US Election results

It's satire, which tends to be based on reality. Like this:

www.nationalreview.com/news/harvard-university-to-offer-segregated-graduation-ceremonies-based-on-race-class-sexuality/amp/

That article was from May 2021 I believe. Were White cisheteronormatives were banned from attending any ceremonies. actually excluded ?

so it was a joke?

Erm…

So segregation is now to be applauded and is progressive.

Utter madness.

https://babylonbee.com/news/columbia-university-to-hold-separate-graduations-for-all-7895-genders

That is a powerful letter. It doesn't say when it was sent though which is a shame.

I think though, that the concept of ‘stopping the boats’ was based on protecting those vulnerable people from making hugely dangerous sea crossings. I remember the discussions at the time were not just about preventing the increase in illegal immigrants, but also to look at options including processing before they got on those overcrowded boats to make journeys in horrendous conditions.

There was this woman on The View absolutely astonished that anyone could ignore Queen Latifah's "endorsement."

The pint of milk theory is still going to be the biggest motivator/demotivator though.

In a battle between concerns about the cost of a pint of milk and the state of the working of democracy, which is going to engage more voters?

This is not rocket science.

It’s shortsighted to dismiss issues as marginal, especially when an election hinges on decisions made by undecided voters. If I were genuinely undecided on the big issues, I might well be swayed by something more personal or aligning with my core beliefs.
For example, I might feel that differing economic policies don’t make much impact over the long run, and in fact in Trump’s first term the US economy did OK (to the surprise of some), so although I might respond to a survey saying economic issues are important to me - because they are, though I don’t have in-depth understanding of them - they wouldn’t necessarily affect my decision greatly, whereas gender issues, which I do feel strongly about and which might affect me personally and directly, would.

Democrat chair smacks down Team Bernie for saying the Democrats should have focused on "bread and butter" issues 🥪 🧈.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/nov/07/bernie-sanders-democrats-election

Being exclusionary to coeliacs AND vegans there Bernie. Tsk.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/restoring-america/fairness-justice/3112331/an-open-letter-to-kamala-harris-from-a-democratic-woman/

I said this to my friends in 2016 who woke up horrified when Trump got in. I wasn't surprised at all, and mentioned how using richer than you'll ever be celebs to tell you how to vote when you're skint every month despite working hard and facing increasing crime in your area, issues that won't affect any celebrity, is the most irritating thing. And the dems did it again!

Yes you're correct. I know the distinction well but here we are not so good at separating the two. Although polling does show that many are ok more ok with general visa based immigration than channel crossings.

I also think the media is part of that, even the BBC who will largely resist building a narrative similar to what Australia have managed to do

It's odd isn't it, although I recall many posts on here about Swift or whoever for Harris and how much it would help

It was a superficial endorsement, who cares?

Do you remember Hillary and her celebrities? I would have thought Kamala would have avoided the same mistake. Nobody gives a monkeys what comes out of the mouths of vacuous Hollywood stars. There was this woman on The View absolutely astonished that anyone could ignore Queen Latifah's "endorsement."

Let’s be fair. She went on SNL, that bastion of woke liberal elites. Those working men and women should have been impressed.

Did Harris do anything in her campaign akin to Trump’s photoshoot in a drive through or garbage truck? Things that would appeal to the working man/women? Those two Trump things were very ‘Trump’ but made him relatable to a lot of people who might otherwise feel overlooked by rallies and talk shows. They were very visual.

Australia takes "stopping the boats" very seriously.
We've (i.e. Australia) had just as much of a neo-liberal consensus as the rest of the western world in the last four decades, and our economic growth continues to depend on levels of immigration that are here being called high. (As a percentage of existing population).
Asylum seekers and immigrants are very different groups, but it suits the interests of politicians to confuse the two in voters' minds.

The Dems didn't even try to court the Hispanic vote did they? They thought they had it in the bag.

I loved that he had to get his points in in the middle about being bettering yourself and increasing wealth, but despite his apparent nervousness, that's Keir Starmer we're talking about, not Tony Benn or Jeremy Corbyn. That said, of course he makes some fair enough points. Points which maybe are familiar enough to MN posters, but not sufficiently promulgated in the mass media.

I came across this analysis on YouTube and thought it might be of interest to the thread:

Blackbelt Barrister - The Left are Losing it in a Total Meltdown, But Why?!

@TrumptonsFireEngine @RedToothBrush when I said that there isn't an LGBT+ ideology, that might have been just clumsy wording on my part.

I don't believe that there is one because it's two completely different groups of people, so there isn't an overarching "ideology" that binds it together. There are LGB people who demonstrate allyship of T, Q and + people because they've been led to believe everyone in the alphabet group is facing the same oppression, but I still wouldn't call that a single ideology. It's more a coercive situation where LGB people have been duped into following T ideology, with Q and + thrown on top. Being LGB is no more an ideology than being female or male.