Anonymous wrote:Honestly, I think not. What are the demographics where she's slipping? Not the ones where Michelle and Beyonce add value.

I worry the campaign does not understand where help is needed.

I think they are there to motivate the base to vote. Not to attract new voters.

The aesthetics were not helpful. I honestly think she’s having a nervous breakdown from this. She’s not built for it. She’s not battled tested. Too phony. Too much astroturfing from wormy surrogates. Multi-million campaign payouts to washed up singers isn’t moving the needle.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the democrats party in a moment.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14006785/Kamala-Harris-democrat-event-screamed-child.html

That is awful; obsession getting in the way of decency.

It’s an example of when you take your online behavior into real life.

+1

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What’s your experience in campaign strategy?

Do you think Michelle Obama and Beyonce Carter do not understand persuasion?

OP here - I have no experience, just a regular joe. That said, it seems pretty obvious where Harris is lagging demographically.

[…] If he beats Kamala this time around, it will be at least partly because he was smarter in using new media to his advantage.

If he beats Kamala this time around it will be due entirely to the corporate media sanewashing everything he does. People like you are helping, of course, by posing as a sane appearing “I thought she was going to win until” person.

It's not corporate same washing. Trump doesn't succeed by people bringing up to America's level. Trump succeeds by bringing America down to his level. He appeals to the worst parts of us, and those parts hiss with glee.

Do you know what sanewashing is?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Joe Rogan >>>>>> Beyoncé, Michelle

Long format informative discussion > celebrity

Both are sucking up to their base. No undecided came out liking Trump after Trump's ludicrous display on Rogan where even Rogan was gasping and laughing at Trump's nonsense.

No, Harris is trying to meet everyone where they’re at, as she has done for the entire few months she’s been the candidate.

Meanwhile the GOP is calling Latinos a garbage patch and calling the VP a prostitute. So… you know, there are differences.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the democrats party in a moment.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14006785/Kamala-Harris-democrat-event-screamed-child.html

That is awful; obsession getting in the way of decency.

It’s an example of when you take your online behavior into real life.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What’s your experience in campaign strategy?

Do you think Michelle Obama and Beyonce Carter do not understand persuasion?

OP here - I have no experience, just a regular joe. That said, it seems pretty obvious where Harris is lagging demographically.

I was predicting a Harris victory right up until I saw Trump go on Andrew Schulz’ YouTube show. Trump would have needed a lot of convincing to do it as it was way out of his comfort zone, but it was a politically brilliant move in shoring up support among young white male voters. Likewise with Rogan. Trump beat Hillary in 2016 by running a more innovative, data-driven campaign. If he beats Kamala this time around, it will be at least partly because he was smarter in using new media to his advantage.

Yeah, the new pro-porn ad from Harris is just so bad. I thought it was fake. It’s not. So you have Trump on Joe Rogan, and Harris with absolutely creepy pro-porn ads, and idk who is running the Harris campaign but that is bad.

I looked up this ad because I thought for sure it was a republican behind it. Nope, Kamala Harris. Absolutely insane ad to run on.

Incorrect, but expected from low information Republicans.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What’s your experience in campaign strategy?

Do you think Michelle Obama and Beyonce Carter do not understand persuasion?

OP here - I have no experience, just a regular joe. That said, it seems pretty obvious where Harris is lagging demographically.

[…] If he beats Kamala this time around, it will be at least partly because he was smarter in using new media to his advantage.

If he beats Kamala this time around it will be due entirely to the corporate media sanewashing everything he does. People like you are helping, of course, by posing as a sane appearing “I thought she was going to win until” person.

It's not corporate same washing. Trump doesn't succeed by people bringing up to America's level. Trump succeeds by bringing America down to his level. He appeals to the worst parts of us, and those parts hiss with glee.

Anonymous wrote:Joe Rogan >>>>>> Beyoncé, Michelle

Long format informative discussion > celebrity

Both are sucking up to their base. No undecided came out liking Trump after Trump's ludicrous display on Rogan where even Rogan was gasping and laughing at Trump's nonsense.

Anonymous wrote:Scammed her base on the eve of the election. Talk about chutzpah.

Oh, honey, bless you.

I think a hit dog hollers and I think some people have seen or read what she’s said - “I hope you'll forgive me if I'm a little frustrated that some of us are choosing to ignore Donald Trump's gross incompetence while asking Kamala to dazzle us at every turn.” - and are a little tweaked that they’re one of those people who Mrs Obama is talking about.

There is no thinking person who looks at the choice and chooses Donald Trump. Those are just the facts. If your claims are “the economy” and “the border” you know full well that Trump is and would be worse in every regard. “She hasn’t explained her policies well enough;” you haven’t looked at her website or listened to her speeches and you’re spinning Donald’s “concepts of a plan” into something they’re not.

Scammed her base on the eve of the election. Talk about chutzpah.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Keep calling women who want to control their own reproductive health satan (as well as misinformation about abortion after birth - you are crazy).

Keep calling women satan. That’s a winning message. NOT.

There are so many great, reliable birth control options. Our mothers and grandmothers would have had completely different lives if they had the options we do.

What do women want? To be able to kill their babies up to the point of birth.

I just can’t get behind that.

Nobody is doing this! Are you one of Donald's cronies?

No one is doing it. Great, so we can ban it then.

Sure if you want to lose elections. Why don't you find something more productive to do with your time and energy?

Ok, if “no one is doing it”, then there should be ZERO electoral consequences for banning it.

Explain why I’m wrong for thinking this, please?

You say “but no one is having late term abortions unless they are medically necessary”… Ok, I’ll take your word for that.

Then why would banning late term abortions that are NOT medically necessary be something that costs votes?

I don’t understand this. If no one does it, then it literally affects NO ONE. So why would cost votes?


Please explain.

Because, my darling ignoramus, as we have seen with the abortion bans “with exceptions” that the forced birthers have already gotten, “exceptions” are BS.

How about you think with your head instead of your propaganda and trust women and their doctors? Why don’t you sit in your misogyny and wonder why you think women are such vile, evil creatures? Does that square up with how you’ve experienced yourself and others? Have you ever met a woman who decided, after a nice baby shower and with the nursery all done, that she just didn’t want to be pregnant? You think that’s happening, for real? Let me tell you about these twins I once heard that my kids teacher said were at her last school, L’monjello and Orangello, because evidently you believe everything you’re told if it already confirms your biases.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Keep calling women who want to control their own reproductive health satan (as well as misinformation about abortion after birth - you are crazy).

Keep calling women satan. That’s a winning message. NOT.

There are so many great, reliable birth control options. Our mothers and grandmothers would have had completely different lives if they had the options we do.

What do women want? To be able to kill their babies up to the point of birth.

I just can’t get behind that.

Please tell me you’re not that dumb. 99% of the later term abortions are medically necessary to save the life of mom or the fetus is proven to not be able to survive outside the womb. No one is voluntarily killing an 8month of baby. How are people this stupid and brainwashed?

Would you want the government making the decision for you if it came down to your wife dying or your (most likely) dead fetus?

If republicans are the party of “Freedom’’ then they should be all over maintaining the ability to save their wife’s life. FWIW I am a fairly strong catholic.

[…]

There are zero reasons why a third trimester “abortion” is needed

Oh, the blissful arrogance and ignorance. What a gentle, sweet world you live in where all pregnancies are blessed, all women are stupid whores and somehow whatever you believe is correct.

Celebrity endorsements don't add anything. People who attend rallies are already going to vote for that candidate; having people on stage saying to vote for him or her isn't going to result in a single additional vote.

The only value I can see is for propaganda - look how many people were at the rally, to suggest at least that much support. But, of no logical persuasive value (bandwagon fallacy). Sadly, many people fall for that fallacy, which is probably why the rally technique is used.

Undecided voters, or those intending to vote for a different candidate, are unaffected by rallies in terms of altering their voting intent.