Trump Wins US Presidency For Second Time (decisiondeskhq.com) 1277
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:4, 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)
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:4, 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: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:4, 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)
"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:4, 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, 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:4, Funny)
Way back in 1973, him and Fred were sued [clearinghouse.net] by the Federal government for denying fair rentals to Blacks.
That was back when he was a very popular Democrat.
I guess he's reformed since then.
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:3)
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:4, Interesting)
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: (Score:3)
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: (Score:3, 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:4, Insightful)
So, it was all the voters' fault.
That's basically the point of democracy, yes.
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:3)
Your take is projection since what you're doing is the exact same thing:
You're talking down to the guys you disagree with, the people that had the audacity to vote wrong, and you're justifying yourself in doing that because you think you're se much smarter than the unwashed peasants.
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: (Score:3)
"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:4, Insightful)
Re: I don't understand (Score:3, Insightful)
It's remarkable to behold that people like you that as topped up on bile, berating others as "ghouls" and "imbeciles" think you have what it takes to criticise others.
All you have is frothing hate and an unfounded superiority complex.
Re:I don't understand (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
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.
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: (Score:3)
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:4, 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: (Score:3)
Most Americans are worse off today than they were under Trump.
About half of the Trump administration took place during the pandemic, looking fondly upon those times is an odd flex. Perhaps there's more to that whole Covid brain fog thing than they've been letting on.
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:5, 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)
No actual communist parties gained a seat anywhere. What the fuck are you talking about?
Re: (Score:3)
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:4, 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:5, Insightful)
Yup, groceries and other goods being locked up behind plexiglass, jobs reports being revised down by hundreds of thousands of jobs each month after the fact, the FBI somehow missing over 1600 homicides along with a metric fuckton of other crime which just so happened to let them claim a lowering of the crime rate, only to be suddenly found the next year so they could again claim a lowering of the crime rate. None of these things happened. Not at all.
Re: (Score:3)
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: (Score:3)
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:5, Insightful)
Actually america was the most prosperous when ...
By any sane measure of prosperity, America is most prosperous right now.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Hmm, ok, here's one: home ownership by young families.
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.
ability of a single earner to support a household.
More women work today, but I'm not sure why you equate more career opportunities for women with "less prosperity".
ability of the average person to afford a college degree
College is more expensive but also more accessible. Many more people go to college today, especially women.
Re: I don't understand (Score:4, 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:4, 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, 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: (Score:3)
It's easy to massage the economy to "look good" during one's tenure as POTUS. You just kick all the proverbial buckets down the road, then let the next person pick up the pieces, rinse and repeat.
Pretty much any country with, say, over 1M inhabitants has an economic inertia measuring in years.
I've seen this trend time and again: populist governments gain power, start throwing money at people (money they don't have, but borrow), then let the next cycle try to fix the shit they left behind.
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:4, Insightful)
If you believe the Dems are communists, you know jack shit about communism, buddy.
Re: (Score:3, 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
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:3)
>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:4, 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.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Kids would prefer candy to veggies, that doesn't mean veggies are objectively worse than candy.
So, to answer your question, the fact that Trump got voted more says nothing about his opponent. It says a lot about what people chose, but not why.
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:4, 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:4, 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.
Good morning (Score:3)
Re: Good morning (Score:3)
The US has footed the bill of the worlds absolutely largest military machine for over half s century. Expenditures of NATO allies has been mere fractions of this for decades.
Case in point: Recently Denmark sent a frigate to the Red Sea as our anemic contribution to Prosperity Guardian against the Yemeni Houthi aggression against international shipping.
There was just a slight problem - when it came to actual firing action they found out that the main guns on the ship was inoperable, because the Danish navy h
End Lawfare (Score:3)
Please try to at least have a clue before typing (Score:3)
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 possi
Canada (Score:5, Funny)
Reminder, the last bus to Canada will be departing in 40 minutes, don't be late!
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:4, 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.
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.
Shithole country. (Score:3)
Sorry to say it, but the USA has gone full retard, and is now a shithole country.
I feel sad for the half that are stuck with it now, but even more so for the future generations.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Sorry to say it, but the USA has gone full retard, and is now a shithole country.
The first clue should've been that we don't even guarantee healthcare as a basic human right. [visualcapitalist.com] What other proof do you really need?
Re: (Score:3)
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: (Score:3)
The US just did the Brexit thing, or the thing that Russia did when it handed the country over to Putin. "Let's vote for the radical solution because it can't get worse than this". Well, you retards, it fucking can and it fucking will.
Re: (Score:3)
Democracy is not immune from destroying itself, and the fact that it can do so is not proof that its principles have been disproven. In fact I would say that a fully democratic political system should be entirely capable of destroying itself, just as on a computer fully controlled by the user there should be nothing keeping the user from running "sudo rm -rf / --no-preserve-root"
Now the US will almost certainly fall into autocracy like Hungary and Russia did, but democracy will live on in other countries, a
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Strange How This Could Happen (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Show me on this history book where the virtue signals touched you.