2024 US Presidential Elections Megathread

[Jacob]

A belief in being "the silent majority" combined with a belief that American democracy has been subverted, so therefore they need to subvert American democracy to save it?

You all know I waver back and forth between worrying about Putin's schemes to destroy Western democracy being actually effective on one hand, and thinking we shouldn't give him too much credit and ascribe super villain powers to him on the other hand.

... but it's certainly the ideal situation from his perspective.

If someone was to take the threat of a significant number of GOP voters (and the party itself) wanting destroy American democracy to "save it", what are strategies that could be taken counter that?

Say if you were a multi-billionaire, and you wanted to devote your time to save American democracy, what could you do? If you could influence the Democrats, what should they do to effectively take the edge off the threat?

[Josquius]

Surely though there's a key in the "white" part of the equation.
All the proper (white) Americans voted for Trump. Biden won because the Dems allow in bazillions of illegals and they somehow are able to vote.

For Putin's powers... Surely both can be true? He has a massive impact though he doesn't have super powers. The thing is it just doesn't need that much junk thrown in certain gears to bring everything crashing down.
When your only goal is destruction rather than building something different, things usually do become a lot easier.

[Tamas]

Surely though there's a key in the "white" part of the equation.
All the proper (white) Americans voted for Trump. Biden won because the Dems allow in bazillions of illegals and they somehow are able to vote.

For Putin's powers... Surely both can be true? He has a massive impact though he doesn't have super powers. The thing is it just doesn't need that much junk thrown in certain gears to bring everything crashing down.
When your only goal is destruction rather than building something different, things usually do become a lot easier.

I think it is better to risk underestimating Putin's influence than risking overestimating it. The reactionary nihilists will not go away even if somehow all Russian influence could be blocked but if you convinced yourself that it wasn't half your countrymen being complete retards but it's all the evil foreign influence, then at best you will end up becoming complacent at worst you will end up with two sides each convinced the other is a foreign agent.


But to answer Jacob's question: I do not know. It is tempting to say we on the progressive side should try to reach out and engage in discourse but it seems like any ground given to the reactionaries is being interpreted as a sign of weakness and a cue for them to dial up the crazy. They also seem to dial up the crazy if they don't get any concessions.

I think the only way out of it is a slow grind. The slow grind of piecemeal cultural progress. In the meantime perhaps it would be good to reign in the identitard edge of the left but that again runs the risk of curtailing the rights of minorities just so reactionaries get free to move back to harassing minorities they have given up on.

[Sheilbh]

A majority of Republicans believe that the US is in an existential crisis, and that they are the only heroes who can save it.  That's why they absolutely must believe that Trump won the 2020 election, because, if they believe that he didn't, then they have to realize that they are in the minority.  They have to believe that they represent the majority of (at least white) America because they think that, if the country was run honestly, they'd never lose an election.  So their superhero task is to eliminate the dishonest office-holders who don't share their, and America's, viewpoint.

I don't know about the hero angle - but I think the thing that I find worrying is that Democrats also, I think, believe the US is in an existential crisis and that it's democratic politics is under imminent threat. The trouble is, I think they're right.

My general view is that no-one's made money betting agains the US. But I think there is a crisis of legitimacy on both sides - that democracy/American governance is at risk, that politics has become existential, that the other side cannot legitimately win - is, I think, really worrying. As I say I generally think the Democrats' views on that are correct and I share them. But that is the sort of twin entrenching of positions and breakdown that I think has echoes of pre-civil war politics or pre-coup politics in other American states (either from the Presidency, or some form of guardian coup, or suspension of politics). And I don't know how you get out of that spiral - off the top of my head I can't think of many examples of countries pulling themselves out of that spiral.

My theory was that the only way was ultimately to make the system work which I thought was challenging because the political incentives for the other side are to stop the system working (I think the US is the country that really has a "good chap" theory of constitutionalism in that sense). I think Biden has done far better on that than I expected, he has genuine legislative achievements with a very difficult Congress - and I think they are broadly working substantively. I don't think that's worked politically but it's still the best idea I have.

If someone was to take the threat of a significant number of GOP voters (and the party itself) wanting destroy American democracy to "save it", what are strategies that could be taken counter that?

Say if you were a multi-billionaire, and you wanted to devote your time to save American democracy, what could you do? If you could influence the Democrats, what should they do to effectively take the edge off the threat?

This is very narrow and I have no idea. I think Biden's given a good shot of what I thought would work.

I mentioned earlier the Latino vote, though, because I think that is important I think since at least 2020 if not earlier there's been clear signs of parts of the Latino vote moving to the GOP in the Trump era - and I think they are increasingly the key swing voters in some states (though perhaps they "matter" less nationally now that Florida's become properly Republican?). Latino Democratic Representatives have been ringing this bell for a while - I'm not convinced, at least four years in, that there's a strategy to keep and win back those voters which I think is a bit concerning.

Also what if the Russian meddling and data-mining theory is true, but of the Democrats? Not so much the Russian bit obviously. But I wonder if the Democrats went down a wrong path politically because of a misreading of 2008 (particularly from Clinton aides, as Clinton 2016 picked up Obama's data infrastructure). I remember reading in 2008 lots about the Obama capaigns very impressive, innovative use of data and micro-targeting etc. It's all stuff we'd view (post-2016) with deep suspicion but was seen as the future. And I wonder if the Democrats perhaps over-committed on that. The actual story of 2008 was broad appeals as well as the data-driven stuff; it was Howard Dean's 50 state strategy, Obama's speeches and rallies which had very broad coverage and interest, the nature of Obama's campaign itself and on the ground activists (again bolstered by Dean's strategy since 2005).

Part of the reason I wonder about that is that I think the internet and the right-wing media space etc matters, but in a lot of ways Trump's a very old media, broad campaign. I think the coverage given to Trump rallies on all (old media) news channels probably mattered more than the social media side of things - that you had CNN cutting into normal programming to run a Trump speech in its entirety (because he will say something "newsy") is extraordinary free coverage that most candidates would never get because they're not that interesting. Obama would becuase he was a great orator who gave "important" speeches and was a historic candidate; Trump does because he will create controversy. And I wonder if the success of Trump v the Republican party (2016 and 2020 v 2018 and 2022) is precisely his ability to reach a broader audience through the old media. That actually the successful strategy in every presidential election since 2008 (and possibly before) was not the micro-targeting, data-driven stuff that drives NYT profiles of young data savants holding parties; but who is best at getting time on broad mass media channels and using it best?

My main thought watching the news from here is that I think the American mainstream media - the CNNs and NYTs etc - have still not got any idea how to cover Trump.

[garbon]

In the meantime perhaps it would be good to reign in the identitard edge of the left but that again runs the risk of curtailing the rights of minorities just so reactionaries get free to move back to harassing minorities they have given up on.

It is also hard because the reactionaries get up in arms about things they never previously cared about. Hard to know what will suddenly become a focal point of rage.

[Tamas]

In the meantime perhaps it would be good to reign in the identitard edge of the left but that again runs the risk of curtailing the rights of minorities just so reactionaries get free to move back to harassing minorities they have given up on.

It is also hard because the reactionaries get up in arms about things they never previously cared about. Hard to know what will suddenly become a focal point of rage.

Yeah.

I am tempted to say the correct approach is contain and ignore. By contain I mean make sure laws are applied to them especially when it comes to fighting their attempts to overtake the state. By ignore I mean carry on without compromising basic values, including, importantly, feeling free to challenge the extremists on the left end of the spectrum instead of feeling a tribal obligation to entertain and empower them. The latter was done by the conservatives in regards to their fringe and it has destroyed them completely.

[Josquius]

I think it is better to risk underestimating Putin's influence than risking overestimating it. The reactionary nihilists will not go away even if somehow all Russian influence could be blocked but if you convinced yourself that it wasn't half your countrymen being complete retards but it's all the evil foreign influence, then at best you will end up becoming complacent at worst you will end up with two sides each convinced the other is a foreign agent.

Surely there's two angles to tackle it. There's the combatting the foreign influence angle obviously, but then there's also the general improvement of education standards and overall quality of life to stop people being so susceptible to falling down that pit.

But to answer Jacob's question: I do not know. It is tempting to say we on the progressive side should try to reach out and engage in discourse but it seems like any ground given to the reactionaries is being interpreted as a sign of weakness and a cue for them to dial up the crazy. They also seem to dial up the crazy if they don't get any concessions.

I think the only way out of it is a slow grind. The slow grind of piecemeal cultural progress. In the meantime perhaps it would be good to reign in the identitard edge of the left but that again runs the risk of curtailing the rights of minorities just so reactionaries get free to move back to harassing minorities they have given up on.

Easy enough to say, but define identitard.
For all the bad faith politicisation nonsense there are valid issues with for instance where to draw the lines around trans women in sport, how to get your legal gender change etc...

I do think tactically its best for the left to just not engage with these issues much and to quietly push forward peoples rights without a song and dance. But again easier said than done.

[grumbler]

Ultimately, the US problem boils down to a poor educational system, brought down by the decisions by all the stakeholders to value personal issues far above the supposed mission.  People believe the social media bullshit because they've never been effectively taught any media literacy.

If I was a billionaire, I'd focus my reform money on creating some sort of online media literacy campaign that appeals to those most in need of media literacy.  One which entertains (so the audience will stay interested) as it educates (so as to accomplish the mission).  I'm not sure exactly how that would work, but if I had billions I could hire the people that could tell me.

[Admiral Yi]

Rashida Tlaib urges Michigan Democrats to vote "uncomitted" in upcoming primary.

[Razgovory]

The congresswoman from the great state of Palestine can go fuck herself.

[crazy canuck]

Ultimately, the US problem boils down to a poor educational system, brought down by the decisions by all the stakeholders to value personal issues far above the supposed mission.  People believe the social media bullshit because they've never been effectively taught any media literacy.

If I was a billionaire, I'd focus my reform money on creating some sort of online media literacy campaign that appeals to those most in need of media literacy.  One which entertains (so the audience will stay interested) as it educates (so as to accomplish the mission).  I'm not sure exactly how that would work, but if I had billions I could hire the people that could tell me.

Schoolhouse rock for this generation.  I like it.

[garbon]

I'm not sure I understand the uncommitted protest in Michigan where people unhappy with Biden's policy with regards to Israel, voted uncommitted in Dem primsry to a tune to of 20%.

Unless they are threatening they will vote for Trump, or third party, or stay home, which in all cases would increase Trump's likelihood of winning - I'm not sure why this protest would matter. Would they be open to Trump victory to achieve their aims?

[Razgovory]

Palestinians engaging in self-defeating acts?  That's unpossible!

[Tamas]

I'm not sure I understand the uncommitted protest in Michigan where people unhappy with Biden's policy with regards to Israel, voted uncommitted in Dem primsry to a tune to of 20%.

Unless they are threatening they will vote for Trump, or third party, or stay home, which in all cases would increase Trump's likelihood of winning - I'm not sure why this protest would matter. Would they be open to Trump victory to achieve their aims?

Here you go: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/feb/28/if-biden-loses-in-november-dont-blame-voters-who-are-angry-over-gaza

"yeah I know Trump is bad, but PALESTINE"

[CountDeMoney]

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/27/us/politics/biden-young-voters-trump-michigan.html

Salma Hamamy, a student at the University of Michigan who has organized pro-Palestinian protests there, said that despite supporting Mr. Biden in 2020, she would not do so again.

"For me, he is beyond redemption — he has lost my vote because voting for him is basically me saying that I am OK with his actions," said Ms. Hamamy, 22. "If that means Trump is elected, I blame the Democratic Party for allowing that to happen."

LOL, even pro-Palestinian students at Michigan are into suicide bombing.

College was so much easier when it just meant binge drinking and date raping.