You're assuming though that most Christians think of Trump as them "taking over". I don't think they do, and I certainly don't (though I'm British so take with a pinch of salt). On the contrary, I interpret continued evangelical support for Trump (in spite of his liberal values) as a sign that evangelicalism has given up on the culture and just wants to carve out its own space. A sort of Benedict option, you could say.
The assumption being that, yes, Trump is liberal but he'll at least let us practice our religion in peace. He'll give us parental rights over our children's education, medical decisions etc. He'll ensure we don't get fired for expressing the wrong views at work. I think that's all most evangelicals want at this stage and they're happy to form political alliance with anyone who will support them in that regard.
You're putting words in my mouth that are irrelevant to the point I'm making in this article. The point is that Trump won by pandering to the center, and this is indicative that the deep left is winning, and Christians stay losing.
True, but any real Christian presidential candidate would never even get through a primary. The only other option is to bury your head in the sand and withdraw from politics entirely. I’d much rather live under a government that will at least leave me alone rather than a government that wants to ceaselessly infringe upon my freedoms
I'm thinking of remarks like this one: "The Christian right tried to protest Trump in this election." Certainly there were some who did vocally protest as such online. But on the whole, white evangelicals continued to support Trump in similar numbers to previous elections.
I suspect it comes down to one's definition of 'woke'. If by woke we indicate broad social acceptance of LGBT adults then it seems that ship has largely sailed. But some define 'woke' as indicating more than that - the enforcement of progressive social values on the population by coercive measures. So I'm thinking of the pronoun police, cancel culture, HR DEI mandates and so on.
Trump might be supportive of LGBT on a personal level, but he's definitely against wokeism in this second sense. And that's the sense that most concerns social conservatives.
My theological beliefs are more traditional Anglican but I am a member of a small evangelical church. I've never been to a megachurch (we don't have many of them in the UK). Are you referring to prosperity preachers perhaps?
You nailed it. As a conservative Christian I didn’t have and will never again have a presidential candidate that matches all of my values. Christians are fighting a rear guard action, it’s the best we can hope for at this point
I think the BoomerCons still have the idea in their heads that "this is a Christian country" (whatever that means) but as a Christian Millennial your take is about right, most of us (at least in the college-educated group) have no illusions that we're anything but an embattled minority, we just want space to operate in freedom.
I live in a very conservative area, and I also think there's a lot of support for at least trying to keep things sane around here, even if large sections of the country are lost. A teacher at the local public school was found to be spreading gay propaganda to the students, and he was fired swiftly and unceremoniously after a parental outcry. This is how it should work: go find a job in a Blue area. But you have to think that if the Eye of Soros came down upon our local school district, Biden or Kamala's DOJ could make life very difficult for us. Under Trump, not so much.
Republicans have always supported high-skill immigration. Trump is not moving to the left on immigration — before Trump, many Republicans were supporting all immigration. Saying Trump pushed left on LGBT, abortion is fair, but Trump has never really cared about these. The gay debate ended by force from the Supreme Court. The same thing was true in the 60s. Nixon couldn’t do much about assimilation because the court ordered it, so he accepted it (for some reason the e-right thinks he didn’t). As far as abortion goes, Trump already did what he set out to do on abortion. He got Roe repealed. He’s always refrained from answering what he would do in response to a national abortion ban. “I wouldn’t need to veto anything because that would never get passed” and such and such.
We’ll see what happens with the curry visas. I’m not a fan, I am the STEMcel who will be hurt by such a thing. It’s difficult to say — Trump doesn’t exactly care about being honest on campaign. Openly calling for mass deportation, bringing up “bad genes” on public TV, and selecting a vice president who follows race scientists and fascists on Twitter is actually better than the rhetoric from 2016, it just felt more jarring in 2016.
Trump does much more pandering to the religious right than he did in 2016. Also, Jews have always been in conservative circles. Neoconservatism is more Jewish than Western Marxism — an incredible feat. The proliferation of Indians and “Insane Clown Party” figures under Trump’s watch is concerning. And you are correct that this has attracted some minorities.
I am still confident that Mexicans won’t swing right ever, but I’ll talk about this in my own post analyzing the exit polls. Mexicans are probably swinging right because A) ICP shenanigans, B) getting fed up with the afrolatry of the DNC. But Hispanics are bound to eventually shift left as they assimilate.
1. "Trump is just returning to Romney, this isn't a move to the left" -- it's a defeat of the hopes and dreams of white nationalists who supported Trump in 2016. It's a vain exhaustion and final defeat of ethnonationalist energies. In 2015, you could say "national populism has never been tried." Well, it has been tried, and it failed to reduce or reverse non-white immigration.
2. "Trump never cared about social conservatism" -- I agree, he is a reality TV show host, not a pastor, but he was able to fool a lot of people who are now marginalized within the party. Remember Steve Bannon's endorsement of Roy Moore? I know this is ancient history to you, but that's never happening again. This is meaningful.
3. Nixon could have easily stopped enforcing Civil Rights law. He supported it and pretended to be disgruntled about it to defeat Wallace.
4. Steve Bannon explicitly supported the Alt Right by name in 2016, so Vance is not an improvement at all, people just have the attention span of houseflies.
5. I will bet you fake monopoly money that Republicans will win a majority of Hispanics in a national election by 2036. Hispanics aren't assimilating to leftism, they're assimilating to the non-college educated white bloc, which is the Trump base.
> you could say "national populism has never been tried." Well, it has been tried, and it failed to reduce or reverse non-white immigration.
Was it *really* tried? Trump was embroiled in legal battles his first term and didn’t have a loyal legislative or judicial branch or even a loyal cabinet. This time around, it’s quite different. I’m not saying to put all your chips on Trump — he can only do so much. And maybe he’ll sit around playing golf and doing nothing. Or maybe he won’t be able to silence the legal battles he’s in. Or maybe Biden will have him arrested or something, I don’t know. But presidents are mainly just foreign dignitaries and commander in chief without a legislative branch to actually enact policy.
> Steve Bannon explicitly supported the Alt Right by name in 2016, so Vance is not an improvement at all, people just have the attention span of houseflies.
Bannon is the opposite of Vance. Where Vance postures as an ordinary put-together conservative, but secretly has dissident views, Bannon talks big game about Traditionalism and Evola and Zpengler and whatnot but then behind closed doors will be talking about how based black men are the future of the Republican Party. Plus, Bannon was a cabinet member. Vance is vice president — the American people voted him in and there is a real possibility that Vance will be forced into the position of president if something were to happen to the 78 year old obese man who has had people try to kill him twice in the past 6 months, and has had hits on his back.
> I will bet you fake monopoly money that Republicans will win a majority of Hispanics in a national election by 2036. Hispanics aren't assimilating to leftism, they're assimilating to the non-college educated white bloc, which is the Trump base.
Then why are second and third gen hispanic immigrants more liberal (even when adjust for age) than their first Gen counterparts? We imagine Hispanics on the farm picking fruit, but they’re a very urban ethnic group all things considered.
I think we are getting farther and farther from my basic point: Trump didn't make America more white. He didn't reverse or halt white demographic decline. He won't do that in 2025, or 2028. No one will ever do that. America will become 40% white and then maybe level off once we become too poor to attract immigrants. But it won't be "national populism" that halts immigration.
White demographic decline is unfortunately due to birth rates more than immigration, which is difficult to change. But it will level off as immigrants stop having kids
I’ve been shopping around for some sort of bizzaro-world to live in where everything is fine. This one is pretty convincing, and a good sign for if we all survive the next four years. I still think there’s a decently high risk of Trump being so bad that none of this matters. Namely, another pandemic coming at a time where the conservative consensus is hostile to the very concept of public health.
Less probable but highly concerning, is some sort of nuclear exchange with Iran.
Hyperbolic at times, but overall an excellent write-up on why I didn't vote for trump! Conservatives are easily distracted and stop paying attention to policy so long as they feel like the libs are being triggered. Even though they nominally won this election, cthulhu continues to swim left.
I'm going to offer a tentative disagree on the intelligence thing. The "educated" will keep going left, sure, but that's not surprising. People who are only good at collecting credentials will of course support the side that values credentials over merit. Credentialed idiots like Dr. jill Biden filling up their agencies with incompetent buffoons is not going to deliver a long term win. These educated people can't even run California. I don't think the war for "elite human capital" is over quite yet.
So this is important for the trans hug thing!
Credentials are not the same as intelligence. This time around Trump won in no small part because he attracted the very intelligent and only marginally credentialed tech/libertarian segment (who also no doubt brought in the new gay-friendly vibe). THis is important. The gay thing has had two factions for a while: the gay rights side and the gay acceptance side.
The educated libertarians broke hard being pro-rights, but they are breaking just as hard against the efforts to force gay acceptance. Many of them do accept gays, and that's because they want to, but the moment a government or HR person tells them they have to, they will fight back hard.
Trump, I think, will mean a serious decline in forced gay acceptance through things like DEI. But he will also, as you mentioned do a lot to normalize gays stuff in a more general libertarian, live and let live, way.
> In the long run, small numbers of smart people beat large numbers of dumb people.
I read up to this point. This educated smart/uneducated dumb hubris. And yet many educated people were genuinely surprised they got electorally ganbanged by the dumb unwashed masses.
You know what, you're right. Stupid people really do have greater predictive power. Intelligence is really holding us back as a society. Time to go lick some lead paint!
kamala harris is educated, and she is as dumb as a post. I know many educated liberals, and their education seems much more like a credentialed indoctrination.
I've never seen anyone on the right use the term Chirtian nationalist. I think it's a term like neo-liberal that people don't use to describe themselves but only to describe others and what they don't like.
The chart with rather fantastic “projections” for 2021-2024 seems to be off by around 80% when checked against actual numbers, unless I’m reading it wrong.
The point of the chart was to show that immigration under Obama was lower than Bush, and immigration under Trump was virtually identical to Obama. My apologies to Joe if those projections were off.
It’s not that they are off, I’m just trying to understand why their projections are 400% more than previous year. And it’s not your fault, it’s CBO which is supposed to be a reasonable source. So I blame myself misreading the chart but I don’t see why
It seems it's merely being the voters being both "no abortion at all even on danger to mom's health" and "legalize abortion even on week 39".
The space between to be honest are still battlegrounds especially on state level.
Moreover, on education - to be honest it's still a toss up to me in regards to that, since the well-educated has been humiliated twice at this point.
Moreover, LGBT especially the T is still a toss up especially on cultural level.
But the rest, yes I agree with you. Thing is the whole alt right & other 21st century white supremacist already attained its goal as Walt Bismarck says, so the rest is just the other stupids.
I don't like libertarianism nor Hanania-ism anyway, so it's a win to me. Actual libertarianism is Somalia & Afghanistan where its people don't even think there's such thing as a country of Afghanistan
After the election the Democratic Party (my party) must rethink many of its policies as it ponders its future.
To have a chance at victory Democrats should try listening to the concerns of the working class for a change. As a lifelong moderate Democrat I share their distain for many of the insane positions advocated by my party.
Democrat politicians defy biology by believing that men can actually become women and belong in women’s sports, rest rooms, locker rooms and prisons and that children should be mutilated in pursuit of the impossible.
They believe borders should be open to millions of illegals which undermines workers’ wages and the affordability of housing when we can’t house our own citizens.
They discriminate against whites, Asians and men in a vain effort to counter past discrimination against others and undermine our economy by abandoning merit selection of students and employees.
Democratic mayors allow homelessness to destroy our beautiful cities because they won't say no to destructive behavior. No you can’t camp in this city. No you can’t shit in our streets No you can’t shoot up and leave your used needles everywhere. Many of our prosecutors will not take action against shoplifting unless a $1000 of goods are stolen leading to gangs destroying retail stores. They release criminals without bond to rob and murder again.
The average voter knows this is happening and outright reject our party. Enough.
Deep: Abortion. I am pro choice through the first trimester. Climate change. I believe it is a threat to humanity. Vaccines. I believe they are effective against death. The Trump cult. I believe he is an idiot.
You're assuming though that most Christians think of Trump as them "taking over". I don't think they do, and I certainly don't (though I'm British so take with a pinch of salt). On the contrary, I interpret continued evangelical support for Trump (in spite of his liberal values) as a sign that evangelicalism has given up on the culture and just wants to carve out its own space. A sort of Benedict option, you could say.
The assumption being that, yes, Trump is liberal but he'll at least let us practice our religion in peace. He'll give us parental rights over our children's education, medical decisions etc. He'll ensure we don't get fired for expressing the wrong views at work. I think that's all most evangelicals want at this stage and they're happy to form political alliance with anyone who will support them in that regard.
You're putting words in my mouth that are irrelevant to the point I'm making in this article. The point is that Trump won by pandering to the center, and this is indicative that the deep left is winning, and Christians stay losing.
True, but any real Christian presidential candidate would never even get through a primary. The only other option is to bury your head in the sand and withdraw from politics entirely. I’d much rather live under a government that will at least leave me alone rather than a government that wants to ceaselessly infringe upon my freedoms
I'm thinking of remarks like this one: "The Christian right tried to protest Trump in this election." Certainly there were some who did vocally protest as such online. But on the whole, white evangelicals continued to support Trump in similar numbers to previous elections.
I suspect it comes down to one's definition of 'woke'. If by woke we indicate broad social acceptance of LGBT adults then it seems that ship has largely sailed. But some define 'woke' as indicating more than that - the enforcement of progressive social values on the population by coercive measures. So I'm thinking of the pronoun police, cancel culture, HR DEI mandates and so on.
Trump might be supportive of LGBT on a personal level, but he's definitely against wokeism in this second sense. And that's the sense that most concerns social conservatives.
I should have said "the self-conscious intellectually honest Christian right." Evangelicals are con artists and self-deluded.
What makes evangelicals self-deluded con artists?
@CF: Are you an evangelical? Have you ever been to a mega church?
My theological beliefs are more traditional Anglican but I am a member of a small evangelical church. I've never been to a megachurch (we don't have many of them in the UK). Are you referring to prosperity preachers perhaps?
If they are losing then God wants them to lose.
You nailed it. As a conservative Christian I didn’t have and will never again have a presidential candidate that matches all of my values. Christians are fighting a rear guard action, it’s the best we can hope for at this point
Thank you for being honest.
Yes. By the way read Aaron Renn's most recent piece:
https://www.aaronrenn.com/p/trump-post-christian-president
I think the BoomerCons still have the idea in their heads that "this is a Christian country" (whatever that means) but as a Christian Millennial your take is about right, most of us (at least in the college-educated group) have no illusions that we're anything but an embattled minority, we just want space to operate in freedom.
I live in a very conservative area, and I also think there's a lot of support for at least trying to keep things sane around here, even if large sections of the country are lost. A teacher at the local public school was found to be spreading gay propaganda to the students, and he was fired swiftly and unceremoniously after a parental outcry. This is how it should work: go find a job in a Blue area. But you have to think that if the Eye of Soros came down upon our local school district, Biden or Kamala's DOJ could make life very difficult for us. Under Trump, not so much.
Republicans have always supported high-skill immigration. Trump is not moving to the left on immigration — before Trump, many Republicans were supporting all immigration. Saying Trump pushed left on LGBT, abortion is fair, but Trump has never really cared about these. The gay debate ended by force from the Supreme Court. The same thing was true in the 60s. Nixon couldn’t do much about assimilation because the court ordered it, so he accepted it (for some reason the e-right thinks he didn’t). As far as abortion goes, Trump already did what he set out to do on abortion. He got Roe repealed. He’s always refrained from answering what he would do in response to a national abortion ban. “I wouldn’t need to veto anything because that would never get passed” and such and such.
We’ll see what happens with the curry visas. I’m not a fan, I am the STEMcel who will be hurt by such a thing. It’s difficult to say — Trump doesn’t exactly care about being honest on campaign. Openly calling for mass deportation, bringing up “bad genes” on public TV, and selecting a vice president who follows race scientists and fascists on Twitter is actually better than the rhetoric from 2016, it just felt more jarring in 2016.
Trump does much more pandering to the religious right than he did in 2016. Also, Jews have always been in conservative circles. Neoconservatism is more Jewish than Western Marxism — an incredible feat. The proliferation of Indians and “Insane Clown Party” figures under Trump’s watch is concerning. And you are correct that this has attracted some minorities.
I am still confident that Mexicans won’t swing right ever, but I’ll talk about this in my own post analyzing the exit polls. Mexicans are probably swinging right because A) ICP shenanigans, B) getting fed up with the afrolatry of the DNC. But Hispanics are bound to eventually shift left as they assimilate.
1. "Trump is just returning to Romney, this isn't a move to the left" -- it's a defeat of the hopes and dreams of white nationalists who supported Trump in 2016. It's a vain exhaustion and final defeat of ethnonationalist energies. In 2015, you could say "national populism has never been tried." Well, it has been tried, and it failed to reduce or reverse non-white immigration.
2. "Trump never cared about social conservatism" -- I agree, he is a reality TV show host, not a pastor, but he was able to fool a lot of people who are now marginalized within the party. Remember Steve Bannon's endorsement of Roy Moore? I know this is ancient history to you, but that's never happening again. This is meaningful.
3. Nixon could have easily stopped enforcing Civil Rights law. He supported it and pretended to be disgruntled about it to defeat Wallace.
4. Steve Bannon explicitly supported the Alt Right by name in 2016, so Vance is not an improvement at all, people just have the attention span of houseflies.
5. I will bet you fake monopoly money that Republicans will win a majority of Hispanics in a national election by 2036. Hispanics aren't assimilating to leftism, they're assimilating to the non-college educated white bloc, which is the Trump base.
> you could say "national populism has never been tried." Well, it has been tried, and it failed to reduce or reverse non-white immigration.
Was it *really* tried? Trump was embroiled in legal battles his first term and didn’t have a loyal legislative or judicial branch or even a loyal cabinet. This time around, it’s quite different. I’m not saying to put all your chips on Trump — he can only do so much. And maybe he’ll sit around playing golf and doing nothing. Or maybe he won’t be able to silence the legal battles he’s in. Or maybe Biden will have him arrested or something, I don’t know. But presidents are mainly just foreign dignitaries and commander in chief without a legislative branch to actually enact policy.
> Steve Bannon explicitly supported the Alt Right by name in 2016, so Vance is not an improvement at all, people just have the attention span of houseflies.
Bannon is the opposite of Vance. Where Vance postures as an ordinary put-together conservative, but secretly has dissident views, Bannon talks big game about Traditionalism and Evola and Zpengler and whatnot but then behind closed doors will be talking about how based black men are the future of the Republican Party. Plus, Bannon was a cabinet member. Vance is vice president — the American people voted him in and there is a real possibility that Vance will be forced into the position of president if something were to happen to the 78 year old obese man who has had people try to kill him twice in the past 6 months, and has had hits on his back.
> I will bet you fake monopoly money that Republicans will win a majority of Hispanics in a national election by 2036. Hispanics aren't assimilating to leftism, they're assimilating to the non-college educated white bloc, which is the Trump base.
Then why are second and third gen hispanic immigrants more liberal (even when adjust for age) than their first Gen counterparts? We imagine Hispanics on the farm picking fruit, but they’re a very urban ethnic group all things considered.
I think we are getting farther and farther from my basic point: Trump didn't make America more white. He didn't reverse or halt white demographic decline. He won't do that in 2025, or 2028. No one will ever do that. America will become 40% white and then maybe level off once we become too poor to attract immigrants. But it won't be "national populism" that halts immigration.
White demographic decline is unfortunately due to birth rates more than immigration, which is difficult to change. But it will level off as immigrants stop having kids
I agree it will level off at 40% if trends continue. But national populism won't be the victor or the cause of that.
I’m a “STEM American”. Really not looking forward to the next four years regardless of how the Trump immigration policy works out.
There is a curious air of seething in this article that isn’t prevalent in most of your other works.
Projection?
No. You seem more smug and irritated than normal.
Ad hom, doesn't address the points.
Is it really ad hom to say that the tone / emotional tenor of an article is smug and irritated? I don't see how
@ImoAtama: what did I say that was incorrect? Tone-policing is very weak.
So complain about tone policing then. Don't cry 'ad hominem' if it ain't. Get it right.
I’m more concerned, I’m not trying to mess with you.
The Carolina Reaper of takes. Well done.
As a leftist this made me feel much better. Thanks!
let's gooo
I’m surprised you can feel anything through the Prozac.
I’ve been shopping around for some sort of bizzaro-world to live in where everything is fine. This one is pretty convincing, and a good sign for if we all survive the next four years. I still think there’s a decently high risk of Trump being so bad that none of this matters. Namely, another pandemic coming at a time where the conservative consensus is hostile to the very concept of public health.
Less probable but highly concerning, is some sort of nuclear exchange with Iran.
I agree that the prospect of war with Iran is frightening, and will cover the possibility in tomorrow's article.
Don't you guys think that if our old equipment can crush Russia in Ukraine and Israel can beat Iran, that if join against Iran we'll be fine?
Isn't it sort of the point of the military industrial complex to be good at this?
I think a war against Iran would be over quickly with Iran the loser.
@travis: I agree Iran would lose, but we would also lose. Article comes out tomorrow.
Shoot I commented too early. 😛 Excited to read it.
I hope you will remember this comment and re- consider when nothing happens.
Some people here are doubting your Leftist status. Not me! If anything you are “Hyper-Leftist” in the sense self-given by Georges Bataille.
Hyperbolic at times, but overall an excellent write-up on why I didn't vote for trump! Conservatives are easily distracted and stop paying attention to policy so long as they feel like the libs are being triggered. Even though they nominally won this election, cthulhu continues to swim left.
I thought you might like this one.
I'm going to offer a tentative disagree on the intelligence thing. The "educated" will keep going left, sure, but that's not surprising. People who are only good at collecting credentials will of course support the side that values credentials over merit. Credentialed idiots like Dr. jill Biden filling up their agencies with incompetent buffoons is not going to deliver a long term win. These educated people can't even run California. I don't think the war for "elite human capital" is over quite yet.
So this is important for the trans hug thing!
Credentials are not the same as intelligence. This time around Trump won in no small part because he attracted the very intelligent and only marginally credentialed tech/libertarian segment (who also no doubt brought in the new gay-friendly vibe). THis is important. The gay thing has had two factions for a while: the gay rights side and the gay acceptance side.
The educated libertarians broke hard being pro-rights, but they are breaking just as hard against the efforts to force gay acceptance. Many of them do accept gays, and that's because they want to, but the moment a government or HR person tells them they have to, they will fight back hard.
Trump, I think, will mean a serious decline in forced gay acceptance through things like DEI. But he will also, as you mentioned do a lot to normalize gays stuff in a more general libertarian, live and let live, way.
It's an empirical question. We can test intelligence.
Yes and the tests show that college graduates are no longer any more intelligent than never attendeds, although that study quickly got pulled.
There are similar declines for higher levels of education.
That’s not true at all. The study was probably pulled because it was wrong — your conspiracy theory is self-serving and typical of MAGA.
You sound like a whiny child. “That’s not true at all” doesn’t change reality anymore than “That’s a woman” does.
Jill Biden is a Doctor
One person anecdotally is not representative of statistical norms. "per capita"
> In the long run, small numbers of smart people beat large numbers of dumb people.
I read up to this point. This educated smart/uneducated dumb hubris. And yet many educated people were genuinely surprised they got electorally ganbanged by the dumb unwashed masses.
You know what, you're right. Stupid people really do have greater predictive power. Intelligence is really holding us back as a society. Time to go lick some lead paint!
kamala harris is educated, and she is as dumb as a post. I know many educated liberals, and their education seems much more like a credentialed indoctrination.
You're strawmanning -- I said intelligence, not education.
In the long long run, religious conservatives will win because they actually want to have kids.
In the long run, genetically engineered liberals will win.
Maybe, but that requires more assumptions. Too bad it's so far off in the future. Neither of us will know.
"The COVID vaccine didn't happen, science isn't real, there's no such thing as cloning"
I've never seen anyone on the right use the term Chirtian nationalist. I think it's a term like neo-liberal that people don't use to describe themselves but only to describe others and what they don't like.
You are ignorant if you think no one calls themselves a Christian Nationalist.
Have you heard of Nick Fuentes?
The chart with rather fantastic “projections” for 2021-2024 seems to be off by around 80% when checked against actual numbers, unless I’m reading it wrong.
The point of the chart was to show that immigration under Obama was lower than Bush, and immigration under Trump was virtually identical to Obama. My apologies to Joe if those projections were off.
It’s not that they are off, I’m just trying to understand why their projections are 400% more than previous year. And it’s not your fault, it’s CBO which is supposed to be a reasonable source. So I blame myself misreading the chart but I don’t see why
Maybe there was 4x as much immigration under Biden?
To be honest I doubt your analysis on abortion.
It seems it's merely being the voters being both "no abortion at all even on danger to mom's health" and "legalize abortion even on week 39".
The space between to be honest are still battlegrounds especially on state level.
Moreover, on education - to be honest it's still a toss up to me in regards to that, since the well-educated has been humiliated twice at this point.
Moreover, LGBT especially the T is still a toss up especially on cultural level.
But the rest, yes I agree with you. Thing is the whole alt right & other 21st century white supremacist already attained its goal as Walt Bismarck says, so the rest is just the other stupids.
This is a simple matter of statistics and opinion polling. I've provided the data, it's up to you to make a counter-argument besides wishful thinking.
Well fair point tho.
It's just like I think it's still too early to make such conclusion, even if I based this from the sentiments
No, we have data and we should make reasonable predictions based on data. I'm not buying the epistemic nihilism you're hawking.
OK, if that's so:
1. Why put up prediction just so soon IMMEDIATELY after Trump 2nd election win?
2. Dems sell "abortion to the point of birth" freedom-maximizing option and it doesn't stick to women as much as the data on abortion you put out
https://www.lipstickalley.com/attachments/img_3375-jpg.6342693/
3. 86% of LGBTQ voters vote Kamala
https://www.them.us/story/lgbtq-voter-turnout-election-2024-kamala-harris
And a lot of "-phobia" are not just based on Abrahamic religions alone
1. Because we have the empirical results of the election. The vote counts aren't going to change much over the next 3 months.
I don't like libertarianism nor Hanania-ism anyway, so it's a win to me. Actual libertarianism is Somalia & Afghanistan where its people don't even think there's such thing as a country of Afghanistan
After the election the Democratic Party (my party) must rethink many of its policies as it ponders its future.
To have a chance at victory Democrats should try listening to the concerns of the working class for a change. As a lifelong moderate Democrat I share their distain for many of the insane positions advocated by my party.
Democrat politicians defy biology by believing that men can actually become women and belong in women’s sports, rest rooms, locker rooms and prisons and that children should be mutilated in pursuit of the impossible.
They believe borders should be open to millions of illegals which undermines workers’ wages and the affordability of housing when we can’t house our own citizens.
They discriminate against whites, Asians and men in a vain effort to counter past discrimination against others and undermine our economy by abandoning merit selection of students and employees.
Democratic mayors allow homelessness to destroy our beautiful cities because they won't say no to destructive behavior. No you can’t camp in this city. No you can’t shit in our streets No you can’t shoot up and leave your used needles everywhere. Many of our prosecutors will not take action against shoplifting unless a $1000 of goods are stolen leading to gangs destroying retail stores. They release criminals without bond to rob and murder again.
The average voter knows this is happening and outright reject our party. Enough.
What do you think the Republicans get wrong?
Deep: Abortion. I am pro choice through the first trimester. Climate change. I believe it is a threat to humanity. Vaccines. I believe they are effective against death. The Trump cult. I believe he is an idiot.