This pod is good, but it is based on a false narrative. I don't know who is doing the narrating, it sure doesn't sound like Bari Weiss. He says "Welp, that was a walloping" and that "there is no doubt about it, they have lost the nation". As I write this, the NY Times has Trump getting 50.3% of the vote with nearly 5% of the votes yet to…
This pod is good, but it is based on a false narrative. I don't know who is doing the narrating, it sure doesn't sound like Bari Weiss. He says "Welp, that was a walloping" and that "there is no doubt about it, they have lost the nation". As I write this, the NY Times has Trump getting 50.3% of the vote with nearly 5% of the votes yet to be counted. And since most of those are in California, Trump will likely not win a plurality of the vote. Here is Nate Silvers's estimate:
Trump is going to win by around 1.5% of the national popular vote. That is the smallest winning margin of the popular vote since 1968, though Bush and Trump both won an election while losing the popular vote.
I get it that Trump easily won the Electoral College. And that is especially damning for the Democrats because he was such a flawed candidate. I strongly hope the Democrats abandon the idiocy of the far left and work to earn the votes of the working class. However, the mainstream media, and apparently The Free Press, are greatly exaggerating the magnitude of Trump's win.
Fair comment, and you may certainly argue that the election would have gone the other way if the Dems had engaged in an actual primary process rather than summarily appointing a straw woman candidate and ordering voters not to believe their lying eyes (and ears) on pain of being labeled a racist, sexist, etc.
But it is worth noting that: (1) the Republicans seem to have held the House and gained seats in the Senate, (2) the Republicans had significant gains amongst a number of facially surprising demographic groups; and (3) a number of progressive referenda were defeated in state-level popular votes (even in midnight blue California).
I suspect that history will prove that the rumors of the death of the Democratic Party have been greatly exaggerated (so sayeth the Twitterati after pretty much all elections these days), but these trends should be enough to make Democrats reconsider some of their core hubristic beliefs: (1) that they are always on the right side of history; and (2) that using the "inevitability of demographics" to justify ignoring the concerns of a large swath of voters may not always be a winning strategy.
Silas - the answer to the question (What now?) does not lie in the statistics exactly. So let's say Nate Silver is correct (finally about something) and the popular vote is really, really close and let's even say, Kamala wins it by a fraction of a percent. The reality that the statistics emulate does not change: Trump did better with everyone, everywhere, all at once. The reality necessitates a course correction for Dem's, and the super fascinating question is whether those at the control levers of the party will allow a course correction. Your very "hope" that Dem's abandon the far left could well be silenced, negated and cancelled by an establishment which invited into its ranks a shadow establishment which did not earn it privileged position, but surely will not give it up for nothing.
That Trump was able to win with all of his baggage, all of the media and other institutions against him, and Roe vs. Wade as a headwind, shows how unpopular the Democrats really are.
It was not a landslide but it clearly showed the Biden administration incompetence and the multitude of irrational leftist culture warrior positions is not acceptable to a majority of our nation.
This pod is good, but it is based on a false narrative. I don't know who is doing the narrating, it sure doesn't sound like Bari Weiss. He says "Welp, that was a walloping" and that "there is no doubt about it, they have lost the nation". As I write this, the NY Times has Trump getting 50.3% of the vote with nearly 5% of the votes yet to be counted. And since most of those are in California, Trump will likely not win a plurality of the vote. Here is Nate Silvers's estimate:
https://x.com/NateSilver538/status/1856331742392545748
Trump is going to win by around 1.5% of the national popular vote. That is the smallest winning margin of the popular vote since 1968, though Bush and Trump both won an election while losing the popular vote.
I get it that Trump easily won the Electoral College. And that is especially damning for the Democrats because he was such a flawed candidate. I strongly hope the Democrats abandon the idiocy of the far left and work to earn the votes of the working class. However, the mainstream media, and apparently The Free Press, are greatly exaggerating the magnitude of Trump's win.
Fair comment, and you may certainly argue that the election would have gone the other way if the Dems had engaged in an actual primary process rather than summarily appointing a straw woman candidate and ordering voters not to believe their lying eyes (and ears) on pain of being labeled a racist, sexist, etc.
But it is worth noting that: (1) the Republicans seem to have held the House and gained seats in the Senate, (2) the Republicans had significant gains amongst a number of facially surprising demographic groups; and (3) a number of progressive referenda were defeated in state-level popular votes (even in midnight blue California).
I suspect that history will prove that the rumors of the death of the Democratic Party have been greatly exaggerated (so sayeth the Twitterati after pretty much all elections these days), but these trends should be enough to make Democrats reconsider some of their core hubristic beliefs: (1) that they are always on the right side of history; and (2) that using the "inevitability of demographics" to justify ignoring the concerns of a large swath of voters may not always be a winning strategy.
Silas - the answer to the question (What now?) does not lie in the statistics exactly. So let's say Nate Silver is correct (finally about something) and the popular vote is really, really close and let's even say, Kamala wins it by a fraction of a percent. The reality that the statistics emulate does not change: Trump did better with everyone, everywhere, all at once. The reality necessitates a course correction for Dem's, and the super fascinating question is whether those at the control levers of the party will allow a course correction. Your very "hope" that Dem's abandon the far left could well be silenced, negated and cancelled by an establishment which invited into its ranks a shadow establishment which did not earn it privileged position, but surely will not give it up for nothing.
That Trump was able to win with all of his baggage, all of the media and other institutions against him, and Roe vs. Wade as a headwind, shows how unpopular the Democrats really are.
It was not a landslide but it clearly showed the Biden administration incompetence and the multitude of irrational leftist culture warrior positions is not acceptable to a majority of our nation.