Kamala Harris has a problem with men. Will misogyny cost her the election?

I agree with your points @biscuitandcake.
However, one of the reasons for manufacturing jobs disappearing has been automation, so that's a double edged sword. It's such a a complicated issue. Trump is trying to make it seem simple and easy, which appeals to his self-deluded followers.

(And if you wanted to do all the above, you would still need to be importing things and exporting things ideally without a high tariff both ways).

@XChrome I think there is space for heavily investing in more automated technologies and very efficient technologies that will make at least some manufacturing work viable. Low labour costs in other parts of the world meant it was cheaper for companies to outsource to them than to invest in more automated processes, but that is changing as slowly labour costs are rising elsewhere. (And some of the problems with long supply chains (Covid, war, ships getting stuck) have been exposed in recent times.) That could actually be a problem in the future if everything is outsourced.
Germany is suffering a bit now, but they were incredibly effective at keeping their car industries etc going. Maybe a better example is the Netherlands very successful investment in their chip industry. So maybe less people employed overall, but people still involved in making things even if those things are more sophisticated/to a higher spec. A lot of people recoil from the idea that their country would just stop making things/become a service economy and I think actually they are right to. But Trump's idea to just put a tariff on everything will kill industry faster and fix nothing.

The reality is that importing Chinese goods is cheaper than making them in the US, therefore there is no incentive to manufacture them in the US. This is why the manufacturing sector has been in the death throes for some time. Increasing tarrifs would only finish it off. Trump does not understand basic economic reality.
He cannot bring manufacturing back to what it used to be. The world has changed. Trumpers don't want to face this and prefer to live in a fantasy world.

And equally, that applies to the UK too.

That would be great, if it was possible. The reality is that importing Chinese goods is cheaper than making them in the US, therefore there is no incentive to manufacture them in the US. This is why the manufacturing sector has been in the death throes for some time. Increasing tarrifs would only finish it off. Trump does not understand basic economic reality.
He cannot bring manufacturing back to what it used to be. The world has changed. Trumpers don't want to face this and prefer to live in a fantasy world.

It reminds me of the scene in the film Primary Colours where the Presidential candidate has a campaign stop in a plant (think it was a car manufacturing plant, but not sure) and he levels with them. He tells them that the era of making money with your muscles is gone and they are going to have to exercise a different set of muscles in the current economy- the ones between their ears.
One of the advisers says, "He's lost them!" and the other responds, "Fuck them. He's got me."
Trump supporters would be outraged by a politician telling the unpleasant truth like that. They want to be lied to so they can live on their Fantasy Island where it's the 1950s. It's really quite sad.

Isn’t the idea that American companies don’t import from China but develop manufacturing (and associated jobs) within the US?

Please do explain how the 60% tarrif on Chinese goods Trump has proposed will protect jobs.
Car manufacturers in particular rely heavily on parts imported from China. It would shut down production, because the vast majority of consumers are not going to be able to pay 60% more for a car. The same is true in other industries.
If you actually understand how these things work, you don't vote for dangerous idiocy like Trump is proposing. That's suicidal.
So either they are ignorant or perversely seek their own destruction. Take your pick, but you cannot reasonably argue they are well informed and rational.

Agree, I always believed that the USA was a forward thinking country, but what I have read,watched and heard, it sounds like it will become a country that is going backwards , and probably it will when it cones to peoples human rights .Trump will win then there will be discord, a country who's leader will become the laughing stock of the world,bet Putin is rubbing his hands and Zelenksy needs to find a safe place.They can stick Disney land where the sun don't shine as it will be called Trump land, I heard he wanted to make the Trumps a dynasty omg he will want to become a king next 😆 lol

When Harris loses this race, she will not return to be the democratic nominee for 2028. They will back someone else.

Who? I thought the whole point was, there was no other feasible candidate on the horizon.

It finally occurs to me what the nagging little irritant is in that title.

Kamala Harris has no problem with men.

[Some] men have a problem with her.

As such, she will be made a scapegoat when they loose. Black men will also be used as a scapegoat for not voting for her. The democrat big wigs will state that they used all their resources to help her win etc but the truth is they set her up for a fall. They knew Biden was going to lose, they weren’t willing to have any of their future rising stars put their name in the hat when it meant going against Trump. That means an ugly battle and they want their stars untarnished for the next presidential race. When Harris loses this race, she will not return to be the democratic nominee for 2028. They will back someone else.

Glass cliff.

If you work in agriculture, or steelworking, or car manufacture protectionism will absolutely protect your job. It isn't good for the country overall, or for consumers, but that's irrelevant here - he's selling a protectionist and low immigration vision to people who don't believe they have seen any benefits to free trade and high immigration.

For most Americans, the federal government only affects them in three ways: taxes, trade policy and immigration policy. It's not like the UK where the national government is involved in the minutiae of every day life. For Americans their state and even municipal governments loom much larger in everyday life. So even if you don't believe in anything else that Trump says and does, if he aligns with your values in those areas why would you NOT vote for him. His opinions on abortion, environmental matters, minorities, education etc are largely irrelevant, because they are mostly state matters.

So you can happily live in a Democratic voting, environmentally and socially progressive state like Colorado, but STILL vote for Trump because it won't affect anything in your state, but you'll pay lower federal income taxes, which means more time for skiing (and bemoaning climate change). And you can be an old-time union diehard in Pennsylvania and STILL vote for Trump because his protectionism will help your local industries (or what remain of them).

His voters aren't stupid - they know that his policies will benefit them personally.

The American Dream

America has a different attitude to those who are successful and wealthy than the UK. We can be almost resentful of it whereas it is more admired in the US, Even your comment about the Lotto shows that - the only way achieve wealth is through luck. Only lotto winners are to be admired for their wealth. The idea that you can work hard and build a successful business to achieve wealth is dismissed.

edited as posted too soon.

Translation : - I want to be rich and pay no pesky taxes. I'm voting Trump in case I win the Lotto. You never know....

You don't think the left understand false class consciousness?

I often think the left fails to understand why poor people might vote right. They often seem to campaign on ‘we will make your lives marginally better’ but ignore that many do not want their lives to be just marginally better. They aspire to be part of the rich and don’t want to be punished when they get there.

As such, she will be made a scapegoat when they loose. Black men will also be used as a scapegoat for not voting for her.

They are fools if they do that, but it's hugely likely. It will push that group even further from being reliable Democrat voters though.

It was interesting watching the Obama speech. I always thought of him as someone who could really read the room and deliver a targeted message, and so it was a shock to see it go so astray - there he was talking to these guys confidently, and I was thinking, oh my God, don't say that, what are you thinking! He seemed oblivious to how it was going to go over. There was one of the guys he was talking to, his body language was wild, you could see the tension building up.

I've wasted a lot of my time recently diving into YouTube looking at political commentary from black men, a lot of them normally music reactors of one kind of another. I think things have really changed since Obama's presidency, and partly because of Obama.

It seems like a lot of them had felt that somehow Obama would change things in a fundamental way, that he was one of them - and of course he was just a fairly regular Democrat president. The language I hear again and again is that they have woken up or been enlightened - they aren't interested much about the race or sex or party the president belongs to, they want to hear about policy. They are also very cynical about the "one of them" thing and seem to feel this about Obama and Harris - their experience is as differernt as a white kid from rural Ohio would be from Harris or Obama's upbringing which was upper middle class, international, from a highly educated background. A lot of them seem to see both of them as "acting black" to pander to them - I don't think they generally care about the fact that they have a different background, but they almost feel mocked.

They seem to think - we've voted Democrat consistently for three generations - maybe we need to be a little harder to get if we want these people to actually address our policy concerns.

One guy who I often listen to for his music reviews basically said, I will listen to any politician who does three things: addresses my taxes (kept 40% more of his pay under Trump); doesn't add new gun control stuff; and a third mundane thing which escapes me at the moment. Racial stuff did not enter into it. He also had a strong sense that the Democrat party dislikes men in general, which I suspect might be a part of the reason they are losing men across the board.

A lot of this isn't about Harris specifically, it's about the Democrats and whether what they are saying speaks to the voters. I'm not suggesting that they need to give up policies they believe in - but the fact is, if the voters don't like those policies - that's probably why they aren't voting for you.

I think Twisty is right. To a large extent, people know how Trump is, if they aren't willing to vote for him, they decided that long ago. He'd have to do something newly awful to change their minds.

A lot of people who would rather not vote for Trump though are unsure of Harris. What she says and how she performs could influence them one way or the other, so she has a lot more to lose or gain potentially. If she loses I think it will likely be due to people staying home more than anything else.

No, that is actually the meaning of globalism.
If by "theories of control" you mean that politics and economics are linked, of course they are.

"Globalisation" is just the process of globalism. They are the same thing.

It’s a very close race. Harris had a good boost to start with and I thought she had it but now it looks like it could go either way

Trump is also seen as a means to an end, not the end in itself. Which is why people that dont even like him, can vote for him.

The opposite of Harris, whose presidency is seen as the end in itself. This isn’t enough for voters in 2024

Its not misogyny that is Harris’s problem.

It’s that she not a leader. She was chosen as the democrats nominee because

1. There was limited time to find a new candidate with Biden withdrawing. They also feared any nominee elections could make the party look divided
2. They were concerned with the optics of passing over a black woman

She isn’t a good enough candidate for president. Her campaign is to highlight how awful Trump is and how Harris is a decent person. Well by that account, most Americans would be good candidates. Its not enough to say she a better human than Trump. Most of us are.

Many people who will vote for Trump don’t even like him. They respect that Harris is hardworking and a decent person, but that’s not what they think will help them keep their jobs, fill their fridges etc

Trumps main asset is his ability to remain unaffected by criticism. Most people would be affected by this, so likely to u-turn or backtrack. He is called racist , misogynist everyday. It makes not difference. To Trump supporters, he a weapon of war. He can take the bullets (literally) and he still goes on. As a weapon of war, he’s all the terrible things you might expect but he keeps on going. So people are willing to vote for him if he deliveres. For example, immigration. Which is a topic only a few years ago that seen him labelled as racist. But now, the majority of Americans of all ethnicities believe that greater control should be at the border and illegal immigrants deported.

So against this candidate, an ugly weapon of war…… they put up Harris?
She isn’t leading the party, it’s the Democrats pointing the way for her. People can see that. For democrat supporters, that doesn’t matter, they will vote democrat regardless but it’s why she has stagnated the last few weeks. She’s unable to flip a lot of the undecided. Which is astonishing seen as a billion dollars has been raised for her campaign. Many saying that this sort of money needs to be spent so that America gets to know Harris. She’s been VP for 4 years, the fact that they believe the electorate don’t know her well enough is shocking. This is because she doesn’t have leadership qualities and this has been shown while in office.

As such, she will be made a scapegoat when they loose. Black men will also be used as a scapegoat for not voting for her. The democrat big wigs will state that they used all their resources to help her win etc but the truth is they set her up for a fall. They knew Biden was going to lose, they weren’t willing to have any of their future rising stars put their name in the hat when it meant going against Trump. That means an ugly battle and they want their stars untarnished for the next presidential race. When Harris loses this race, she will not return to be the democratic nominee for 2028. They will back someone else.

For precisely the reasons why the democrats picked her, is precisely why she won’t be able to gather enough votes. She will prob win the popular vote, like Hilary because as I said, she’s a decent person. But she won’t win over the swing states because she doesn’t have what it takes to be a leader of the worlds largest economy.

Worst of it is the party will get away with setting her up. People will choose to ignore it, like they chose to ignore a declining Biden.

@MonkeyToHeaven unfortunately she can't just restore roe v wade.
She could champion an amendment to the constitution to add abortion rights but it's unlikely to pass and there'd need to be a word for women that excluded all males for it to work but Harris doesn't want that and quite frankly Democrats have been promising to make that amendment for over 2 decades and have done nothing and I don't believe she's any different

I think restoring Roe vs Wade & extending child tax credits, providing first-time homebuyers with up to $25,000 for down payments, plus more generous support for first-generation homeowners, build 3 million more rental units and affordable homes, outlaw new forms of price fixing by corporate landlords, reversing tax cuts to the wealthy & banning assault weapons will benefit women.

Much more than a plan to deport millions which won't happen, tariffs and a "concept of a plan" for healthcare.

@MonkeyToHeaven you might want to read this and reassess her speaking prowess.
By the way I'm no Trump fan nor as a pp stated am I a racist I just think Harris is a dangerous shit show and is more dangerous for women than Trump and that's shockingly scary as we all know what sort of nightmare he is

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/us/politics/2024/10/24/kamala-harris-cnn-town-hall-our-experts-react-verdict/