Even if you support his economic approach, for example, wouldn't his criminal behaviour, or his racist and transphobic views disqualify him? One does not wash away the other.
openly going after him that way and trying to "destroy" him (letisha), using the legal system as a bludgeon for political reasons was a huge mistake. so this continuously worked for him, not against.
you could take anybody of any party and find a venue somewhere in the country with a cooperative DA and get a jury to convict on some felony. [1] people realize this and aren't fooled. so it just isn't done. it probably isn't done more because it's a self-own than because it's morally wrong, but that's politics.
the ends certainly do not justify the means, but regardless it's also an incredibly stupid strategy.
> racist and transphobic views
unfortunately, these words, as well as "nazi" and "fascist" have been misused, abused, and overused to the point of utter uselessness. so now it's far to easy for people to just say "maybe i don't like DEI or i do like having police dept. so apparently makes me a 'literally violent racist' now. this is just more of that same vitriol, ignoring it"
trump did not win the election. he just stood around while the radicals and extremists on the left lost it for themselves. bigly.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Give_me_the_man_and_I_will_giv...
Yep. The ‘Twitter Left’ (pejorative) royally shit the bed with this one. Their unbridled vitriol contributed heavily to the overall ‘no words mean anything anymore’ nature of US politics. It’s really the primary way that the Left contributed to the whole phenomenon.
Dare point out that something someone did isn’t actually ‘fascist’, and dare suggest that the implication only serves to muddy the waters, and you’ll be chastised by someone that in all likelihood isn’t as much of a ‘radical leftist’ as you in any meaningful way.
I hope the loud kids are happy with where we’ve ended up. Evidently so, because it’s only gotten worse.
Post truth. As in people can lie, other people will expect they are lying, and still promote The liar.
people are still feeling the residual effects of the economy. they felt that and decided they wanted change. not to mention Harris had a 3 month ramp up, and people didn't know her.
twitter was filled with "woke" around 2016 and 2020 by the way; Americans still gave the Democrats the popular vote.
> people are still feeling the ... effects of the economy > they felt that and decided they wanted change.
this i agree with, except that effects are "residual". it's not improving for most people on the bottom 1/2. it's brutal out here.
> Americans still gave the Democrats the popular vote
now this is widely reported that as not true [1], CNN showing ~51.2%, which would be the best in 20 years [2].
[1] https://www.cnn.com/election/2024 [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_presiden...
that was a mistype. I meant to say the residual effects of COVID on the economy.
> now this is widely reported that as not true [1], CNN showing ~51.2%, which would be the best in 20 years [2].
I think you misunderstood; I meant that the Democrats won the popular vote in 2020 and 2016.
It is rhetoric that tries to paint the picture that his supporters must be racist and transphobic, or at the very least tries to create a chilling effect where people are afraid to come out in his support for fear of being labelled as such.
> He questioned Harris' racial identity during the campaign.
It was an obvious jab at the identity politics of the democratic party. Besides - regardless of how stupid it is - questioning someone's racial identity does not make one a racist.
> He claimed at numerous rallies that boys would come home from school as girls without their parents knowledge.
I'm sure he means that literally and there's clearly no explanation for wanting to ban the promotion of sex-reassignment to children other than being transphobic.
Look, I don't like the man either and I'm nowhere near what he represents politically, but these attacks are ridiculously transparent to me and anyone who isn't so overjoyed to swallow them as truth they've become completely blind. It's fooling nobody but the already fooled. To everyone else it's actively off-putting.
https://www.donaldjtrump.com/agenda47/president-trumps-plan-...
I agree that you can’t generalise, since there are many voters who are simply not aware of positions / policy like the above. Having said that there are plenty who are, and they love to troll by saying the bad part out loud then dissembling through hand waving or claims of irony or victimhood.
Off-topic rant… I’ve seen identity politics mentioned over and over again the past 24 hrs. I don’t know what the definition is, but promising to dismantle the legal and medical apparatus surrounding an entire identity sure looks like identity politics to me. And personally, the only time I am exposed to any form of identity politics is when I see conservatives screeching about the topic whilst espousing heavily political opinions on why they don’t like certain identities.
That policy clearly and specifically targets children from a medical perspective, not an "entire identity".
You could say arguing the government will only recognise two genders or ban people born men from womens sports is transphobic, but it seems a weak position. The policy doesn't do anything to adult trans people that I can see, beyond the sports element.
The summary appears to be "adults can make these decisions, not kids", which a few years ago was seen as a fairly moderate position.
It is fine to say: "I think his policy is transphobic.". Do not say or imply: "If you support Trump, you must be fine with his transphobia."
Not only is the latter a disrespectful way to have a political discussion, it's also likely to backfire once people are in the voting booth. It is especially likely to backfire if people take the time to actually look at his position and find it to be moderate.
Logically those groups are racist transphobic and misogynistic support Trump. It's factual because it's logical.
In fact, I would much rather prefer conservatives go back to saying slurs. I'd much rather hear 'whore' or 'slut' than having policies to chase women out of state for getting a legal abortion.
I'd much rather hear 'fa*got' than have PrEP coverage revoked causing another HIV epidemic.
I'd much rather hear 'tr*ny' than have even more transgender people kill themselves.
Conservatives desire an ideal argumentative perspective where they can actively harm others and claim they didn't cause the consequences. It doesn't work that way. If you support an action and are aware of the consequences, you support the consequences.
MLK was arrested and convicted many times. Mandela spend decades is jail. Navalny was convicted and ultimately killed in jail.
When the government is after you for your political activity, such convictions don't count for much.
> He questioned Harris' racial identity during the campaign
When a candidate was selected for the office for belonging to certain race and gender [0], and bases political messaging on racial identity [1], I think it makes it quite valid for questioning.
[0]: https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/28/politics/joe-biden-potential-...
[1]: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/turning-page-...
The "actual truth" of the matter does not matter today -- the perception is truly that he is a god-like hero, come to save the masses from the oppression of the elite.
I mean, come on.
Well when you put it like that.
But really, it's interesting how this time around my entire Puerto Rican side of the family voted for Trump. All lifelong democrats too. These folks are the core of the country: Teamsters members, paraprofessionals, and mid-tier civil servants. They laughed at the joke about the pile of trash. They left Puerto Rico in the 60s for a reason.
As much as you don't like to admit it, your idea of "divisive" and "racist" and "violent" is based on a subjective standard. It just is. A lot of people disagree or don't find it offensive enough to care. I can't stress this part enough; these are the actual majority of America as indicated yesterday.
This is all to try and point out that this is a great time for the Democrats of America to take a hard look in the mirror and realize that, if this guy is so bad, then how the hell did he win so convincingly? I'll give you a hint but it involves the fact that a lot of these demonized Trump voters are, indeed, very fine people that would give you the shirt of their backs if you needed it.
Less than a third of Americans cast votes for Trump in this cycle.
I was inartfully making a claim that voter apathy is a big thing, and as a result no winner can ever really claim to represent a majority of Americans.
IIRC 2020 was the only election of modern times where any candidate garnered more support than "did not vote." Putting it clearly here: neither Obama, Bush, Clinton, Bush, Reagan garnered support of the majority of Americans. It's not a partisan argument I am making here.
A form of government where a third or 40% of the governors routinely fail to exercise their duty has problems.
Logically their hands are dirty now.
Either way, it is such mouth foaming of the wokespeople that fuels the right.
For example:
> they're literally paying a guy to enact those policies and views.
Not literally, no. There are so many layers of indirection, that you could as well say everyone using money pays a guy... Either way, this applies in the same extent to people who voted for Kamala Harris so I guess we can say from now on, that Kamala voters literally pay to enact misogynist and transphobic policies and views.
Keep demonizing Trump voters, it will surely convince them to not vote Trump ;)(well they can't vote him on the 3rd term, but if you demonize them, they will sure continue voting against you).