Are Michigan, Wisconsin, and PA the “blue wall” anymore?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So interestingly, Trump got less votes this year than he did in 2020. This isn't the mandate people think it is, though he did win the popular vote. However, Harris obviously failed to turn out voters in the urban areas people expected. She got less votes than Biden did. So the party really needs to examine why.

If this isn’t a mandate, what in your opinion is a mandate?

The best part of a mandate is that it comes with high expectations. They have to deliver or will get punished next time. Talk is over.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No they are states where the majority of people are rational and will side with the party that offers the greatest chance for financial and physical security.

Maslow was a smart guy, the party that best addresses people’s basic physiological and safety needs will win every time.

People need to be able to afford a place to live, food, not worry about having their kids shipped off to a war.

Agree. Democrats can wax poetic about many ideas, but the single most important concept they cannot grasp is that Americans are financially struggling. They refuse to accept that reality.

When you can’t feed yourself or your family, and can’t afford shelter, that’s all that matters.

They seem to despise people who can’t afford these things, and double down by calling them names.

Democrats still are attacking Trump and talking about how bad his supporters are, instead of understanding why they were rejected across the board.

The world in its entirety is complex, but people as a whole are not. They need to eat, be sheltered from the elements, and care about the safety of themselves and their children.

Democrats are rejecting the idea that people care about themselves and their children and go a step further and call them nazis for doing so.

So many people have said: I don’t agree with everything Trump or republicans stand for, but I know I could afford to live under Trump.

Democrats say no, no you couldn’t, you are wrong. Also, you are a nazi. Thus, presidential election 2024.

Okay. Trump said he'd fix the economy. Apparently tariffs is the strategy to do do. The clock starts January.

This. Tariffs plus mass deportations. As Trump likes to say, "we'll see what happens."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So interestingly, Trump got less votes this year than he did in 2020. This isn't the mandate people think it is, though he did win the popular vote. However, Harris obviously failed to turn out voters in the urban areas people expected. She got less votes than Biden did. So the party really needs to examine why.

Republicans won:

– Presidency
– Popular vote
– Senate majority
– House majority
– State governor majority
– State legislature majority

That’s not a mandate?

Yes but it's not that more people went out and voted for Trump than before. He actually got less votes. What we need to understand is why people didn't come out for Harris.

Because she bragged about Dick Cheney’s endorsement while also being on tape advocating for sex changes for prisoners? She basically chose to come off as a war hawk with overly woke positions on social issues, which is probably the worst kind of politician the Dems could hope to run.

The Dems would be wiser to run someone with Bernie’s economic and foreign policies and working class appeal and Manchin’s cultural and social attitudes. It won’t win fans in NW DC or Bethesda, but if you’re pissing those people off you’re on the right path to winning national elections. The Dems will never get the message though, which is why it’s going to be a very tough time for them for the foreseeable future.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So interestingly, Trump got less votes this year than he did in 2020. This isn't the mandate people think it is, though he did win the popular vote. However, Harris obviously failed to turn out voters in the urban areas people expected. She got less votes than Biden did. So the party really needs to examine why.

Republicans won:

– Presidency
– Popular vote
– Senate majority
– House majority
– State governor majority
– State legislature majority

That’s not a mandate?

Yes but it's not that more people went out and voted for Trump than before. He actually got less votes. What we need to understand is why people didn't come out for Harris.

Because she bragged about Dick Cheney’s endorsement while also being on tape advocating for sex changes for prisoners? She basically chose to come off as a war hawk with overly woke positions on social issues, which is probably the worst kind of politician the Dems could hope to run.

The Dems would be wiser to run someone with Bernie’s economic and foreign policies and working class appeal and Manchin’s cultural and social attitudes. It won’t win fans in NW DC or Bethesda, but if you’re pissing those people off you’re on the right path to winning national elections. The Dems will never get the message though, which is why it’s going to be a very tough time for them for the foreseeable future.

Yeah, I agree with you. That's why I don't understand people going after the progressive wing. Bernie is speaking to THOSE people we lost. That's who we need more of.

[Anonymous]

Let's be real for a second. The midwest didn't vote for a woman twice against Trump. A lot of the people there are also extremely racist. They want to deport undocumented migrants and Harris isn't white enough for them.

I've certainly talked to people in those places and the N word is still in wide circulation for many people there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So interestingly, Trump got less votes this year than he did in 2020. This isn't the mandate people think it is, though he did win the popular vote. However, Harris obviously failed to turn out voters in the urban areas people expected. She got less votes than Biden did. So the party really needs to examine why.

Republicans won:

– Presidency
– Popular vote
– Senate majority
– House majority
– State governor majority
– State legislature majority

That’s not a mandate?

Yes but it's not that more people went out and voted for Trump than before. He actually got less votes. What we need to understand is why people didn't come out for Harris.

Because she bragged about Dick Cheney’s endorsement while also being on tape advocating for sex changes for prisoners? She basically chose to come off as a war hawk with overly woke positions on social issues, which is probably the worst kind of politician the Dems could hope to run.

The Dems would be wiser to run someone with Bernie’s economic and foreign policies and working class appeal and Manchin’s cultural and social attitudes. It won’t win fans in NW DC or Bethesda, but if you’re pissing those people off you’re on the right path to winning national elections. The Dems will never get the message though, which is why it’s going to be a very tough time for them for the foreseeable future.

Yeah, I agree with you. That's why I don't understand people going after the progressive wing. Bernie is speaking to THOSE people we lost. That's who we need more of.

I’d also like to note that this the kind of candidate Biden positioned himself as in 2020 when he won the election. He was a little to the right of Bernie on economics and further to the right on foreign policy, but he had the Union Joe message and working class appeal and had moderate social and cultural positions relative to the rest of the candidates…and he WON.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So interestingly, Trump got less votes this year than he did in 2020. This isn't the mandate people think it is, though he did win the popular vote. However, Harris obviously failed to turn out voters in the urban areas people expected. She got less votes than Biden did. So the party really needs to examine why.

Is that so? I haven't seen final numbers yet, as several states are still counting.

How did Harris 2024 compare to Biden 2020?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let’s be real for a second. The midwest didn't vote for a woman twice against Trump. A lot of the people there are also extremely racist. They want to deport undocumented migrants and Harris isn't white enough for them.

I've certainly talked to people in those places and the N word is still in wide circulation for many people there.

Where these the same people in counties in Michigan who voted for Obama by 30
points more than Romney and then only voted for Harris by 4?

Dems will never get it. Gird yourself for a JD Vance presidency in 2028.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let's be real for a second. The midwest didn't vote for a woman twice against Trump. A lot of the people there are also extremely racist. They want to deport undocumented migrants and Harris isn't white enough for them.

I've certainly talked to people in those places and the N word is still in wide circulation for many people there.

Ding, ding, ding! This is what it boils down to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s be real for a second. The midwest didn't vote for a woman twice against Trump. A lot of the people there are also extremely racist. They want to deport undocumented migrants and Harris isn't white enough for them.

I've certainly talked to people in those places and the N word is still in wide circulation for many people there.

Where these the same people in counties in Michigan who voted for Obama by 30
points more than Romney and then only voted for Harris by 4?

Dems will never get it. Gird yourself for a JD Vance presidency in 2028.

You can't compare this to the Obama years. The fact that you would even say that shows how incredibly stupid or at the very least disingenuous you are.

[Anonymous]

I have trouble with the notion that R’s are winning due to people that are financially struggling. None of the many R voters I know are remotely struggling financially. All are quite well off and are instead obsessed with transgender bathrooms and critical race theory in schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No they are states where the majority of people are rational and will side with the party that offers the greatest chance for financial and physical security.

Maslow was a smart guy, the party that best addresses people’s basic physiological and safety needs will win every time.

People need to be able to afford a place to live, food, not worry about having their kids shipped off to a war.

Agree. Democrats can wax poetic about many ideas, but the single most important concept they cannot grasp is that Americans are financially struggling. They refuse to accept that reality.

When you can’t feed yourself or your family, and can’t afford shelter, that’s all that matters.

They seem to despise people who can’t afford these things, and double down by calling them names.

Democrats still are attacking Trump and talking about how bad his supporters are, instead of understanding why they were rejected across the board.

The world in its entirety is complex, but people as a whole are not. They need to eat, be sheltered from the elements, and care about the safety of themselves and their children.

Democrats are rejecting the idea that people care about themselves and their children and go a step further and call them nazis for doing so.

So many people have said: I don’t agree with everything Trump or republicans stand for, but I know I could afford to live under Trump.

Democrats say no, no you couldn’t, you are wrong. Also, you are a nazi. Thus, presidential election 2024.

This. I'm a liberal dem who did not vote for Trump and we are high HHI but I have long said I understand Trumps popularity. I totally get why he win and it's not only Econ it's everything - the Dems only campaign motto in this election was criticizing Trump. I think a lot of people ran from that brand of politics and saw in Trump a leader because at least he is himself. Look, I detest him too but at the end of the day, he's a real ass. The real part appeals to a whole lot of people.

[Anonymous]

The Amish, like the Ents in Tolkien’s LOTR, rose up in PA and voted against the creeping tyranny of the Democrats in Orthanc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s be real for a second. The midwest didn't vote for a woman twice against Trump. A lot of the people there are also extremely racist. They want to deport undocumented migrants and Harris isn't white enough for them.

I've certainly talked to people in those places and the N word is still in wide circulation for many people there.

Where these the same people in counties in Michigan who voted for Obama by 30
points more than Romney and then only voted for Harris by 4?

Dems will never get it. Gird yourself for a JD Vance presidency in 2028.

You can't compare this to the Obama years. The fact that you would even say that shows how incredibly stupid or at the very least disingenuous you are.

I can’t not deride the same population in county as racist because they voted for a Black man with the name Barack Hussein Obama by 30 points over a square white rich dude? Are you joking?!!!! I’m referring to the voting totals in Flint, Michigan. These aren’t white racists. They’re working class Black folks white folks and they didn’t like what Dick Cheney’s best friend was selling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have trouble with the notion that R’s are winning due to people that are financially struggling. None of the many R voters I know are remotely struggling financially. All are quite well off and are instead obsessed with transgender bathrooms and critical race theory in schools.

And I’m sure you are so in tune with the Union voters in Flint and the Muslim voters in Deerborn….

The delusion and hubris on here is maddening.