Trump Wins US Presidency For Second Time (decisiondeskhq.com) 1605
Major media outlets are beginning to declare former President Trump the winner of the 2024 presidential election, having secured 270 electoral votes. "He becomes the first president in more than 120 years to lose the White House, and then to come back and win it again, after President Grover Cleveland in 1892," notes The Hill. As with previous election announcements on Slashdot, this is your chance to talk about it and what it means for the future of our nation.
In a victory speech, Trump said that he was the leader of "the greatest political movement of all time." He said: "We overcame obstacles that nobody thought possible," adding that he would take office with an "unprecedented and powerful mandate." President Trump has vowed a radical reshaping of American government, tasking SpaceX and Tesla chief executive Elon Musk "with conducting a complete financial and performance audit of the entire federal government and making recommendations for drastic reforms."
UPDATE 12:30 PM PST: Vice President Kamala Harris has officially conceded the 2024 presidential election, calling former President Trump to offer her congratulations. She's expected to make a concession speech at Howard University at 4:00 PM EST. You can stream the speech here.
In a victory speech, Trump said that he was the leader of "the greatest political movement of all time." He said: "We overcame obstacles that nobody thought possible," adding that he would take office with an "unprecedented and powerful mandate." President Trump has vowed a radical reshaping of American government, tasking SpaceX and Tesla chief executive Elon Musk "with conducting a complete financial and performance audit of the entire federal government and making recommendations for drastic reforms."
UPDATE 12:30 PM PST: Vice President Kamala Harris has officially conceded the 2024 presidential election, calling former President Trump to offer her congratulations. She's expected to make a concession speech at Howard University at 4:00 PM EST. You can stream the speech here.
I don't understand (Score:5, Insightful)
Disclaimer: I live in a former Communist country.
I just don't get it. From where I stand, that guy's a fraud A to Z. There is nothing appealing about him. Horrible character, lies all the time, has an ego so big the Sun would orbit him if he had gravity.
WHY do people vote for him? And, more importantly, why do people STILL vote for him?
Re: I don't understand (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: I don't understand (Score:4, Insightful)
Neither do I, but why then vote for someone who is the least probable to change the system, only to use it to profit from it himself as much as he can, and f*** the people?
Re: I don't understand (Score:5, Insightful)
I am appaled by his re-election, precicely for the reason that Trump will continue to erode the democracy in the US.
Harris wouldn't have changed anything either, but I am convinced the GOP under a Trump presidency will make a play for preventing the democrats from winning again, setting the US on a path to being a single party state and eventually ending up like Russia.
I hope I'm wrong..
What the US needs is to end the first past the post system in these elections.
Re: I don't understand (Score:5, Insightful)
Trump and Trump supporters want actual citizens to decide the fate of the country...
Was that what happened in the January 6th riots? Since No True American(tm) would vote for the Democrats, "Actual citizens" had to decide the fate of the country?
Re: I don't understand (Score:4, Funny)
Re: I don't understand (Score:4, Insightful)
There are no Marxists in the Democratic party. Is your dictionary broken such that you don't know what "Marxist" means?
Everything you are repeating has been debunked, and if you weren't living in a bubble surrounded by Newsmax fake news you would realize this.
Re: I don't understand (Score:4, Insightful)
The reality is that immigration is one of the major drivers of economic growth in Western societies. The US government's war against immigration has led to situations like with PSSI, a meatpacking company that employed over a hundred children, or with Hyundai-Kia, which employed 14-year-old children in its factories. As a result of the labor shortage caused by the war against immigration, industry groups are now pushing to weaken child labor protections, and have been successful in Arkansas, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, Ohio, and South Dakota.
The Democrats are not fighting against this. They also strengthened border protections. Under Biden, the border wall to Mexico was extended. If Democrats had some kind of nefarious plan to bring in more immigrants in order to sway the election, none of these things would be happening.
The reality is that there is one party that has detected that they can no longer win a majority of voters in the US, so they're doing everything they can to make sure they can stay in power even without winning elections.
This will have terrible implications, not just for the US, but for free, democratic countries all over the world.
Re: I don't understand (Score:5, Insightful)
Harris promised to end Trump tax cuts, which included a huge increase in standard deductible, because their bumper sticker tax policy declared it "tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires" and no analysis was needed.
The Trump tax-cuts were a giant middle-finger to the middle class in regions of the country that didn't vote for him. Sure, the standard deduction was increased, but itemized deductions were reduced substantially more than the standardized deductions were increased for many people. People like me and my spouse.
Under Trump, our taxes went up. And that's despite doing all the "good things" that reduce your tax bill, like contributing to retirement, structuring your investments to be tax-efficient, and hiring an expert to do your returns. Even so, our taxes went up.
The Ds called it a tax-cut for millionaires and billionaires because that's exactly what it was. Marginal rates in the upper-income brackets were reduced. You don't think anyone analyzed this?
Re: I don't understand (Score:5, Insightful)
Trump and Trump supporters want actual citizens to decide the fate of the country...not have it decided by a bunch of people that just showed up from countries where they, as citizens of those countries, could not create a successful society.
Nor do they want them coming in at a rate that they all just end up living in enclaves, without making any effort to assimilate.
What do you mean by "actual citizens"? You can only vote if you're a citizen! Someone who took the oath yesterday is, with the sole exception of not being able to run for President, every bit as equal of a citizen as a natural born one.
How long do you propose new citizens wait before they be allowed to vote?
Do you propose that immigrants from certain parts of the world have longer waiting periods?
Or do you prefer to just go back to the time when voting was only for the landowners?
Re: I don't understand (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: I don't understand (Score:5, Informative)
In the 30 something states that do NOT require ID to vote...it's hard to stop them.
Bullshit. Have you ever voted? They'd have to know the name of someone registered to vote at that particular polling location, who hasn't already voted and won't vote, and be able to convincingly forge their signature.
This "the illegals are voting" is the biggest load of shit I've ever heard. Get a fucking clue.
Re: I don't understand (Score:5, Insightful)
That's easy....actual citizen vs illegal alien....as in someone who crossed illegally, or failed to leave when visa expired.
So anyone who is not an actual citizen is an illegal alien? See below.
We fully welcome people that come here LEGALLY and become citizens.
I have a green card. I am not yet a citizen and may never become one. Am I welcome?
In the 30 something states that do NOT require ID to vote...it's hard to stop them....I mean, c'mon, even in Europe they require voter ID....why is that so tough to implement such a basic common sense rule here throughout the US?
I suppose it's not that tough, as long as it's not that hard to get an acceptable ID. However "hard" it may be to stop non-citizens from voting, the fact is that it just doesn't happen [npr.org] -- at least nowhere near a scale that could have the slightest effect on an outcome.
Re: I don't understand (Score:4, Insightful)
The US just avoided being dragged down to the level of the lowest common denominator.
The US will now sink to the level of Russia where the oligarchs hold sway and the people are forced to beg for scraps. Taxes on the middle class will go up while those on the 1% will go down. Tariffs will wreak havoc on businesses just like they did the last time, causing the defict to once again soar to new records. Freedoms will be curtailed and there will be two classes of people: white men, and everyone else.
So this is how democracy dies, with thunderous applause.
Re: I don't understand (Score:4)
"literally" means something:
1. In a literal manner; word for word.
2. In a literal or strict sense.
3. Really; actually.
Yet all you did was post a known-to-be-a-lie propaganda claim.
You are literally an idiot repeating literally idiotic propaganda.
Re: I don't understand (Score:5, Insightful)
I just don't get it. From where I stand, that guy's a fraud A to Z. There is nothing appealing about him. Horrible character, lies all the time, has an ego so big the Sun would orbit him if he had gravity.
Here's the answer to your question:
That is literally what the democrats are trying to do with immigration, and voter ID laws.
Trump and Trump supporters want actual citizens to decide the fate of the country...not have it decided by a bunch of people that just showed up from countries where they, as citizens of those countries, could not create a successful society.
Too many Americans believe this horseshit. You can thank Rupert Murdoch, the Koch brothers, the oil & tobacco lobbies, etc. for training generations of Americans to lap up whatever bullshit they spout as facts.
Re: I don't understand (Score:5, Insightful)
Conflating illegal immigration with legal is a red herring. No one is against legal immigration, except maybe those affected by the H1B program.
Don't try to pretend that's true.
We just had about a month of Trump and Vance complaining non stop about legal Haitian immigrants. They made it clear they know they're legal immigrants, but they don't care and want to deport them anyway. They don't like that they were able to get here legally and want to get rid of them anyway.
It's all about hate, and making excuses to try to justify it.
Re: I don't understand (Score:4, Interesting)
Yes, they're here legally.
If you want to play the "once illegal, always illegal" game we can start by deporting your hero Elon.
Re: I don't understand (Score:5, Insightful)
What fantasy world do you live in where the GOP has any wholesome motives whatsoever? Donald Trump rose to prominence on white supremacism, period, and has built on that foundation with criminal greed and treasonous relationships with America's avowed enemies.
You can't just make up your own facts because they would be more comforting than the truth.
Re:He's racist AF. The Feds sued him for it! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: I don't understand (Score:5, Insightful)
The skills needed to win elections are different from the skills needed to govern.
The election is an emotional appeal. It is the popularity to the masses. During the election every location gets told what they want to hear. Lies are tolerated because of the emotional response. Whatever stokes the population ego, particularly giving people to blame and giving targets for aggression, they win elections.
Governance is about logistics, balance between the masses and the individual, balance of global concerns with national concerns with regional concerns with individual concerns. Government is about policy rather than popularity.
Re: I don't understand (Score:5, Insightful)
Continuing that line of reasoning: not believing in the system, American democracy, is entirely understandable. The public is too easily manipulated to vote on power hungry, immoral individuals and parties, incapable of good government. This is of course a general problem in democracy. There are plenty of examples where democratically elected parties have failed to work in the public's general interest (with Germany in the 1930's en 40's as a horrific schoolbook example) and currently many democracies have difficulty dealing with populist propaganda amplified by social media. But I think in the USA the system is especially vulnerable, having insufficient guards to protect the system from manipulation by the rich and powerful, eroding the checks and balances needed to make sure government is not corrupted. Already, the gains of technological progress flow almost exclusively into the hands of the very rich, while the general population does not benefit or is worse off than in the preceding decades. Yet every party's electoral program ever claims that they will improve the lives for the common people! So yes, of course people have lost faith in the system.
But voting for Trump because you don't believe in the system is of course still very a stupid thing to do, because if he and his cronies get their way, they''ll replace it with something far worse (an autocratic kleptocracy, like Poetin's Russia).
Re: I don't understand (Score:5, Informative)
Funny, those of us normal folks who lived in the US during Trump's administration enjoyed rising wages, lower taxes, with affordable groceries and housing at that time. We voted for more of that.
You factually voted for less of that. The only one of those things that Trump delivered was lower taxes, and he only gave you that for two years. Everything else on that list was a result of Obama's presidency and it had all conclusively ended by the end of Trump's.
Re:I don't understand (Score:4, Insightful)
People don't really want either of them, but when forced to make a choice, they choose the one they think will be less bad.
That and evidently there was a major uptick in Google searches for "Did Joe Biden drop out of the presidential race?".
People who don't pay any attention to anything (and yet we let them vote) expected to go in and vote for Joe, then they didn't see any names on the ballot they recognized.
Re:I don't understand (Score:5, Insightful)
I just don't get it. From where I stand, that guy's a fraud A to Z. There is nothing appealing about him.
"I just don't understand how Nixon could have won. Nobody I know voted for him".
You don't get . it because you probably live in a bubble, at least socially. But you're not alone, because you have a lot of compatriots on Slashdot.
BTW, Trump is also projected to win the popular vote. And the GOP will take the Senate. And it's looking like the GOP will keep the House, albeit narrowly.
In short, if you can't possibly understand why Trump won, maybe you should get outside of your circles and mingle with other folk who think differently than you. BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF THEM.
Or, you can just keep hanging with the folks here who will insist that it's all due to cheating, Russian "interference", vote suppression, etc etc etc.
Bottom line: Americans know who Donald Trump is. They know his ideas, his positions, and have watched the whole legal circus surrounding him these past two years. They have plenty to judge him by.
And they chose him anyway
Maybe ask yourself "Huh, could it have been that the American electorate considered the alternative that fucking bad? Yes. Yes they did.
Re:I don't understand (Score:4, Interesting)
I know why he won. he won because he was voted.
But why did people vote vor him, specifically?
My take: because he is what they want to be. They want to be that person who can say anything, no matter how big of a balooney it is, and nothing happens to him. they want to be rich and get by by winging it, and so on.
Re: I don't understand (Score:5, Insightful)
Have you considered asking them?
Re: I don't understand (Score:4, Insightful)
Have you considered asking them?
Bingo. The Democrats lost the presidency, the Senate, the HOR, and a majority of the governorships because they won't even talk to 52% of the American people.
A majority of the people don't care about identity politics, don't want drag queens in classrooms, don't want boys on the girls' swim team, are sick of the "asylum" charade at the border, don't like the politicization of the DOJ, and are tired of being called bigots and fascists.
Disclaimer: I didn't vote for Trump, but I understand why most people did ... because I talk to them.
Re: I don't understand (Score:5, Insightful)
You say all that, but it doesn't hold up. One hears way more from the Republicans about identity politics. It's the almost #1 topic on fox news. Apparently Americans DO want identity politics and they just voted for it big time.
Re: I don't understand (Score:4, Insightful)
I know why the Democrats lost. Half of the biggest appear detached from reality. They'd rather have simple, but wrong answers and someone to blame. This is a pattern which has repeated throughout history time and again.
Re: I don't understand (Score:5, Insightful)
I see. So, it was all the voters' fault.
Why does winning even matter when it's so much easier to sit around feeling smug about losing?
There are six political power bases in America:
1. The presidency
2. The Senate
3. The House of Representatives
4. The Supreme Court and judiciary
5. The governorships
6. The state legislatures
Of those six, the Democrats now control zero. Perhaps, maybe, just maybe, they should look at their policies and question why America isn't buying what they're selling.
Re: I don't understand (Score:5, Insightful)
So, it was all the voters' fault.
That's basically the point of democracy, yes.
Re: I don't understand (Score:5, Insightful)
It's simpler than that. Trump is a populist, he offers simple solutions to difficult problems. They are not real solutions, but they sound easy and most importantly hurt other people who he blames for everything.
Re: I don't understand (Score:5, Interesting)
Bingo. The Democrats lost the presidency, the Senate, the HOR, and a majority of the governorships because they won't even talk to 52% of the American people.
That's flat out wrong and you know it.
The country is not divided into to two sides separated by geography. We ALL have Trumpers in our own families. I know you have democrats in your own family, would you watch a Trump rally with them and answer any questions they might have? Do you talk to them about politics? Would you even sit down with a totally blank slate, neutral 18 year old kid barely able to think critically but not already engulfed by political issues, watch the MSG event and just answer questions? Could you do that?
I can't talk to my own dad about Trump. It's not like I don't try. It's like talking to a cult member, because you don't know what's going to be a third rail and just shut them down. I'll try going in totally ignorant of maga talking points on some issue and step in it. "Hey Pence was an alright guy at least right?" Yah, oops, that ended abruptly. Can't even talk about the fucking vice president for some reason.
Talk about the economy and bring up a WSJ article "they're biased", dad it's owned by the guy that owns Fox, "I don't read the news". You'd think I'd just told him Jesus isn't real. It's all about feelings. So we talk, but you can't talk about politics or whatever maga world considers to be politics at the moment, tik tok, bitcoin, Disney, whatever. He won't watch a Trump rally, or admit being aware of anything that happened at one, apparently because he doesn't want to know or is embarrassed? I'm not embarrassed to discuss any Kamala/Walz anything, I'll give the pros and cons. I can talk about the latest Biden gaff without turning red faced and shutting down full cult mode.
So don't tell me democrats don't talk to republicans. I'm not convinced y'all even talk to each other about this stuff.
Re: I don't understand (Score:4, Insightful)
You listened and heard the bullshit excuses for why people voted for Trump. Now apply logic and common sense to those excuses and you'll see they're fictitious boogeymen used to scare weak minded people. Meanwhile you literally have women dying due to the consequences of the last time Trump was elected, but sure its the Democrats obsessed with identity politics...
The reality is that the majority of people, Americans included, are generally complete fucking idiots. It certainly doesn't help that one party has a hard-on for destroying public education in an effort to privatize it, and it is also no coincidence that the majority of uneducated people also prefer this same party. So yes, it is the fault of voters for falling for such idiotic populist garbage because they're generally dumb, selfish, and too lazy to see past the surface.
Re: I don't understand (Score:5, Informative)
cisgender straight white male victim card.
Exit polls show that Trump's share of the "white male" vote declined.
He won because of stronger support from Latino men and young black men.
Re: I don't understand (Score:5, Insightful)
I still don't understand why the Democrats didn't hold a primary. You know your candidate is bad when her own hand-picked cabinet quit because they can't fucking stand her.
Three. Fucking. Years. Ago.
https://www.newsweek.com/kamal... [newsweek.com]
And somehow they got it in their heads that she'd win? I think it hadn't occurred to them that affirmative action might help you get into Harvard, but it doesn't help you win a public office.
Re: I don't understand (Score:5, Insightful)
This.
From what I see from afar, it's not Trump who won the election. It's the democrats and their hubris that lost the election.
They thought they could get Hillary pushed into a presidency, completely ignoring her scandals and unlikeable character. There were better candidates and the way they were pushed to the side was dirty. Voters did not forget that.
Then they thought they can push Biden into a 2nd term despite his dementia becoming clearly obvious. From what I see, he wasn't a bad president, but couldn't sell his victories.
So among all the candidates the dems picked the one already burdened with a bad reputation, with a more than questionable history, and as vice-president an easy target for criticism against the current administration. And again, the dems decided to push through their favorite candidate, as if voters didn't exist and would have the same preferences.
The democrats are lost in their own bubble. They think that whoever party leaders prefer the people will vote for. Maybe this time they'll wake up. Nah, who am I kidding?
Re: I don't understand (Score:4, Interesting)
They may have told themselves they were voting for change, but they voted for a convicted felon who is promising mass deportations, taking away their healthcare, taking away more reproductive rights, and who previously started a violent insurrection when it was time for him to leave office. And that's not even the half of it.
It's Brexit all over again. Voting for change without considering that the change will be far, far worse.
Re:I don't understand (Score:4)
"I just don't understand how Nixon could have won. Nobody I know voted for him".
That's not what he said. He said Trump is a fraud.
You don't get . it
That's literally what he said.
Huh, could it have been that the American electorate considered the alternative that fucking bad? Yes. Yes they did.
Clearly. We all know that. The question that people with even a tenuous grasp of reality want to know is why, because most of the reasons put out for Trump are disconnected from reality.
Anyhoo enjoy the next 4 years.
Re:I don't understand (Score:5, Insightful)
being female is a strike and then having the audacity to be not white is a double strike.
We recently had a black President and even re-elected him. The closely leading Republican candidate (after Trump) this time was a Sikh woman who will probably be President next time.
The Republicans are fine with electing a "woman of color". Meanwhile, the Democrats main platform is: "If you don't vote for the black Democrat women, you are a misogynist race traitor." Which party seems more obsessed with race?
Re:I don't understand (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I don't understand (Score:4, Interesting)
The US has become more racist since Obama, not least because of Trump and his rhetoric. The GOP in general has been pushing the idea that civil rights and the opportunities for minorities have "gone too far".
On top of that the GOP has got worse when it comes to their willingness to do anything to win, no matter how underhand. They have been gerrymandering for years, and refused to give Obama his SCOTUS pick. Now they have a compliant SCOTUS that has managed to take away women's bodily autonomy, and given Trump immunity.
Racism has always been a favourite tool of populists, and Trump is no different. You only think the Democrats are calling you a racist because there is so much racism and decent people are speaking up about it.
Re:I don't understand (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:I don't understand (Score:5, Interesting)
it is 100% that 80 year old trump will become unable to function at some point is his presidency.
That is not functionally equivalent to Trump dying though. If he becomes unable to function his ghouls will basically run the country just like Reagan's officials and technocrats ruled the country when he became incapacitated by senility. In that scenario Vance may actually be sidelined because they won't have to share power with him as long as Trump lives.
Re:I don't understand (Score:4, Interesting)
If the last incapacitations (Wilson and Reagan) are any guide, it's almost certain the VP would be cut out of the loop. The VP has only two constitutional roles; break ties in the Senate and wait for the President to be impeached, die or become incapacitated to the point that the 25th Amendment is invoked. If Trump were to suffer some sort of severe cognitive decline or a medical event like a stroke, but was still, like Wilson and Reagan, to hold a pen and smile for the camera, it's the Cabinet that would take effective control, and as you say, Vance's role wouldn't change at all. He's the "spare" and only to be pulled out of the trunk if the President kicks off or becomes so mentally incompetent that there's no way to hide it.
To some extent we've seen that with Biden. He makes nowhere near the number of public appearances that his immediate predecessors did. Whether that's because of age and infirmity, or just his style, a Trump 2.0 may actually see him a lot less, particularly if age-related illnesses carve into his public-facing persona.
A few point to explain it to you (Score:5, Informative)
1) IQ is a gaussian centered around 100. So effectively half the population is below average intelligence and will not understand or grasp at complex electoral programs, and they are weak to populist trope or soundbites.
2) more often than not in the US, people don't vote for a specific person, but rather for a team. There is maybe 10-15% which switch side. The rest of core elector always vote dems or reps no matter what, or don't vote. That's how MTG , Boebert and Trump get elected.
3) At Presidential election people in the US *mostly* don't look at each candidate programs, but rather something far FAR more simplistic : was my life better now than 4 years ago ? Some will skip voting or switch vote depending on that sole factor
4) you keep repeating people they are worthless and the reason for all is bad and they are privileged *while they feel shitted on by society*, and at some point people rebel against it. That's why in MANY country (Germany, US, Korea chief among other) the male youth shifted far into the right.
This is not a single factor. But combine all 4 ? Then you get a trump president 2024, a red waves in the senate and IMO very probably a majority in congress. A complete carte blanche for 2 years to Trump to do whatever.
Re:A few point to explain it to you (Score:5, Informative)
So, to summarize, democracy turned into idiocracy, faster than expected.
Re:A few point to explain it to you (Score:5, Interesting)
As Karl Marx would say, base shapes superstructure. Also, chickens have come home to roost. For decades, all American (and most Western) governments have worked diligently to dismantle and destroy the middle class. And they largely succeeded. This is the only logical consequence - idiocracy. Enjoy it.
Re:A few point to explain it to you (Score:5, Insightful)
So, to summarize, democracy turned into idiocracy, faster than expected.
It did not. President Dwayne Herbert Elionzo Mountain-Dew Commacho valued the advice of experts and got Not Sure to help, when it turned out the latter was the smartest man in the world. That kind of thing doesn't happen in this reality.
Re:A few point to explain it to you (Score:4, Insightful)
2) more often than not in the US, people don't vote for a specific person, but rather for a team.
Also, Trump has basically taken over the Republican Party. In his victory speech, he only talked about his victory and MAGA's, his movement's and not the Republicans's.
Re: I don't understand (Score:5, Insightful)
Blame the Democrats for putting a mentally ill person into the presidency, lying about it, then bypassing primary elections and place an extremely unpopular candidate as a replacement. That rubbed a lot of people the wrong way
Also, we in the US do not understand why people keep hating on Trump when all it takes is providing a competitive candidate. It should not be that hard, but the Democrats are now 0 for 3 in their candidates.
Re: I don't understand (Score:5, Insightful)
"Also, we in the US do not understand why people keep hating on Trump"
Simply because he is a horrible person. I am dead serious: I can't find one positive thing about him, as a person. And, believe me, I tried.
It's even more perplexing to me, since you already had him as POTUS once, and seem to have liked it.
Just puzzling.
Re: I don't understand (Score:5, Interesting)
We learned the lesson very well during the Clinton era that personal behavior is no longer important. Only policy matters.
Most Americans are worse off today than they were under Trump. Policy. That's it. All this stuff about how he is as person is utterly irrelevant and has been since Clinton. We learned that lesson very well. So, here's Trump, an egotistical asshole with great policies for 51.1% of the voters and that's more than enough to get elected.
Maybe in some other universe where it wasn't sold to the voters that fucking your intern is ok and being a general shit bag to women is ok they didn't elect Clinton or Trump. But we're not in that universe. Personal character no longer matters.
Did you know Biden had to drop from his first attempt at office over a plagiarism charge decades ago? Character mattered then. But the second time, no one gave a shit so he got in, too, just like Trump and Clinton, all men of low moral character and ethics.
Re: I don't understand (Score:4, Insightful)
Most Americans are worse off today than they were under Trump. Policy. That's it. All this stuff about how he is as person is utterly irrelevant and has been since Clinton. We learned that lesson very well. So, here's Trump, an egotistical asshole with great policies for 51.1% of the voters ...
... and those policies only being great for 51.1% percent of the voters on the extreme right is exactly the problem because it is what John Adams called a "Tyranny of the majority" and in this case a very narrow one. I know 'my way or the highway' politics are very seductive and visiting retribution on the other 48,9% to make them cry is great fun. However, the person that will fix America is going to have to come up with great policies that appeal to 75% of Americans on both sides of the trench lines, that requires compromise and Trump just ain't that guy. He even said it himself: 'I am your retribution!!!'.
Re:I don't understand (Score:5, Informative)
Trump wins because he acknowledges the issues his voters have, and promises to fix them. Of those there are imaginary ones, like communism, and real ones, like loss of jobs and destruction of middle class. Two thirds of the country are one hospital visit away from being homeless. The latest generations are never going to be able to afford homes. Team Dem pretends these things don't exist, but they do, and affect more and more of the populace, and as such, will command more and more of votes.
I'm not saying I believe Trump will actually fix these issues, the last time something was actually fixed in the States was the New Deal. It's been a while. It's not going to happen any time soon, whoever the president is. Wasn't going to happen under Kamala, didn't happen under Biden, nothing under Trump last time, Obama - nope, Dubya - lol... The list goes on. The job of the president is to turn campaign donor money into campaign donor policy. Donors are who made them president, it's who they are responsible for. It's that simple.
But if one has a choice of two candidates, one who knows your problems and promises to fix them, and the other guy doesn't and doesn't, many people are going to choose the first one. Lies don't matter here, the truth was dead in the US a long time ago already. And it's not like the other guy tells the truth. If the other guy says everything is all right, but nobody in your town has a job, that's the lie you care about. If the other guy says (s)he's proud of the America (s)he has built, they publicly acknowledge they're your enemy. Trump on the other hand positions himself on the side of the little guy, and as being hated by the establishment for trying to help the little guy. The establishment helps him along with that by hating him.
The donors of course don't hate him. The donors don't give a fuck, they donate to both candidates and will get whatever they want no matter who wins. If the people somehow get anything, it's a side effect of giving away public policy or public money to the donors. The issue has actually been studied: https://www.cambridge.org/core... [cambridge.org] . Voter preference has no effect on policy in the US. Only money does. Arguing about which president is better or worse here is like arguing which cheek of the ass does the best farting.
Re:I don't understand (Score:4, Interesting)
That makes sense.
For some reason, your post made me think of... all those religious cults in the USA, which gather large followings.
Many, many people in the USA really like and enjoy being groomed into becoming fanatics, through words alone.
Very interesting. I had never considered that before.
Re:I don't understand (Score:5, Insightful)
In my country we have a left that is losing on all fronts to people that I can easily consider as complete lunatics or criminals, but this left cannot understand what is happening, much less react accordingly. And why? It is because while the average citizen is trying to make ends meet and return home alive at the end of the day because of crime, this left that I mentioned is more concerned with "neutral pronouns" and other things that have no real impact on the life of this average citizen.
Re: I don't understand (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm speaking only for myself. I seriously thought about leaving a blank ballot until I was standing in the voting booth. I didn't even fill in the bubble for him until I had done everything else. And the reason I made myself do it is this:
With Trump, there are a few known deficiencies, but the general attitude and instincts about policy are correct. With Biden, and now Harris, the talk was warm and fuzzy but the policies were a death by a thousand cuts: de jure bans on natural gas exports, de facto bans on ICE cars, more mandatory kangaroo courts for sexual assault accusations in the universities, mandatory affirmatiins the delusions of the gende-confused (even if children and even if temporary). And on it goes.
Re: I don't understand (Score:4, Insightful)
Soo, a rapist, convicted criminal, serial liar, fraudster, admirer of totalitarian leaders, etc. counts as having a "few known deficiencies" for you? Are you serious?
Re: I don't understand (Score:4, Insightful)
No actual communist parties gained a seat anywhere. What the fuck are you talking about?
Re: I don't understand (Score:4, Insightful)
Bernie is as much a communist as Donald is a Nazi. Both claims are utterly false.
Yours truly, someone who actually has an idea what communism is.
Re: I don't understand (Score:5, Informative)
This actually answers the question quite well: because his followers are voting based on a fantastical misinterpretation of reality.
Re: I don't understand (Score:4, Funny)
I see that too. Those who yell "COMMUNISM" have, in fact, no idea what communism is.
Sure they do, it's everybody to the left of Trump.
Re: I don't understand (Score:4, Interesting)
Communism is when me and my friends all get on a survival game server, work together toward a common goal, pool the fruits of our labor and divvy them out based on who will make the best use of them.
It tends to break down beyond the social group scale, which is why we have systems like socialism that incorporate the good parts of communism (support for varying levels of individual capability, ensuring a share bare minimum) with the good parts of capitalism (giving rewards to selfish innovators rather than relying on altruistic innovators, more effective filtering and selection for acumen in predicting future events and trends).
Re: I don't understand (Score:5, Informative)
Because the alternative is actual communism, which you claim to come from.
This was obviously said by someone who has never been to an actual communist country.
Harris, Biden , Democrats have nothing, absolutely nothing in common with communism. In a communist country, they would be considered a right-wing capitalist bourgeois party. Even Bernie Sanders would at best be considered to stand slightly left of the centre. A social-democrat maybe, but not communist at all
Re: I don't understand (Score:4, Informative)
I talked with my coworkers about this the other day, living in Western Europe, we all agreed that the U.S.A. democratic party is more right-wing than the most right-wing party here looking purely at the fiscal things they stand for. This is not relative to communism. The U.S.A. is essentially a science fiction capitalist distopia compared to most European countries where things such as At-Will employment, private prisons, or lack of universal healthcare simply don't exist and aren't discussed or remotely plausible in any foreseeable future.
Re: I don't understand (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually america was the most prosperous when ...
By any sane measure of prosperity, America is most prosperous right now.
Re: I don't understand (Score:5, Informative)
That's not what the voters thought...
People always look back at their youth as a golden age and believe the world is now going to hell.
They're usually wrong, and they're certainly wrong now.
America's economy is booming [economist.com]
American productivity leads the world [economist.com]
Re: I don't understand (Score:5, Interesting)
Fifty years ago, 63% of American households owned their homes. Today, 66% do.
Houses today are twice the size, and the average household is three people instead of five.
So, families are more likely to own their house today and own way more space per person.
Yes, but the people who own their houses today are the same ones who owned their homes fifty years ago. If you look at the percentage of young people who own their homes, I believe you will see a much different result.
Also, home ownership is viewed differently by different swaths of the population. For middle-class white people (who did go pretty hard for Harris), your home is an investment that accumulates wealth. For poorer people, it's a place to live where they plan to stay until they die. For people who view their homes as an investment, rising property values is a good thing. For those who view a home as a place to live, rising property values simply mean more property taxes.
Re: I don't understand (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: I don't understand (Score:4, Insightful)
So is Trump.
When all else is equal, what makes the difference?
She promised to continue the current misery, said she would not change anything from the last four years of her administration, flip-flopped on every policy, and the only actual policy promises she made was to re-instate some Trump ones. Except for about two sentences suggesting some specific economic relief ideas that every single analyst on every side said were insane. She lied constantly. She totally failed at every assignment she was given as Vice President. She tried stunts like visiting the border a few weeks before the election, which as "Border Tzar" (according to Biden) she should have been securing for the last 4 years. And every single time when asked any question (about anything, including how she would fix anything), she totally refused to answer at all, would recite that she came from a middle class family (dubious), worked at McDonalds (a verifiable lie), and the rest of her response to any/all issues: "I am not Trump."
And that behavior was too much even for a lot of Democrats, let alone undecided voters. She was pathetic, and refused to connect with the voters.
She got the "Anybody but Trump" vote, which is significant. But she did worse than Joe Biden, who ran as the I'm-not-Trump last time.
When Trump was running against Biden, I thought Trump would win handily. After Biden's on-camera mental dementia breakdown at the debate, I thought it would be a landslide. And so did the Democrats. When the put Harris in, I thought she would win, and was predicting that since Biden dropped out. Even with her pathetic miserable joke of a campaign, I thought Trump would lose (although by about as close a margin as it turns out he has won). I thought she would win until early the early-morning post-election. At which point, everyone called it (even though not all the votes are in).
Short answer: Trump emotionally connected with voters, and people remember the economy was good under him, and the border issue is a big deal. Meanwhile Harris connected with nobody, was unable to articulate that she had anything whatsoever or any plans to offer, and was just obviously way the hell out of her league. And the race was still pretty close, because that's how bad Trump is.
I thought Trump did a pretty good job last time, and despite his crazy talk, I think he'll probably do well this time. I have never paid attention to his tweets (I don't do social media) and his nonsense. Just results.
Re: I don't understand (Score:4, Insightful)
worked at McDonalds (a verifiable lie)
No it has not been verified as a lie.
The McDonalds store she claims to have worked at (which I have eaten at myself) has no record of her working there. That is understandable because it's been some years. She did have someone who claimed to have worked there say it, but it turns out that was a campaign worker who was discredited (and who also, of course, had no proof).
But there IS proof. Undeniable, simple to show proof.
If Kamala worked at McDonalds, then the IRS and the SSA both have a record of this: the forms filed by McDonalds. They keep this forever, and there is no question that this documentation is available. (This is not a form that she filed, nor does it depend on how much she was paid, nor is its retrieval time-limited or difficult to get. It's there.) She could not produce this simple piece of paper. Now, why didn't the Trump camp demand this from her? Well, you see, Donald Trump not revealing certain tax documents has been a major attack topic of the Democrats. The Republicans really, really don't want to being up the topic of anybody's tax documents.
A major issue for the Democrats has been Donald Trump not showing some of his tax documents. They would like nothing more in the whole wide world than to rant about his not showing his tax documents. This would be an opportunity to both drive home her "middle class" standing, and go on a huge campaign about Trump's tax returns. The Democrats would be slobbering over themselves at this absolutely irresistible opportunity.
Odd that she wouldn't place a phone call to the IRS and have them produce the document for her, isn't it?
Re:I don't understand (Score:5, Informative)
If you believe the Dems are communists, you know jack shit about communism, buddy.
Re: I don't understand (Score:5, Insightful)
I also live in a former communist country.
On top of that, I lived through communism, for some time. I lived through food shortages, through witnessing neighbors being pulled out of their homes in the dead of the night, in their pajamas, never to return again to their homes. I lived through power outages, 12 degrees Celsius inside our home at day during winter, I lived through waking up in the morning to see windows iced on the inside.
I lived through years of misery under Communism.
And you think Commies are out to get you in the USA? You're delirious.
Re: I don't understand (Score:4, Interesting)
Romania, the 1980s.
Re: I don't understand (Score:5, Informative)
American Liberals believe that they have the freedom to tell everybody else what to think and do, just like the European Communists.
Nobody is telling people what to do more than Republicans, period. Who you can love, what you can do with your body, what you can put in your body. Any idea that the Democrats are the party of greater authoritarianism is insane.
Re:I don't understand (Score:5, Insightful)
The funny part is if you read this description to most people out of context, they'd assume you were talking about Trump. He doesn't pay his contractors, lies about super obvious things like reading the bible, changes his opinions on a whim, bankrupted all of his businesses, lost most of his money, many people from his previous staff publicly asked people not to vote for him again, has rambling talks, answers questions by just talking about whatever is on his mind regardless of the question (wind farms!), and so on.
Re:I don't understand (Score:5, Interesting)
Who will implement Project2025.
This has been the Republican plan all along.
Was this what you voted for?
Re:I don't understand (Score:4, Insightful)
You can expect that he will be found to be "sick", the 25th Amendment will be used to remove him, and install JD Vance as Prez. Who will implement Project2025. This has been the Republican plan all along. Was this what you voted for?
This leaves out the realistic situation that 47 will be removed by cheeseburger and Diet Coke arterial blockage or convenient right wing nutjob shooter. Then JD will implement project handmaids tale and undo democracy. Using the 25th is probably plan F.
Re: I don't understand (Score:5, Insightful)
>all the decent ones ... Etc etc.
Even while spewing this divisive bile, you and ten million like you still pretend to be in the "decent people" crowd.
Zero understanding.
Re:I don't understand (Score:5, Insightful)
> I am not an American
Exactly. You do not and can not understand. This is the only thing you said that makes any sense to me as an American.
And oh please with the drama and trauma. Just stop.
One does not have to be an American to recognize a functioning idiocracy. In fact, in this case, being American might make that task harder.
No need to cry (Score:5, Informative)
If you can survive a lunatic madman once, you can survive twice. This country was designed so that any moron can run it. The lower IQ the better.
Re:No need to cry (Score:5, Insightful)
No, this time there are no guardrails. There are no reasonable people to hold him back.
We really don't have any idea how bad it can get but what Project 2025 spelled out is nightmarish.
Re: No need to cry (Score:5, Insightful)
You still have hundreds of reasonably sane people in Congress and in the state governments. The US prez is not a dictator.
Prior US presidents were not dictators.
Those people are going away. Remember, a stated goal is to shrink the government. Getting rid of the people loyal to the constitution is job #1, and the more is breaks the function of the government the better.
Re:No need to cry (Score:4, Interesting)
You can chop the Washington Post off that list now that Bezos has bent the knee to dear leader. Better, I think, to go with the BBC, and other sources beyond his reach, for news from now on.
Canada (Score:5, Funny)
Reminder, the last bus to Canada will be departing in 40 minutes, don't be late!
Re:Canada (Score:4, Insightful)
Not sure if this is joking but that's actually a real consideration for a lot of people today.
The Republicans spent a lot of time and money attacking and demonizing LGBTQ people. A lot of them have already lost access to healthcare, and networks have been created to help them leave states that oppress them. With the federal government coming for them, will anywhere be safe now?
Dark times.
The left lost men, latinos, non-college (Score:4, Insightful)
In this election, the right picked up more men, more latinos and blacks, and more non-college educated than in other recent election. For latinos and blacks, the left just expected that they would get their support with no lobbying or special attention. For men and non-college educated, economic life and community life has gotten even worse under Biden, and Harris's plan to improve the lives of men and working class didn't seem to resonate. So, unsurprisingly, given the two party system, people were less excited to vote for the party in power. And a couple of percent makes all the difference.
Re: The left lost men, latinos, non-college (Score:4, Insightful)
presumably if "latin men" could vote they aren't going to be deported. and maybe some of those people are precarious enough economically to out of self interest not want more illegal immigration like other blue collar/precarious classes. some of those "latin men" probably see themselves as white or white adjacent enough to not think of themselves in the way that category is being imposed on them. ultimately it's an empirical question about where the votes came from, were lost, etc
Re: The left lost men, latinos, non-college (Score:5, Insightful)
No, they reached out to Latinx. Very different and that shit pisses off most Latinos and Latinas. See the difference?
Her losing had nothing to do with the shaming canard about "oh because she's a woman". You can't ever define woman. She lost because she was a terrible candidate and the only person on the planet Trump could have beat except Hillary, an equally horrible candidate.
At least Hillary isn't stupid and she won her primary. Harris: zero votes. On her way to save democracy. So fucking offensive and insulting.
The near future (Score:4, Insightful)
Groceries are going to become very expensive as the Kroger/Albertson's merger goes through.
Tariffs will dramatically increase the prices of everything sold at big box stores.
Corruption will increase dramatically.
Ukraine will be cut off by the U.S. It's going to be up to Europe.
NATO is a done deal. The U.S. will likely withdraw.
The long standing independence of the U.S. military - swearing it's oath to the constitution will be subverted and those who favor the president over the constitution will be promoted. We may see the military used on U.S. soil within the next 4 years.
It's likely that social security and medicare will see significant cuts. The ACA will be cancelled and there will not be a replacement.
Insulin will return to several hundred dollars per dose.
The U.S. will become more aligned with Russia.
The rest of the world will never trust the U.S. again. It will be viewed as China or Russia (in it's heydey).
Hundreds of young women will die each year over the next four years as increasingly draconian anti-abortion laws go into place.
And I may be overly optimistic. I'm old. I'll probably be gone in 4 to 8 years anyway. God help the young folks I leave behind.
He's talking about the merger (Score:4, Informative)
The rest of the stuff that will be affected by tariffs is what he was talking about when he said big box store prices will go up.
This is why Donald Trump won. I'm sorry man I'm not trying to be cruel but you're reading comprehension needs work. You combined two unrelated topics in your head, The Kroger Albertsons merger and the tariffs. Both are related to inflation which is what caused the mistake you made. That challenge with reading comprehension is what makes you vulnerable to propaganda. Not that any of this really matters anymore since we're not a democracy
Re:The near future (Score:5, Informative)
The President is not bound by law. The President cannot be "prevented" from doing anything. Have you been keeping up with the Supreme Court?
The irony is that the office itself only exists "by law" as defined in the Constitution. Without "law", the Presidency does not even exist. Without law, there are no "duties" by which to judge if there is "absolute immunity" as literally anything is an "official duty". The constitutional crisis has already occurred, it came and went without incident. Now we simply wait for the newly elected destroyer of our country. He will get sworn in by the very Justice who has authorized him to become a permanent dictator.
US Politics has gone to shit (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm one of the most elderly people you will find on Slashdot. Politics has always been slimy, but it's devolved really badly at this point.
The main thing I hope for, four years from now, is that both parties will offer good candidates. I feel like we've reached rock-bottom.
With Trump being the incumbent, and the Democrats response to him, it could not happen last time. I had hoped the parties might turn around this time, but no such luck. Here's hoping for a good four years, and for much better offerings the next time out.
Why is anyone surprised he won? (Score:4, Insightful)
Even if Harris could have held the fort down, she basically admitted that she had to fix all the problems she and Biden created, which means the last 4 years were a train wreck, to which she wanted to recover from. All Trump had to do, was not demonstrate insanity, and I'm not talking about questionable statements or ideas, I mean insane, and he wasn't, so he won.
The only people the Democratic Party can blame, are themselves. They blew the entire race apart, then had no plan to put it back together, and arguably let a terrible idiot win. I'm not a Trump fan, but he was smart enough to outplay the special kids, and so his team won. He's also "special", just not wheelchair shaking special, like Biden and Harris.
Re:if America were real then this could not happen (Score:4, Interesting)
I realised a while back that being from an anti-democratic criminal background was no obstacle for power when Bongbong Marcos won the philipines presidency despite being the scion and son of Ferdiand Marcos the worst kleptocrat in philipines history who looted the whole damn country for his personal profits.
If *that* motherfucker can win an election, nobody is safe from demagogues.
I hope the US pulls through. Its only 4 years and then he's inelligible to run again, but good grief theres a lot of damage that can be done in those 4 years.
Re:if America were real then this could not happen (Score:5, Interesting)
Project 2025 doesn't even need Trump to survive long enough to move in, and after that there will be no coming back for decades. Did you think the stacked Supreme Court was bad? Silver lining: No more political uncertainty.
Re:if America were real then this could not happen (Score:4, Insightful)
Please try to at least have a clue before typing (Score:5, Informative)
1. In the US, one is not considered a "convicted felon" until after sentencing (I know, it sounds odd, but it's part of an incomplete process) and Trump has not yet been sentenced. The Democrats were in such a hurry to convict him of SOMETHING as a campaign tactic (so they could campaign against him as a "FELON") that they pumped-out the talking points before they were able to complete the deed. It was dishonest anyway, since they knew it would be overturned after the election and was only going to be possibly useful in the campaign.
2. In the US, law enforcement normally sides with the victim rather than the perpetrator. In this case, Trump was a businessman being blackmailed by Stormy Daniels and in any normal situation law enforcement would have been on his side and prosecuted Stormy. The fact that they went after the blackmail victim (Trump) and did nothing to the blackmailer (Stormy) is exceedingly problematic unless you are a partisan hack blinded by political hatred. The prosecutor in the case, Alvin Bragg is a partisan Democrat hack who campaigned [youtube.com] for office on a pledge to prosecute Trump - if you like Soviet-style justice, then you support this stuff... and if you're into Karma you'd better be prepared for the Trump admin to do this to some high-profile Democrats. Trump might choose to be merciful, as he did to Hillary when he was in his first term, but you should be aware that plenty of his supporters want him yo get medieval on the Democrats ad teach them a lesson. If he does not, it will be because he's the better man or because he does not want the distraction.
3. It had NOTHING to do with tax fraud. Had Trump declared that the hush payments were a campaign expense, he could have been prosecuted and jailed for a serious campaign finance violation (this exact thing happened to one of my previous congress critters). The Democrats know this full-well which is why they're so angry he did NOT declare it as a campaign expense (THAT would have been an easy prosecution). Trump's bookkeepers declared the payments as personal legal expenses, so the New York prosecutor who went after him had a problem... he had to try to create a crime by claiming these payments were to cover up some other crime, AND that the other crime was a federal one. Problem was: the feds had already declared no such federal crime had occurred - so the judge (also a Democrat) told the jury they did not need to agree on what federal crime may have occurred. This allowed the jury to convict without ever agreeing on and specifying WHAT CRIME was committed. This will ABSOLUTELY be overturned in the appeals process. We do NOT convict people in the USA for unnamed federal crimes and then punish them without ever telling them what underlying crime they are guilty of - it's basic violation of the plain text of the US Constitution.
You really have NO CLUE about this stuff. This is NOT a tax matter, and the IRS is nowhere in sight on this. It's also NOT a campaign funding issue, since Trump specifically did NOT put it into that category and the FEC previously found in his favor on the matter.
Personally, I'm rather tired of often seeming to defend specific people (like Trump in this case) while simply trying to defend REALITY, but I guess that's the world we increasingly live in when most people get OPINIONS from hyper-political hacks on TV or in the blogosphere instead of paying attention to the DETAILS and reading actual documents.