USA Election 2024

[Eric]

But are you asking the right question. Has the country moved right or has the leadership of Dem party moved left and drug everyone with it without them realizing it. I know I get pushback on this, but I am not sure what policies the GOP has moved right on from say 1990 or even 2000. I can think of many the Dems have moved left on. And in some cases, far left.

The GOP has sold out all of their souls, just because the American people like some of the anti-woke/immigrant stances doesn't change that. To me, this says far more about the American people than it does any party, they simply don't care about his character flaws as long as they see the direction as one they agree with.

That said, I see the same shift locally as I do nationally, a shift away from policies that are soft on crime, overregulated, and poorly managed financially. Even in Liberal San Francisco they're recalling two mayors over this stuff. I think it's less about party and more about accountability right now.

In my view these things always have a shift but it takes being on the extreme end of it before we're willing to make a change. In a few years the pendulum will probably start swinging the other way again.

 

[rdrr]

We plan to retire somewhere on the beach on eastern Sardinia As to the other thing, you know, it's all relative. It's always interesting to have an adventure. If things are not going well, we can always come back.

IMO I would suggest looking at one of the Scandinavian countries. Which are currently very liberal in their thinking and society. Sweden or Norway would be my first choice, but you have to be okay with the cold. Italy is becoming very facist and I would do a lot of research on the emigration process first.

On another tangent...

I admit I am going to sound like one of those "conspiracy theories", but here is where I am in the stages of post election funk. One of three are true.

1. I am crazy and so are most of us on this board, except a few individuals who believe the cost of eggs and milk are more imporatant than democracy. I mean what the numbers show is that America wants a dictator, and my resistance to that idea means that I am crazy in my opposition to that.
2. I have been hospitalized and am in some life support coma. There have been a series of tragedies and stresses in my life over the past few weeks and with the election results, it seems as if my brain is helping me pass and transition, but playing this crazy story. Kinda like the Life is a simulation thread, but it's my own personal simulation. Stress point are;

• Finding out my surgery has a chance (around 10%) to fail and be crippled for the rest of my life.
• My brother had a mental breakdown and was hauled away by emergency services a week and a half ago somehow he talked his way out of a section 12.
• My brother's wife a mere 3 days later fell down the stairs and is looking like she will need an elbow replacement.
• My sister-in-law (wife's side) was mistakenly told twice by her PCP she had ovarian cancer with a 10cm mass last Friday afternoon (fun weekend), and thank god the Oncologist has determined that to the best of her experience and optinion she thinks it's benign.
• A smattering of friends siblings and parents passing away.
• And of course the election results.

3. 21 Million voters don't just fall off a cliff in 4 years. I wouldn't give any creedence to this option, except for the people to whom I am accusing, Trump, Elon, and Putin. We all know they were meeting secretly and if a state agency wants to hack into something it is very very hard to prevent it. Also I would point to the very weak DoJ head that I think was asleep for the last 4 years.

Funny enough and I don't mean to make light of it, but number 2 was caught on a hot mic. My wife was on a work call and went into the kitchen. I just got off of a work call myself and met up with her, she was numb so she didn't warn me there was an open mic with two co-workers that I personally know. I ranted about my theory and then heard laughter coming from her laptop and voice saying "You aren't dead or crazy." *Embarrassed* And that is why I can share that one.

Sorry to basically vomit up the crazy thought that are rattling in my head, but I don't know what else to do.

 

[Nycturne]

I guess I have a slightly darker take: people believe what they already want to believe. In other words ... it isn't that they believe the economy is shit because they've been bamboozled by a brilliant story. The story just has to be good enough to provide cover for what they already want to believe in. They want to believe that the economy is shit because if it isn't then their identity is under threat. This is fundamentally about the identity of white male America.

That certainly plays a part, but those folks were voting Trump either way and were already motivated voters. What decided the election doesn't look to be them, but the choices by more intermittent voters. This was an election where voter turnout dropped by 15 million votes compared to 4 years ago. It's the people who decided to stay home, mixed with those that vote, but otherwise are disengaged from politics, that made the difference here.

I kinda hate how we measure performance in terms of percentages, when the fact that the vote count dropped by 10% is a big part of the equation. It's slicing the data in ways that masks an aspect of what's going on.

This isn't to say that 40+ years of wealth and media concentration hasn't dramatically destabilized our politics and society. It has and thus greatly contributed to our situation today, but we've moved beyond that to the point that we're dealing with a crisis of identity. And I contend that's what the focus on the "pocketbook" is missing. Yes people are upset with their leaders everywhere and we've seen shifts in government, including occasionally far right governments getting the boot due to economics and unhappiness. But overall, the far right is on the rise worldwide and continues to be so and it is for more than just economic anxiety. I mean ... we're not in a recession and the government is getting the boot.

We aren't in a recession, but by the sentiment of the population, it's hard to tell the difference. And that is also partly my point. It's not about the reality of the numbers, but the perception. And one of the things that the right has been doing is telling the story of a failing country. One that has successfully been getting people concerned about the strength of a rebounding economy. A lot of this reminds me of this exchange from Sneakers:

 

[Herdfan]

The GOP has sold out all of their souls, just because the American people like some of the anti-woke/immigrant stances doesn't change that.

Ok, when was the GOP ever pro immigration?

And even some liberals are getting tired of "woke". Last night Van Jones on CNN was lamenting that every six months there was a new term he had to learn.

 

[dada_dave]

The GOP has sold out all of their souls, just because the American people like some of the anti-woke/immigrant stances doesn't change that. To me, this says far more about the American people than it does any party, they simply don't care about his character flaws as long as they see the direction as one they agree with.

That said, I see the same shift locally as I do nationally, a shift away from policies that are soft on crime, overregulated, and poorly managed financially. Even in Liberal San Francisco they're recalling two mayors over this stuff. I think it's less about party and more about accountability right now.

In my view these things always have a shift but it takes being on the extreme end of it before we're willing to make a change. In a few years the pendulum will probably start swinging the other way again.

Yes the pendulum is swinging the other way, but I want to make it clear that, if you actually crunch the numbers and compare cities with different policies, the soft on crime, over regulated, poorly managed financially, perception is (for the most part) wrong - this where I very much agree with @Nycturne below. Let's just focus on the first for now: we had a local spike in crime due to the pandemic - but the cities which adopted tough on crime policies before the pandemic and continued them through it had as larger if not larger spikes in crime. Even with spike, crime is still at historical lows, like massively. So we're going back to policies that were worse than the ones we had even in the extreme situation they were faced with which will cost us more and result in massive cuts to education and all the other programs which do more to lower crime in the long run (seriously even the proponents of the proposition admitted the cost would be tens to hundreds of millions to prosecute and house extra prisoners, where do you think that money is going to come from?).

Again, this is where I agree with @Nycturne, people can adopt "just so" stories, and the "easy" solutions that accompany them, that feel right. But in the end these are massively counterproductive and can be self-fulfilling viscous cycles until they get so bad that they require the readjustments we already made. The end result of such policies are not safe, quiet streets for most people. The end result is Rodney King, George Floyd, etc ... protests, or worse, riots.

Yes the pendulum will swing back and I agree with you that normally it swings back once at the extremes, but I'd contend we only got the center before swinging back right, as @GermanSuplex said, our "left" parties are pretty damn centrist compared to everywhere else.

That certainly plays a part, but those folks were voting Trump either way and were already motivated voters. What decided the election doesn't look to be them, but the choices by more intermittent voters. This was an election where voter turnout dropped by 15 million votes compared to 4 years ago. It's the people who decided to stay home, mixed with those that vote, but otherwise are disengaged from politics, that made the difference here.

I kinda hate how we measure performance in terms of percentages, when the fact that the vote count dropped by 10% is a big part of the equation. It's slicing the data in ways that masks an aspect of what's going on.



We aren't in a recession, but by the sentiment of the population, it's hard to tell the difference. And that is also partly my point. It's not about the reality of the numbers, but the perception. And one of the things that the right has been doing is telling the story of a failing country. One that has successfully been getting people concerned about the strength of a rebounding economy. A lot of this reminds me of this exchange from Sneakers:

This I agree with and in fact I see it as driving exactly the perception @Eric talked about. Even in liberal California we're going back to the policies that failed us and getting rid of the ones that were working. And we're doing it because the new policies having been enacted the most recently were blamed for circumstances which would have been even more devastating under the old ones. So I don't disagree, I just wanted to emphasize that the identity politics of what is driving Americans to vote the way they do (i.e. the ones actually voting) which is lost in the "pocketbook" discussion and I think because people don't want to acknowledge it.

 

[Chew Toy McCoy]

Great observation. I think this is the reason why I remain cautiously optimistic. MAGA does not have a strong ideological basis, it's just anti-immigration rhetoric and fuzzy complaints about economy. Once Trumps politics inevitably make things worse, most of his support base will dissipate. And I hope that the system is robust enough to at absorb at least some of the damage.

However, there is another historical analogy, which is probably more apt here — Italian fascism. Italy didn't have a strong national ideology. It was a fragmented, depressed nation without a democratic tradition, a nation that desired a strong leader. I think there are some parallels to the current day USA, although of course there the situation is more nuanced.

What pisses me off is we are nowhere near the historic economic conditions that should cause people to choose or turn a blind eye to a fascist experiment. It wasn’t 70 million+ impoverished people who voted for Trump, not to mention the impoverished who didn’t vote for him or didn’t vote at all. But I shouldn’t be that surprised because we are an extremely materialistic country with an extremely low bar for what is considered unlivable conditions. What I see is white people sliding towards a lower economic existence that has been historically common in minority communities but for whites is the end of the world. As far as minorities joining the Trump ranks, for many they probably saw it as an opportunity to join the white wave of economic outrage that didn’t exist before when it was only their communities and their problem.

 

[cbum]

I think we are missing the forrest in the policy trees here.

I'm not worried about conservative policies or legislation, even if I believe they are wrong. They can be changed if they don't work.

I'm worried about the threat of wholesale throwing overboard of all rules and behaviors that were explicitly made by T in the last 4 years.
Throwing out the civil servants and replacing them with ignorant sycophants. The whole 2025 stuff - Heritage foundation fever dreams. Expected absence of any "sane" adults in the room that T now knows how to avoid. Pursuing political enemies. Deputizing the Justice Department. An insane federal Judiciary and SCOTUS and their presidential "infallibility" finding. And on and on.

I'm sick to my stomach.

 

[dada_dave]

I think we are missing the forrest in the policy trees here.

I'm not worried about conservative policies or legislation, even if I believe they are wrong. They can be changed if they don't work.
I'm worried about the wholesale throwing overboard of all rules and behaviors that were explicitly made by T in the last 4 years.
Throwing out the civil servants and replacing them with ignorant sycophants. The whole 2025 stuff - Heritage foundation fever dreams. Pursuing political enemies. Deputizing the Justice Department. An insane federal Judiciary and SCOTUS and their presidential "infallibility" finding. And on and on.

I'm sick to my stomach.

Yes I agree and this is why I maintain that the pocketbook, policy discussion is actually less important here - even if I agree with ideas that politics is perception and people tell themselves stories, it is less germane to the worst of what's coming.

 

[Eric]

Ok, when was the GOP ever pro immigration?

And even some liberals are getting tired of "woke". Last night Van Jones on CNN was lamenting that every six months there was a new term he had to learn.

Yes, I conceded that point. Did you even read my post?

 

[leman]

IMO I would suggest looking at one of the Scandinavian countries. Which are currently very liberal in their thinking and society. Sweden or Norway would be my first choice, but you have to be okay with the cold. Italy is becoming very facist and I would do a lot of research on the emigration process first.

Right-wing populism is rather successful in Scandinavia as well. It is a global phenomenon, unfortunately. As a double Swiss/EU citizen, I am quite privileged when it comes to mobility within Europe, and I don't see these things changing any time soon. Plus, I am married into an Italian family

 

[Eric]

Texas State University one day after the election.

 

[rdrr]

Texas State University one day after the election.

Ah the religion, except that sentiment is not Christian in the least.

 

[Chew Toy McCoy]

But are you asking the right question. Has the country moved right or has the leadership of Dem party moved left and drug everyone with it without them realizing it. I know I get pushback on this, but I am not sure what policies the GOP has moved right on from say 1990 or even 2000. I can think of many the Dems have moved left on. And in some cases, far left.

Here’s something I think you can agree with that isn’t a specific policy. Starting with Clinton the Democrats started going after the big money donors, most notably the financial sector and Silicon Valley. In that world the priority is increasing profits which usually results in screwing over people and the workers. That is “the elites” the right is raging against. Previous to this big business was largely the constituency of the Republicans. So again, not a specifically a policy, but a definite movement to the right.

Also look how much Democrats have said the economy is great. In political speak “economy” is code for how the wealthy are doing far removed from the reality of the common citizen.

IMO too much attention on the right is put on some left leaning social polices to ignore the fact that the Democrats have moved to the right in support of the wealthy.

 

[Eric]

All I can say is Republicans own the keys to the kingdom now, can't blame liberals anymore. We've seen this before when Dems had both houses (likely) and the presidency, they will only be able to point fingers at themselves for the next two years.

 

[shadow puppet]

 

[dada_dave]

All I can say is Republicans own the keys to the kingdom now, can't blame liberals anymore. We've seen this before when Dems had both houses (likely) and the presidency, they will only be able to point fingers at themselves for the next two years.

If elections proceed as normally, and sadly that is now a big if, the party in power always loses the midterms - almost without fail except for right after September 11th.

Here’s something I think you can agree with that isn’t a specific policy. Starting with Clinton the Democrats started going after the big money donors, most notably the financial sector and Silicon Valley. In that world the priority is increasing profits which usually results in screwing over people and the workers. That is “the elites” the right is raging against. Previous to this big business was largely the constituency of the Republicans. So again, not a specifically a policy, but a definite movement to the right.

Also look how much Democrats have said the economy is great. In political speak “economy” is code for how the wealthy are doing far removed from the reality of the common citizen.

IMO too much attention on the right is put on some left leaning social polices to ignore the fact that the Democrats have moved to the right in support of the wealthy.

Because in the 80s Democrats in the US and Labour in Britain lost badly to Reagan and Thatcher, said the country was moving rightwards and therefore they had to move as well and were indeed rewarded for it ... for a time.

 

[Chew Toy McCoy]

Right-wing populism is rather successful in Scandinavia as well. It is a global phenomenon, unfortunately. As a double Swiss/EU citizen, I am quite privileged when it comes to mobility within Europe, and I don't see these things changing any time soon. Plus, I am married into an Italian family

This is the result of massive inequality everywhere while governments run cover for their wealthy.

 

[rdrr]

This is the result of massive inequality everywhere while governments run cover for their wealthy.

Although I agree that the right wing populism is trying to make a foothold in Scandinavia, they are still very left leaning. I am sure that the right will eventually and unfortnately make significant progress there, as of right now it is better than most of the EU nations. My original point was, since I don't mind the cold, that would be my personal first choice over Italy/France/Spain. Of course the SO doesn't want to leave her family.

@leman make sure you check out cheaphouseseu on Instagram, they cover most of the EU. The catch is you got to read the details and these houses are usually an hour+ away from a major city. I almost made a bid on one in Denmark an hour and 15 minutes from Copenhagen. Again... the SO said no.

 

[dada_dave]

This is the result of massive inequality everywhere while governments run cover for their wealthy.

I absolutely agree that's part of it, but again we can't ignore the identity politics happening here and in Europe. It isn't just about inequality and I think this is where the left in America and Europe trip themselves up. They think if we just convince people to adopt left-wing economic policies everything will be great in the long run while ignoring a huge percentage of why even centrists are being rejected which has nothing to do with economics. Basically if it comes down to it, a lot of people are willing to give up more inequality if they see that there is someone below them and especially if that's a group they don't like or at least don't share an identity with.

"give them someone to look down on and they'll empty their pockets for you"

One of the biggest problem with the inequality is the amount of control that gets ceded to the wealthy and powerful - the more wealth and power they have, the more they crave, the more destructive they are willing to be to get it.

 

[Chew Toy McCoy]

If elections proceed as normally, and sadly that is now a big if, the party in power always loses the midterms - almost without fail except for right after September 11th.


Because in the 80s Democrats in the US and Labour in Britain lost badly to Reagan and Thatcher, said the country was moving rightwards and therefore they had to move as well and were indeed rewarded for it ... for a time.

This is probably too much for many on the right to wrap their head around, but the real source of their anger is the Democrats moving to the right and by extension abandoning them. The nonexistent by actual power "left" has fuck all to do with it.