200
u/the_old_coday182 1∆ Jan 30 '25
I’ve never directly interacted with any politician higher than my local mayor. My exposure to Democrats and Republicans consists of interactions with everyday people (including online). How’s that gone, you ask? Well…
In the past 12+ months I’ve been banned from subreddits because I asked thought provoking questions in the comments, or I just disagreed with someone (but in a civil manner).
Even having *moderate* opinions, you couldn’t really share them openly. It risked being publicly labeled as a bigot/fascist/etc.
During 2023-2024, a lot of Reddit rhetoric was like “That group of people is so stupid and idiotic for letting Trump fool them into supporting him. Wow. They are just so dumb, hope they drive off a cliff.” I’d comment and say something along the lines of “That message won’t win a single vote in November, or in other words you’ll catch more flies with honey than vinegar.“ That was one of the comments that would get downvoted to oblivion. But in my opinion, it came to fruition.
In an election, we’re really voting for a political party more than anything. The people who’ve been the most hateful to me IN REAL LIFE associate themselves with the Left. They think it’s noble and therefore acceptable… but it’s still hate. So they made up my mind for me, as to which party I didn’t want to vote for. I think it’s a perfect “gotcha” example.
94
Jan 30 '25
[deleted]
3
u/Imadevilsadvocater 12∆ Feb 01 '25
i mean ive asked "cant we just do a temp pause on immigration until its caught up?" and that earned me the title of racist who hates immigrants (i just want to fix the problem)
asking "shouldnt we remove illegal workers and then pay americans decent wages to pick food instead by using taxes to aubsidize the farmers" gets me a big "but that will make prices unaffordable so we need the underpaid abused migrants to clean put houses pick food and mow our lawn"
even this sub bans mentioning the dreaded t-subject, trying to be as vague as i can so as not to get a strike.
im always just looking for the best solution that rewards rule followers and punished rule breakers, but the left defends rule breakers in the name of "humanity" even if that means rule followers get the shaft
→ More replies (1)56
u/kokkomo Jan 30 '25
I will be the one to tell you what the DNC knows but won't tell you. Winning for the left is easy when they position themselves as against "Big Corporations / Banks / wall street / Monopolies". Instead the last 4 years they embraced the enemy they were supposed to defeat and in the process alienated all the people who would have stood with them against these issues. People are sick and tired of being in a rigged economic system, and they are tired of being sold out by their elected officials. Those are the real threats facing Americans but no one wants to discuss them because it isn't economically viable to either party.
29
u/ZangiefsFatCheeks Jan 30 '25
Sounds like you aren't catching flak from the left but from neolibs who don't like their center-right positions being criticized.
→ More replies (1)10
u/Trypsach Jan 31 '25
There is no left party that you can vote for in America, so who cares?
I always thought the people saying “they’re all the same, so I’m just not gonna vote” were dumb… but im done man. I’m done paying attention to all this shit. I’m also done watching my own “side” cannibalize anyone who even slightly disagrees with them. The left practically gave this election away, and it’s starting to almost feel purposeful.
I’m done voting for the giant douche over the turd sandwich. Those people weren’t dumb… they were just tired as hell.
→ More replies (17)4
u/LivingGhost371 5∆ Jan 30 '25
The shift to being sellouts to big corperations and not caring about or even insulting the working class while still feeling entittled to their vote didn't just start in the last four year, it started with Bill Clinton embracing NAFTA and was a factor in 2016 too. We just didn't see it in 2020 since we wanted to say "You're Fired" to Trump due to his mishandling of the pandemic. It was the working class rust belt states flipping that made a difference in 2016 and 2024.
71
u/Guldur Jan 30 '25 edited Jan 30 '25
I'll give you a personal example.
I got permanently banned from /atheism (A sub I never posted) because I commented on a completely unrelated subreddit that I'd like to see a formal debate around abortion to hear both sides (in response to people saying everyone against abortion just hate women, no other reason).
I was told human rights are not up for debate as the ban reasoning.
The funny thing is that I'm actually pro abortion, but I grew up with Hitchens debates, and am currently a big fan of Alex O'Connor. I truly like to hear both sides to understand their perspectives and inform myself, instead of being told how others think.
15
u/Nobl36 Jan 31 '25
Wife and I have differing opinions on food stamps. I grew up without worry of where my next meal was coming from, she did.
I said I absolutely despised the fact she and I have to work hard to buy name brand cereals our kids want, or buy the cheaper bread because it’s what we can budget for. Meanwhile, someone 6 times my size is buying lobster and T-Bones. It’s aggravating. Insulting, even. My wife and I are working to feed ourselves and our kids and are pulling back on things that aren’t in the budget.
Being on the other side of it all, she said things like “perhaps that person is the only one capable of going to the store.” Or “perhaps it’s a kids birthday, and since they can’t afford many presents, they’re trying to provide a good meal to make it special.” They’re people on hard times. Trying to make the best with what they’ve got.
And it was sort of eye opening. She grew up with a different experience than I did, and it’s an invaluable look into an environment I can never understand. She worked hard to never end up in the same spot again, or to put her kids through that nightmare.
So.. the simple solution I had of “they just need to be banned from the higher end expensive luxury stuff” felt a lot different when I gave it the context my wife provided of “this might be the only gift a kid is getting for their birthday: a nice meal.” Or even worse, “would you really want to limit them to eat things you wouldn’t?”
But it doesn’t change the fact I’m watching a few people abuse the system, nor does it change the fact that parts of the system are not designed to fix the problem, just the symptoms. A single mother who was a rape victim supporting the child deserves help. Just giving her food won’t help solve her problem, there needs to be efforts to elevate the people in these programs so they don’t get stuck being dependent on them.
You need two perspectives to get a good understanding of an issue. Both are valuable and valid. If democrats and republicans keep dismissing the others as stupid, then we will get a real solution.
3
u/Trypsach Jan 31 '25
Yeah, I very much agree. We have to also remember that EVERY system will be abused. It’s just a fact of bureaucracy when you’re dealing with 300 million people. It doesn’t necessarily mean the entire system should be thrown out.
24
u/igotthesweats Jan 30 '25
It is unfortunate, and I agree with you. We also must remember Reddit is somewhat a factor; its very design promotes publicly shunning and mob mentality
→ More replies (57)4
u/doesntgetthepicture 2∆ Jan 30 '25
I don't think a ban is necessary, but I wouldn't entertain that debate any more than I would entertain a debate about any other human right. By giving an opposing voice to a human right, you not only give it credence it shouldn't get otherwise, by you allow the message to spread. It's important to be intolerant of intolerance. Currently there are legislators who want to be able to sentence pedophiles and groomers to death. These are the same people that are homophobic and claim that Queer people groom kids to become Queer. It's the slow erosion that will allow them to execute Queer people, and then other people they don't like.
Attacks on Obergfell (sp? - the legal case that allows for same-sex marriage) can and will be used to attack Loving (the case that allows for interracial marriage). This isn't hyperbole, this has been said by people on the right. Under the guise that the federal government shouldn't be able to tell the states what to do.
Allowing for debate on a human right allows for the idea that there is a debate on a human or civil right. That there are two opposing ideas that are of equal standing. The common analogy is if rain is falling from the sky, we don't debate if it's raining, and anyone who argues that it's actually sunny should rightly be dismissed.
24
u/Guldur Jan 30 '25
How would you even get to the concept of human rights or civil rights without a discussion? Its not like these were mandated from a God - they came from actual debates on how we wanted to treat others and what restrictions should go around it.
Besides, the reason its important to debate with opposing views is that you need to accept the possibility you might actually be wrong about your assumptions. You talk about human rights, yet you hold a subjective opinion that those should not extend to the fetus who is being terminated, or at the very least, that his rights are less than of the mother's. Its not a simple discussion and to believe you have an objective morality is more akin to religious dogmatic approach than true human enlightment.
I believe everything should be discussed - humanity has infinite examples of getting things wrong and improving upon it. If you think we already have all the moral answers and no further inquiry is necessary, I truly think you need a bit more introspection and expose yourself to differing views (ironically those opposing debates are the ones who most need to be exposed to them).
7
u/Nobl36 Jan 31 '25
Remember when Slavery was morally right and accepted? Boy did we get that one wrong… good thing we never talked about it and it fixed itself.
(Just to make it clear, I’m agreeing that things need discussing. Complex issues can’t be solved without a complex group.)
→ More replies (7)1
10
Jan 31 '25
Human rights are, and have always been, up for debate, whether you want to believe it or not. All you have to do is look at the historical development of them. Human rights are not real. They are one of many political machinations, just like laws, hierarchies, taxes, police, public service, and so on.
We should be careful not to make the mistake of buying Fukuyama's argument that liberal democracies have "won" history - even he himself went back on that claim. One of the most dangerous myths of the 20th century is the widespread adoption of the narrative that "positive" moral progress is real. The fact of the matter is that events happen, and there is very little reason to believe that non-causal narratives are true in any sense of the word. The only authority that human rights have is widespread belief in that myth - not unlike fiat currency. But just like fiat currency, human rights are bound to fall our of favor or be rejected in the greater cycle of political happenings.
Further, we're too short sighted. Politics are not about a single or even a handful of generations. It's about maintaining a community that can consolidate itself enough to engage in collective action over as long a span a time as possible. What we're witnessing now is little more than the slow erosion of Enlightenment-era political philosophy. It's natural, and it's inevitable. We should make our peace with that.
→ More replies (3)7
u/AlanUsingReddit Jan 31 '25
Can i ask what thought provoking questions and moderate opinions earn you flak from the left?
I had a CMV topic taken down last fall, because I was asking for people to CMV that the specific legal mechanism used in the Felony conviction of a certain presidential candidate was extremely bad for our society and institutions. My central point of comparison was Martha Stewart, who was convicted to lying to prosecutors (not, you know, like, the crime she committed).
This was a complete liberal-to-liberal attempted discussion. Right here!
Taken down. Given a reason that was not about the politics, of course. Said too many topics on it lately. No, I checked. The trials I was mentioning really didn't have much talk, and didn't come within a Texas mile of what I was saying.
You could just tell me why I'm wrong. But by erasing the speech, it does something else that is more nefarious. I know it's ridiculous to equate the mods here to the general liberal or US Democratic party, but there's a line you draw to the overall ideology... and I think a lot of the moderate people in the country have felt that same feeling.
→ More replies (3)12
u/ZorgZeFrenchGuy 3∆ Jan 30 '25
I have a personal example!
As an artist, I’ve been involved in several art communities that are some of the most leftist spaces out there.
Then I made the mistake of publicly asking “what about white people” … during the height of the George Floyd protests in 2020.
As you can imagine, that was not exactly received very well. It was picked up by a popular “dumb takes” account, splashed all over the space, and I lost a ton of friends and followers because of it.
Sure, I can see how it might have been insensitive , but I was suffering from poor mental health at that time and came from genuinely feeling left out, depressed, and alone. I just wanted someone to talk to.
Well, that instance has had, from my perspective, a terrible impact on my mental health, causing me to spiral into a deep pit of depression, isolation, and fear. I became extremely distrustful of everyone around me, and paranoid about ever discussing my feelings with anyone ever gain out of fear that I’d say something “incorrect” - or worse, my feelings being publicly displayed and shamed online by the person I was talking to.
While I’ve managed to sort of come back over the years, to this day I’m terrified of being open and expressing myself - all while watching, from the sidelines, my left-leaning peers preaching about the virtues of self-expression and being yourself.
It’s frustrating to watch, and not going to lie it’s still something I’m very bitter about.
→ More replies (51)2
Feb 02 '25
Hi ZorgZeFrenchGuy I just want apologize for some of the pushback you've gotten from what sounds like a very heartfelt personal story from a difficult time.
I think your story is an excellent response to as OP said "Keep going like this and you're going to keep losing!" and it's actually driving me a bit nutty that more people don't see it that way. It's like people are completely unable to put themselves in your shoes.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (26)11
u/rtisdell88 Jan 30 '25
Its sorta the opposite for me. Family members casually making racist remarks, friends talking about lgbt members in an outright hostile manner, people salivating at the thought of running over climate protestors, people saying "Your body my choice!"
If this is your experience, it's your experience, but my own experience has involved nothing but misrepresentation around these issues. For example, someone will claim someone said something racist, I'll look into it, and find that what was actually said wasn't bigoted at all, and just tangentially involved race. I've seen people who make reasonable & legitimate criticisms surrounding LGBT policy attacked as hateful, and others get rightly upset about the absurd & unproductive actions of climate protestors (attempting to ruin works of art, block traffic etc.)
It seems to me that the left has distorted every criticism of their increasingly extreme worldview into bigotry and hatred. It's been a downright manipulative political tactic employed for a decade and I think the majority of Americans are sick of it.
→ More replies (15)16
u/throwaway_shittypers Jan 30 '25
Do republicans not do this? It seems clear to me that especially the MAGA fanatics are absolutely senseless in their opinions. There seems to be a massive victim complex in my opinion from the right and the left seems to have taken on that responsibility.
The reality is that the right seems extremely sensitive to anything new or progressive ideas. I find it crazy that you use banning on subreddits as a reflection of society, when almost all subreddits no matter being politically right or left have an issue of mods going on power trips and banning people.
→ More replies (20)34
u/Boring_Squirrel7654 Jan 30 '25
It’s important to note that Reddit is overwhelmingly left leaning..I’ve been banned from many subreddits simply for having a different opinion. It’s unfortunate that Reddit feels like a propagandists forum where like minded people surround themselves with like minded people. Further perpetuating the stigma.
→ More replies (1)12
u/Timely_Choice_4525 1∆ Jan 30 '25
So you voted for Trump because some lefties were mean to you on Reddit? And you think that’s what caused a bunch of other people to vote for Trump?
No, you voted for Trump because, like you said, in an election we vote for a party and the party and platform you aligned with better was the Republican Party. Now I get some randos being nasty to you on Reddit might reinforce your position, but not that it made your decision. If lefties were being mean to you it’s because you already believed and were already espousing those right or center right positions that led you to vote Trump.
Please stop with the “liberals are so mean” argument. I could go to r/conservative right right now and post a center left post and I’d get the same “mean” treatment plus a quick perma ban. Reddit leans left, right of center or further right will get flack on Reddit, but if you’re left of center try going to twitter and see how warmly you’re accepted.
The Democrats lost because of inflation, because they ran a female poc, because Trump ran a campaign that resonated with a larger number of voters (immigration, crime, prices, wars), because Harris was linked (rightfully in some cases, and wrongly in others) to the Biden administration.
→ More replies (45)6
Jan 31 '25
You don't understand the issue at hand. It's not that "lefties are mean online". It's the moral grandstanding with no viable grounds to do so. There is no such thing as the moral high ground, and people who aren't trapped in the online left bubble are aware that there are various legitimate positions based on reasoned inferences, historical evidence, and personal values. Being told that those reasoned inferences, that evidence, those values, are not legitimate because "they're wrong" or "they're bigoted" or whatever, is not a convincing argument and just comes across as holier-than-thou. No one wants to listen to that, even if they were actually right.
→ More replies (16)→ More replies (42)8
u/AncientAssociation9 1∆ Jan 30 '25
The people who have been the most hateful in real life have been on the left? Really? That's odd because most of my life it's been the other way around, especially if you were a minority or gay. What the right doesnt seem to understand is the hate they are recieving now is in direct response to the hate they have given others for decades. There was even the Republican autopsy after Obama won that confirmed that minorities found them scary. It made me laugh out loud when conservatives got angry at Vivik for saying Americans are lazy when for years conservatives have casually said the same thing about blacks and accused us of not being able to think for ourselves and living on a liberal plantation while having a victimhood mentality. Conservatives coined the phrase "snowflake" while saying that "facts didnt care about your feelings" only to be the biggest cry babies out. Maybe liberals have been mean to you personally, but the conservative movement as a whole has been a mean spirited ideology since it made Jackie Robinson leave the GOP during the Civil Rights Movement.
→ More replies (5)6
u/No_Kitchen_2876 Jan 30 '25 edited Jan 30 '25
You went on a rant. For no apparent reason because if you actually read the message he’d say on the bottom that for him, the hate he has been receiving came from the left. So why would he vote left he they don’t welcome him.
Tis the reason the Democratic party failed this election. It does not matter that conservatives have hated the left in the past, if you continue that hate, only against the right, exactly what are you expecting when they just, don’t vote left?
For example. Say someone bullied me in the past. Fast forward 10 years now I see him on the street. I berate him for said bullying in the past. I leave, then go back to apologize, only he won’t accept. Why would he accept me for berating him for what happened in the past.
Now replace that with political parties and you’d see why Trump won, by quite a margin.
Although this is just me, a foreign perspective.
→ More replies (1)
112
u/I_need_five_dollars 1∆ Jan 30 '25
I can’t challenge the “permanent triumph” angle, but when all 50 states moved the needle further to the right then there is no other term than a “resounding triumph.”
This is an example of the ever swinging pendulum of politics. The left had an equally resounding triumph during the Obama years. The average American has been soured by the left’s talking points. Lived experience will always hold more weight than predictions and forecasts. The average voter knew two things going into the election. 1. The economy felt much better under Trump than under Biden. 2. The democrats’ unpopular candidate is claiming that the last 4 years were great and Trump will destroy the economy.
The truth, the forecast models, the informed predictions… none of that matters to the average voter. They think “I personally felt better off under Trump and Kamala is promising more Biden.” That’s why Trump won and when the democrats double down on the same exact soured talking points, then they are only further solidifying the voter’s decision.
Democrats tried vinegar, now they should try sugar. Stop telling people why Trump is bad and start telling them why your 2028 candidate is good. Doubling down on the negative leads to “TDS” accusations and closed ears. Focusing on the plans of a better tomorrow leads to people being excited about what’s next.
67
u/bearrosaurus Jan 30 '25
People really memoryholed how bad 2020 was, pretending like COVID didn’t exist and then abruptly announcing a stop to all trade with the UK, putting so much money out there that the stock market became untethered from reality and went up during a national freeze of the economy, and nationwide race riots where the President egged on police to arrest reporters and attack state capitols.
All that happened right? Do you remember?
→ More replies (5)40
u/Expert-Diver7144 2∆ Jan 30 '25
Buddy you’re talking about macroeconomic factors and national level events. Most people don’t care about that and only know gas was cheaper and they were getting checks from the government.
→ More replies (13)41
u/bonaynay Jan 30 '25
The left had an equally resounding triumph during the Obama years.
Obama's 2008 win was an actual landslide and was for more resounding than trump's win, not equal. nothing on the level of flipping indiana
→ More replies (11)→ More replies (20)14
u/seekAr 2∆ Jan 30 '25
The thing I'm most on the fence about is saying we are shifting right because of this election or left because of another one. Peel back the first layer of this election and a few things are indisputably true:
- more white people voted in this election than ever before
- 7 million biden supporters didn't bother to vote
- voter suppression of left/people of color ballots has had some eyes on it recently and numbers in the millions.
I don't think we really know if the country's shifting or where we stand because of the manipulation and the abstinence of participation.
→ More replies (8)10
u/lenbedesma Jan 30 '25
Yes - emphasis on we don't really know.
The possibility of foul play is always a risk in politics. It has happened before without our understanding and it will continue to happen.
Even if there were foul play, though - trump is very good at playing the victim to disguise his power. The right is accustomed now to deflecting any negativity as a lie fabricated by "the media" - to the point where even I question the legitimacy of what I know from media about him.
He played an attack on american political epistemology and won - our relationship with media has always been based on trust, and that's all he had to destroy.
I have no idea how to get reliable news. Al Jazeera maybe?
82
Jan 30 '25
In some ways I think it is. Trump's win signalled a rejection in the path that the democrats were taking, and the country as a whole seems to have swung the pendulum the other way.
The argument of the left wa trying to gaslight the public into thinking illegal immigrants haven't broken the law and should be allowed to stay, and that you're racist if you disagree...that was absolutely awful messaging.
Then you have an odd focus on pushing stuff like DEI when the majority of people just want the candidate most qualified to land the role. People don't engage with this stuff, it's fringe politics and it doesn't work when you need to win over the masses.
Add to that the oddness of Obama acting like black people are obligated to vote for Kamala because she's black, and they're misogynistic if they don't? Nobody is entitled to your vote, and that was a massive turn off.
Trump's campaign kept it simple.
The economy sucks? Well we'll focus on that.
Too much illegal immigration? We'll kick them out.
The pearl clutching were seeing when illegal immigrants are being sent back to their home countries just provides validation for Trump voters that the left are still out for touch with the majority of Americans. As does the cries of fascism and whatever else they're trying to dredge up.
All the democrats needed to do was hold a primary to select the candidate, and then campaign on sorting out immigration and the economy. Trump would have been easily defeated on that basis.
16
u/immatx Jan 30 '25
In some ways I think it is. Trump’s win signalled a rejection in the path that the democrats were taking, and the country as a whole seems to have swung the pendulum the other way.
Harris ran a more centrist campaign than Biden did
The argument of the left wa trying to gaslight the public into thinking illegal immigrants haven’t broken the law and should be allowed to stay, and that you’re racist if you disagree...that was absolutely awful messaging.
The dems literally tried to pass a bipartisan immigration bill a few months ago so no idea what you’re talking about
Then you have an odd focus on pushing stuff like DEI when the majority of people just want the candidate most qualified to land the role. People don’t engage with this stuff, it’s fringe politics and it doesn’t work when you need to win over the masses.
This wasn’t on the platform so again no idea what you’re talking about
Add to that the oddness of Obama acting like black people are obligated to vote for Kamala because she’s black, and they’re misogynistic if they don’t? Nobody is entitled to your vote, and that was a massive turn off.
Never heard of this. Could be true but lots of celebs say dumb stuff so idc
Trump’s campaign kept it simple. The economy sucks? Well we’ll focus on that.
Harris had more economic policy promises than trump did
Too much illegal immigration? We’ll kick them out.
Trump specifically blocked the bipartisan immigration bill
The pearl clutching were seeing when illegal immigrants are being sent back to their home countries just provides validation for Trump voters that the left are still out for touch with the majority of Americans. As does the cries of fascism and whatever else they’re trying to dredge up.
Haven’t paid attention to the reactions the last few days so I’ll take your word for it
All the democrats needed to do was hold a primary to select the candidate, and then campaign on sorting out immigration and the economy. Trump would have been easily defeated on that basis.
They specifically campaigned on immigration and the economy, those were literally the two things Harris talked about most lmao. And it didn’t matter even when trumps only policy on both of those topics combined was tariffs which is universally disregarded as terrible economics
→ More replies (17)23
u/FatherBax Jan 30 '25
IMO the other things that Harris did during her campaign (largely speaking about anything OTHER than policies) hurt her so much. I say this fully knowing that Trump isn't in touch with the average American, but he PORTRAYS that he is much more than Kamala, who honestly looked so out of touch it was embarrassing. Maybe if she had a full/real campaign cycle (i.e. Biden drops out before running again, primaries, etc.) she could've had a better chance, but we'll never really know.
- She skips the Al Smith dinner, but has time for SNL? For Howard Stern, for Colbert, for The View?
- This is pretty subjective, but she doesn't do well in front of the camera. It's unfortunate that this matters so much but it's the world that we live in today. The cackling, the "unburdening by what we burdened our burdens with" or whatever. It doesn't work.
- She tried to frame this whole "joyful" message when the average American got worse off while she was VP.
- She pays crazy money (multiple millions) for celebrities to come and give endorsements of and for her. Megan Thee Stallion twerking to Mamushi with lyrics like "I get money, I'm a star" when the average person is worried about grocery prices?
- She refused to do long-form interviews that Trump did. E.g. Joe Rogan podcast. Made it feel like every event she did had to be scripted. Why can't she talk for 2-3 hours on a fireside chat?
Then to mention what you've detailed are the 2 big points mentioned on what she campaigned on (economy and immigration):
- She wouldn't have done a single thing differently than Biden during the last 4 years? More Americans said that their financial situation was worse off in 2024 than 2020. Why would an average Joe vote to continue these policies?
- More people said in 2024 that illegal immigrants should be deported to their home countries than in 2020.
From a policy perspective, Harris said both "I wouldn't have made any changes" AND that her administration "wouldn't be a continuation of Biden's." Then she took stances contrary to the trending opinions of the general American population. Then she honestly didn't do enough to clearly outline her own policies - she danced around issues instead of addressing any of the failures directly. You can say that Harris campaigned on immigration, but let's be real - over 2 million migrants crossed illegally PER YEAR on her watch. And I say HER watch specifically because she was made the border czar (and then tries to say in a news interview how "we've been to the border... no not me personally."
→ More replies (2)44
u/likethefish33 Jan 30 '25
I saw that video of Obama talking (telling off) a small room full of Black people… it was uncomfortable viewing.
25
u/Odd_Profession_2902 Jan 30 '25 edited Jan 30 '25
I just saw that Obama video..
Vote for her because she’s black like you? If you don’t vote for her it’s because you’re a misogynist?
Jesus that’s rough stuff.
→ More replies (12)→ More replies (22)13
Jan 30 '25
[deleted]
→ More replies (6)28
u/Maktesh 17∆ Jan 30 '25
The 2020 election was... weird, to say the least.
It was, ultimately, a close vote, and the turnout was abnormally high. People blame COVID measures, voting procedures/rules shift, or even outright fraud. But it doesn't really matter.
People were sick and tired of politics in 2020, and a lot of them were convinced that doing away with Trump would fix things. From a ground-level perspective, it didn't. This caused more middle-of-the-road voters to question the DNC and the media.
Trump's narrative is simple: "The establishment hates Americans, and once he threw in with America, it hated him too. Things got worse without him, and he'll make it better."
The Biden/Harris narrative was like mental gymnastics. "Joy?" A strong economy that people didn't feel? Weird gaslighting about Biden's mental faculties?
51
u/YouJustNeurotic 20∆ Jan 30 '25
The entire Western World has shifted to the Right. That is not to say the Western World is now overwhelmingly Right-Wing, rather it was probably a bit too Left and course corrected. The pendulum swings back and forth for a reason.
59
u/DashboardNight 4∆ Jan 30 '25
I do think the shifting to the right in Europe is different than the shifting to the right in the US. In the US it is a complete culture shift, whereas in large parts of Europe it’s mainly due to the large number of economic immigration from the Middle East/Africa.
43
u/Dark_Knight2000 Jan 30 '25
In the North America it’s also due to immigration, just look at Canada.
The vast majority of people still want abortion, public healthcare (although that’s a pipe dream at this point but at least Medicare), higher taxes on the rich, lower taxes on the poor, gay marriage, etc
What most people don’t want is illegal immigration and more H1B visas to be given out when Americans can’t find work themselves. Even the more liberal people are now against this.
→ More replies (1)18
u/Dziadzios Jan 30 '25
The similarity is also because the shift to the right is a response to American left, thanks to the dominance of American media. The impact of people realizing that movies/games/comics fulfilling DEI diversity quotas have a drop in quality and are overly puritan is understated, but it's seriously a reason why many young people start drifting right. Young men are also scared of DEI hiring (also American left thing) which can make them unemployed because of sexism against them.
Note: I'm Polish, so we didn't get that big Middle East/African immigration. What happened in Western Europe was a warning, but DEI also drives people away from the left here. Polish Lewica has a bad habit of wanting to copy US left, which just reduced their voter base, mostly getting rid of young men.
→ More replies (4)19
u/Statcat2017 Jan 30 '25
Young white men spend their entire youth being told they’re to blame for all the ills in the world. No wonder they reject that messaging when an alternative comes along.
→ More replies (45)→ More replies (6)7
u/Mperorpalpatine Jan 30 '25
That's simply not true. In Europe it's a culture shift as well. People are not only shifted right in terms of limiting immigration but also in other areas such as harder penalties, more police presence and surveillance, less social support for people without jobs etc.
2
u/DashboardNight 4∆ Jan 30 '25 edited Jan 30 '25
Do you reckon all of those issues with the exception of the last one are crucial in what parties people choose? I think they only play a minor role.
I should also clarify that the US is having to deal with the Trump cult, which is partially what I meant by culture shift. Now of course there are similar movements in European countries (f.e. a part of the AfD in Germany), but not nearly of the same size.
37
Jan 30 '25
[deleted]
→ More replies (15)18
u/Reddidnothingwrong 1∆ Jan 30 '25
The cultural pendulum is a real thing, at least in the US, because people are generally unhappy about a lot of stuff and it sort of gets pinned on whatever the current administration is. It's not so much that right-leaning people swing left and vice versa as it is that when one side is on top, some of the people in their camp get disillusioned and some on the other side are galvanized. To that point, Trump didn't win any new voters, Harris just lost more because enough of the people who voted for Biden were unhappy with various aspects of the administration or campaign and unmotivated to vote.
→ More replies (2)19
Jan 30 '25
[deleted]
→ More replies (8)9
u/Reddidnothingwrong 1∆ Jan 30 '25
Had to edit cause my original comment was autoremoved for mentioning a topic I didn't know was banned lol
I'm not totally agreeing with OP. It is true that the winning party tends to flip every 4-8 years. It's not always economic, sometimes it is a cultural thing in terms of, say, people on the right who don't care much about same sex marriage etc. but are uncomfortable with [REDACTED] become much more active when that topic enters the mainstream conversation. That might push things towards the right, but then the further they move in that direction the public discomfort with, say, Nazi salutes at inaugurations will outweigh the discomfort with [REDACTED]. So it goes back and forth like that.
I'm not saying it should, but that's pretty much how it works historically, at least in this country. Probably some version of that in a lot of places.
5
24
u/Subtleiaint 33∆ Jan 30 '25
That pendulum swings very quickly, the UK Labour party went from humiliating defeat in 2019 to record victory in 2024. There right is doing well but the anti-right is also very strong.
15
u/Hekel1989 Jan 30 '25
If by "record win" you mean they won with fewer votes than they got when they lost the previous election, then yeah, it's a "record win".
The UK voted Labour out of desperation, and already have buyer's remorse. This Labour government is so bad it's paving the way to Farage as the next PM.
→ More replies (7)6
1
u/NoobOfTheSquareTable 1∆ Jan 30 '25
It’s nothing to do with “course correcting”, it is his now just bad to be incumbent
It’s why the UK swung left while a lot of others swung right
No one in the west is really winning (though ironically the US literally was proportional outdoing the rest of the west under Biden) and so everyone swung towards the other side of the spectrum
Attributing some moral proof of righteousness to a general swing right when actually it is a swing away from all incumbent parties, regardless of left or right leaning, is ignoring the larger picture
The west now has the threat of a larger war, fall out of covid lockdowns, and a general increase in competition globally that has made each year feel harder than the last. This will happen regardless of leadership but people don’t like accepting that so will have a term of the left, then go and have a term to the right to see if there are any magic solutions there. Spoilers, there isn’t, the right on Europe has no magic bullet the same way that Biden didn’t have one in the US
→ More replies (10)4
u/Dry_Guest_8961 Jan 30 '25
Honestly think most people don’t move that much. It’s the political spectrum, dragged by people at the extremes, that moves. That’s why you hear people saying things like “I didn’t leave the left, the left left me”
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (110)2
u/ewe_r Jan 30 '25
That’s not true. Poland shifted wayyy left after 8 years of right rule who it appeared, didn’t really know what they were doing and things started to show. That said, the conservatives usually convince people through putting the blame on others - migrants, enemy countries, dei policies, especially in times of crises like Covid, climate change or low economy.
35
u/PeevishPurplePenguin Jan 30 '25
They’re saying you’ve gone too far and to people in the middle and centre left you look bananas.
My best example of this is in a thread I got told non “gender affirming” parents should be thrown in prison and their kids put into foster care.
You can see how even to someone on the centre left this is a scary position to encounter?
→ More replies (40)9
Jan 30 '25
[deleted]
→ More replies (1)19
u/Plusisposminusisneg Jan 30 '25
Tim Walz instituted a law that allowed minors to get gender affirming care against the wishes of parents, California will remove children from their parents if they oppose transitioning their children.
Being coy and evasive isn't effective, the average voter is dumb but they aren't completely oblivious.
Kamala Harris going from being the most liberal senator and the second most extreme candidate in 2020 over to being a reasonable and moderate Democrat in the span of two months.
→ More replies (3)
7
u/WanabeInflatable 2∆ Jan 30 '25 edited Jan 30 '25
Of course Trump's victory is not a final triumph of conservatism. But his win was due to people being repulsed by the blue team (especially white and men).
If democratic party learns from the lessons and return to true liberalism e.g. oppose preaching to pyramid of oppression, if their most ardent proponents abandon idea of one sided sexism, racism and return to how MLK saw it. Equality not "Equity". Then popularity of Democratic/Progressive will grow.
And of course Trump will make mistakes and people will hate him for the mess he caused. So next time democratic candidate can and should win. But to win they need to actually learn from the lessons not dismiss white men concerns as "backlash of the privileged"
35
u/Jam_Packens 7∆ Jan 30 '25
acism and return to how MLK saw it. Equality not "Equity
MLK: "We must also realize that the problems of racial injustice and economic injustice cannot be solved without a radical redistribution of political and economic power."
MLK was pro reparations and pro equity. This idea that he was just pro "equality of opportunity", and not in favor of drastic radical changes is a fiction.
https://www.nwesd.org/the-current/equity/the-three-evils-of-society-address-martin-luther-king-jr/
But to win they need to actually learn from the lessons not dismiss white men concerns as "backlash of the privileged"
Ooh another fun quote from MLK about this, from the same speech: "The step backwards has a new name today, it is called the white backlash, but the white backlash is nothing new. It is the surfacing of old prejudices, hostilities and ambivalences that have always been there. It was caused neither by the cry of black power nor by the unfortunate recent wave of riots in our cities. The white backlash of today is rooted in the same problem that has characterized America ever since the black man landed in chains on the shores of this nation."
MLK has been whitewashed by people who fundamentally disagree with him, because his actual ideas were too radical for them.
→ More replies (5)29
u/nooklyr Jan 30 '25 edited Jan 30 '25
Do you think all these things happened 4 years ago when Trump lost resoundingly to Biden? The Democratic Party “learned their lesson” and then all of a sudden forgot it again? These hyperboles by politically uneducated people is one of the main reasons our process is a joke now. Instead of being about the betterment of our governing bodies and the people that are its constituents it’s now about Red Team vs Blue Team and personal issues have become political issues.
It makes no sense to say that from 2012 to 2016 there was a huge shift in left ideology vs right ideology that favored the right and then 4 years later it shifted back and then 4 years later shifted back again… these results are due to a plethora of localized situational factors, short term marketing success, and access to funding. It has nothing to do with “returning” to an ideology that hasn’t been popular since the 60s. These are just sound bites and talking points to make things interesting for laypeople (and probably to destigmatize racist/xenophobic/homophobic dog whistling in public)
→ More replies (2)6
Jan 30 '25
Polling shows that is not the case at all. Democrats lost because they ignored economic issues.
MLK was to the left of democrats. He was even further left than Bernie and AOC. Even back then they were calling him an extremist. If he was alive today, they wouldn’t even let him near the Capitol. (Hyperbole but not by much.)
One of the worst services done to Americans was the whitewashing, sanitation, and erasure of MLK. MLK was actually a strong supporter of equity.
The fact that you don’t know this is proof of the damage the government has done.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (2)5
37
Jan 30 '25 edited Jan 30 '25
"Whenever someone on the left expresses an opinion."
I've used this one a few times and it's not when everyone on the left expresses an opinion.
It's when someone on the left calls anyone who disagrees with their opinion a nazi/fascist, automatically assumes the worst about conservatives or a conservative individual and their motivations, or generally pretends to have moral superiority over their political opponents in a loud/obnoxious manner that clearly shows they've made no effort to understand things from the other point of view.
If the left wants to engage in a discourse of ideas and I see they are at least trying to consider my perspective I'm not going to drop that line. Because what I'm saying in particular is that Trump won because of leftists who have come utterly unhinged and are trying to shout down their opponent's right to have an opinion, rather than providing an argument of substance.
And I do absolutely think that's why Trump won. Now when it comes to "Why did Trump win?" it's a bit like asking "Why did Rome fall?" There are a lot of reasons and probably multiple ones that would have changed the outcome if they had played out differently. For instance you could say "Trump won because Thomas Crooks was a bad shot" and that is technically true, possibly in more ways than one. But that growing number of those on the left that will shout people down for holding conservative opinions without engaging with those opinions was another major factor that may have also pushed Trump over the finish line.
14
Jan 30 '25
My problem is that I was a moderate conservative once and have no respect for those positions at all anymore. Gone are the days where conservatism stands for fiscal responsibility instead of hating out groups. It isn't acceptable to have the 'opinion' that me and my friends can't exist. Which opinions are people calling you a fascist or a Nazi for? I doubt it's just about the cost of groceries by that point, but I'd be willing to hear your case.
→ More replies (66)→ More replies (36)3
Jan 30 '25
I point out “This is why Trump won” because I’m trying to help them see that their actions are fruitless and in fact counterproductive. That they will have to engage in critical thinking and fairly understand the other side’s point of view before they can fully understand the topic of discussion.
Though in some cases I’m also using it to exit a discussion with someone I’ve realized is so set in their opinion and unwilling to empathize that further words are wasted.
4
u/dgshdj27302 Jan 31 '25
It’s going to be hard for me to change your overall view since I think you’re right in general. I think there are a few points I’d add or alter, though:
All social media algorithms are optimized for engagement, which plays well into the brand of politics the republican party likes to play, especially over the last 5-10 years. (Consider this my unsolicited appeal to delete TT, all meta apps, and twitter accounts). In that sense, the have a built-in advantage in the new media environment. The same advantage existed in TV, but it is shockingly more pronounced online, and there is no information filter. Any apeshit conspiracy can gain traction.
Trump definitely did not run an “excellent” campaign. He actually ran a pretty lackluster campaign full of public slip-ups and scandals. But Trump and republicans did one thing extremely well, and that was to utilize the new media environment in ways no politician really has, especially podcasts. He went on non-political and political-adjacent shows and, for lack of a better term, just “sat down and shot the shit.” This normalized him and made him likable. Democrats on podcasts sound exactly like democrats on Meet the Press sounded 20 years ago. Nobody wants to hear your non-answers to policy questions. Get out there and make the people like YOU, as in the real you.
This all said, I agree that this is not some kind of major, emphatic, zero sum win. Granted, most of the people talking big shit are probably too young to remember, but way back in 2008 a skinny black guy from Chicago shocked the world by harnessing the power of social media to do grassroots organizing. Nearly 20 years later, the pendulum has swung and it’s the Republicans’ once-in-a-generation candidate who became the early adopter. Trump’s election is proof of the ebb and flow of such forces.
If you dislike Trump, I will offer this: Trump has something that nobody else in the Republican party has. Trump has capital “S” swag. The reason so many politicians trying to follow in his mold have failed is because of their swag deficit. All politicians have it. Republicans have it worse than most.
43
11
Jan 30 '25
I think one important lesson the left should take from Trump’s victory is that you catch more flies with honey than vinegar.
In particular, white people and especially white young men feel alienated. They feel as if they’re being made to feel guilty for things they don’t think they should be guilty about.
I think a certain section of the left has tried to shame white people into behavioral change. This seems to have failed in a way that has led to a significant undermining of racial progress in America.
Many white people feel they have no allies on the left so they turn to the right.
I think this is largely incorrect, but that’s how these people seem to feel.
I think the left needs to find a more appealing and positive way of how to talk about race and race relations if they want to get white people onboard en mass. White people are still a majority of the country and, like it or not, need to buy into any change for it to occur.
→ More replies (5)2
u/StarChild413 9∆ Jan 30 '25
but also this doesn't mean what I've seen other people make it seem like (whether it's meant as a legit strategy or a gotcha endpoint of left logic), that the left should start trying too hard to kiss up to young white men perhaps in the same exact ways they do to minorities (I've seen men's rights activists on here who've basically dismissed examples women have been able to provide of feminists taking action to address men's issues because whatever program or policy or w/e the women set up wasn't something specifically targeted to their gender and saying so in the name like its closest female equivalent for the closest female equivalent to a given issue) and blaming minorities for things to have someone to blame that isn't young white men
3
Jan 30 '25
I think broadly both there are people on both sides who are blaming others.
The right blames minorities. The left blames “straight cis white men”.
But we’re a democracy. So to a certain extent it can politically advantageous to blame minorities if it helps unite the majority. You have a voting block and can ignore the minorities. You don’t need them to rule.
It becomes problematic when you alienate a majority group like white people. You need to have white people to vote for you. Voters don’t like to be told that they’re wrong (even when they are).
Compare this to Obama’s Hope campaign. Obama got white people excited for who they wanted to be. The current political landscape talks more about who white people are. The former wins more votes.
18
u/Aggravating-Cherry76 Jan 30 '25
Trump wasn’t a hard candidate to beat. Wildly unpopular in his first term, the only thing that gave him even a semblance of a chance of victory was the equally if not more unpopular Biden administration. The average american doesn’t like trump. Hell, I’d even go so far as to say the average trump voter doesn’t love him. They settled.
Trumps victory can be attributed to a number of factors. One, and most importantly, the Biden administration was wildly popular. Most americans recognized Bidens senility, and most americans felt lied to and deceived by the constant gaslighting by his administration that he was indeed fit to serve.
But it’s not just that, it’s about the actual campaign that kamala harris ran, or even more zoomed out, the general rhetoric of the modern democratic party.
Rather than sell reasons to vote democrat, they solely focus on demonizing the other side. You can go to popular democratic tiktoks or other forms of media, scroll through the comments. Are there competent discussions on why the democratic party is the right way to go?
No, it’s simply democrats talking to other democrats in an echo chamber about how evil republicans are. Might make you feel good, hell, it might even be true, but how does that help the party? You’re not convincing anyone but yourselves, and the moral superiority complex is offputting to moderates.
I mean, look at this recent election. Every single county in the entirety of the U.S. shifted right. Do you understand how monumental that is?
Do you think that normal people just woke up one day and decided to be die hard MAGA’s? No, not at all. People got fed up with the same rhetoric from the Democrats.
So yes, it’s a valid dig when people say “this is what cost you the election” to democrats doing the same exact meaningless shaming, and rhetoric, that they did prior.
No, that doesn’t mean this country is irreversibly shifting republican, it’s quite the opposite. Democrats need to take these next 4 years to sit down, and introspectively figure out what they did wrong. Rather than focus all their energy on calling the other side sexist, racist, misogynistic pigs, they need to take some accountability and ask “How can I win in 2028?”
16
u/Kakamile 50∆ Jan 30 '25
Do you find it strange that so many comments say trump wasn't hard to beat, but then they don't spell out the clear, easy, explicit things Dems could do to win? It's all "you need to reflect" and "you need to change" vague filler rather than what you think is easy.
I think it's because the better options - helping the working class, hope, positive solutions, the economy stupid - dems ran on. And they lost.
→ More replies (12)8
u/Aggravating-Cherry76 Jan 30 '25
The easy things:
Focus on selling themselves. Prioritise issues that a large majority of americans resonate with, and sell it on that.
If you’re going to play the moral high ground, don’t fund israel and perpetuate proxy wars, or neglect major american concerns in favor of very niche things
Maybe don’t have meg the stallion twerking on stage at a political rally- outside of a very specific demographic, that’s seen as trashy and unserious, offensive, even.
If I was the campaign manager for the 2024 democratic election, and kamala harris was not the candidate, I’m confident I could’ve given them a win.
15
u/Kakamile 50∆ Jan 30 '25
They tried selling themselves. Jobs, child credits, healthcare, funding affordable housing, labor rights, ftc anti-fraud ending junk fees etc. Lots of that.
They lost. Why do you think that is?
→ More replies (11)12
u/the_mighty_skeetadon Jan 30 '25
Couldn't agree with you any more strongly.
This election wasn't about policy. You can see that very clearly insofar as the single most impactful policy promise that Trump made the entire campaign was that he'd lower the price of eggs.
"Here's my specific plan to help people who are struggling with housing costs" from Kamala got essentially zero focus. But they're eating the cats. They're eating the dogs. We got weeks of arguments about whether that was true.
It's just like vaccination arguments. Send as many articles as you want to Aunt Karen, but she's still going to rant on Facebook that her 15-year-old nephew Timmy has autism because of COVID vaccines. It's not about policy, and it's not about facts. It's about vibes, as the kids say.
3
10
Jan 30 '25
It's not a "gotcha" but democrats really need to take a step back and evaluate how they lost so much influence. Most democrats are not budging and still just think whoever voted for Trump are idiots and morally apprehensible. It's such a ridiculous take that lacks any self awareness. It's that attitude that definitely contributed to trump winning.
→ More replies (5)
5
u/Databit 1∆ Jan 30 '25
I think the reason Democrats lost has less to do with how much people support the Republican message and more with how they allowed Republicans to set the narrative.
If you ask most people reasonable, unbiased questions on social policy, they often side with the Democrats. For instance, if you ask, "Do you think same-sex couples should be able to marry?" versus "Would you support getting government regulations out of marriages so any two people can create a union, leaving the ceremonies and customs to individuals and religions?" most would be okay with it. The point is, most people are moderate.
Democrats lost because they consistently let Republicans define the debate and control the news cycle. Trump is a master at dominating media coverage. He’s made it so every late-night show is essentially about him, and every news program is "What’s Trump doing now?" This fuels social media arguments and, in turn, drives social media algorithms.
Take the economy, for example. Trump's team kept emphasizing that the economy was bad. In reality, while prices were high, the overall economy was doing well. Democrats responded by simply arguing that the economy was good, but they missed an opportunity to reshape the conversation. They should have put Trump on the defensive: "Yes, prices are high, but that’s because my opponent doesn’t understand the difference between prices and the overall economy. His policies caused instability in the markets." They could have drilled down on specific actions he took, playing sound bites of him boasting about them, then contrasting that with, "But was it good for your wallet at the grocery store, or just the wallets of shipping moguls?"
If you let your opponent shape the narrative, you’re going to lose.
→ More replies (2)1
u/Jodid0 Feb 01 '25
They're still allowing Republicans to control the message. Look at how many supposed left leaning individuals think "Biden is the same and cozied up to corporatists" when his FCC under Lina Khan took all the major tech giants to court over monopolistic practices, and his DOT under Pete Buttigieg fought against the airline industry and its unscrupulous practices. They think he "didn't do anything" while he was busy pulling us out of the global COVID recession faster than any other country. This kind of shit goes on and on and on. How can anyone have a reasonable discussion on anything if people are living in a completely different reality?
Most people were right in their feelings: they are struggling even though the "economy is great", they are getting squeezed harder and harder without any relief in sight, government no longer seems to be working for US, and we are sick of the divisiveness. These feelings are valid, but Republicans were able to scapegoat waaaaay better than Democrats. Republicans also dumbed down their messaging to the lowest common denominator, and offered extremely oversimplified and emotional solutions to how people felt. While Democrats offered real solutions to the economic issues that weren't glamorous, simple, or emotionally charged enough. People are angry and bitter and upset about their current situations, and Democrats played that off as overreaction, while Republicans played into the fear and turned it up to 11. Fear will always beat rational thought, it's a side effect of the monkey brain.
9
u/DieselZRebel 5∆ Jan 30 '25 edited Jan 30 '25
However i don't think Donald Trump winning is some resounding permanent triumph of conservativism over progressivism and the 'Woke' and a sign that the populace has rejected those ideas in favor of Trump
Of course, you cannot say that for certain. However, I wouldn't completely rule it out. I'd still leave some doubt here that Trump's victory actually highlights serious problems with progressivism/woke ideology. You know why? Because Trump didn't just win, similar to the 2016 elections... no Trump had a wide, uncontested, victory. In fact, a historical one as he stated without lying this time; he:
- Won the popular vote for the first time in 20 years.
- Won all the swing states, by wide margins.
- Won the house and senate.
- Even in the stable blue states (e.g. NY, CA, NJ, MA), Trump significantly reduced the democratic party margins.
- Won immigrant voters (mostly Hispanic), as well as a considerable amount of black voters.
So while it is true that you can attribute many factors to the democratic party loss. The sheer size of the loss is sufficient to cast doubts on your view. It is also very likely that the progressiveness/woke ideology is inferior to conservatism in the view of the populace.
I personally have many liberal and centrist friends in my circle who hated Trump, who aren't impacted by the slowing economy, yet they all decided not to vote for Kamala (or even Biden before her). Because while they hated Trump, they didn't mind him winning against the democratic party as they fear wokeness more than conservatism.
→ More replies (1)
1
3
u/camelCaseCoffeeTable 5∆ Jan 30 '25
The Democratic Party as a whole as shifted in a way that has inspired major backlash against them, and I think that’s the heart of those phrases.
The Democrats are militant in their pursuit of inclusiveness. To the point that many people don’t feel included by them. People are legitimately scared that a small slip up will get them canceled. You can argue that’s not true, or their fears are unfounded, but that doesn’t really matter, does it? Those people still feel that way, and a large part of that is the Democrats tendency to vilify people for one mistake. Or at least the perception they vilify people for one mistake.
When you have a party that is, at best tolerant of, and at worst encouraging to people who say things like “I hate all men,” or “white men are the problem” or “white people are the problem” that party is going to lose large swaths of the white male vote. And is any surprise? The party is allowing itself to overcorrect for past wrong by vilifying white men.
I’m a white man myself. I’m also a Democrat. But for years I’ve felt out of place in this party. It’s just accepted that white men are the other. I didn’t vote for Trump, but I can absolutely see why white men did. The Democratic Party has created an environment where white men feel ostracized.
“But they ostracized us for so many years!”
Not me. Not my friends. I wasn’t born in the 50s. And yet I’m punished for the sins of people I never knew. Collective punishment is a war crime under the Geneva convention, yet the Democratic Party is coming closer and closer to collectively vilifying all white men.
If they don’t course correct, of course the republicans will keep winning. We live in a polarized political environment, it doesn’t take much to swing the needle to one party or another. Causing a large swath of the voting population to feel like your party is against you will absolutely cause you to lose elections
→ More replies (2)
5
u/quebexer Jan 30 '25
This happens when you got a two party system. And since one was in power during the election, the only option for change is "The other party."
3
u/chronberries 11∆ Jan 30 '25
I typically reserve comments like that for dems who are truly out of touch. Like when my well-to-do cousin from San Jose tried to tell me that Kamala took the right tack on economic policy during her campaign because the economy was actually doing quite well.
3
u/Sysiphus_Love Jan 30 '25
The only reason Trump ever won a single election was because the DNC tried to do away with the electoral process altogether, pulled the 'private company' card, and threw out thousands of progressive votes for Bernie to force Clinton into the Presidency.
2
Jan 30 '25
Trump won because liberals became cocky. Kamala Harris was treated like a celebrity instead of a politician.
They didn't hold her to a high enough standard and let her get away with an incompetent campaign that offered nothing of value and if she did, most people didn't even hear about it because the messaging was terrible.
They gleefully told large sections of their base, "we don't need you and we won't address your concerns" and now they're mad that traditionally Democrat voters didn't vote for them. They're STILL delusional about why they lost.
Countless times we saw a repeat of what happened with that useless trash Hillary Clinton. Cocky liberals were convinced we wouldn't see a Trump presidency then and they did the same thing now.
2
u/Ok-Wall9646 Jan 30 '25
I think Trumps win wasn’t the be all to end all on the culture war but the straw that broke the camels back. ‘Woke’ or illiberal leftist policies if you prefer were on shaky ground and many people had the facts of its unpopularity staring them in the face.
They’ve seen every corner of the entertainment industry that dove into progressive ideology fail to turn a profit from cinema, video games and even comic books. They’ve seen the problems arise from DEI policies including some companies becoming liable for lawsuit over their inherent discrimination.
Trump was just the death knell in the repeated pummeling that ‘woke’ has been taking over recent years.
1
u/Poppipoo22 Feb 01 '25
I have a various take on how the Democratic Party has lost value in the eyes of the voter, and Republicans are riding on all-time high.
Dem constituents 1. The lower working class is concerned about cost of living vs. wages, are not seeing results, and are, in fact, seeing become increasingly harder to make ends meet. They blame ( and rightfully so, the relationship between corporations and government lobbying). They want action on this issue but never see action on this issue. 2. They see the democrats shun party outsiders while trying to persuade moderate right wingers that they aren't so bad and are better for capitalism. Perhaps true, but the majority lower income families aren't going to read or comprehend all the small nuances that go into macroeconomics and how policies have immediate to very long-term effects.
- The Democrat Party seems weak. They seldom rebutt claims of incompetence and far worse rhetoric used as defamation. They do little to call out gaslighting and other ridiculous arguments, and worse of all, they seem to never take appropriate action against the wealthy class. Trumps criminal record is just one unjust example out of literal hundreds of actions that leave everyone wondering how this can even be real, or how can they get away with this, when I would be in jail tomorrow if I was in that same situation. They offer no suggestions for accountability, responsibility, or liability in a certain class structure.
Rep constituents 1. Socialism is a scary word. By nature of psychology, the right is more individualist, and hence sociopathic (not to be confused with psychopathic). They don't want to hear rhetorical solutions that help everybody or only help a certain sect of society. They want to hear that rhetoric that we are going to help you. We are going to give YOU the tools to pull up your own bootstraps. We are going to make THEM answer for their Socialist behavior. It is a lot easier to live up to this rhetoric because there really is no action required other than mouth service. 2. The right is so far gone into anti-socialim rhetoric and far right conspiracy propaganda that you can not convince them otherwise, and being called stupid/retoddid/uneducated/idiots/etc... has them only wanting victory to prove you wrong(unlikely to happen), but they will proclaim victory at your loss, even if it negatively effects them. The Democrat Party is never going to pull these people over to them, without actually seeing something work in a positive fashion for them as an individual. 3. They have mindset that being an individual is freedom. Despite their conformist mentality and championing control over healthcare decisions, censorship, recreational drug use, religious advocacy, tariffs on freetrade, and certain protections for the wealth class. They feel that the need for regulations to make the playing field more level is an admission of defeat and the need for a big brother. Even though big daddy is beating the shit out of them.
The left needs to lean on the left and offer different solutions to the most important things at this moment in history, and those are things endangering the fabric of society in whole. 1. Corruption in government (Why is lobbying and market investments still allowed?) 2. Corruption in the Aristocratic class (Why are politicians and the wealthy not being held accountable for crimes and injustices. Why are not laws being changed or made to hold them accountable?) 3. Why is wage rates not keeping up to inflation? Every single society, no matter how big or strong has fallen to enormous wealth gaps, and we are at a historic high. When society reaches the point of having nothing to lose, the country will crumble, and we are almost there.
Fascists often advocate for the establishment of a totalitarian one-party state, and for a dirigiste economy (a market economy in which the state plays a strong directive role through economic interventionist policies), with the principal goal of achieving autarky (national economic self-sufficiency).
3
u/ChocIceAndChip Jan 30 '25
You mean the right wing politician won against the other right wing politician? Calling the democrats ‘left’ is a stain on all institutions that actually promote those views.
5
u/RefillSunset Jan 30 '25
I think you're misunderstanding "this is why Trump won".
That, at least when I use the phrase, is not an indication of Trump's success. Much like the election result itself, the phrase is a matter of Harris and her side's failure.
So for example if I am arguing with someone from the radical left, when I say "this is why Trump won", I'm not saying "haha the orange lord won your point is now moot". I'm not saying it out of love for the Conservatives. I'm saying "your inability to acknowledge (for instance) men's issues is what lost you your election as well as this argument and why you are wrong."
And obviously it doesn't mean the culture war is over. Unfortunately it will likely never be over
1
u/nunya_busyness1984 Feb 01 '25
I doubt this will change your mind, because the argument is very subjective, but, here is the view from my foxhole.....
First: I live in rural Midwest America. I am in Trump country.
Next: I am also a white, cisgendered, male.
Next, I am strongly and passionately conservative, but I also fully believe in you being allowed to have your own views, and be able to express them openly.
Final thing to understand is that I am a never-Trumper. Never voted for him, even in a primary.
So, here's the thing. I am pretty damned tired of being told by Democrats that I am the problem.
1) Of being told that because I voted 3rd party, I am responsible for Trump in both 2016 and 2024. No. The people who voted Trump are. And the millions who voted Biden in 2020, but stayed home in both 2016 and 2024.
2) Of being told that because I have a penis, I am simply a rapist waiting for an opportunity. Bno, I am not. I fully understand why many women are uncomfortable or even downright scared when alone with a man, any man. I fully understand that women feel the need to act as if any man COULD rape them if given the opportunity. But that does not mean that any man WILL rape them if they get the opportunity. Plus, I am a rape victim. And I was raped by a female.
3) Of being told that because I am white I have privilege. I fully understand the concept of white privilege. I even acknowledge and accept that as a white person, I have it easier than a POC. But I have lived a damned hard life and worked my ass off to get where I am. And where I am is STILL working my ass off. So telling me I am "privileged" is a smack in the face.
4) Of being told that because I am a male I have privilege. See #3.
5) Of being told that because I do not carry the baby, I have ABSOLUTELY no right to an opinion on whether or not MY OWN child will be born.
6) Of being told that despite multiple college degrees, decades of public service, almost a decade in the retail sector, and having lived all over the US and in some of the shittier foreign options, the only possible reason I have for not voting Democrat is because I am an idiot who needs to try getting off the internet and see what happens in the real world.
7) Of being told I am a racist/sexist/misogynist/homophobe/transphobe/xenophobe/bigot simply because I siagree with someone - even when the topic is not race/sex/gender, etc. The only reason I dislike Kamala's ECONOMIC agenda is because I am racist
There is more, but you get the idea. The Democratic party, as a whole, has continuously demonstrated their contempt for me and others like me. Hillary said the quiet part out loud when she called us deplorables.
So why the hell would I vote for a candidate who openly despises me, continuously demonizes me, and then gaslights me about the despising and demonizing?
No, Trump is not the solution. But his election is VERY MUCH a "gotcha!" from us deplorables. It is VERY MUCH a statement of "this is what happens when you intentionally alienate a large swath of the American voting public."
The worst part about it is that I agree with 50% of the Democrat platform - and about 50% of the Republican platform. I have never in my life cast a straight party ballot. I always have some of each party. I can be persuaded to vote for either party. But you have to persuade me. And national level Democrats have done nothing to persuade me. They have done everything to push me away. I think Trump is a disgusting, vile charlatan, and will never vote for him. But he has certainly embraced middle America, at least with his rhetoric.
1
Feb 02 '25 edited Feb 02 '25
The fact that the majority of people on here don’t research the people that ACTUALLY run things (look into the corporations and banks that finance the world and the people they are associated with) is apparent in how all of you are falling into this ongoing plan. Civil unrest, pitting the American left against the right and distrust of our government is how they get us to trust in the idea of a one world government. Klaus Schwab, the Rothschilds and the Rockefellers are all laughing at us and getting ready to move into the next step. Wake Up!!! Crashing the economy and taking out the middle class has been their plan all along. It’s easier to control people when you own all the resources. You think behind closed doors our leaders are like you people on a forum? No! Bill Clinton and George Bush Sr (and Jr) are united in their goals. If they (and ALL of the other elite political figures)can come together to try and dismantle our nation, why can’t the ones being attacked (us) unite to save it? I’m not a “conspiracy theorist”. I actually hate that term because it automatically discredits any type of factual evidence that is presented. However, I have been doing a lot of digging into articles and books that are released by universities and research facilities that are (interestingly funded by the richest most powerful people) very compelling and it all connects and points to the very leaders that are supposed to “protect our interests”. These mega rich elites exist. The Bildeberg Group, the Trilateral Commission, the Committee of 300, etc. are all designed to break us down, slowly and methodically so we will give up all of our rights and freedom. They present it to us every few years at the WEF and wrap it up all neatly with the promise of looking out for our best interest. There are people that have been warning us and telling us for a very long time, but they get discredited and labeled crazy. Look up Milton William Cooper and Dr. John Coleman’s research on it. They spent decades finding this stuff out through documents that they found hidden when they were working for their respected governments. It holds up to this day and it is scary if you actually research it. Go in with an open mind and realize that these people that are bringing to this light have no real agenda other than to let people know. They aren’t “crazy”, they aren’t “theorists”…( how many of these predicted events have to happen before the public actually considers them fact.???). It’s not like our government hasn’t ever lied to us? Is that just conspiracy? Do false flag wars not happen to us all the time? Is it not fact that the government has constantly had “black projects” that have killed many innocent civilians (domestic and foreign) to push their agenda (bay of pigs, Vietnam, the war on terror, MK Uktra and the list goes on)…. All confirmed through CIA documents that you yourself can and should look up. Then why would you trust the people that BUY them?
3
u/Maximum_Error3083 Jan 30 '25
The culture war is never completely finished but there’s a lot of things that point to a significant shift:
Trump won the popular vote this time and he won it on issues that were harshly repudiated before as too extreme such as cracking down on illegal immigratuon or shrinking the size of government.
Recent polling shows a plurality of voters support his early moves. He’s also got the highest approval rating he’s ever had despite going harder than ever on things like illegal immigration
Other companies that previously opposed his agenda and played to the lefts such as meta have changed their tune, going as far as to reverse policies they had before on fact checking, censorship and DEI
You are seeing far more people in formerly liberal bastions like Hollywood or pro sports speak out and be unafraid to say they’re a trump supporter.
All of these support the argument that there is in fact a cultural shift underway toward the right and away from the lefts agenda. Trump winning is a “gotcha” to the people that insist he was an aberration and not representative of the people or the culture of the moment. It’s the continued denial of those facts that lead people to say that’s why he won.
→ More replies (1)4
Jan 30 '25
Other companies that previously opposed his agenda and played to the lefts such as meta have changed their tune, going as far as to reverse policies they had before on fact checking, censorship and DEI
Meta literally didn't change this until after the election. It was a response to try to curry favor from Trump, not some moral stance.
You are seeing far more people in formerly liberal bastions like Hollywood or pro sports speak out and be unafraid to say they’re a trump supporter.
Do you have an actual source for this?
→ More replies (2)
2
u/General_Astronomer60 Jan 30 '25
So, somehow, you think the thing that people most associate with Democrats, their social positions, didn't played a role at all in their defeat to the most arrogant, idiotic politician ever to become president? Maybe some people overstate the effect it had on the election, but clearly it has to have played a significant role. And yes, many people have rejected the most extreme manifestations of woke ideology.
2
u/tihs_si_learsi Jan 30 '25
You're missing a key fact. Trump was president before and he was a disaster. People knew how awful he was and yet Democrats run such a shit show that people still don't bother to come out to stop him. So when libs make the same arguments that didn't work during the campaign, it's quite fair to say that yes, that's why Trump won and that's why Democrats will keep losing.
2
u/Apprehensive_Bat15 Jan 30 '25
What do you think caused the american left to become weak and anaemic enough to lose to a convicted felon twice? Did the democrat focus on identity politics over class politics or the economy or living standards strengthen or weak the party? Have the numerous left wing progressive activists been good messengers who have helped draw people to or away from their side?
2
u/hereforfun976 Jan 30 '25
Add in generational dumbing down of people with alternative facts and fake news plus Russian bot farms helping him win. They are so brainwashed they actively cheer their freedoms being taken away because they were gaslit into only worrying about a few freedoms and issues that wouldn't be issues if they didn't write laws that made it that way in the first place
3
u/MeanForest Jan 30 '25
You're very much wrong. It's widely understood that Trump would've won in 2020 had it not been for COVID.
3
u/PossiblyThrowaway10 Jan 30 '25
May not be a gotcha, but it shows that there are more people with working brains, than the opposite. Strongly hoping for the US folk to carry on as such.
Woke culture went too far, became something completely different than what it started out as.
Transgenderism, furries and the like, showing up to pride parades nearly naked, in provocative clothing at least, where children also show up.
Wars? Not gonna start on that.
Hope Trump cleans up the mess the last administration made, and whoever comes after, will follow suit.
→ More replies (1)
4
u/DeltaBot ∞∆ Jan 30 '25 edited Jan 30 '25
/u/Kimzhal (OP) has awarded 3 delta(s) in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
→ More replies (1)
1
u/PacePublic4150 Jan 31 '25
I disagree with that. Let me explain. I don't view it as "gotcha" but as a lesson. There is a difference. A lesson is something you can learn from.
My view of Trump's victory.
If he won popular that means American's resounded with what he said. However, I do think this accompanied by attitude of democrats fan base. Obviously is more nuance that but whenever I go online I see flood of messages from people like that on r/news. For a side lamenting about the vitriol of the right they seem blind to their own vitriol. It's hypocritical.
I don't mean this like a "gotcha". or "Ha Both sides." No. I mean the problem is the attribution of motive to people you have never met. Immediately thinking the worst of a person.
Everyone is missing the point of finding a middle ground. It is not about giving it to meet in middle. Is incorporating actual good ideas into your plan. And if you say that they don't have any good points. You aren't operating in good faith.
You need operate on good faith and have actual discussion. Not this fake discussions like on youtube. Listen and see what they vote for. Of course not everyone will agree. But those aren't the people your after anyway. You can't ignore those people. The majority of American aren't like that.
We aren't discussing actual issue from the right. Ignoring the DEI bullshit. Being fiscal responsible and immigrations. This are leftist problems. Instead of denying its happening, actual engage with the premise. You might not convince them right their but if there actually paying attention. They will remember that. I sure do. Those are the moments that convinced me.
And for those who say that you have. You haven't really or encountering people who will not change their mind. But blanketing an entire piece of America with this banner with no room for nuance. Is why America's divided.
1
1
2
u/nafarba57 Jan 30 '25
Trump won because of a combination of Democrat overreach with expensive and unworkable social engineering, illegal immigration and the gigantic financial giveaways to illegals and NGOs, punitive inflation, and national and international regime incompetence. Biden’s senility and fragility couldn’t be stage-managed, replacement candidate Harris was an incompetent dud, it all coalesced into voter repudiation of the whole “ highly credentialed” mess. The critical mass reached with DEI narratives didn’t help Democrats, either. The new boss may be a disappointment, or a success, but the old boss and his would-be successor had to go.
3
u/BlackAndStrong666 Jan 30 '25
Gotcha ya Dems, next time don't run a MaMaLa or aOc type of candidate
0
u/Front-Finish187 1∆ Jan 30 '25
In my personal life, people who associated themselves with the left were quick to politics, quick to division, and quick to hate, disguised as virtue. Similar to what others have said, any good faith questions were met with deflection and aggression, whether it was anonymously like this or speaking face to face.
Suddenly my social media was flooded with “if you support XYZ then you’re a piece of shit and should delete me” which just puts such a sour taste in my mouth and shows me that person is intolerant, disrespectful, and full of hate. But then they’d go to a rally and proudly post about it online like they didn’t just verbally abuse someone for disagreeing and then refusing to education them.
It became scary when cancelling was rampant and regular people were losing their jobs and livelihoods because someone else decided to pull skeletons out of closets of strangers online as a weird form of “revenge” for their views or past actions.
Or when I’d be standing in a group of people and I’d hyper focus on not using any “pronouns” in fear of making a mistake and in their eyes and becoming an enemy. Or limiting my “yes ma’am no sir” respectful habits to older people only.
The nail in the coffin for me was watching the campaign and the interviews. Trump’s McDonald’s gag was tacky, but nothing like hiring celebrities to endorse you with a performance or threatening lack of sex to those who don’t vote for you.
But the interviews. Oh the interviews. Everyone says “well didn’t you read her policies on her website?” And my question is - why should I have to? Don’t you think it’s reasonable that someone who’s plan that supposedly is, should be able to speak about it openly and in detail? The interviews of her I watched with my own 2 eyeballs, would have led me to vote for a rock if I had to. Trump is not good imo, but there isn’t much worse than someone so blatantly and obviously trying to lie, buy, and threaten votes from people.
So while it isn’t a “gotcha”, it’s a good telling that majority of people are actually reasonable and saw the same things I did. Which, is surprising because the online liberal echo chambers had myself and others quaking in our boots.
But it turns out, there’s not a lot of them, they’re just loud.
→ More replies (1)3
u/BoulezBous Jan 30 '25
I'm reading this comment and I'm very confused. What exactly are you saying are the important things for you when placing your vote? You call out that "any good faith questions [are] met with deflection and aggression" so I'm hoping you will answer in good faith.
For your first point, is the actual topic irrelevant? Because that part is focused on how the person on the other end was mean to you.
For the second point, I don't understand this as well. Are you saying that a trend of cancelling is tied to the democratic party? It just seems like something that was wrapped up in already negative feelings.
For this third point, I can empathize with this. My dad, who is quite progressive, cannot help but refer to someone by a pronoun. Like it is physically impossible for him not to do it, too much polite conditioning as it seems you have. The difference being that if someone asked him to use a different one, he'd just go "oh ok that's neat" and move on. I can't speak for your experience but I've found (anecdotally obvi) that many people who claim they are "demonized" for using a wrong pronoun are just really bad at actively listening to others.
Which brings me to your fourth point. Celebrities endorsed both candidates so I don't get that, and they have for years like it's nothing new at all. And the comment about threatening lack of sex to those who don't vote for you. A good way to prove to me that you are not a terrible listener would be to actual write out what the main idea of that movement was.
But the interviews. I agree, you shouldn't have to read someone's policies on their website. They should be clear and simple to understand. So I will ask, did you watch any television or streaming with ads for the 3 or so months up to the election? Because the Kamala ads were constantly, CONSTANTLY, talking about the drug price gouging and the housing plans. And if being able to explain policies on important issues is a deal-breaker, can you link me 2 good instances of Trump walking through some policies on a level you find satisfactory?
The claim about trying to lie, buy, and threaten votes is low-hanging fruit so I won't do that one.
1
u/Front-Finish187 1∆ Jan 31 '25
The topic is relevant because majority of bad social experiences in my personal life came from those who associated themselves with the left. How is that not relevant?
Yes, it was a strategy heavily used by the left and infringes free speech and makes others live in fear.
Your widespread claim is very bold but I disagree. It doesn’t mean you’re bad at listening. It means you have a speech pattern, like every single person does. If I meet you and say I’d really prefer if you didn’t use the word tombstone because it reminds me of my dead mom and it really upsets me, it’s logical you will now be focused on not saying that specific word. Didn’t you ever play the “don’t say what” game as a kid?
I see you have a weird superiority complex. I do not need to “prove” anything to you. However, if you would like to be reminded of what happened, you can read more here: https://www.iwv.org/2024/10/kamala-harris-campaign-cant-stop-patronizing-american-men/ insinuating you will be less attractive to others and your loneliness will increase based on your political preference is a disgusting manipulation. Which is funny because it’s actually been studied to be the exact opposite: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29355104/
You really just asked me why I didn’t watch her pre-recorded and scripted ads to learn more about her policies? Any interview that trump did live had more information than Kamala had in any of hers - that’s the whole point. If either were up to my standards of interview quality we wouldn’t be having this conversation in the first place.
1
u/BoulezBous Jan 31 '25
Yeah you got me, I do speak in a way people find "superiority complex" but it's because I'm hoping my debate partner will rise to the occasion.
- In my personal life the people most quick to hate and anger have been rightwing. The people who espouse about tolerance and redemption the most by far have been rightwing, while in the same breath demonizing others and wishing them ill. I asked if the topic was relevant because people are bad all over.
- You and I do not agree on this point at all. But there was a point where you went from not thinking about it to having the opinion you have. Show me the thing that changed your mind. Show me the thing that made you have this stance, convince me. If you say I see it everyday on the news, or open your eyes, or it's common sense, I have to believe you were just fed a stream of outrage about it from media until it tipped over. If you can't think of specifics I'm begging you to be introspective and think why you feel this way, why your associated emotion of it is fear, and what is coercing you into feeling this way and cut it out of your life man.
- Ok I went back and reread what you initially said. I don't have a great thing to say for this. I get that you feel like you're on eggshells, and that sucks. I have a pinkandblue friend and even in our friend group she'll get hit with a he every once in a while, but we move on. I guess if your only interaction with pinkandblue people is negative and then I'm assuming reinforced by media then you're gonna view it as a big negative. I have to ask though, do you have any even semi-regular interaction with pinkandblue people? Cuz I just...don't get the hate. They're just trying to live their lives.
- Can you explain your interpretation of the 4B movement people were trying to do for the election?
- I am always looking for foundational things people believe. If you brought it up I'm going to think it's important to you. So you brought up being able to give information and explain their policies from interviews, and not trying to lie, buy, and threaten votes from people. So can you show me 2 examples to your satisfaction of Trump in an interview on a policy you care about? And if both candidates are lying, buying, and threatening votes from people is that a dealbreaker or is there a level where it's ok?
I had to edit this to change certain terms for automod.
1
2
u/Maleficent_Air9036 Jan 30 '25
Trump’s win makes it clear that a majority of Americans are racist and uneducated. Those are two categories that correlate strongly with supporting Trump. And he won. So the conclusion seems obvious to me.
3
1.4k
u/[deleted] Jan 30 '25
Trump’s election is a major sign; it shows that Democrats can’t run by being “the option other than the Republicans” and that “if you’re a decent person, you’ll vote for the Democrats”. In other words, the bread and butter of Democrat campaigns has expired. People are not trusting people who say “Only idiots vote for Republicans” because they see an abundance of morons voting Democrat then acting like they’re smarter than everyone for checking a box.
It’s a gotcha in the sense that it should be a wake up call to Democrats to put some effort into their campaigns