• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Top 5 Reasons the Democrats Lost the Election

MarkCorrigan said:
OP, the fact you think Kamala Harris is far-left is disturbing. Not surprising at all, but disturbing.
Click to expand...
I asked a trumpkin on YouTube recently if he could define communism with his own words. He replied that it was so typical of liberals to ask people to 'define' words (his scare quotes, not mine).

They really want to live in a world without facts, and where even words don't mean anything.
 
The GOP lied, ran on a platform of lies, and ran against a strawman version of Kamala. The Party spent decades building a misinformation infrastructure that the Dems just could not overcome.
What the Dems need to do is win local elections and spend a massive amount of resources on a media infrastructure. Dems will have an uphill battle in all elections for a decade or two until they can build something to counter The Party's chokehold on the media.
 
dirtywick said:
i'm having trouble squaring up the idea that woke leftist policy is unpopular, yet most of the country seems to be somewhere between pretty ok to genuinely happy with a health insurance ceo being gunned down in the street
Click to expand...
Because leftist policy involves gunning down CEOs in the street?
 
MarkCorrigan said:
OP, the fact you think Kamala Harris is far-left is disturbing. Not surprising at all, but disturbing.
Click to expand...
She was far left in 2020, not so much in 2024 and not at all prior to 2020. Changing your mind is fine but she's never even tried to explain her evolving opinions.
 
But Trump didn't contradict and change his mind all the time?
First, I doubt your claim. Secondly, if the "flip flopping" mattered, it would've turned Trump voters off as well. If both candidates were doing it, it wasn't a factor in why she lost.
 
Theres a lot of different sorts of voters.
A. Folks that will always turn out for one party or the other. She had those.
B. Folks that might turn out for one party or the other. She seems to have lost a lot of those.
C. Folks that might vote for either party, She seems to have lost a lot of those.

Sure, she wasn't going to get the folks that would turn out for Trump no matter what.

Also, I was just pointing out that at least at on point in her career she was quite far left. A response to the "the fact that she is considered far left is disturbing" shouldn't be, she has been quite far left.
 
Brainster said:
Because leftist policy involves gunning down CEOs in the street?
Click to expand...
You mean the leftist who gravitates towards Tucker Carlson, Jordan Peterson, and Peter Thiel?

Do we get to contrast this to the right's policy of shooting up schools, synagogues, Walmarts, etc?
 
It's amazing that they believe calling these right-wing shooters leftists will actually convince us that the problem is the left.....
 
thaiboxerken said:
It's amazing that they believe calling these right-wing shooters leftists will actually convince us that the problem is the left.....
Click to expand...
Not to derail, but I don't think he fits neatly into anywhere on the one dimensional line. He complains about "wokeness" and seems to be a fan of cyber libertarianism, but he also has a very anti-corporate bend and accepts climate change. He just hasn't quite seen the contradictions yet.
 
He certainly didn't get the idea to murder health insurance CEO's from the left, although that's what The Party is asserting.
 
I'm pretty sure hating the people prolonging your suffering is something a lot of people understand, irrespective of their political disposition.
 
thaiboxerken said:
The GOP lied, ran on a platform of lies, and ran against a strawman version of Kamala. The Party spent decades building a misinformation infrastructure that the Dems just could not overcome.
What the Dems need to do is win local elections and spend a massive amount of resources on a media infrastructure. Dems will have an uphill battle in all elections for a decade or two until they can build something to counter The Party's chokehold on the media.
Click to expand...

Exactly the same advice given to third parties over twenty years ago. It didn't take.

Actually, the Adopt A Kitten sign in the middle of I-26 never changed throughout the entire election. You would think they could have at least, during the last month of the election, out bid and got the sign to advertise their candidates. Unbelievable.
 
A woman that vocally champions women's rights above all else will never win, because it's self-interested. The feminists need to take a page from the Obama campaigns... he barely talked about race at all. That's why he was able to win. We can have a female president, or we can have a feminist advocate president, but we can't have both in the same person.

This is twice now that we've had this problem. When will they learn? How fascist do we have to get before the bitches learn (sorry... couldn't resist. I do hope you realize it was meant to be humorous)? The fem vote might win them the nomination, but it'll never win the presidency, mainly due to pushback. It was even worse with Harris, considering her her primary political identifiers were sex and race.

Nobody (at least, nobody important) gives a crap what sex and/or race she is... as long as it isn't constantly shoved down our throats by the press, and to some degree, the campaign itself. Neither is a reason to vote for her or against her. Being constantly reminded of these things as if we can't tell by looking is ONLY a reason to vote against her.

And that's literally all I have to say about the election. I won't even speak the other candidate's name... or read or listen to anything whatsoever about him. As far as I'm concerned, he doesn't exist. My sanity requires it.
 
Last edited:
And yet, the underendowed can drone on and on with their white greivances.
 
Donal said:
And yet, the underendowed can drone on and on with their white greivances.
Click to expand...
Hmm? Yeah, don't care about anybody's moral outrage about it. Literally the only thing that people barely paying attention (most voters) knew about Kamala Harris was that she is black, Half-Indian, and female. That's it. Literally nothing else got through.

While all that is fine, none of it is a valid reason to vote for her, especially if you don't share those characteristics.

I don't give a flying horseradish about what you think anybody should or shouldn't be able to say. I care about not having a fascist felon as president. I'm talking about results, not higher values. Sure, people can advocate for whatever the hell they want, and bitch about how "entitled" rich white guys are (through no fault of the random individual white guy, btw... the vast majority of us aren't personally in charge of hiring, promotions, or law enforcement, despite minority communities having stereotypes stating otherwise, possibly because it's mostly true where they live... but most whites don't live anywhere near big cities), but if the cost is losing to a freaking fascist, it ain't worth it.

But technically, that's getting a bit off track. The whole white privilege thing wasn't really a big part of the election. At most, it set the scene for the culture war BS that made losing possible... but it wasn't pushed all that hard in this cycle that I noticed. It is an interesting point that rural whites will never be able to relate, though. And that's also where Democrats always lose, obviously. I'm not sure that demographic can even be shifted anymore. Too many bridges burned in the culture wars. It's not so much that we're racist (some are, admittedly), it's that we're sick and tired of hearing about big city racial tensions that are completely irrelevant to our own communities, and for some unknown reason, seemingly getting blamed for it just because we're white. I would have to drive 60 miles to see a black person, and even there they'd be ridiculously rare.

...and that's through no fault of my own. I was born here. My mother's side of the family has been in this community since just before The Civil War and at least one fought for The North (but it's Bloody Kansas, so we probably have both sides in there somewhere... possibly even some that didn't give a damn either way).
 
Last edited:
I do see the other side of the issue. It's just that the problem has nothing to do with me. Hell, I'm even one of the 10% that still votes Democrat in this county -- when there's a candidate even available. But I also fully understand why my neighbors are annoyed by the rhetoric. It somewhat annoys me, too.
 
Last edited:
Of course, it didn't help matters that Walz was caught lying about his military record, his trips to Hong Kong, and his football coaching experience. In 2018, he referred to weapons that "I carried in war," when in fact he never carried a weapon in a war zone during his National Guard service--he was never in a war zone at all, not once. In 2005, he implied that he had been deployed to Afghanistan in 2003 as part of Operation Enduring Freedom, when in fact his deployment was to Italy--he never set foot in Afghanistan.

Walz told journalist Joshua Green, a liberal journalist who admires Walz, that in 2004 he confronted George W. Bush campaign staffers and asked “if they really wanted to arrest a command sergeant major who’d just returned from fighting the war on terrorism” (LINK). Walz never did any fighting and was never deployed to a war zone.

In 2004, Walz was photographed holding a sign that read, "Enduring Freedom Veterans for Kerry," which plainly implied, and which most people inferred, that Walz was saying he was a veteran of the war in Afghanistan. He was not. Again, Walz never got anywhere near a war zone, never carried a weapon in combat, and never saw any combat.

In 2009, Walz claimed he was in Hong Kong during the Tiananmen Square massacre in 1989 and that he witnessed the killing of protestors by the Chinese army. He said he could "never forget" what he saw. Uh, only one problem: he was not in Hong Kong at that time (LINK). When he was confronted with the fact that he was not in Hong Kong on June 4, 1989, he said he "misspoke." Uh-huh. Yeah, you bet.

I should add that when Walz got wind that his National Guard unit might get deployed to Iraq, he quickly retired (LINK).

I should also add that Walz claimed he coached a high school football team to a state championship. He clearly and repeatedly gave the impression that he was the head coach, and leading Dems, including Kamala Harris and Amy Klobuchar, described Walz as the coach who turned a losing high school football team into a champion. Walz himself talked about having "some great coaches with me." He referred to himself as "Coach Walz." Etc., etc., etc. But, in point of fact, he was an unpaid assistant coach.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom