No matter what, this wasn't the Trump-repudiation Democrats were looking for

Covid-19 is the #1 issue this year catching the attention of the people, and to me the divide reflects that some people care more about safety and protecting lives, and others care more about the loss of income and conveniences that come about from trying to create that safety.

And also, I think of all the people passing along BS on Facebook and Twitter and realize that I can ignore them until it comes time to vote. :frowning:

Perhaps once he’s out of office and is charged by New York for some crimes, it will start to hit home that he’s not the shining knight they think he is.

what’s even worse is that the two are not mutually exclusive, but inextricably linked

@Chefguy - nah, that won’t realise that. It will just make him into an unjustly persecuted martyr

I was also looking for a repudiation of Trumpism via the removal of more Trump bootlickers in the House, especially the more absurd ones. I haven’t seen much about that in the news (but I haven’t actually looked yet either).

What happened with Jim Jordan? Matt Gaetz? Devin Nunes? Kevin McCarthy? Louie Gohmert? Before I go looking, I’m going to guess that most or all of them are re-elected.

I think in general we all will need to step back and fully take stock of this.
2016 was one of the biggest political shocks ever, but we found ways to rationalize it. Hillary was a historically unpopular candidate. It was a protest vote rather than voting for Trump. There were some in the rust belt who had rational concerns and had been left behind.

This time, it’s pretty clear that a huge proportion of the US public actively support Trump.
Despite him doing things on a weekly basis that would be utterly disqualifying for traditional politicians or even most public positions. Despite him not even really having a plan for the next term; spending his time instead building hate and misinformation.

I don’t want to rant too much in this thread.
Just to say, I can’t begin to understand how so many people can support Trump. I look forward to the Dope fighting my ignorance on why.

You are absolutely correct until your last sentence. Since when has “losing by a hair instead of by a lot, when you wanted to win by a lot” (and believed, for whatever delusional reasons, that you would) been “vindication” of anything?

For months on end, the polls had Biden up nationally by 8 percentage points or more. We were continuously told that “this isn’t 2016; Biden’s lead is much bigger and Trump is in much worse position.”

Then came Election Night and - Trump significantly outperforms the polls. The blue wave doesn’t happen; Republicans gain in the House and still hold the Senate.

That sort of outcome doesn’t repudiate Trumpism; it emboldens it. It shows that Trumpism is very much alive and potent indeed. Perhaps “vindication” was too generous a term, but it means Trumpism escaped the axe and will instead remain a force to be reckoned with for a long time to come. It also greatly hampers any Biden agenda and denies him a mandate.

I think a lot of us hoped for a repudiation, but how many of us really expected one? I know I didn’t. I figured the election would be close and I didn’t think Biden had it in the bag.

I wonder now if that’s the answer. If you take away comeys surprise HRC might have done better than Biden.

Way better than a general success … tax cuts, wholesale regulations wound back, 3 SCOTUS nominations and 70mil librulls vexed, irked and riled.

Exactly. That was one of the excuses back then. People would often say “Trump is the least popular republican candidate ever, but had the good fortune to be pitted against the least popular Democrat” (or words to that effect, I can’t remember the exact phrasing).

But now we have to concede that, in terms of popular support, Trump is a formidable opponent, period.

Again, much of what you say is true. I take issue with the idea that the outcome “emboldens” Trumpism, though. Do you think Trump will stick around as the leader of a movement if/when he doesn’t get the personal gratification he sought? Personally I don’t think he will.

If he doesn’t retain the presidency, legitimately or illegitimately, I don’t see him sticking around to fight the good fight. He’ll pout, sulk, externalize blame, and ultimately slink off to Saudi Arabia or something. He’s not interested in leading a movement based on political ideals if actual struggle and self-sacrifice are involved.

Sorry but couldn’t disagree more.

Trump has campaigned as an outsider, fighting the establishment, while being president.
Fighting the gummint will actually be a simpler message to sell than fighting a supposed “deep state”.

If Trump has any principle, if he has any core conviction (wait for the end of the sentence…) it’s that crowds of people should be giving him adulation. More people should be booing his enemies. He’ll never stop the rallies now.

Finally, and I’m only realizing this now, in some ways he’ll be more dangerous than when he was president. He’ll be telling his supporters that the government is for them not for us. He’ll be riling them up to do something while telling them any and all laws can be ignored.

ETA: This is putting aside that “Trumpism” is more than just Trump himself. I think Velocity was more getting at the idea that this kind of behaviour and misinformation has been emboldened.

My hope is that he’ll be too preoccupied with his legal and financial problems to do much campaigning and rabble-rousing. He will likely face prosecution for fraud in New York, and he’ll be dealing with lawsuits that were on hold during his presidency. Deutsche Bank is also fed up with him and could seize his assets if he can’t repay his debts.

There’s nothing in the Constitution that prohibits a convicted felon from running for POTUS, but at least he wouldn’t be able to hold rallies in prison.

I just posted a similar predictions on the follow along thread. Like it or not the Trumps are now a political dynasty, and if it’s not Donald himself it wouldn’t surprise me to see another Trump or Trump-in-law on the ticket in 2024. Who knows, perhaps multiple Trumps will stand in the primaries :grimacing:.

Sure, but if he loses this election, what would he be rallying for? The 2024 nomination? He can try, but eventually, I’m sure that his supporters would drift off. It’s four years away, he’s no guarantee to be the Republican candidate in 2024, and he lost the 2020 election. Why would anybody attend a rally for a loser (assuming he loses this year)?

I think any future Trump rallies will necessarily take the form of “find anything to draw the Trump supporters in”: “Tonight, Donald Trump, with special guests Scott Baio, Roseanne Barr, and Dennis Quaid, with music by Ted Nugent.” But it’s going to get boring when he’s not guaranteed to be the Republican candidate in 2024.

Did it make sense for Trump to have been doing campaign rallies immediately after getting elected?

I agree with you that it would not be rational for Trump to continue doing rallies if/when he loses. Nor would it make sense for anybody to attend them. But who is going to be rational here? Trump? His followers?

Or, to put it another way: Trump doesn’t need to claim he will run for office again. He can just be something akin to a televangelist now. Enough people want to listen to his brand of hate and ignorance.

Thanks for cheering me up.
This is one positive scenario that is still plausible.

Post like this make me wish we had an “upvote” button.

I think you’re right. My view of Trumpism is that it’s a doctrine of pro-majority, anti-liberal populism. And the election has made it clear that about half of the US supports the ideas of that doctrine.