Election 2024 Part III: Out with the old!

[Fippy]

I stopped using Amazon many years ago & never looked back,
but yup by now there's no chance to convince peoples on that.

 

[Gorbles]

I won't argue that many conservatives fit these labels but hand wringing away Trump's support as solely caused by these is lazy & counterproductive (call it Hillary's deplorables strategty), again if that was all there was to it no one who voted for Obama would turn around and vote for Trump.

If that was the case, the names conservatives call liberal centrists would surely push them left.

Surely?

 

[Narz]

If that was the case, the names conservatives call liberal centrists would surely push them left.

Surely?

Yeah, that's a trend too, more people pushed to both extremes. The problem is the left eats their own & the right is more welcoming to newbs.

 

[Voidwalkin]

No, he comes under some pretty intense criticism for his heel turn in presentation vs. material politics. Though I believe that's faded, because everybody knows who he actually is now. It's not a surprise anymore, it's just another lying politician that said what people wanted to hear, until he didn't have to keep up the appearance anymore.

John Fetterman continues to support raising the minimum wage, and his views represent many people in the Midwest, as has been true from the start, and is barely made less true by progressive distaste for him, because progressives are a distinct minority in the US.

What people? Sister? Brother? Cousin? What State? What context? Otherwise, can you see that this is just a "some people say" kind of comment... the "appeal to anonymous authority" fallacy.

FWIW, my little brother and a former close friend went right during metoo, in Ohio. Dad went right during Covid.

Again, I'm not disputing that people have their reasons. I've said as much, exactly. What I'm specifically expressing skepticism of, is the claim that someone criticizing them on the internet somehow turns them into a Trump voter. They were already a Trump voter based on their own internal, conscious and subconscious reasons and they're just trying to blame it on someone else

Bit narrow. It's not from one interaction, but a discomfort with the culture of the left as it has evolved over the past decade.

Disagreement over prioritization of goals, reluctance to break with longstanding norms, or concern over double standards of sympathy/unfairness in categorizations of whole groups are the patterns I sense from it. Accusations of prejudice fly in such disputes readily enough.

At some point in those 10k interactions, many do decide "yeah it's socially perilous to be around such people, and this is not something I want to see become mainstream in American society." There's not much room for them to remain on the left or in leftist spaces, as in all these places, there will be a vocal minority present to continue this process. They leave.

This process of expulsion continues to move the progressive movement further away from mainstream views, until such a point arrives that they're attacking some very mainstream views directly and regularly.

 

[aelf]

FWIW, my little brother and a former close friend went right during metoo, in Ohio. Dad went right during Covid.

Bit narrow. It's not from one interaction, but a discomfort with the culture of the left as it has evolved over the past decade.

Disagreement over prioritization of goals, reluctance to break with longstanding norms, or concern over double standards of sympathy/unfairness in categorizations of whole groups are the patterns I sense from it. Accusations of prejudice fly in such disputes readily enough.

At some point in those 10k interactions, many do decide "yeah it's socially perilous to be around such people, and this is not something I want to see become mainstream in American society." There's not much room for them to remain on the left or in leftist spaces, as in all these places, there will be a vocal minority present to continue this process. They leave.

This process of expulsion continues to move the progressive movement further away from mainstream views, until such a point arrives that they're attacking some very mainstream views directly and regularly.

These are the result of manipulations by billionaires. The "mainstream," if it exists, is what has resisted the manipulations thus far.

 

[Narz]

Bit narrow. It's not from one interaction, but a discomfort with the culture of the left as it has evolved over the past decade.

Disagreement over prioritization of goals, reluctance to break with longstanding norms, or concern over double standards of sympathy/unfairness in categorizations of whole groups are the patterns I sense from it. Accusations of prejudice fly in such disputes readily enough.

At some point in those 10k interactions, many do decide "yeah it's socially perilous to be around such people, and this is not something I want to see become mainstream in American society." There's not much room for them to remain on the left or in leftist spaces, as in all these places, there will be a vocal minority present to continue this process. They leave.

This process of expulsion continues to move the progressive movement further away from mainstream views, until such a point arrives that they're attacking some very mainstream views directly and regularly.

Leftist culture has also become very self-abasing. I'm part of another forum that's dwindled in size over the years pretty much exactly as you've described (and as many online spaces have) to the point where it's basically an echo-chamber of middle-aged white men decrying themselves and pedalstaling/infantalizing the 'other'.

And self-abasement is just not the American way.

I hate the movie Scarface but there's a line in it where Tony Montana says "I always tell the truth. Even when I lie" and I think that sums up Trump very well. He doesn't care about anything but power & the spotlight, he's one of the most brazen liars in modern history but he sells himself as unafraid whereas the stereotype of the left (even amongst those on the left) is fearfulness/cautiousness/worry about saying the wrong thing (not necessarily worry about doing the wrong thing just not saying it).

Hillary had a self-assuredness that she obviously deserved to win, she was the only 'correct' choice. Harris seems to be trying a little harder not to put off that vibe but it's still there.

I could never be a conservative but that's because I'm thought about it a lot, I grow up in a conservative family and I'm an environmentalist (I hate to give myself an 'ist' but I don't know how else to put it, it's my highest value) but for those for whom politics is like sports, I can see why Trump would make the sport more exciting.

Many seem to feel like to even be able to try and understand Trump's appeal makes them somehow awful people, it's like trying to put themself into the head of someone who voted for Hitler, they recoil even at the thought. But that's how these types operate, what 'good' people can't even imagine very often happens.

 

[Gori the Grey]

I've found this discussion fascinating. I can't quite spare the time to work out my thoughts fully. But I will just say this: I think that our politics is aligning in large measure around this social phenomenon, instead of traditional political issues. So it's not quite right to say that a leftist on the internet drives someone right (on the old scale that defines these matters: low capital gains tax) by calling him a sexist. Rather, the "right" is increasingly defined as people who want to speak their mind without being called out. And the left is increasingly defined as "no, I'm going to call this behavior out for what it is." So people sort themselves into those two categories. Since one political candidate is selling that precisely, "Don't tell me what I can't say," people whose speech meets with social condemnation gravitate toward that candidate. That's what Trump is selling: a world where you don't have to censor your own speech out of concern for other people.

There are political commitments underneath this, ones that drive the left to its censoriousness and that explain the kinds of things the right wants to be able to say. But the vector on which it's being fought out has to do with speech, as Void and Narz are testifying.

At the MSG rally, Trump was as explicit as he could possibly be on the point:

"When I say 'the enemy from within,' the other side goes crazy," Mr. Trump said on Sunday, mocking his critics.

 

[Gorbles]

Yeah, that's a trend too, more people pushed to both extremes. The problem is the left eats their own & the right is more welcoming to newbs.

Disagree strongly. Plenty of examples of right-wing groups fighting with each other, this goes back over a decade if not longer (when it was more relegated to corners of the Internet than it is today).

John Fetterman continues to support raising the minimum wage, and his views represent many people in the Midwest, as has been true from the start, and is barely made less true by progressive distaste for him, because progressives are a distinct minority in the US.

None of that is incompatible with what I said. You're the one who claimed he came under intense criticism for his views.

 

[Canadian Bluebeer]

Those "leftist" media you call out all campaigned for Trump. And he never would have been elected had they been as critical of him as they were of Clinton.

I wouldn't say campaigned "for" him, more of nobody could believe what he was saying.
(and well, it was Hillary. )

Right now, pretty much all the coverage of him is negative.

Fox centrist moving to the left?

Have you watched Fox? To fair, the moment they try to shift from Trump enablers, they lose audience share -- and advertising dollars -- to network pop-ups like Newsmax. MSNBC is remarkably leftist for a US network.

True, but they keep trying. (It's Murdochs kids running it now, and they want to go more left)

Trumpies are without exception rich, racist, or stupid, and often more than one of these.

I ain't rich, nor stupid, and calling me a racist is fighting words.

Should I call all the leftists <SELF CENSORED, SELF CENSORED, SELF CENSORED, SELF CENSORED, SELF CENSORED> morons?

I'm Canadian, but I've lived in the US, I prefer Trump to "the other one".
I've never LIKED him, but he has been fun to watch, mean tweets and all.
Watching the leftie proggies go total bughouse nuts is amusing.
(and some of the righties doing the same thing ... a twofer!)

I've stocked up on popcorn for next week.

(our elections are so blasted BORING! sigh)

 

[soundjata]

Yesterday there was a really big happening downtown
Famous restaurant was opening again for its customer tasting pleasure
So I got there out of curiosity, imagining the fine cuisine they where about to deliver…

But before we could start eating, the cook told us about a new set of rules for the venue:
- There will be only two dishes to chose from: 1. carbonized rat meat and 2. rotten swamp grass.
- The choice would be collective as every guest was to vote secretly for one, and the majority would decide what everyone would have in their plate.

Ensued really strong arguments between meat defenders shouting "I can't have a meal without bones!" and vegetables partisans "Veggie meal or strike!"

None of us thought about contesting the rules of that restaurant though. (It's the best in town)

 

[Birdjaguar]

Philadelphia sues Elon Musk over daily $1M payments to voters​

The Philadelphia district attorney says the promotion is an illegal lottery.

Betsy Woodruff Swan Politico
10/28/2024, 12:10pm ET

Philadelphia is suing tech billionaire Elon Musk for giving $1 million per day to randomly chosen voters who share their contact information with his political action committee and promise to support the Constitution.
The endeavor, helmed by Musk’s pro-Trump America PAC, is “indisputably an unlawful lottery,” according to the lawsuit, filed by Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner on Monday. Pennsylvania regulates lotteries heavily and lets local prosecutors sue people who run illegal ones.

The giveaways also run afoul of Pennsylvania’s consumer protection laws, according to the lawsuit, which says that while Musk claims winners are chosen randomly, he seems to favor people who attend Trump rallies. The lawsuit notes that Musk’s PAC says more than 280,000 Pennsylvanians have signed the petition that gives them a chance to win the money.

Krasner asked a judge to immediately order Musk to stop the payouts. Shortly after the suit was filed, Musk’s PAC blasted out several pictures via X (formerly known as Twitter) of a Michigander who received one of the checks.
“Every day until Election Day, a person who signs will be selected to earn $1M as a spokesperson for America PAC,” read the post.
It previews Musk’s likely legal defense: that the payments are paychecks, not gambling winnings. Reached for comment for this story, a spokesperson for the PAC pointed to the tweet.
Krasner is not the only law enforcement authority scrutinizing Musk’s giveaway. Last week, the Justice Department sent a letter to Musk’s PAC warning that the stunt could violate a federal law that prohibits paying people to vote or register to vote.

 

[lymond]

^^^The Irony

 

[Birdjaguar]

Trump's cabinet?

Who could be in Trump’s next Cabinet? Here are leading contenders.

www.politico.com

 

[Sommerswerd]

Trump is now up 0.4% on RCP aggregation on the backs of multiple recent polls showing him up. WSJ and Atlas Intel have Trump up 3%, while FOX News, CNBC and Forbes/Harris all have him up 2%. Rasmussen actually only has him up 1% after revising their poll yesterday that had the race tied. Worth noting, is that all those polls are typically favorable towards Trump and RCP essentially seems to have swapped out some polls they were previously using, in favor of more Trump-favorable polls, however, even the polls that were more favorable to Harris have been trending more in Trump's favor lately, so Harris was losing ground regardless.

Harris is still leading on 538, but it has shrunk down to a 1.3% lead, with Trump now showing slim leads in Arizona, Georgia, Nevada, North Carolina and Pennsylvania. Harris still has a slim lead in Michigan and Wisconsin.

Silver Bulletin has Harris up by 1.2%

 

[aelf]

I ain't rich, nor stupid, and calling me a racist is fighting words.

Should I call all the leftists <SELF CENSORED, SELF CENSORED, SELF CENSORED, SELF CENSORED, SELF CENSORED> morons?

I'm Canadian, but I've lived in the US, I prefer Trump to "the other one".
I've never LIKED him, but he has been fun to watch, mean tweets and all.
Watching the leftie proggies go total bughouse nuts is amusing.
(and some of the righties doing the same thing ... a twofer!)

I've stocked up on popcorn for next week.

(our elections are so blasted BORING! sigh)

People in Canada are just as susceptible to the grift. In your case, the root cause might be a kind of bitterness that induced a cruelty that's attracted to Trump's cruel showmanship.

I've found this discussion fascinating. I can't quite spare the time to work out my thoughts fully. But I will just say this: I think that our politics is aligning in large measure around this social phenomenon, instead of traditional political issues. So it's not quite right to say that a leftist on the internet drives someone right (on the old scale that defines these matters: low capital gains tax) by calling him a sexist. Rather, the "right" is increasingly defined as people who want to speak their mind without being called out. And the left is increasingly defined as "no, I'm going to call this behavior out for what it is." So people sort themselves into those two categories. Since one political candidate is selling that precisely, "Don't tell me what I can't say," people whose speech meets with social condemnation gravitate toward that candidate. That's what Trump is selling: a world where you don't have to censor your own speech out of concern for other people.

There are political commitments underneath this, ones that drive the left to its censoriousness and that explain the kinds of things the right wants to be able to say. But the vector on which it's being fought out has to do with speech, as Void and Narz are testifying.

Would you say now that being anti-woke is a huge part of Trump's appeal?

 

[Gori the Grey]

After the speech today, the crowd should go do something constructive: march through the streets of DC handing out granola bars, e.g.

 

[Sommerswerd]

Quite the interrogation!

Just talking man. It's difficult to discuss the reasons particular people vote for Trump without some details about those voters.

I had in mind a friend of mine from Florida who went from being a long haired hippie to a religious conservative

OK thanks. So this is a good example. This friend lives in a Red state and he found Jesus, which is two factors that would strongly influence him to be Republican voter. So I don't think this guy would be voting Trump in response to getting dragged by "the left" online. He's a conservative Republican, in a red state and Trump is the Republican nominee. That's why he, and guys like him would vote for Trump. Incidentally, I don't think its too controversial to say that this is the main reason people are voting for Trump. They are conservative and/or Republican and Trump is the Republican nominee. There may be much more numerous, varied and complex reason why they are Republican and/or conservative, but their main reason for voting for Trump is just his party affiliation.

If you have an hour to kill

I don't right now, but I will give it a watch and comment later, thanks for the video.

This isn't some hearsay, and even if I didn't know anyone personally who's swung right it's well documented that the divide of young men & young women is highly than ever before recorded

Right, but I'm not disputing any of that. Again, what I am addressing/disputing, is the claim that criticizing people online turns them into Trump voters.

 

[Gori the Grey]

Would you say now that being anti-woke is a huge part of Trump's appeal?

I've never not said that. I only said I didn't think there was anybody new he could bring to him on that basis: that everyone for whom that is appealing is a part of the 71 million he got last time. They are certainly staying with him. But Harris did a pretty good job, I think, of not explicitly taking on "woke" issues, so there's only as much anti-woke animus directed toward her as toward the left in general.

 

[aelf]

I've never not said that. I only said I didn't think there was anybody new he could bring to him on that basis: that everyone for whom that is appealing is a part of the 71 million he got last time.

Well, if he's winning, that would suggest that he's bringing new people to his side. What else enabled him to do that?

 

[Gori the Grey]

He's not winning. The polls seeming to show so are inaccurate, and not accounting for a turnout imbalance. Both.

(I realize that I will not have my vindication on this point until election day.)