To hope that Donald Trump doesn’t win the election

[RosaMoline]

….it’s getting closer.
I was hoping that Kamala would be a shoo-in for the presidency, but looking at the betting odds, I’m feeling quite pessimistic.
It’s incomprehensible to me that a convicted felon, racist, rapist, liar and misogynist who spurred on an insurrection - after everything that’s happened - is running for office again and may very well win.
It’s comforting to read though that fellow Brits DON’T support him.
Apart from Reform. Obviously.
yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/50752-who-did-britons-want-to-win-the-2024-us-presidential-election

Why don't the Democrats do more to appeal to voters in "flyover country" instead of piling up unneeded votes on the coasts?

How?

If it was about policy (support for unions, fair tax for lower earners, lowered prescription drug prices, forcing health insurance companies to accept people with pre-existing conditions, access to reproductive health care) the Democrats would win those states easily.

But it's not. It's about tribalism and disinformation and the stoking of fear (immigrant caravans coming to rape and murder you before they eat your pets and steal your jobs). There are people in large parts of America whose only news sources are Fox News and social media.

Why does tribalism and disinformation affect those in Republican states than in Democrat states?

Not in a country built around states rights. You have to get a lot of electoral votes to cancel out high density states. It’s based on density to account for higher population states.

For example… Texas has 40 electoral votes and Wyoming has 3. Should Wyoming just be disregarded in all elections? What the hell does a voter in New York know about living in in Indiana? But the Wyoming and Indiana voters with some other ‘flyover states’ suddenly can make a difference.

it’s not perfect but it’s also not the worst system.

www.archives.gov/electoral-college/allocation

Because Fox and the like, plus talk radio, like Alex Jones dominate the news environment. Fox is likely to be on all day in pretty much every environment - the dentist's office, the local bar, the local restaurant, the care home, the car repair place, the hairdresser.

People are less likely to go to university or be surrounded by people who have gone to university (there's lots of research about the depth and breadth of sources people get their news from and its relation to educational level). It's an interesting topic that there's a lot of really smart research around.

I suspect you know that's not the history of it. It's an archaic system that weights the desires of a minority of the population and if it were to work in reverse, the Republicans would throw it out before Trump could open his mouth an wail about it. If Harris were to win the electoral vote and not the popular vote, I can only imagine the mayhem that would follow.

And just by population density, many voters in New York will originate from states like Wyoming and Indiana, so know quite a bit about it.

Well then why don’t the democrats fix that? I mean surely they have resources to show these yokels the error of their ways.

Or just maybe (and I’m spitballing here) these alleged ill informed people in these flyover states might have done their own research and decided they don’t agree with democrat policies…

no that can’t be it I’m sure you are way more educated and and clearly more informed than the average hayseed.

(psst in case you were wondering… attitudes like this turn people off from listening to you!)

And yet it still seems to work (for both sides). Just think a bunch of those flyover states that aren’t FL, NY, CA are actually the ones that the decision comes down to.

At any time a candidate can turn a typical electoral vote to their side. (Google Reagan/Mondale). They just have to work for it. I’m ok with the electoral college even when it doesn’t work in my favor.

Why don't the democrats do something to reverse the flow of educated people from Republican states to Democrat states?

If it was just popular vote, what would be the point of candidates campaigning in large swathes of the country, or doing anything for those people if elected to office?

It's Democratic Party policies. Your usage gives you away.

My parents are from Ohio. I love the state and a bunch of people there. I don't think they're hayseeds. It's a fact, however, that many of them are ill-informed. I think it's a tragedy that Fox, which spews lies all day every day, is convincing them to distrust experts and to vote along tribal lines in ways that don't improve their lives.

I don't know anyone who is better off for being denied health insurance due to a preexisting condition. Do you? I do know that serious economists are predicting that Trump's proposed economic plans will bankrupt social security within 6 (I think it was 6) years. Are people in flyover country going to be better off then?

Trump and Co. can shit on those blue cities and states all they want and deport multitudes of people and tank the economies, but they're going to miss the blue state dollars that keep them afloat.

(psst in case you were wondering... I don't pretend to think these people are going to listen to me, I don't care in the slightest what you think of me, so my attitude doesn't really matter!)

Right?! As it is these states only matter to some every 4 years.

Right. And how exactly do you see Trump/Johnson et al reacting if she were to win the EC and not the pop?

Guess what my parents are from OH and PA…

And I love that every 4 years our leaders need to pay attention to the people who live there.

I’m not arrogant to think I know what the voters there deem important nor would I ever think I could tell them what should be important to them. I’m going to trust that the people who live there know what policies they want to support.

Well because the president isn't all powerful, so the checks and balances of congress and (ideally) the judiciary should represent constituent interests no matter who's in the white house. I mean, it's really just norms, I guess, that no previous president before Trump has floated refusing to do things for states that voted the other way.

Why don't the democrats do something to reverse the flow of educated people from Republican states to Democrat states?

What are your suggestions?

I think you would have a very hard time making a case that the Biden admin has ignored those states. Even when their own representatives have voted against the bills, Federal infrastructure money has flowed into them at pace.

I think if the voters there were given true and factual information about policies, they would have the tools they need to know what policies they support. You spend a day in which everywhere you go has Fox News playing and tell me how much policy you've learned about at the end of the day.

I was just there for a week for a wedding. This is not hyperbole.

Who forces these people to watch Fox news all day every day?

But yet you appear to think these people are so easily duped by Fox…. If the Biden administration was the be all and end all it would not matter what Fox said.

Or you think they are stupid and distracted by shiny things.

My own Granny… married to a coal miner who was a union stewardess (back on the day as they say) stopped voting for the democrats. She certainly wasn’t stupid… she decided that the democrats weren’t acting or talking for her anymore. I’m not even sure she had cable news networks… and she would never had watched Fox News.

Please though do go on telling me how she was ill informed. I can’t wait to hear this.

She obviously wasn't ill informed. I'm sure she voted Republican because she benefited from their policies.

For all of my UK friends… this is the arrogance that the current republican voters are voting against….

”If you weren’t so stupid you’d know that X is better for you than Y”
”Gosh it’s a shame that your ignorance is stopping you from seeing the truth”

Here’s a really big home truth that may be useful for you all in the future…Stop treating people who disagree with you like idiots and listen to why they don’t agree. You might learn a thing or two.

-signed
The person reading the thread that has been insulted here for almost 1000 posts because she’s interested in how ‘the other side’ thinks and wants to understand where they are coming from

Most Americans are concernd about their wages, houses, economy and reducing illegal immigration which adversely affects them all. If you think most people are bothered about a collection of virtue left wingers whiners talking about " fascists, misogynists" etc you're living in cloud cuckoo land. If mumsnet was any further to the left, it'd be on the hard shoulder and even here 30% think the virtue signalling OP is unreasonable. In the real world many people including me support Trump and the fallout will be spectacular to see on here when he is appointed next president. Make sure you have a box of tissues ready

If you genuinely believe that Mumsnet is far left, I think we can safely discount the rest of your opinions.

I am starting to feel quite hopeful that Kamala will win, and by a substantial margin.

Of course I do, Izimbra, though in politics - as in much of life - things are often more nuanced than that

I don't pretend to know Biden's thought processes, or even if he has any functional ones left, but one thing that's agreed by vast numbers across the board is that it may have been better for Biden to withdraw long before he did

I really hope you’re right!
🤞🤞🤞

Why do you think that? Is it based on polling atm