Trump wins presidency for second time

But the Dems did. They did everything you're asking for. Their messaging was totally different from 2020, everything was clear and understandable.

That's what's so sad. The Democratic campaign was A+ in execution. The Republican campaign was a disaster in execution, but they won anyway.

The message of this election isn't that Democrats did something wrong. It's that they did everything right, and a majority of voters simply still don't care. They don't think the insurrection mattered, and they think Trump will fix inflation because he's a strong businessman. And they don't listen to anyone who says otherwise.

I don't see anything the Dems could have done about that. You can't force people to listen, you can't force people to understand economics. That's not something campaigns can do.

Its hard to say what happened internally, but Biden could have stepped down in time for them to have a proper primary.

The democrats told people who are suffering 'the economy is great, this is what great looks like to us'. How is that a winning message with people suffering?

>The Democratic campaign was A+ in execution.

Objectively untrue; Harris lost.

>You can't force people to understand economics

You're correct. So you have to reformat the message. The Dems failed to do this. I can tell you have never been a teacher: teachers are forever having to change their messaging because different people understand in different ways.

> The Democratic campaign was A+ in execution.

She had 0 counties where she outperformed 2020 biden.

This teaching thing is a terrible comparison. As a teacher you have a captive audience with a (somewhat) agreed upon goal: the student(s) are going to learn something.

This is absolutely not the model for candidate<->electorate relationships in any way. If anything, the elector(ate) wants the candidate to simply tell them things that confirm what they think they already know.

> can't force people to understand economics

People were actively deceived along the way. Do you remember that intially Yellen (and Powell together) called the inflation "not broad enough to be considered inflation", then called it "transitory" and justified printing so much money all the way into 7% inflation. At 3% PCE, Powell said everybody to relax, that nobody should doubt they will use every tool they have to fight inflation. Bostic at 2% PCE said he is not worried, he welcomes higher inflation, approaching 4% inflation would be cause of concern and would require action. Action that never came. They just lied and misinformed the people for years. People listened to this, it was all over the media. It's wrong to suggest people didn't listen.

Do you remember after 5 years of review they came up with symmetric inflation target of 2% and they instantly abandoned it because that would require lower inflation for decades to come. And nobody in media questioned it, they said people "misunderstood the target".

They don't want to educate people about the economy, they want people as stupid as possible.

>> Their messaging was totally different from 2020, everything was clear and understandable.

But when you have the VP is running for the office that her boss has just occupied for the last four years, the whole point of the VP running is to continue what they started - not suddenly say you would do a bunch of stuff differently when YOU were riding shotgun on the poor economy, inflation, immigration and crime.

Harris was asked repeatedly what she would do differently and said "nothing". She was a horrific candidate. She couldn't speak to voters without a teleprompter, she was a cringe worthy public speaker, she was never on message and always reverted back to, "Well Donald Trump did this and that." which never connected with voters.

She also had a front row seat to Biden's mental decline and repeatedly went in front of the media and defended him to the very end when he was removed and she replaced him. Harris was the same person who got zero financial support from democrats during the 2020 campaign, had to drop out and didn't even make the primaries because of the lack of support from voters.

If you were paying attention, this was completely predictable.

By contrast, Trump was on message, had a plan, left all of his divisive rhetoric at the door. He connected with voters, reached across the aisle and formed a coalition with RFK, Gabbards and Musk. He went on podcasts to reach younger voters. Anybody else see Vance on the Theo Von podcast? He campaigned relentlessly in the key battleground states, he did tons of impromptu interviews.

There's a reason he's projected to get 300+ electoral votes AND win the popular vote and nothing in your comment would seem to understand why.

Take a look at the markets today. Take a look at the price of Bitcoin right now.

The country wanted significant change and they voted that way.

> Objectively untrue; Harris lost.

Yeah, sometimes if you play by the rules you lose.

> So you have to reformat the message.

They did, and it didnt matter.

The argument here is essentially: 1) IF the dems communicated correctly, they would have won 2) They did, and it didnt matter. 3) If they had communicated correctly they would have won.

Correct communication here is a place holder for winning.

Consider the many things the Dems did pull off, including Biden dropping out, and the massive massive outreach and funding they used to get the message out.

Consider that Trump is definitionally reprehensible, as just a human being, forget the standards America used to have as a presidential candidate. Seriously - tell me you think that Trump <the person> is actually what you want in a Republican candidate. Every single time, Trump supporters have to resort to some variant of "he didn't really mean that", to defend him.

There is FAR more incorrect in Dem electioneering than just communication. I think the fundamentals of how elections are held have changed. You dont really need policy any more.

Your criticism of Yellen and Powell's messaging is valid, but I have a very hard time believing that had any impact on this election.

The US fared better than almost industrialized nation post-pandemic. Our inflation is currently under control, unemployment is low, wages are rising. I have a hard time believing that anyone could have handled a hard situation better than the Biden administration. Meanwhile, Trump's stated economic policies (no income tax, make it up with tariffs) are unequivocally bad ideas that would make the prices paid by most Americans far far far higher than what they're paying today.

The overlap between "People who know Jerome Powell and think he did a bad job" and "People who think Trump's fiscal platform will be good for the average American" is close to zero people.

> That's what's so sad. The Democratic campaign was A+ in execution. The Republican campaign was a disaster in execution, but they won anyway.

So, put differently, you're saying that Democrats did not have Product-Market fit, while the Republicans did. Yes?

Trump was on message, had a plan, left all of his divisive rhetoric at the door - Hardly.

>Trump's stated economic policies (no income tax, make it up with tariffs) are unequivocally bad ideas...

...but they are very good memes, as in units of information that compete for attention. I think we are now, post-2016, in the social media era of elections, where policy content matters far less than policy vibes.

Dems are not in the venues where people are talking about these issues. I see tons of right wing youtubers, tiktokers, podcasts, and there is just far less dems in these environments or willing to go to these places. You need more Bernie types (not necessarily his politics exactly) but the willingness to go these places repeatedly and talk about ideas.

Are you serious? The entire nation was fully captivated this election cycle.

"By contrast, Trump was on message, had a plan, left all of his divisive rhetoric at the door."

This is when I knew you were screwing with us.

Because you guys twist everything the guy says

Captivated is not captive, and even if it is etymologically adjacent, most of the electorate did not expect to have to learn about stuff like econometrics ...

I think every single thing Trump did during the last 3 months hurt his campaign, actually. It had just already gotten to the point where nothing he said mattered, because people were choosing him based on their experience in 2019

> Objectively untrue; Harris lost.

I would fault the Democratic party platform itself, not the campaign. It's valid to say the campaign was executed well and that the failure was due to disagreement with the Democrat party line.

Trump has a policy platform they agree with more -- that's something that is not easily overcome by how the campaigns are run.

E.g. "secure the border". Trump fought to build a wall during his first term. To voters who want a more secure border, that speaks louder than anything either candidate can say (or not say) during their campaigns about what they will or won't do.

They could have also not perpetrated a genocide. I haven't committed a single genocide during the biden term. How hard can it be?

Then I meant captivated AND captive. Why are you being pedantic?

This is nonsense.

From the memorable “grab them by the pussy”, to fabricating stuff about the draft recently.

“ She’s already talking about bringing back the draft. She wants to bring back the draft, and draft your child, and put them in a war that should never have happened.”

The only twisting here is when people try to ignore what he is saying and pretend he meant something benign.

Is it? Because between part time job, gigs, and people falling off unemployment benefits from receiving them too long I don't trust unemployment figures, they are measuring the wrong thing. It seem people work longer hours, for less disposable income overall.

> The Democratic campaign was A+ in execution.

polls had 'country on the wrong path' at ~75%

Kamala Harris wouldn't break from biden on anything, even when she was begged by the media to do it several times over several days.

That's just one example of dumb shit the dnc/kamala did.

How was anybody captive? I didn't see a single campaign ad or watch a single rally, except for a couple of brief excerpts that I chose to.

You're missing the critical point: it's not about captive, it's just that this helps with the critical point, which is an expectation of learning taking place, rather than worldviews/prejudices confirmed.

Don't bother with unemployment, look at labor force participation.

Buttigieg did this literally nonstop on behalf of Biden and Harris. Did nothing.

I see, I missed that nuance in your point.

The problem is he's not harris and he just started doing this like a month ago.

Pretty much any US president would've supported Israel similarly.

They don't have to though. It's easy, just don't send weapons to a perpetuate a genocide. A child could pull it off.

Sure, I don't disagree but that's not the policy of the US under many, many presidents.