Which election are you talking about? Because I'm not referring to the election that happens every four years in the States. Every election in-between can, and often does, have major consequences. Or, it could, if enough people made sure of it.
That might actually be related to your question -- what matters is not just one election. If that's the case, then we've already lost.
If you're looking someone to blame, blame the idiots who engineered the blue ticket, not the voters who couldn't stomach it
https://news.gallup.com/poll/24655/party-images.aspx
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/favorability/dona...
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/favorability/kama...
None of this shit is going to help the economy.
Eggs are more expensive already and the current admin has admitted they aren’t going to do anything about it.
But the media won’t be hammering on the egg price story, and people won’t feel like it’s as bad.
Also-
I do wish the gripe wasn't the egg thing - that one in specific is because they're intentionally killing hens to keep us safe from disease. last thing i want is for them to make the egg price go down and everyone gets sick.
when the tarrifs happen we will have plenty of economic disaster to point to.
Also Also-
when the pitch for the two candidates are "things stay bad" vs "i promise to change things to make your life better (lie)", it kinda makes sense
i don't agree with trump voters. frankly i hate them. but it's understandable at least
i hope they don't end too many species along the way
When you vote for Kamala over Trump, you show them your preferences, and they'll run and govern in a more methodical way. The next batch of candidates gets even better.
But Trump winning means the next batch will be even worse.
Pretty wild to suggest that continuing stability, growth, and reindustrialization is the same as tearing everything down.
From the perspective of tens, if not a hundred million, what that meant is continued decline, increased instability and broken promises, because that's the long term trend they're living and the one they were promised would continue.
By the way, it's not true that it was entirely stopped by Republicans - for every vote there were Democrats that went over the line, and the Democratic leadership failed to whip or primary them, which the voters rightly or wrongly will assigned the blame for the Democratic party.
Additionally, the fact that Trump appointed judges that were able to block them is in no small part thanks to the Democratic party being too ineffectual to do the same in the Obama and Biden administration.
Unless the Democrats make a point of recognizing what they could have done to play the game better and get their campaign promises through, the average voter will, rightly or wrongly, simply interpret this as the Democrats not being willing or able to follow through, and penalize them in consequence. When the Democrats willingly slow down and let internecine fights prevent themselves from helping people while the Republicans just ram their agenda through, voters will inevitably interpret this as the Democratic party making the conscious decision to break their promises, which is not entirely correct but not entirely false either.
To avoid this, Democrats would have had to be candid and say that they would likely not pass their electoral promises even if they had a majority (see: Obamacare), or somehow fix their party and get their shit together.
And Kamala was even more corporate
the dems are fighting to give as few boons as possible to the people and as much to their donors and we tell them when the line was crossed.
2. we're not getting another batch lol
My take is its less left/right and more useful/useless. Obama won big because people thought he'd do something.
Trump promised a lot of change and boy he's certainly doing exactly that.
At the end of the day though, I think the time of party politics is over. Whatever Americas gonna be like next its not gonna be this
The Democratic Party has been putting forward establishment candidates since at least Jimmy Carter, the only exceptions being Bill Clinton and Obama. And notably, they both were, like Trump, a bit of a black swan in party politics.
I think you will understand eventually.
We'll see who's ultimately right in four years.
Your last administration and congress tried to get a tighter grip on immigration, but it got blocked.
The "concessions" from Canada and Mexico that they made in order to avoid the tariffs were planned since end of last year.
> stop letting countries take advantage of us economically
That's _incredibly_ rich coming from a US citizen.
A country that has been continuously waging war, has been spying on their allies privately and publicly at a massive scale, is living on an ever increasing private and public debt, has been strongarming smaller countries, including allies and including neutral countries, in order to adhere to their economic and legal demands. And is primarily responsible for two of the largest economic crisis in recent history.
Give me a break...
> cut stupid government waste
Cutting waste is always good. That's common sense. Your administration hasn't however proven that they will do that in any meaningful way so far. I would have started with the 100mio in golf outings or the massive "defense" budget.
From here all of this theater looks like regular old corruption.
> cut out the identity politics and DEI wasteful bullshit
I'm not familiar with how "DEI wasteful bullshit" actually manifests. What I'm however familiar with is that this and other acronyms are constantly used to lie, distract and divide. Shortly after recent disasters "DEI" was blamed by your admin before any proper analysis could even be made. That's shameful behavior and not something to be proud of.
You have a trade deficit, because you're spending more than you can afford to a degree that you crashed the global economy. And have the audacity to say that your allies are taking advantage of you.
The reason nobody has been calling it out, is because financial institutions are licking their fingers from the massive debt Americans accumulate. But everyone knows that the next crash will happen and everyone knows where it will originate from _again_.
Trump is probably right when he repeatedly said that the US in in decline. But what he's doing is shifting the blame to foreigners instead of pointing the finger to where it hurts.
Nope. A trade deficit is when your trading partner buys more of your goods than you of theirs.
> to a degree that you crashed the global economy.
If you're talking about the Great Recession of 2007-2009, then, nope, you're wrong again:
"The causes of the Great Recession include a combination of vulnerabilities that developed in the financial system, along with a series of triggering events that began with the bursting of the United States housing bubble in 2005–2012."
The trade deficit is based on many things. But ultimately the asymmetric purchasing power of one side leads to a higher deficit. If that purchasing power is drastically increased via irresponsible debt, you are creating an imbalance.
No, that's a trade surplus, the opposite of a reade deficit.
It's true that when one encounters someone with views far from one's own, it can provoke a kind of shock experience. That's how your comment reads to me. If so, I'm sorry—it's not pleasant to realize that (in a way) your neighbors are not who you thought they were.
I've written about this dynamic in the past, in case you (or anyone) are interested:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23308098.
https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
I worry about how the online forums will evolve in the coming years. I'm quite pessimistic, since so many people are now ennemies.
Vote in a democracy. Do things to preserve voting in a democracy.
Vote with your wallet for representative news stories that matter to you and not just indulgent shock material.
Vote with your mind and know what is truly important for you, your happiness, and your loved ones.