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

I agree, but the perception has been created among the political class that "trans rights" must be progressed, even though they have rights already.

It theory, if he is prepared to listen to voices other than activist civil servants. But those activist civil servants put a lot of barriers in the way.

The big difference this time is having a Republican President with both Houses having Republican majorities.

Far harder for a President to get something that think is a priority if Congress has a majority of the Party you aren't part of.

Yes, definitely. Interesting times.

And also, but I dont know about their powers, the number of State Govenors being elected, ie as decisions about abortion are at state level, and also trans rights, women's rights.

Biden introduced changes to Title IX, forcing states to accept men in women’s sports, on his first day in office. Trump could change that back. He could also introduce federal laws that all states must follow.

I think the governors have a lot of power in their own state and can pass or veto state laws etc.

Biden’s new Title IX rules protect LGBTQ+ students, but avoid addressing transgender athletes
https://apnews.com/article/title-ix-sexual-assault-transgender-sports-d0fc0ab7515de02b8e4403d0481dc1e7

Has it changed since April this year?

I thought Biden's changes were stopped by the Supreme Court?

As of September 13, 2024, pursuant to Federal court orders, the Department is currently enjoined from enforcing the 2024 Final Rule in the states of Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wyoming; the Department is also currently enjoined from enforcing the 2024 Final Rule at the schools on the list located at https://www.ed.gov/sites/ed/files/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/list-of-schools-enjoined-from-2024-t9-rule.pdf .

Per Court order, this list of schools may be supplemented in the future. The Final Rule and this resource do not currently apply in those states and schools. Pending further court orders, the Department’s Title IX Regulations, as amended in 2020 (2020 Title IX Final Rule) remain in effect in those states and schools.

This statement heads what is meant to be the final guidance re Title IX 2024, which means (I think that it is not yet implemented) because of challenges by individual states.

See https://www.ed.gov/media/document/t9-final-rule-factsheet

And this is a more plain English of what is / was intended.
https://mcandrewslaw.com/major-changes-to-title-ix-effective-august-1-2024/

Background information from WoLF on how they have re-acted to proposed changes to Title IX.
https://womensliberationfront.org/news/e9cp4hdx4v4zghxz34iplyfwpiawo4

This is a deep dive article on Trump’s win, some interesting stuff - if you like infographics this is for you:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14047959/Trump-unthinkable-triumph-Donald-won-America.html

Yes these are the (nearly the same figures) as the ones I quoted yesterday.

The only really big change was in the Hispanic/Latino community. More so men, than women.

And a slight change which is interesting a slight increase in older voters turning to Democrats, whilst fewer younger voters.

But overall, which (on a skim read I cant see) is the really only relevant point, is that fewer democrats turned out to vote.

I haven't seen an article addressing turnout in total.

Maybe the large increase in over 45 year olds voting for Trump is indicative of parents with impressionable teenagers.

There’s definitely a meme going round on Twitter stating that Gen X was pissed off with identity politics affecting their work and family life so they decided to vote for Trump.

The data has shown that voters age 45-60 swung to Trump in higher numbers than other groups so parents being concerned sounds as good a reason as any other Kite 🤔

Trumpton said 'no one could possibly object to unless they were Nazis.'

Upthread there was an interesting post. It discussed the names that people who are not progressive left, have been called by some of the progressive left.

When you are trying to gain votes from more of the population (because the progressive left alone is not made up of enough people to win an election) calling the people that you want to vote your way names is not a good strategy.

I have watched various film reviews on youtube. Sometimes they have American guests on. 'The message' in films/TV is often discussed as is the criticism of the audience by the media when films/TV programmes are not as popular as the studio hoped. It is clear from watching these that calling people bigots, 'ists and 'isms does not win them over. What it does is disengage them and it means that the words (such as bigot or the various 'ists and 'isms) are losing their punch.

So, if calling people names doesn't get them to watch a film, why would it win their vote?

If the Dems want to win over the swing voters in the next election, one of the things they need to do is learn this lesson.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/nov/09/us-voters-kamala-harris-donald-trump-republican

"...I started calling voters five weeks ago and especially then, many voters said they didn’t know who Harris was or what she stood for. It is said that an open primary process would have given Harris the chance to separate herself from Biden, but not a single person I spoke to suggested that they would have preferred a different candidate.

"..But gender did play a role. Time and again, voters, very often women themselves, told me that they just didn’t think that “America is ready for a female president”. People said they couldn’t “see her in the chair” and asked if I “really thought a woman could run the country”. One person memorably told me that she couldn’t vote for Harris because “you don’t see women building skyscrapers”. Sometimes, these people would be persuaded, but more often than not it was a red line. Many conversations would start with positive discussions on policy and then end on Harris and her gender. That is an extraordinary and uncomfortable truth..."

So, if calling people names doesn't get them to watch a film, why would it win their vote?

I see it as analogous to Remain. I still see FB posts from the Remain organisation (who funds that?), and years after the ref, their basic pitch still is

"See what you've done, you thick racists? Good job we're not thick racists like you are." Once again, what a way to win hearts and minds. But I don't think they are even trying; they are just halo-polishing.

I mainly heard the idea that the US wasn't ready for a female president from the left, not people on the right.

In fairness, each time a woman has stood for President its been as a Democratic party candidate. So it makes sense that those conversations would be happening within the Dems. Possibly if a Republican party put forward a female candidate, there would be discussions within the Republican party about whether this was a good idea or not.
But also - the person describing that was someone who had spent weeks phoning people up asking their opinion. If they had been working for the Republicans their questions would have centred around trying to persuade people that Donald Trump was a good candidate. And would have got feedback on his flaws. And of course, the Republican's aren't conducting post-mortems because they won.
I say Democrat and Republican not Left/Right because this isn't something which is discussed so much in the UK where we have had 3 prime ministers (all Conservative). And because the policies of the left and right in America don't map at all well onto the policies of the left and right in the UK, and other countries are yet more different. Sometimes I think reducing everything to "liberal lefties" versus right destroys a lot of nuance.

https://x.com/KDansky/status/1854960798856007712?t=k3SgaQZ2hjOZpg603pKdng&s=19
It was one of the main reasons that swung the election towards Trump

Vote change by demographic

https://news.sky.com/story/us-election-how-big-a-win-was-this-for-donald-trump-13250701?authId=11ijnqqo_a*M1NNMzB4VnVNcGFHVGx4MXFSMlY5cnBtcXRidS03V3AyOWxRZjBrQVphc0MxdGl0UHpHcHlmWmhKTW9YYnFHWQ..

Trump actually made gains among the 18-24 voter group (gen Z or is that gen alpha) up to about a third compared to about 15% before.

He also has the majority of voters with income under $50k (about£35k so basic rate tax payers equivalent)

Harris wouldn't have made it out of primaries.

I've read comments BTL in American newspapers where readers have said how frustrated they are with every meeting beginning with a tedious virtue signalling process of pronouns and apologies for occupying native American land. Many of them said they voted Trump as they were fed up with that.

That seems... short sighted