US Election results

[IwantToRetire]

Kamala Harris 27
45.2% popular vote
12,768,875 votes

Donald Trump 99
53.8% popular vote
15,275,564 votes

270 to win

U.S. election results 2024 | CBC News

6/11/2024 @ 01:25 GMT

So to repeat I do not think that the Republican position on trans issues is anything to do with feminism or women's rights. It is about traditional values, women's roles etc..

What do you mean by the 'Republican position on trans issues'?

What is your opinion of the campaigning done by women like Riley Gaines? Do you think she supports women's rights or is she just to be dismissed as a Republican who supports traditional values?

What makes you think that the right for women to have single sex sports and spaces is something only valued by feminists? You don't have to be a feminist to not want men in women's changing rooms. In this respect the Republican position on trans issues is exactly the same as the feminist one.

I think that with this we have to look back at the way abortion has been treated mainly by the courts, rather than proper legislation.

America never went through the proper work of coming to some kind of socially accepted compromise around abortion. Which is to say, where most people could live with the laws even though they might not totally reflect their views.

In the US, I could have pictured this kind of social discussion coming up with something like many of the European models, probably with some variety in different states.

Instead it was put to the courts and a fairly extreme approach was mandated. Which is just not a way to deal with serious questions with a lot of complex moral elements. These really aren't things that the law can address in a significant way, nor is it meant to - it doesn't have the capacity to think about such things. So of course that resulted in social discord.

I think part of that is the fear of prosecution that means people like doctors aren't making medical decisions with their best judgement. Literally no one thinks these are good outcomes, even the most conservative of Catholic theologians would believe they make sense as a way to practice medicine.

But it's not about good practice, it's about liability. And liability centered approaches are really really shitty no matter whether it's medicine, education, etc

Ah, OK. Thank you for clarifying.

I hadn't come across "project 2025" and this issue being a part of that.

I still doubt they'll do anything at a federal level but yes, it shows that those that believe it will haven't plucked it out of thin air.

Yeah, I just want to expand this a bit.

I don't know where the idea that Republicans all want to enforce arbitrary damaging gender roles on women has come from, but it's bullshit.

I can't imagine anyone saying something like this has actually spent any time talking to American women who vote Republican.

They think women have the right to private women's spaces.

They think women have the right to safety.

They think women have the right to say no to getting undressed with male people.

Beyond that, they think women have the right to an education, jobs, to vote, own property, wear pants....

@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.

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?!

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.

Fun facts which popular reporting has concealed.

Obama and Clinton got (within a few thousand) the same number of votes in 2012 and 2016, so in terms of populat vote they were equal.

in 2020 Biden got 81 million and something compared to their 65 million and something. The biggest popular vote in the past 4 presidential elections.

So far, but could still change, Trump has got fewer votes this time, than 4 years ago.

So there is no, was no, Republican surge. Its just like the Democrats stayed at home.

Its as though the MSM once they have made up an angle early on an election, just stick to it even when the facts make clear it isn't true.

Fewer white men and white women voted for Trump this time!

But in all demographics the change was around +1% or - 1%

Apart from both men and women classified as Hispanci/Latino where Trump increased his vote by +18% men and +7% women.

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

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.

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.

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

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."

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?

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

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!

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

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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

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