
https://twitter.com/FrankLuntz/status/1347372955534204929?s=20
Full video: https://twitter.com/FrankLuntz/status/1347398046909300736?s=20
In 2004, the biggest GOP victory in 3 decades, Bush won 50.7% of the vote and 286 EC votes and Bush won the suburbs by 52% to 47% for Kerry as well as winning rural areas by a resounding 57% to 42% for Kerry
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_United_States_presidential_election
So the point is that Clinton had a 3 million vote margin over Trump, but it was very inefficiently distributed so she lost (partly unfortunate for her, partly poor tactics). Whereas Trump had a 7 million vote deficit, which was very efficiently distributed but still left him as far off as Clinton in the Electoral College vote.
It surely isn't controversial that winning the popular vote by 3 million but losing the Electoral College vote by 74 is annoying but provides a reasonably good base for next time, whereas LOSING the popular vote by 7 million and the Electoral College vote by 74 is much more problematic. The illusion is that Trump lost in a squeaker because he scweamed and scweamed and scweamed about it... but that's somewhat misleading.
Now that isn't to say Democrats don't have a problem with how their votes are distributed - they do. But it does mean they were in striking distance in 2016 in a way Republicans aren't now.
It also isn't getting better for the Republicans at the moment in terms of the states they will need to win back in 2024. Georgia is a fairly large state that does now look rather purple and the trends aren't good. Arizona is also now looking pretty blue across the board. The Georgia run-offs means Puerto Rico is quite likely to become a reliably blue state. The rust belt looks better, but arguably Trump had a special blue collar white appeal that it's quite hard to replicate (and, as a reminder, he lost there).
I'm left with little choice but to infer that he just made a stupid decision and lacked the flexibilty to change it once its shortcomings had become apparent.
But, my gut is that Israel and a few small states really knocked the ball out of the park.
The UK, Japan and Canada did an excellent job.
The US has been reasonably good, the EU has been worse than the US (albeit not by a huge margin).
And developing countries have been an utter disaster zone.
Trump's success has all been about remaking reality. Creating an image of the successful businessman, despite all his real business failings. Convincing his supporters that he was on their side, when he did nothing to help them.
So when Covid came along he tried to bargain with reality again, and finally met something that couldn't be denied.
Accepting the reality of the emergency was not an option because it would have meant admitting he had made mistakes early on, and it would have damaged the stock market.
At least questioning a rapacious green lobby that threatened to put millions dependent on energy jobs out of business.
Recognising that millions Americans in small isolated towns feel safer owning a gun, because the police aint an option.
Understanding that international commitments often have adverse outcomes for ordinary Americans, and trying to negotiate more with them in mind
Understanding that the foreign war cheques so favoured by liberals are written with the blood of Americans in small towns.
Understanding that being descended from a confederate soldier is not a lifestyle choice and nothing can be done about it.
accepting that Eating at Appleby's, drinking Jack Daniel's and driving a pick up are not offences and do not make you an inferior person.
Accepting America has done some bad things in the world, but done a lot of good things too.
Fuck it, we might as well all go skiing and play beer pong. Get herd immunity and damn the cost.
He doesn't want what is best for America, he wants what is best for Trump. Listening to experts who know what they are talking about isn't his style. If there's a big problem just wish it away - Climate Change is a Chinese hoax, Covid will "magically vanish".
If Putin and Kim Jong Il didn't declare it a National emergency and mandate masks Trump wouldn't either
Not an easy question.
Unfortunately fiscal restraint is out of fashion everywhere
Indeed, Sir Norfolk, that same point was made by Mitch McConnell in a rather less distinguished forum than this. In the end, the result really wasn't all that close.
'Veering' and 'going off course' is just a way of expressing this that makes it sound like it blew a gasket or got hit by a stray seagull, and was a comforting British cock up (if a nuclear cock up can be comforting). All we actually know, is that it changed its course - that where we asked it to go, was not where it went.
Best not to indulge the MAGAs further - treat them like adults.
Equally, had Hillary contested the Election result and incited an angry mob to ransack the Capitol Building, she should have been locked up. Lock her up! Lock her up!
Telling that he uses terms like 'the Nats' & 'Nat Nostrodamus' quite happily, presumably why Unionists invariably feel the need to put former advisor to Alex Samond next to his name, as if this was some guarantee of objective insight. Says quite a lot that referring to something that he hasn't been for 10 years is his USP.
"Drinking Mugfuls of Delicious Liberal Tears"
Trump's ultimate problem seems to be either that there was nobody in his inner circle who could tell him Certain Inalienable Truths....or else, his ego had already weeded them out long before Covid struck.
If you are going to have a war with all the other Mafia families at once, you're going to need a damn good consigliere.
I appoint you to the Supreme Court for life. You give me the election.
That's a head scratcher, why he did that. Or is it?
Equally if you have a senate determined not to convict you could literally get away with murder.
They both got Covid wrong at first but BoZo did realise that and swiftly changed tack. (I'm told that thirty minutes of Macron yelling down the phone at him did the trick but even if that is a myth he did at least do the right thing eventually.)
Trump appeared unable to acknowledge an error publicly, even if in private he knew how much of a mistake he had made.
Israel's right to exist? Naturally.
Humanity before political affiliation, it's not hard.
There is a current of thinking that assumes that social conservatism is a state of nature and that all the stuff the liberal left argues for is the aberration, only possible with massive state control. Make that assumption and it's not too hard to marry up "state bad, social conservatism good" in a package. Kind of Singapore, or Thatcherism, if you've only read the Ladybird Book on either topic.
Whether it works well enough for the Republicans to win an election is another matter. But without the votes that Trump uniquely reached, they need to try something...
Which would have saved you the early hours covering and thus £££.
And he's not a swing voter, of course. The Republicans couldn't give a damn if nobody in NY votes GOP.
What matters is how far NY guy speaks for Republicans in Georgia or Pennsylvania or Arizona where they have to choose Senate candidates to bring it home for the GOP in 2022, and how far he's an unrepresentative, east coast elitist who just happens to vote Republican (because he wants low tax and so on).
I have only spoken to Johnson once. When I asked him about the economic costs of a no deal Brexit, he airily assured me that these were hugely overstated, with the absolute certainty of somebody who had given the subject absolutely zero thought. I've never met Trump but have spoken to one of his lieutenants, Corey Lewandowski, who informed me with absolute certainty that global warming is a fraud.
These guys don't do reality. It makes them great at campaigning, especially in an era of cheap internet propaganda. It also makes them absolutely terrible at governing.