EricDeb

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

they did fix inflation. they told people it was fixed, which it is. What they failed to message well was why it happened in the first place and that it was a global phenomenon

Exactly its all messaging and if the messaging is not getting through you need to go where voters are discussing these things (podcasts, youtube shows, tikTok, etc). And they needed to start doing it 2 years ago not 4 months ago.

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.

exactly its all messaging. dems suck as messaging and kamala was not the right person to deliver messages because she avoided interviews, conversations, etc. Dems needed someone who would go on any show at any time like Bernie does.

The best solution imo would have been 1. to run a candidate not associated with Biden. 2. To say "inflation happened globally" and double and triple down on that. Half baked solutions like you're suggesting from someone associated with Biden + gaslighting the public that its not that bad were not the answers people wanted.

I think that argument might have worked better if there wasnt the impression Biden made it worse with covid relief/spending bills. Also Dems needed someone out there repeating their messages ad-nauseum and kamala was not a pete buttigieg type who will literally go on any show at any time.

Equally bad incentives apply to smaller ("alternative") media outlets right wingers consume.

Didnt Biden want to raise taxes on those making more than 400k a year or something?

great point I agree

it remains to be seen whether they can find the next trump hes unique

it will shrink with california but yes hes on track to win

She didnt explain why inflation happened. She didnt explain why dems did not crack down on the border until right wingers made an issue out of it. She didnt distance herself from biden. She didnt explain how she would protect abortion rights. I wanted her to win but she didnt have answers or her messaging was not getting through

of course. And this was a failure of messaging by dems

Spot on. You nailed it. And dems needed to communicate why those things were not their fault or have answers... instead they tried "vibes"

Of course, its not logical, but voters "feel" they were better under trump without realizing inflation was a global phenomenon. This was also a failure of Dem messaging.

You have no idea if thats why she lost. Thats why you want to believe she lost but it could be things like inflation, immigration, and not having clear messaging. Also not distinguishing herself from an otherwise unpopular president.

Yea Kamala should not have been the candidate. She was tied to Biden who was associated with inflation which I think really decided this. I'm not sure the rest of your comment has that much to do with it

I mean if they registered with some identifiable piece of info (SSN for example) then you would see two votes with the same SSN if they were pretending to be someone else and if they dont have an SSN then they arent a citizen.

I'd rather see more forced RTO than more off/near-shoring at this point as sad as that is to say.

He didnt seem to make a huff about India or Turkeys censorship

but not in India or Turkey apparently

I fully acknowledge companies are more complicated than real estate

Couldnt it be similar to a property tax? That's evaluated on an annual basis. If you feel it's wrong you can appeal

Probably zuck is just trying to seem neutral however it shakes out in November

Well soon agency experts will focus on displaying their loyalty to Trump as their main job focus. But yes in theory what you're saying is true

Textualism when convenient you mean.

philosophically I see what you're saying, but will congress be good at passing small laws to amend the ever changing regulatory landscape? I'm going to guess no. So practically this could be a nightmare

I strongly disagree. As someone above said it's the equivalent of requiring a meeting for every commit when building software. How good do you think congress will be at passing small laws when changes need to be made in federal agencies regulations?

I could not disagree more