85.2%

[canpakes]

.
Speaking of:

… I assure you the reason is entirely cost of living.

According to Trump, he won because of ‘the groceries’.




I guess that I should have posted this on page 1. It would have saved everyone some time.

[Gadianton]

Last night before dozing off, I caught David Pakman's post-election analysis:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6p6jp46Bzbo&t=726s

David's objectivity is a bit better than most of the pro-Democrat channels, he's definitely more open to saying things Democrats won't like and unsubscribe for, and I think he did a fair job here. He met with the Biden administration post election and he's one of the premiere left-leaning independent media channels.

The good news is we're all right, including Trump, he won on groceries. He won lying about groceries, of course, and has since walked back his claims about lowering grocery prices, but a win is a win. I got hundreds of "high prices" Kamala texts from the Trump campaign, and half of the Trump signs I saw said "Trump" on top and "low prices" or low crime on the bottom. The three biggest voter-claimed issues in his discovery were, 1) economy, 2) border, 3) crime. These were issues that mattered most to voters, and Democrats failed to adequately address them. Unexplored was the question as to what extent the Trump campaign created the hysteria over these three items whole cloth: I find it fascinating that voters just happened to have these three big issues in mind and Trump nailed it as he masterfully addressed them while Kamala totally failed. That's important when coming up with a counter strategy, which I think will be very difficult.

Down the list, David mentions the impending dominance of independent media and that it's right-leaning. I think this is huge. This has been in the works for decades, it goes beyond Joe Rogan. The History channel can barely be about history because people just aren't interested in history. They want Ancient Aliens. Even National Geographic needs to have alien hunter material to avoid bankruptcy. All the big podcasts that are the most entertaining for me are right-leaning, that's the connection with shock topics: aliens, conspiracies, and all of that, the hosts don't necessarily need to say anything specifically pro-Trump.

It's hard to say how long the drone obsession will last, but could it become an election issue? Even though Democrats were driving drone legislation pre-hysteria and the right just killed it, the messaging is all on the right. "Believe drone reporters". Its the right who is validating the public's concerns, even when totally irresponsible, and turning it into a huge LARP-fest. Well, it works. No conspiracy here, the right didn't stage a drone invasion just to freak out the public, they have years of experience amplifying drama and taking it to the cash register. This is a fresh topic, and it will be nearly impossible already this soon in the game for Democrats to compete in the messaging space.

Interestingly, David's analysis didn't uncover anything about misguided woke policies or the need to apologize to Nazis (Trump supporters).

[Dr Exiled]

Last night before dozing off, I caught David Pakman's post-election analysis:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6p6jp46Bzbo&t=726s

David's objectivity is a bit better than most of the pro-Democrat channels, he's definitely more open to saying things Democrats won't like and unsubscribe for, and I think he did a fair job here. He met with the Biden administration post election and he's one of the premiere left-leaning independent media channels.

The good news is we're all right, including Trump, he won on groceries. He won lying about groceries, of course, and has since walked back his claims about lowering grocery prices, but a win is a win. I got hundreds of "high prices" Kamala texts from the Trump campaign, and half of the Trump signs I saw said "Trump" on top and "low prices" or low crime on the bottom. The three biggest voter-claimed issues in his discovery were, 1) economy, 2) border, 3) crime. These were issues that mattered most to voters, and Democrats failed to adequately address them. Unexplored was the question as to what extent the Trump campaign created the hysteria over these three items whole cloth: I find it fascinating that voters just happened to have these three big issues in mind and Trump nailed it as he masterfully addressed them while Kamala totally failed. That's important when coming up with a counter strategy, which I think will be very difficult.

Down the list, David mentions the impending dominance of independent media and that it's right-leaning. I think this is huge. This has been in the works for decades, it goes beyond Joe Rogan. The History channel can barely be about history because people just aren't interested in history. They want Ancient Aliens. Even National Geographic needs to have alien hunter material to avoid bankruptcy. All the big podcasts that are the most entertaining for me are right-leaning, that's the connection with shock topics: aliens, conspiracies, and all of that, the hosts don't necessarily need to say anything specifically pro-Trump.

It's hard to say how long the drone obsession will last, but could it become an election issue? Even though Democrats were driving drone legislation pre-hysteria and the right just killed it, the messaging is all on the right. "Believe drone reporters". Its the right who is validating the public's concerns, even when totally irresponsible, and turning it into a huge LARP-fest. Well, it works. No conspiracy here, the right didn't stage a drone invasion just to freak out the public, they have years of experience amplifying drama and taking it to the cash register. This is a fresh topic, and it will be nearly impossible already this soon in the game for Democrats to compete in the messaging space.

Interestingly, David's analysis didn't uncover anything about misguided woke policies or the need to apologize to Nazis (Trump supporters).

I think democrats need to realize that voters actually can think for themselves and most chose Trump in 2024 and then look to see why that happened. Maybe it's what the democrats were selling or the lack thereof that lost the election. Perhaps the elitist idea that the idiot voters are somehow controlled by russia (the 2016 nonsense reason democrats claimed Trump won) or bamboozled by Trump this go around needs to go. This article by politico seems to point to that, but, this thesis could be wrong of course. Vote for us or you're an idiot has been the playbook for a while and so why not continue it. Case solved.

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/12/2 ... p-00195806

[Molok]

The situation with Lindy Li and the minor disagreement between us are essentially the same. One individual expresses a viewpoint that diverges from the progressive narrative, leading to an onslaught of attacks from progressives who seek to vilify and label this person as a bigot, racist, or similar. In the last 15 years, progressives have embraced a confrontational approach, targeting anyone who disagrees with them. This election, that strategy of attacking everyone who holds a different view ultimately led to the Democratic Party's defeat. A bully is universally disliked.

This is a fundamentally dishonest representation of what actually happened, and you know it. A much more accurate way to summarize the last few interactions between us would be to say "one person says something obviously not grounded in reality, and steadfastly refuses to provide a single example to back up their wild assertions while using language that is white supremacist coded until the other person they are talking to becomes exasperated enough to say they have to be trolling" You are not a serious person.

[Gadianton]

That politico article does cite culture war as a factor, unlike Pakman. The article does point out the lack of standing for anything in particular or appearing as a government pawn rather than having a real platform as a problem. Pakman also pointed that out, I just didn't mention it above.

You would need to cite precisely what part of the article you believe is saying the message "vote for us or your an idiot" is claimed to be a problem. I mean, if that is so offensive that it can't work, the entire enterprise of right-wing media would have collapsed in the 90s. Going around piping off about "liberals" has been core to the identity of the religious right for decades. Being rude and offensive appears to work very well. It's totally in vogue, and now that a few liberals are reacting by reflecting these tactics, some right-wingers are losing it and going so far as to claim that it lost the election for them. ha.

If Trump can't find a way to imprison or sue independent media into non-existence, the "incivility" is just getting started. And I think that's a positive thing. What I think is perhaps most funny about this claim is that I don't think most people are even aware it's a thing. Most people -- the low information voters as Xen calls them -- have no clue that this is the platform of left-leaning independent media. Only heavily online culture warriors like Ceebs would know about it, but even then, most right-wing culture warriors don't venture out of Rumble like Ceebs and would they even they be aware of it? Their issue is that Kamala represents the deep state, not that Kamala is saying people who vote for Trump are stupid. My right-wing friend, for instance, is apparently totally unaware this problem. He would have no idea who TYT even are, or Pakman, or Steve Schmidt, or Meidas Touch.

But man cannot live by bread alone. The problem with all the left-leaning independent media isn't that they are wrong to throw tomatoes at MAGA, but they need to come up with something positive to believe in as well. It may be that all the negativity from Fox and the big right-wing pundits is entirely smear campaigns based on nothing of substance. But then, Trump turns around and goes on 20 different independent right-wing podcasts and for hours and hours, is able to to apparently present himself as a real caring person who stands for something. Right now, mainstream media has sold out while independent media rightly fights Trump, but they need a platform beyond that.

[canpakes]

I think democrats need to realize that voters actually can think for themselves and most chose Trump in 2024 and then look to see why that happened.

I think that it’s also fair to say that plenty of voters don’t see a need to ‘think through’ anything more than the fact that some things are more expensive now than 4 years ago. They’ll blame the folks in charge and cast a ballot accordingly, figuring that they have nothing to lose from choosing someone else other than the incumbent. Not everyone is as invested in the drama of politics as some of us here are, and it’s not as if ‘throw the bums out’ hasn’t been an election cliché for a good 100 years or so.

And this isn’t a condemnation of either party’s behavior at the polls. This kind of reaction is seen from voters on either side of whatever fence line we want to choose.

Gad’s not wrong in pointing out that this cohort can probably be more easily swayed by 3-word phrases and 10-second sound bites via the multiple media that permeates and envelops their every waking moment, though.

[canpakes]

But man cannot live by bread alone. The problem with all the left-leaning independent media isn't that they are wrong to throw tomatoes at MAGA, but they need to come up with something positive to believe in as well. It may be that all the negativity from Fox and the big right-wing pundits is entirely smear campaigns based on nothing of substance. But then, Trump turns around and goes on 20 different independent right-wing podcasts and for hours and hours, is able to to apparently present himself as a real caring person who stands for something. Right now, mainstream media has sold out while independent media rightly fights Trump, but they need a platform beyond that.

To your point above, I saw this comment elsewhere and think that it sums things up pretty succinctly in its own style:

There are many reasons why, in my opinion, Trump managed to cinch a win. But one of them is that I believe many Americans value entertainment and spectacle more than just about everything. Trump talks like an idiot, but he does so confidently and entertainingly.

People don't remember the crazy stuff, just the memes and the soundbites.
We're a nation gripped by extended adolescence and Trump appeals to people who want easy answers to problems they don't understand but think are complicated. The Democrats aren't "fun," in other words.

Furthermore, they're perceived as killjoys and nags. The Democrats have hitched their horse to culture war minutiae over economic populism.

The Democrats are seen as the Party of "Everything is terrible and everyone is racist/sexist/etc. and you're not allowed to enjoy anything ever because of it." Regardless of how true or not this is, it's how people see them. Worse yet, the Democrats have done a piss-poor job of remedying this perception. Meanwhile, the Cons are the Party of "Woo! America! Let's have fun! Freedom and beer and burgers! Woo!"

The Democrats can't advertise to save their lives, and Cons do nothing BUT advertise. Democrats think their actions speak for themselves and that being loud and boisterous about them cheapens the effort. But the Cons will scream and cry and yell so much, viewers can pick and choose which narrative they like the most and just run with it.

The Democrats either need a charismatic, fearless firebrand who can rile up a crowd with rousing speeches of how the blood of the working man is being drained by oligarchs who will eat your children if they thought it would save them a few bucks. That, or a John Stewart type: a charismatic, entertaining figure who has all the right policies and knows how to talk to the average person.

My two cents.

[Gunnar]

I think democrats need to realize that voters actually can think for themselves and most chose Trump in 2024 and then look to see why that happened. Maybe it's what the democrats were selling or the lack thereof that lost the election. Perhaps the elitist idea that the idiot voters are somehow controlled by russia (the 2016 nonsense reason democrats claimed Trump won) or bamboozled by Trump this go around needs to go. This article by politico seems to point to that, but, this thesis could be wrong of course. Vote for us or you're an idiot has been the playbook for a while and so why not continue it. Case solved.

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/12/2 ... p-00195806

The fact remains that voting for Donald Trump and his MAGA conservatives was a horrible mistake, by almost ever objective measure, and this will become increasingly apparent during the next 4 years. People don't like to be characterized as idiots--especially if they really are. They would rather risk remaining idiots, than admit to being or having been idiots. The more foolish they have been, the more they will resist admitting to having been so foolish. Perhaps too much emphasis was placed on pointing out how foolish it was to ever support Trump in the first place, and people, especially the foolish, would rather risk remaining foolish than admit to being or having been foolish.

Too many voters were insufficiently aware of the objective fact that by nearly every objective economic factor such as record job growth, record low unemployment rates, highest GDP growth of the so called "G7 nations, declining inflation rates (reaching the lowest of most, if not if not all other nation, Biden's Administration has left us significantly better off than most, if not all other nations, and better off than we were at the start of his administration. Biden has, believe it or not, left Trump's incoming administration with a strong and still improving economy, which Trump will undoubtedly try to take full credit for as long as it continues, but blame Biden if it takes a turn for the worse due to Trump Administration policies and actions. It is tragic that so many Americans seem to give more credence to Trump and MAGA's unrelenting torrent of baseless and easily debunked lies than to the well documented strength of the leading economic indicators: U.S. economy grows at 3.1% pace in third quarter, an upgrade from previous estimate

GDP growth has topped 2% in eight of the last nine quarters.

Consumer spending expanded at a 3.7% pace, fastest since the first quarter of 2023.

Real GDP increased at an annual rate of 3.1 percent in the third quarter of 2024.

In the second quarter, real GDP increased 3.0 percent.

Why are so many voters more inclined to un skeptically believe the easily debunked torrent of lies coming from Trump than the solidly evidence-based, positive economic indicators that are easy to look up and confirm?

[Gunnar]

But man cannot live by bread alone. The problem with all the left-leaning independent media isn't that they are wrong to throw tomatoes at MAGA, but they need to come up with something positive to believe in as well. It may be that all the negativity from Fox and the big right-wing pundits is entirely smear campaigns based on nothing of substance. But then, Trump turns around and goes on 20 different independent right-wing podcasts and for hours and hours, is able to to apparently present himself as a real caring person who stands for something. Right now, mainstream media has sold out while independent media rightly fights Trump, but they need a platform beyond that.

To your point above, I saw this comment elsewhere and think that it sums things up pretty succinctly in its own style:

There are many reasons why, in my opinion, Trump managed to cinch a win. But one of them is that I believe many Americans value entertainment and spectacle more than just about everything. Trump talks like an idiot, but he does so confidently and entertainingly.

People don't remember the crazy stuff, just the memes and the soundbites.
We're a nation gripped by extended adolescence and Trump appeals to people who want easy answers to problems they don't understand but think are complicated. The Democrats aren't "fun," in other words.

Furthermore, they're perceived as killjoys and nags. The Democrats have hitched their horse to culture war minutiae over economic populism.

The Democrats are seen as the Party of "Everything is terrible and everyone is racist/sexist/etc. and you're not allowed to enjoy anything ever because of it." Regardless of how true or not this is, it's how people see them. Worse yet, the Democrats have done a piss-poor job of remedying this perception. Meanwhile, the Cons are the Party of "Woo! America! Let's have fun! Freedom and beer and burgers! Woo!"

The Democrats can't advertise to save their lives, and Cons do nothing BUT advertise. Democrats think their actions speak for themselves and that being loud and boisterous about them cheapens the effort. But the Cons will scream and cry and yell so much, viewers can pick and choose which narrative they like the most and just run with it.

The Democrats either need a charismatic, fearless firebrand who can rile up a crowd with rousing speeches of how the blood of the working man is being drained by oligarchs who will eat your children if they thought it would save them a few bucks. That, or a John Stewart type: a charismatic, entertaining figure who has all the right policies and knows how to talk to the average person.

My two cents.

All the above makes very good sense.

[Gunnar]

I think democrats need to realize that voters actually can think for themselves and most chose Trump in 2024 and then look to see why that happened.

I think that it’s also fair to say that plenty of voters don’t see a need to ‘think through’ anything more than the fact that some things are more expensive now than 4 years ago. They’ll blame the folks in charge and cast a ballot accordingly, figuring that they have nothing to lose from choosing someone else other than the incumbent. Not everyone is as invested in the drama of politics as some of us here are, and it’s not as if ‘throw the bums out’ hasn’t been an election cliché for a good 100 years or so.

And this isn’t a condemnation of either party’s behavior at the polls. This kind of reaction is seen from voters on either side of whatever fence line we want to choose.

Gad’s not wrong in pointing out that this cohort can probably be more easily swayed by 3-word phrases and 10-second sound bites via the multiple media that permeates and envelops their every waking moment, though.

As usual, you and Gad stated it much better than I could!