What did Democrats do wrong?

[Donal]

They didn't shift as much. The majority supported Trump by a 1 point greater margin than 2020 and at a far greater margin than 2016. the HArris campagin actually lost a point since 2020. And white women make up about 40% of voters, so they are a big deal.

 

[theprestige]

Is that the entire reason why lives were saved. Is it not also possible that confusion arising from entering a different state with different speed limits could also cause accidents?

We have good data and studies on increased safety arising from lower speeds.

Speed limits change all the time. Even on the interstate, different segments may have different speeds posted. I don't think there's ever been any significant safety concern about this. It's not like cars will spontaneously combust if they cross from a 70mph state into a 55mph state. We already expect drivers to be aware of and adjust to the changing speed of traffic, and to changes in the posted speed limit.

Examples I'm sure you're just about to share with us.

Monopolies. Cartels. The Soviet Union. Etc. But this is not the thread for this topic, so I won't be developing it further. If you want to argue that the Democrats lost votes by failing to sell us on central planning, feel free.

If there are no national standards,

Strawman. I'm saying there doesn't need to be a national standard for highway speed limits. That's exactly the sort of thing that states can and should handle for themselves.

then why bother having a central government?

Because some things probably do need national standards, or collective investment. Defense. Diplomacy. Things like that. Speed limits? Not so much.

All this fuss about Trump and Harris, for nothing. If a single source of national legislation and policy is both undesirable and unnecessary (in your eyes), then why bother with one?

Already addressed.

 

[d4m10n]

They didn't shift as much. The majority supported Trump by a 1 point greater margin than 2020 and at a far greater margin than 2016. the HArris campagin actually lost a point since 2020. And white women make up about 40% of voters, so they are a big deal.

I'm seeing a much smaller shift among white females.

They are blameless when compared to, say, Hispanic males (like myself) if we're going to assign blame to groups instead of individuals.

 

[Donal]

Honestly, a 1-point or 0.1 are both within the margin of error. My point was, they were expected to come out big for Harris and the dems couldn't even hold the same numbers from 2020.

 

[thaiboxerken]

I've heard that many voters didn't vote because of their bigotry. They could not vote for a woman of color, no matter the outcome.

 

[d4m10n]

I've heard that many voters didn't vote because of their bigotry.

How could we test this hypothesis given the data readily to hand? Exit polls, by definition, cannot capture those who stayed home.

White folks (the group presumably most susceptible to bigotry against African Americans and perhaps also Americans of south Asian ancestry) moved towards Trump noticeably less than any other group, in the interactive I linked at #963.

 

[Donal]

Because the majority of white folks were already there. My point was the HArris campaign set a ton of mone on fire thinking they could rely on white women.

 

[d4m10n]

My point was the HArris campaign set a ton of mone on fire thinking they could rely on white women.

I don't live in a swing state, but the ads I did see (usually during sports events) seemed to target women more generally.

 

[Cosmic Yak]

Monopolies. Cartels. The Soviet Union. Etc. But this is not the thread for this topic, so I won't be developing it further. If you want to argue that the Democrats lost votes by failing to sell us on central planning, feel free.

I cannot comment on why the Democrats lost votes, because I'm not allowed to.

 

[Donal]

OK, not to bring up The Topic, but New York State had a ballot initiative to ammend our Equal Protection Clause in the state constitution

This proposal would protect against unequal treatment based on ethnicity, national origin, age, disability, and sex, including sexual orientation, gender identity and pregnancy. It also protects against unequal treatment based on reproductive healthcare and autonomy.

It outperformed Harris by 13 points.

Has there been an analysis of how many people just voted top of the ticket and left the down ballot stuff blank? Was it different than previous years? How many split tickets were there?

 

[d4m10n]

New York State had a ballot initiative to amend our Equal Protection Clause in the state constitution

Laws like that inevitably leave it to the courts to decide whether it's okay to tell blind people they cannot get driver's licenses, tell pregnant people not to board the rollercoaster, or tell big hairy men that they aren't cut out to be Hooter's waitstaff, which is just to say that "Equal Protection" isn't what it sounds like on its face.

As to Harris, it's hard to say how closely her campaign or her party are tied to such things, but your anecdote suggests it's not all that tightly, at least in NY.

 

[ponderingturtle]

OK, not to bring up The Topic, but New York State had a ballot initiative to ammend our Equal Protection Clause in the state constitution


It outperformed Harris by 13 points.

Has there been an analysis of how many people just voted top of the ticket and left the down ballot stuff blank? Was it different than previous years? How many split tickets were there?

We were actually talking about that this weekend and apparently the republicans used different adds to fight it, in Dutchess County a fairly red county they when solidly transphobic on it, while down nearer the city they were more focused on immigration.

 

[Donal]

Laws like that inevitably leave it to the courts to decide whether it's okay to tell blind people they cannot get driver's licenses, tell pregnant people not to board the rollercoaster, or tell big hairy men that they aren't cut out to be Hooter's waitstaff, which is just to say that "Equal Protection" isn't what it sounds like on its face.

I think the initiative is a little more protective than you are saying, but I mostly agree wit hthat point. However, I saw the debate over it first hand. One of the most popular signs for the Republican candidate for state assembly in my area was "protect girls sports" and it was a dirtect response to this. People were being told it was going to put men in high shcool girls' sports.

As to Harris, it's hard to say how closely her campaign or her party are tied to such things, but your anecdote suggests it's not all that tightly, at least in NY.

Yes, its anecdotal. Yet another anecdote. That's why I asked the questions at the end. Has anyone actually found data points correlated to ballot initiatives and down ballot candidates vs the top of the ticket?

 

[Tero]

Funny how people make that personal connection to the presidential candidate. A good majority have no idea what the other candidates look like and sound like.

 

[ahhell]

Funny how people make that personal connection to the presidential candidate. A good majority have no idea what the other candidates look like and sound like.

It is isn't it. I doubt its as big a thing in constitutional monarchies. Makes me think we should have separate head of state to do all the showing of empathy and having dinners with foreign potentates and such.

 

[Tero]

the grievances part of Trump. They did not need to "get" anything, just prevent others

aaron.rupar
33 minutes ago
New in PN: Trump ran on identity politics and won"Trump built his coalition by stoking shared grievances. He didn’t campaign on making life better for certain identity groups. He campaigned by mobilizing people against ones they loathe and fear."

Trump ran on identity politics and won

He united voters around shared grievances, not plans to solve their problems.

www.publicnotice.co

 

[d4m10n]

Three major things the Democrats got "wrong" from 2020-2024, bulletized and hyperlinked:

1. Inflation
2. Immigration
3. Inculturation

Median voters were hoping to get less of each; in every case they got more than they wanted.

 

[Thermal]

Three major things the Democrats got "wrong" from 2020-2024, bulletized and hyperlinked:

1. Inflation
2. Immigration
3. Inculturation

Median voters were hoping to get less of each; in every case they got more than they wanted.

Ok, but... those three things clearly would be in a hard core Trumpists top 5 too. So does it make a lot of sense to say "what Dems got wrong is to not have been Republicans?"

We actually got less inflation, and at lower impact than the rest of the first world. Immigration is not really a problem for either side; fence jumping is. For whatever inculturalization may include, it's basic message is "be excellent to each other", although some surely get carried away but pretty much no one likes a zealot anyway.

"Become more like the adversary to win" does not seem like a solid strategy. Showing what's better about your plan is doing it right, which should be largely at odds with your opposite number's philosophy. If it weren't, you'd be on the same side, +/-.

 

[Thermal]

"What did the Dems do wrong?" is begging the question that they are indisputably the right choice, and so must have failed at something for the voters to not agree. Maybe the voters just didn't agree with the premise that the Dems are indisputably the right choice?

 

[Donal]

There's no evidence "wokeness" had any affect on the election. Especially since, and this cannot be stressed enough, HARRIS DID NOT RUN ON IT!

Inflation has been down. Is it good? No, CoL is still too damn high. But, a big reason for that is the Orange Weakling's horrible first term. And it's only going to get worse the second time around.

Again, immigration is overstated.

Harris and the Democrats' biggest mistakes:

1) let Republicans frame these discussions. Immigration and wokeness are distractions, not issues. And Republican/neoliberal policies are how we got the high cost of living with stagnant wages. Harris bragging about tax cuts and owning a gun and being tough on undocumented immigration and having "the deadliest military" all had her on the back foot

2) they ran right on important issues towards the end, which told voters that Trump was right. They marched out more Republicans at the convention than they did progressives. They hid Tim Walz away in favor of Liz Cheney in the last month and a half. All in service of the mythical "reasonable Republican".

3) Gaza

4) Promising more of the same. People are not happy. Yes, the Biden adminsitration did a lot fo good. But, outside of Buttigeig, no one in the adminsitration seemed to have a clue how to sell it. He had a low popularity rating and Harris said she wouldn't change anything. I get not wanting to throw Biden udner the bus while yo uare still his VP, but have a better answer for the very obvious question.

5) Abandoning being an actual Democrat. Remember all the hype and happy surprise when she picked Walz? How he came out and had people laughing at the Republcians? How folks saw his school lunch program and other Democratic policies working in the Midwest? Her $6k first year child tax credit? Expanding the very popular yearly child tax credit? Why the ◊◊◊◊ did she stop talking about all that?

6) Focus groups and consultants and all the same top down, big donor ◊◊◊◊ Clinton relied on in 2016. They started off with a populist message that was hitting home and killed their momentum to make their corporate backers happy.