There were moments by both campaigns that could’ve easily done them in but there were two particular incidents that I knew would swing the election. I know because it swung mine. This was the most patronizing thing I’ve seen from a campaign trail. It insulated a couple of things. Either A: That men are violent/controlling of their spouses/gfs or B: That we give a crap about how women vote That they tried the same ad but with men shows how out of touch they are with the Brotherhood. Fellow dudes, when’s the last time we spoke to each other about who we voted for? Unless it’s in passing, I can’t imagine a single place it would come up amongst men outside of a political meeting. But that was relatively harmless(or would have been) if not for Michelle’s politically in conceived speech. If her goal was to turn male voters away from Kamala, it’s actually astute but only in that sense. “Please vote for us, and if you don’t then you don’t care about women.” That’s what men heard, and again it’s greatly offensive. It was a sure fire way to get men to either be indifferent or vote Trump. Now, the exit polls back me up completely. Guess where the only change came in the last week? You guessed it: Men. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-elections/exit-polls?amp=1 And at that, to a 7-12% difference in the vote among late deciders. It was a devastating week for Kamala, and it all could’ve been avoided. To be fair to her, she wasn’t the one who framed these messages in this way. But they were her surrogates in the campaign trail. Ladies, if you want men to vote in favor of women issues you have to give them a positive reason to do so. This “OMG, you’re awful” passive aggressive crap doesn’t work unless you’re my daughter and sometimes not even then. If a guy talked to another guy like that, ****’s going down. With ladies we largely have to take it. But the vote to her point was indeed a way to bitchslap it back. So we did. Talk about counterintuitive.
All Kamala had was divisive identity politics. I could vote for a classic liberal candidate, but when a campaign tries to assign guilt to me that is a non-starter. I am not a racist because I did not like Obama. I am not a sexist because I did not like Clinton.
The liberal hive cannot accept that their version of subjugation wasn't more successful. And now they are mad at the public for having rejected them. It's funny shyte.
Kamala did the best she could with the strategy she decided to use. The Obama strategy "when they go low, we go high". It doesn't work anymore! Trump chose lies and personal attacks. Democrats need to learn from this. They didn't even need to lie. Telling the truth about Trump... hammering it in... using all those billions she had at her disposal to remind people over and over, every single day, that Trump is a convicted felon and a rapist... THAT is what works today. I was left with a bit of a bad feeling after the VP debate that I couldn't quite put my finger on. I, like most democrats, was expecting Waltz to corner JD Vance on HIS lies. He chose an amicable debate. In hindsight that was a bad idea! Lies need to be confronted with facts. But this has to be done over and over because... people tend to forget... If Democrats expect to make any gains in the midterms... and win in 2028, REMINDING people every single day of the kind of creep who will be in the WH is mandatory. And they will be criticized for wrestling in the mud with the pigs but, if it works.... who cares!
Idk I think the polls were playing games so it's easy to take how close it appeared going in to the last week with how different it actually was as attributable to things like a few campaign ads when Kamala simply is a crappy candidate who runs crappy campaigns even when gifted with tons of money and a criminal for an opponent. Itd be real interesting I think to take a dive into each campaigns inner polling and see if the writing was on the wall a lot earlier, and when that shift took place
I disagree. If Harris lost because she wasn't mean or nasty enough, that's fine with me. Personally, I would never run for office, but if I did, I'd rather keep my personal integrity and be polite and courteous and lose, rather than being a mean, nasty prick and win. Looking at the disgusting attack ads from both sides, even at low level races, I think it is about time that we have a politician who beats their opponent with kindness. Maybe I am being naive....
I personally go on YT and watch the Nixon V Kennedy debates. We used to have class in our system and now both sides are doing it.
The point I'm making is that it's what WORKS. I'm not in favor of being nasty for the sake of being nasty. But I AM 100% for telling the truth! I don't think that raping women is less nasty than telling people that the guy they want to put in the WH is a rapist.
Commiemalla never "went high". She couldn't. That would mean she would have to talk about the issues and that's the last thing her handlers wanted.
So, calling Trump supporters fascists, racists, sexists, homophobes, xenophobes, terrorists, garbage and traitors wasn't nasty enough?...lol
I agree with you 100%. Strange that Biden got elected being that he also had UNPROVEN rape accusations against him You libs and your FIBS People see through it now, thats why the red wedding happened.
Really. So how is it then that the best candidate the democrats have couldn't beat Hitler? That's what you did, you know. Tried to convince everyone that Trump was Hitler. It failed.
Because "Hitler" knows how to manipulate his cult. I wouldn't compare Trump to Hitler but, since you do... I'll just come along for the ride.
Lets be blunt, shall we? The democrats, in their arrogance, tried to sell four more years of brandon. But brandon showed the world he wasn't up to the task anymore. Stuff happens. But the real mistake, the one that sealed the deal, was choosing Harris to replace brandon, and it was done in a political form of insurrection. No blood was spilled, but Harris was the anointed one without benefit of a single vote from her "followers". And then they let her speak without a handler, without any safeguards. Whether it was because after brandon they were just plain tired of always being ready to pull the plug, or they figured after brandon harris could manage, or whatever. The fact is, harris shot herself in the foot. And cackled doing it. And she had help from the media; the obvious talking point that compared trump to hitler, the milk toast reaction to the assasination attempts, and the sophmoric attempt to distance harris from brandon, even though they had been so clearly attached at the hip since the beginning. I'll tell you what I think might have pulled it out for harris. Nothing. Once she was the chosen one, and once she was let loose without a filter, the die was cast. It was trumps to lose. So now, hopefully, trump will put good people in the right place, he'll be transparent as he can be with America, and his media people will be better than the left's media people. He has a chance. For at least the next two years he holds both houses and can expect them to go along with much of his agenda. The left will twirl and pee all over, but if republicans stay true, then trump will have a chance. Because according to democrats this isn't over yet. Not by a long shot. The goal is still to get trump, no matter what.
No thanks. I prefer facts, arguments and rational thought. Read your post and found none... If you want to make a point, MAKE it. Straight to the point. Because I'm not willing to waste my time reading endless meaningless crap anymore.
The DNC platform is as it always is, piss poor policies drowned out by identity politics and scary name calling.
