Comment by danielovichdk
10 hours ago
How the US president became president is still the question that baffles me the most.
Twice. You did it twice.
10 hours ago
How the US president became president is still the question that baffles me the most.
Twice. You did it twice.
The Israeli lobby poured a lot of money into his campaign after 10-7 and the entire reason the current administration even has beef with the ICC is because they issued arrest warrants for Netanyahu.
I don't doubt that Israeli lobby poured a lot of money for him, but just that isn't enough for more than half of the people of a country to vote for a pathetic moron.
He has always been openly racist, sexist, misogynist, idot for as long as I remember.
A lot of labels are used in your observation. The problem is you only assigned them to one person and not the other subjects.
Turnout was 63.7% of eligible voters (lower than 2020, and even 100% would exclude certain felons, underage folks, mentally incapable folks, minors). And from that subgroup of a subgroup "only" 49.9% of voters selected Trump.
Still a crazy number, but not "half of the people of a country".
1 reply →
I don’t see how they could possibly do that AND have money leftover to fund space laser research. The math just doesn’t add up.
> The Israeli lobby poured a lot of money into his campaign after 10-7
Israeli lobby has enough money to elect Trump but not to change perception of Israel?
Can it be that Trump won because the public was fed up by the previous administration?
Nothing incongruent there. The campaign funds can of course be used on wedge issues that don't actually relate to Israel. Changing public perception towards scenes of destroyed homes and dead children is much more difficult.
16 replies →
Most of the times the opposition doesn't get enough credit. It feels as if the winner did everything.
In this particular case the credit goes go the opposite side. They screwed up so much as to make this possible.
I have heard the analysis by political pundits and I agree with it in context, but it’s still incredibly insane.
We basically cannot trust America anymore since its people have, as a whole, have lost the ability to reason and think critically. And the people in power want it that way. They prefer do disenfranchise most of their population so they can win elections using their core base who will believe anything.
>In this particular case the credit goes go the opposite side. They screwed up so much as to make this possible.
I'm sorry, but this is complete horse manure, albeit it's become a favorite fantasy/apologist/woe-is-me take on the right as the Trump disaster continues to unfold. But the opposition had NOTHING to do with Trump being chosen for POTUS. The Right had a perfectly decent choice: Nikki Haley. She had plenty right policies and no doubt would have made much of the left very upset, but she is also intelligent, sane, and cares to the normal degree about the country and basics of the constitution. She'd have been fine. She'd also have trivially creamed Democrats, and be holding Congress vastly better fwiw.
But out of the entirety of the US, only a single state (Vermont) voted against Trump. Every single last bit of the rest of the country chose Trump. There were no Democrats on the list for the Republican primary. Republicans could have sent Trump packing no problem, and then taken the WH and a bigger chunk of the House/Senate to boot. Trump being in the general and then WH was and forever will be 100% on the GOP.
Careful, hackernews has loads of redditors these days, and they hate any of their fantasy narratives being challenged by common reason.
Crazy take. Kamala and Hilary were fine candidates. Trump won by convincing the electorate "she's for them". Just straight up fake news
Kamala was pretty bad. I think she had the left most voting record in the senate when they needed a centralist?
3 replies →
> How the US president became president is still the question that baffles me the most.
> Twice. You did it twice.
If you want the answer, look at the Democrats. That's why he got elected twice: they were that bad at politics.
No. It is fault of conservatives, republicans and their supporters. Primary and absolitely. And same everywhere. AfD rise is on the AfD and those voters. The person doing the bad things is the culpable one.
Blaming everyone except those who worked hard to achieve this is absurd.
Always someone else's fault.
The people most responsible for getting their candidate elected is the campaign team. If the plan is just for your opponents to do a bad job, you don't deserve to win.
If half the voting population elects a vicious moron completely unsuitable for power, that's not the fault of the opposition. *They actively chose to vote for the fascist.*
Party of personal responsibility and all that.
There have been people that claimed they would have voted for the worst rulers registered in history before the dems; and at the same time John Bolton recurretly used the phrase "a cardboard cutout would be better than".
The question on whether they perceived (actually, whether they can perceive) what others like e.g. Bolton see is valid - nonetheless, you have to face that they explicitly, vocally refused to vote for the dems, "whatever it takes".
And the system in the USA is very broken - among the issues, there are only two options in the choice, with all the paradoxes it brings.
> If half the voting population elects a vicious moron completely unsuitable for power, that's not the fault of the opposition.
Don't let the opposition off the hook: as you said they lost to "a vicious moron completely unsuitable for power." How does someone fuck up an election like that so badly? It should have been a slam dunk.
It's the fault of the opposition for not doing a better job (at all manner of political competencies). One thing I've noticed over the last ten or so years, is that Democrats/Liberals/Progressives are very averse to admitting to and learning from their own mistakes. They'd much rather focus on blaming someone else for their own incompetence.
13 replies →
[flagged]
1 reply →
That's like blaming a rape victim for being bad at fighting off her rapist.
If you want the answer, look at Republicans. They nominated him twice, and the second time around the Republican base ignored all of the moral issues they knew about and voted for him anyway because they wanted the chaos and anger.
Look at the polling right now: even after Trump's policies have destroyed millions of Republican lives, those voters are still convinced that Trump has their best interests at heart and its really those dastardly Democrats' fault somehow even though the GOP controls all 3 branches of government.
> That's like blaming a rape victim for being bad at fighting off her rapist.
WTF? The Democrats lost some important elections to a fool, that's nothing like getting raped.
> If you want the answer, look at Republicans. They nominated him twice, and the second time around the Republican base ignored all of the moral issues they knew about and voted for him anyway because they wanted the chaos and anger.
I'm not saying there are no problems with Republicans, but that the bigger, more important, and more tractable issue is that the Democrats could lose to someone like that, twice.
Complain about how bad Trump is all you want, but if you lose to him, it's pretty clear you are in some important sense worse than him. Focus on fixing that, because bitching about the other side is going to do no good.
2 replies →
And after he tried to overturn an election he lost.
> I don’t wonder anymore [how Trump won twice]. I think he won for that exact reason. Because he carried at least one broken shard to reflect the broken shards in millions of others.
> If you’re a racist, you found your guy. If you’re a misogynist, you found your guy. If money is your only religion, you found your guy. If your heart is armored shut, you found your guy. If you mock the disabled, you found your guy. If intelligence makes you insecure, you found your guy. If you’re a sexual predator, you found your guy. If you trade in humiliation and conspiracy and filth, you found your guy.
[…]
> If he’d only carried one or two of these pathologies, he might have been dismissed as just another loud, damaged man. But he carried a buffet of them. That was the appeal. Millions could locate themselves somewhere in the wreckage. They didn’t have to agree with all of it. They just had to recognize a piece of themselves in it.
[…]
> Trump is a symptom. The deeper illness is collective. If there’s one sentence that defines his power, it’s this: “He says the things I’m thinking.”
* https://minocquabrewingcompanytimes.substack.com/p/the-thing...
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Jochum (?)
(AFAICT, originally posted on Facebook, but I don’t have an account so can’t really search it.)