President Trump 2.0

[Stephen]

Originally Posted by Pierre

Secure the border

Deport illegal migrants

Reduce tax

Reduce inflation

Introduce Tariffs on cheap imports that hurt US manufacturing.

Roll back on Climate targets and policies that hurt US consumers

End the war in Ukraine

If you were ever paying attention, which you obviously weren’t, they were very clear.

---------- Post added at 21:14 ---------- Previous post was at 21:12 ----------



He was and he did.

You, however, appear to be unable to cogently understand them

---------- Post added at 21:24 ---------- Previous post was at 21:14 ----------



This is an accusation levied at Americans by ignorant Brits (yes that is directed at you ) that like to feel superior, which is unfair and wrong. They have a continent they can frolic across without the need of a passport. We don’t have that luxury.

It’s also a myth that the USA is a homogeneous country, it isn’t. Going to different states in the USA is like visiting 50 different countries.

We need a passport otherwise it’s Cornwall every summer, the options for Americans are vastly greater.

---------- Post added at 21:26 ---------- Previous post was at 21:24 ----------



And they have no obligation to consider the world o/s of the US. (I’m not suggesting you’re implying they should)

He'll likely only reduce taxes for his rich pals and not those that really need it.
So tariffs on cheap imports? He is planning on large tariffs on most if not all imports. Even stuff they don't or can't manufacture in the US.

Even IF he is able to reduce inflation, which is not even majorly high. The price of goods will probably not come back down to what they used to be, yet that is what voters are expecting.

[Dude111]

Originally Posted by Mick

my post stated he was going to win

Ya Mick I felt he was gonna also....

I know alot of ppl are mad about it!

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Stephen

He'll likely only reduce taxes for his rich pals and not those that really need it.

“Likely”. So you have no evidence he will, has he said that…..or are you just overreacting a little bit emotionally?

So tariffs on cheap imports? He is planning on large tariffs on most if not all imports. Even stuff they don't or can't manufacture in the US.

Ok, show me where he has said that……………I’ll wait. I’ll be waiting a long time, but I’ll wait.

Even IF he is able to reduce inflation, which is not even majorly high. The price of goods will probably not come back down to what they used to be, yet that is what voters are expecting.

Well, of course they won’t, because that’s not how inflation works……which proves you don’t
understand it.


Inflation should always increase, which means generally prices will always increase. They will come down or stay static due to competition or supply and demand. Also modest and non-inflationary pay increases will help the electorates back pocket.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Stephen

He'll likely only reduce taxes for his rich pals and not those that really need it.
So tariffs on cheap imports? He is planning on large tariffs on most if not all imports. Even stuff they don't or can't manufacture in the US.

Even IF he is able to reduce inflation, which is not even majorly high. The price of goods will probably not come back down to what they used to be, yet that is what voters are expecting.

No, that’s deflation, which means more unemployment. Nobody wants that.

Originally Posted by Paul

I'll tell you otherwise then.

You happened to guess right, as did many people.

If it were possible to "call it" in the manner you imply, there would be no point in anyone voting.


Its going to be an "interesting" 4 years (if he lives that long).

I saw the early voting data, (not who voted for who but ballots returned based on party affiliation) so of course there is a point in voting, it’s through this early voting data, she was massively under performing in Pennsylvania by a lot compared to Biden in 2020.

PA is a massive swing state, I knew she was in trouble & it wasn’t just PA she was struggling with & that’s why I said in my post back in Oct, Trump was going to win, it wasn’t a hope, or prediction, I simply knew it, looking at the EV figures & I based what I said with actual votes cast data.

Biden had a 1.1 Million Early vote lead going in to Election Day in 2020 in PA
Biden won the state by 80,000 votes after Election Day, so Republicans turned out in large portions on actual day of voting, but it wasn’t enough to cut through Biden’s massive firewall.

Kamala’s lead was way down around 300,000 going in to Election Day 2024. So Republicans on Election Day, did same, came out in force, Kamala’s poor early vote lead meant they cut through her lead, Trump won it by over 235,000.

As I knew how Republicans vote more on Election Day, I knew she was in big trouble approaching Election Day & I knew, looking at this information, Trump would win it, given how crucially winning PA usually means also winning the presidency.

[jfman]

Where did you see the data out of interest?

Only asking as it'd almost certainly be true. Harris lost votes (vs Biden 2020) everywhere. Every state, every congressional district and almost every county.

Across every demographic she lost voter share. Age. Sex. Race. Income. You name a metric and Harris moved the dial backwards. This isn't a quirk of the electoral system. Nor is it that Trump's campaign was more effective at dragging out a 'certain type' of voter than Harris. It was almost entirely uniform. That's a bad candidate, or a bad message.

Originally Posted by jfman

Where did you see the data out of interest?

Only asking as it'd almost certainly be true. Harris lost votes (vs Biden 2020) everywhere. Every state, every congressional district and almost every county.

Across every demographic she lost voter share. Age. Sex. Race. Income. You name a metric and Harris moved the dial backwards. This isn't a quirk of the electoral system. Nor is it that Trump's campaign was more effective at dragging out a 'certain type' of voter than Harris. It was almost entirely uniform. That's a bad candidate, or a bad message.

There’s a lot of noise and it’s hard to tell from this distance, but I get the impression that the Dems have gone far more to the left on social issues than is generally appreciated from this side of the Atlantic. Gender identity politics seems to have hurt her (‘women won’t vote for a woman who can’t say what a woman is’ is a phrase I’ve seen more than once), the widespread, campus-occupying, Jew baiting over the summer also seems to have become attached to her despite complaints from that lobby that she wasn’t doing enough on the issue. And the southern border issue is also hanging round her neck. But most of all, the GOP campaign successfully tied her to Biden and his legacy is inevitably filtered through his rapid decline over the last 6 months in particular. She was (almost) literally shackled to a corpse.

Originally Posted by Mick

As I knew how Republicans vote more on Election Day, I knew she was in big trouble approaching Election Day & I knew, looking at this information, Trump would win it, given how crucially winning PA usually means also winning the presidency.

What you don't know, and nobody could know, is how much of that Republican vote on Election Day had moved to early voting. That's why people are cautious about looking at early voting, especially in the United States, where there is little history of early voting and the last one was influenced by COVID.

It was entirely possible that the Republican scepticism of early voting in 2020 that saw the Democrats amass a huge early vote before the Republicans turned out in droves on Election Day had equally out. This could mean this time more Republicans vote early and there isn't as big a gap between early voting and on-the-day voting.

---------- Post added at 08:29 ---------- Previous post was at 08:26 ----------

Originally Posted by Chris

There’s a lot of noise and it’s hard to tell from this distance, but I get the impression that the Dems have gone far more to the left on social issues than is generally appreciated from this side of the Atlantic. Gender identity politics seems to have hurt her (‘women won’t vote for a woman who can’t say what a woman is’ is a phrase I’ve seen more than once), the widespread, campus-occupying, Jew baiting over the summer also seems to have become attached to her despite complaints from that lobby that she wasn’t doing enough on the issue. And the southern border issue is also hanging round her neck. But most of all, the GOP campaign successfully tied her to Biden and his legacy is inevitably filtered through his rapid decline over the last 6 months in particular. She was (almost) literally shackled to a corpse.

There will be a lot of this kind of analysis, and it will shake out more as the dust settles, but I think this kind of stuff matters on the margins. Ultimately I think the biggest reason she lost in Americans weren't happy with the economy and Democrats got the blame for inflation. I believe every incumbent government that was in power during that spike has now lost power apart from Macron in France.

That said the left clearly has a big problem talking to certain demographics. I think men between 18-30ish and traditional working class in rural areas especially.

BTW This is fascinating. How the electoral coalition are changing in America. We're seeing the same here:

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees

You’re missing the point he perhaps didn’t explain them cogently to you he obviously managed to resonate with a degree of the population and he obviously resonated more strongly that KH did to the electorate

This btw is a view shared with me talking to colleagues in the US (supporters of both parties)

The other view which seems to be held is that a section of the population aren’t aware of the world outside of America and that they see things such as the economic downturn and cost of living as something that happens only to them.

But are you not just describing Populism? Tell them what they want to hear irrespective of the facts.

Harris was a poor choice but she was not Trump and that is all that matters here. You know some of his supporters think, and I include some CF members in this, that you should not be scared by the extreme things he said he will do because when in office, he will just be rational and more moderate. I find this position literally insane: you vote for someone who you assume is lying when he said what he will do in office and you vote for what you hope he will do, not what he says he will do. Crazy ...

BTW, how long before the family grifters show up for "work"?

[jfman]

Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees

The other view which seems to be held is that a section of the population aren’t aware of the world outside of America and that they see things such as the economic downturn and cost of living as something that happens only to them.

The fact it happens elsewhere doesn’t exempt governments around the world from blame (like Pierre, I’m not saying you said that but I’ve heard it on podcasts). They aren’t passive actors in macroeconomic policy.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by ianch99

But are you not just describing Populism? Tell them what they want to hear irrespective of the facts.

That's not populism, that's Politics.

[ianch99]

Some of the reasons why Musk is shilling for Trump:

Elon Musk could reap a whopping tax break if he joins a Trump administration

[jfman]

Originally Posted by ianch99

Some of the reasons why Musk is shilling for Trump:

Elon Musk could reap a whopping tax break if he joins a Trump administration

And? Do you think all those Democrat donors and business activists were doing it out of the kindness of their hearts?

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by jfman

And? Do you think all those Democrat donors and business activists were doing it out of the kindness of their hearts?

Ah, so you don't mind then. I am surprised but I guess people change. The level of influence Musk will have will be immense and so will his rewards.

It is the old argument "well they are all like that so it does not matter" - well in this case it does because Musk is dangerous. He is not like the run of the mill DC lobbyists which you seem to equate him to.

[mrmistoffelees]

Originally Posted by ianch99

But are you not just describing Populism? Tell them what they want to hear irrespective of the facts.

Harris was a poor choice but she was not Trump and that is all that matters here. You know some of his supporters think, and I include some CF members in this, that you should not be scared by the extreme things he said he will do because when in office, he will just be rational and more moderate. I find this position literally insane: you vote for someone who you assume is lying when he said what he will do in office and you vote for what you hope he will do, not what he says he will do. Crazy ...

BYW, how long before the family grifters show up for "work"?

Here's the thing, I don't like Trump, I don't think he'll make a good president some of his polices don't resonate with me.

BUT the line I've bolded above is EXACTLY why IMHO KH lost. Trump had policies, you might not like them, but they were liked enough by the voters for him to make inroads into the democratic vote share.