It’s a reference to this:
Firstly, the lights behind him were red and blue. Secondly, he accused “MAGA Republicans” of being enemies of “equality and democracy”, which remains true (the former being demonstrated by all the pantytwisting over DEI and the latter by, well, January 6).
Good heavens. First the tan suit, then a red background. What precious snowflakes. Thanks for the reference, I hadn’t heard this one before.
Tell them the red background was just Biden paying an homage to the Republicans. That’ll shut 'em up.
Oh, no it won’t; they’ll just bitch about something else. Or about this and something else. Or about this and two something elses. What a bunch of whiners.
“Republican primary voters currently prefer Trump to DeSantis by 33 percent.” (Economist/YouGov). Oddsmakers put Trump’s chances of winning the Presidency at one in three. (See article below.)
But there is a difference between entertainment and governance. In Bob Woodward’s book on Trump, he explains how Trump almost single-handedly blew up America’s trade and foreign relations with South Korea. An official moved the signed letter on his desk ready to do so and he eventually forgot about it. There may be reason to doubt or deny this version of events but I haven’t heard anyone do so.
I didn’t see DeSantis’s announcement, but this article about it is pretty savage. (DeSantis claims to have raised $8m in 24h which is impressive compared to his competitors.)
Maybe this will make sense to me later?
Makes complete sense now.
A sizeable fraction of humans love tyrants. Or think they do until the tyrant’s goons put their boot on their neck, not those other folks the idjits expected them to boot.
The only way the reactionary right in the USA will learn is after their parents or spouses or children have been hauled away to Gestapo headquarters in the wee hours. Then they will understand that this was not a smart move. But not until.
Well, yes. But Trump needs, if not a majority, then 48 percent or so. And even if 48 percent do love tyrants, of some sort, I don’t think 48 percent love right-wing tyrants.
Here is a good new article explaining why Trump keeps on polling slightly ahead of Biden without need to label swing voters as tyrant-lovers:
What kind of voters do Democrats need more of?
This gets to why I think Trump will win in November 2024. Low information voters don’t realize that Biden is actually in favor of reverse discrimination. When the Supreme Court rules against it, probably this year, AA will get lots of attention, and Biden will probably shoot himself in the foot by saying he regrets the court decision. That will give Trump a couple more points that can’t be recovered from.
Hope I’m wrong.
P.S. What if Harris endorsed the likely Supreme Court decision and said that one reason she went to Howard was that she knew she would be judged on purely non-racial criteria. Yes, I know, she won’t do that. But if she wants to be the rare VP candidate who helps her ticket, she could.
Not even remotely accurate.
Because of the gerrymandering and red state / blue state vs the EC, Trump can win with very few swing voters in very few constituencies. He does not need anywhere near 48% of the popular vote to win.
Trump personally dominated the Republican party when he was in power, and the effect is that after losing in 2020, he still dominates the party. For seven years now, Trump has been the face of the Republican party. There’s no going back, and there’s no reclaiming of the party by moderates. They’ve been out of the picture for too long, nobody with pre-Trump name recognition is going to attempt a Pat Buchanan, much less pull off a Bob Dole. Get used to seeing Trump until he keels over.
Look at the field this cycle - they’re people who really came to national prominence during the Trump years. Yes, that includes Asa Hutchinson, who was a nobody in 2015 unless you lived in Arkansas and has little name recognition even now.
~Max
There is some cause for concern. Biden needs to build back better. Trumpet abortion concerns, fulfill his promises which appeal to interests (see first article), rely more on positive actions than negative opposition flaws. He has only kind of unified his party. He has not persuaded the average dude that he has done an excellent job. I’m not saying he has not done some good, or been free from obstacles, or is not a markedly better candidate.
I’ve heard it reported that 1 in 5 Black male voters picked Trump in 2020, up from 2016. And he has non-negligible support in Hispanic and Asian communities. Minorities aren’t monoliths of liberal or any other ideology.
I know it’s hard to fathom given the (deserved) constant negative press, but nearly half of the voting population did in fact pick Trump in 2020. Most probably did so holding their nose - MAGAhead election-denying diehards are a ruling minority in the Republican party. It was not a landslide for Biden. Trump has demonstrable pull, at least when it comes to his own candidacy. Love him or hate him, he is a political leader with proven charisma.
~Max
Only if the greens and libertarians do extremely well.
If Trump gets 48 percent of the major party vote, he loses according to this, I think, rather objective analysis:
The Republican Electoral College Advantage
The way polling has gone for the last year, Trump would probably win both the electoral college and the popular vote. And those pollsters don’t ask for voter ID. If you want to know why Trump is viable, I’d ask why Biden won last time. I think it was because he was perceived to be much more regular-guy moderate than normal Democrats, and that gets back to my Liberal Patriot link.
Hope you are correct about him not having unified his party.
Only 27 percent of voters are Democrats. That’s roughly half of what is needed to win. And you can’t appeal to the other needed half without some Clintonian triangulation that will lose some Democrats to the Greeens. But in actual swing states, most of those Greens would hold their noses and vote for Biden anyway.
Whatever he has, I wouldn’t call it charisma.
That’s exactly what it is. 100%. Simple words, aggressive nature, name-calling. The weird hairdo. The orange skin. The grumpy face. It’s hard to ignore his presence, and not just because he is powerful. PoliSci students will study his mannerisms, appearance, and paradoxical appeal to so many people, for years to come.
~Max
It’s the opposite. It’s charisn’tma.
cha·ris·ma
noun
compelling attractiveness or charm that can inspire devotion in others.
what trump has is not attractiveness or charm. It may be compelling and inspire devotion in others, but it’s not charming.
My dictionary gives definition 1a as “A rare personal quality attributed to leaders who arouse fervent popular devotion and enthusiasm.” Entry 1b involves personal magnitism or charm, implying attractiveness in the sense of attracting popular attention. Which Trump excels at.
~Max
Okay, by that definition he’s charismatic. As were Charlie Manson and Jim Jones.