stevenkesslar

Here's an interesting thought. I'm hearing a lot that this is the worst year for Democrats since ................. whenever. The dinosaur age? And as those poll results I posted show, it actually is the worst year for Democrats on the Presidential vote since there has been polling on how Hispanics voted. That said, we went into election 2024 with 212 Democrats, 220 Republicans, and 3 vacancies. As of right now, if every House candidate who is leading in a close race wins, we will have 212 Democrats and 223 Republicans. So the Republicans get the 3 vacancies. And they have one more House seat than the 222/213 split in 2022, when Democrats escaped the "red wave". If this is as bad as it gets, what happens when it gets better? Other than being bummed that Will Rollins probably will not win in the Palm Springs House district (but it ain't over yet), I'm honestly hoping Republicans win the House. I think I can bet what they will do. But I hope I am wrong. If I am right, in two years no one will be thinking of how the Democrats went too far. Because we will be living with how the Republicans went too far. Speaking of which: https://x.com/KFILE/status/1854546388417188101 Every county in California voted for a "tough on crime" measure. In some ways you could say it is a symbol of how "woke" is overridden. On every ballot measure I first decided how I wanted to vote. Then I read the list of Democratic ballot measure recommendations. Every one matched my preference, except for tough on crime. So I voted for tough on crime. If this is the horrific lesson Democrats need to learn in California, where we are the supermajority, I think Democrats will manage just fine. And if I had to name one way Harris screwed up, this would be it. She could have made a point of endorsing the measure, and talking about how she is tough on crime. She didn't. More broadly, she never had a "Sister Souljah" moment. She needed it, being a California liberal. But it would not have changed the outcome.

Duh! I'm very aware that I'm way more interested in this stuff than most people. But I do think Lichtman was just way off message and wrong when he said "disinformation" is why his Keys were wrong. It's pretty close to saying, "My Keys are fine. The problem is you fucking stupid Trump supporters, who are ignorant and don't understand what I think is good for you." Flip side, since I just watched one hour of Team Halperin, is they think it is condescending and delusional for Democrats like me to think many Trump supporters may end up regretting what they voted for. Remember how in 2016 Trump supporters on Obamacare said there was no way he would cut Obamacare without replacing it with something better? Until he almost did cut it, but for John McCain. So I'm happy knowing too much, just like many Trump supporters are happy not knowing enough.

If you have not watched this interview between Chris Cuomo and Morgan, you should like it. I watched it a while back. But if I call right I think he mentioned Beshear as the kind of Democrat who can win. Of course, you and Morgan will not see eye to eye on Pelosi. He adores her, because she is so effective. Again, I think if Biden were the nominee he would have lost by a much bigger margin. We know for a fact that Harris raised a ton of money and recruited volunteers that saved the asses of many, many Democrats, compared to how things looked the day before Biden dropped out. Credit Pelosi for that. Morgan was right. He calls Pelosi "Little Bo Peep with razors." If you don't believe him, ask Joe Biden. 😨

Really Steven, why would anyone think that any poll is right after this election? Was it Mark Twain that said; There are lies, damn lies and statistics. Polls are nothing more than statistics. Mr Twain is laughing from his grave this week. First, thanks for reading my very long post. I cited so many polls in it that it should be clear that I read polls, and respect them. Even when they are wrong, which they often are. Second, as regards Jan.6th, I'll just cut and paste three: I'll make an intentionally simplistic and false statement. For the good of the Democratic Party, the very best thing that could happen is that Trump ignores all that. If I am being crude and partisan like Trump is, I hope he acts like a dictator on day one. And starts to arrest political opponents, or just any American who protests. And encourages MAGA guys with guns to attack cops in blue cities who actually defend Americans' right to protest. Let's just throw in that he starts rounding up, caging, and deporting the legally American children of "illegals". The resistance will make what happened from 2017 to 2021 look like child's play. That would help Democrats, just like it did in 2018 and 2020. For the good of the country, I think all this future would be horrible. I hope Trump does not go there. But he may. He almost promised to. And, like I said, this was a simplistic and false statement. I don't think this is what most Democrats or Independents want. I do think it is what they fear. I'm a California liberal who would be happy with either Harris or Beshear. Ask me who I would rather have as President, and I will say Harris. Ask me who is more likely to win, and I will say Beshear. I genuinely admire and respect both of them. So this is a debate I welcome. So let me turn this around and ask you a question. Why did Harris do so much better than Biden, who did so much better than Clinton, among voters who felt they were about the same financially as they were four years ago? The answer to that question matters immensely, simply based on math. Because in 2020 it is why Trump lost. If 2020 were like any year from 1976 to 2016, and that group split their vote, Trump would have won in 2020. And not by a small margin. Conversely, if people who felt the same as they did four years ago voted in 2024 the way they did from 1976 to 2016, Harris would have lost in a real landslide. Somehow, she managed to win among people whose financial situation was the same as four years ago by 43 points. That is unprecedented. Why? Just to be extremely clear, the exit polls said that in 2024 24 % of voters felt better off, 30 % felt the same, 45 % felt worse off. Again, my bumper sticker for the whole 2024 election is that 45 % was the "wall of lava" that Harris could not outrun. Not unlike Romney's 48 %, which is why he lost an election he should have won if it were only about the economy. Unfortunately at some point years ago CNN got rid of their exit polls from many past elections. So you will have to take my word for it, since I am obviously a poll geek. As a rule of thumb, from 2000 to 2016, at least 2 in 3 people who felt better off consistently voted for the incumbent party. At least 2 in 3 people who felt worse off consistently voted against the incumbent party. And people who said they are the same split their vote. In many years - How that breaks down in a good or bad economic year largely determines who win. That is why so many pollsters and pundits focused so heavily on the right track/wrong track question. This Gallup poll reinforces the point. The two years in which people who felt worse off vastly outnumbered those who felt better off were 1992 and 2024. Is it a shocker that the incumbent party lost? But look at 2020. Trump should have won in a landslide. 55 % of voters felt better off, even in the depths of COVID lockdowns. So what explains his loss? I think it was all the stuff about unhinged, narcissist, crude, sexist, racist, liar, etc. Some of this is anecdotal. My Republican brother who voted for him in 2016 detested him by 2020 and called him a "megalomaniac." My centrist brother, who I think of as a Bloomberg Democrat, literally kept saying somebody should shoot Trump in 2020. The two US Senators I knew best were Paul Wellstone and Jeff Merkley. So I know some pretty far out there liberals. I am amazed how many moderate people Trump radicalized. That is my explanation for why so many moderate people who felt they were either better off in 2020, or the same as four years ago, fired him anyway. It was the opposite in 2012. This Gallup poll used slightly different wording. In 2012 45 % said they were better off. 52 % said they were worse off. Team Obama knew they had a problem. Their solution was to portray Romney as a fat cat who didn't care about the 48 %. It worked. But in 2020 61 % said they were better off, and only 31 % said they were worse off. 2016 to 2020 was mostly the tail end of the economic recovery and stock market boom that started in 2010 or so. Trump should have won handily with numbers way better than any other incumbent in this century. Why didn't he? How would this sound: Kamala Harris loses to Trump 55 to 43? Over ten points. Imagine how bad that would have been. But if this were 1976, or 1992, or 1996, or 2004, voters who felt the same as four years ago split their vote almost 50/50. In 2024, Kamala won that group -which was 30 % of the electorate - by a 69/28 margin. Again, totally unprecedented. If that group split their vote 50/50, like they did in almost every Presidential election polled before Trump, she would have lost in massive landslide. Michael Steele said something that was in the ballpark of your point on TV this week, but in a much softer way. He said Trump voters have obviously stated they are "good with" all this stuff about Trump being unhinged or a fascist or whatever. I think that is a good phrase. If I were an elected Democrat I would presume that Trump voters will be "good with" some racist insult. Or some joke about Puerto Ricans being garbage. Would they be good with Trump arresting Nancy Pelosi, or watching Trump loyalists beat up cops who are defending some other institution that Trump is attacking? I don't think so. Trump was tailor made for Saul Alinsky's phrase, "the action is in the reaction." What I honestly hope he does is moderate. And try to figure out how to build a right of center working class conservative party. Sadly, I think Trump is clueless on how to do that. He didn't even try in his first term. Tax cuts for billionaires? One person I genuinely like is Susie Wiles. She claims to be a moderate, which is backed up by the fact she worked on John Huntsman's campaign. If there is hope for Trump's working class party, it is with people like her. If Trump is left to his own hatreds and narcissism and cruelty, this will go down the same or worse as his first term. Beshear, or whoever Democrats nominate, will clean the clock of JD Vance, or whoever tries to replace him. Beshear in particular excels at just being the nice down to earth guy you want your daughter (or son 😍 ) to marry. But this is the debate Democrats should be having. Is 50 % of America (I think that will be close to Trump's final vote total) all in for authoritarianism or fascism or racism or sexism? Or did they vote for Trump because they felt worse off, and are hoping he just makes the economy work better for them? I clearly think it's the latter.

Can we just first address your cruelty in victory? It's not a good look. Lichtman said another thing that makes this election different is he has had more hateful bile thrown his way by MAGA true believers than ever before. He says he had to get the police involved. You know, those people that defend us, that you think it is patriotic to beat up? What is your problem,? Why are you so cruel? Lichtman also said for some reason people attack him for having a Jewish nose wearing a toupee. What is the problem with having a Jewish nose wearing a toupee? He proudly proclaims he does not wear a toupee, and it is his own hair. But if he did, what is your problem? It's like saying he's vermin because he has a Jewish nose. No one would ever refer to people as "vermin", would they? Why Trump's authoritarian language about 'vermin' matters Oh. Wait. That is so October 2024. We're past that. Go ahead. Call me vermin. And accuse me of being anti-Semitic again. Your lies are not a good look, either. If you think this election was a mandate for violence, or the deep patriotism of beating up cops, or America's tolerance for hate and cruelty, you are dead wrong. I mean, not dead in the sense that people have guns pointed at your face. Just dead wrong. Trump won despite his cruelty and unhinged statements. You better get clear on that. What I like about The Keys is it gives us an optimistic and even wise way to think about why people vote the way they do. It's not because people said, "Oh, that man is Black. That man is a Jew." Obama won twice. Kamala's Jewish husband was not a problem. I don't need The Keys to tell me this election was either going to be a referendum on the economy and inflation, or on how unhinged and crazy and mean Trump is. People voted on both. Trump won because the economy and inflation were more important. I would argue that is wise. Democracy don't mean shit when you can't feed your family. It's Bill Clinton's "strong and wrong" thing. I think Lichtman is having a bad month. His explanation dug his hole deeper. His main explanation was that Democrats attacked our incumbent President. So the "party mandate" Harris got was at best a mixed blessing. That is true enough. I will always believe Biden screwed up by having to be forced out. Had he not stepped aside, all that Kamala money and Kamala enthusiasm that basically made everything but POTUS a tie would have been gone. I am pretty sure Biden would have taken Tammy Baldwin, Elissa Slotkin, Jacky Rosen, and Ruben Gallego down with him, to name four. Gallego is now a symbol of how Democrats can win in a "red state" by being fierce defenders of the working class. Jon Favreau claimed that Harris lost by about 1.5 % in the swing states, and 4 % on average everywhere else. I have not fact checked that. If it is even partly true, that means all those volunteers and all that money and "joy" kept it from being a lot worse. I will always think that the key mistake Democrats made was in 2020, not 2024. By nominating Biden, who some would argue was already in cognitive decline by 2020, we set 2024 in motion. So what worked as a political Band Aid in 2020 did not look so good in 2024. I think Biden was a good President. But he is definitely old. And he should never have run for a second term. I think it is fair to say that in 2024 incumbency is not a plus. This has been true all over the world. So one explanation is that what is true most of the time isn't true all of the time. Incumbency killed the Democrats. So that basically was a strike against Harris in 2024. Sorry, Alan. But beyond that, it simply was the economy, stupid. This is splitting hairs. But in 1992 Lichtman predicted Clinton would win, because Bush 41 had six keys against him. One of those was a recession. Lichtman was being very lawyerly. He argued that the 1990 recession technically ended in 1991, but the NBER did not declare it over until 50 days after the 1992 election. Whereas in 2024 we have not had a recession. I just think that is way too clever. In 1992 Carville argued, "It's the economy, stupid." I have watched an interview of Lichtman in 1992 when he argued that people feel like we are in a recession. So what Carville and Lichtman proved is that it is very hard to be objective. They of all people should have known that 2024 was a lot like 1992 in that sense. Not coincidentally, Bush 41 was one of the few incumbents who did worse with Latinos the second time around. Now Biden and Harris join the club, for the same reason. My explanation is that incumbency and inflation hurt Harris. That is the big and almost obvious picture. I think Lichtman was not as objective as he tries to be. Oh well. But that would place six keys against Harris, and explain her loss. A lot of Democrats will disagree with me on this. But I think the 2024 election shows voters are wise. Latino men put their pocketbooks and families above all this other stuff. Including racist jokes and horrific cop beatings that most Americans detest. You would be wise to figure out this election was NOT a mandate for any of those things. Or anything, other than that inflation and so-called "open borders" suck. Let's see how much Latino men go wild for tax cuts for Elon Musk and their favorite, Mark Zuckerberg. What we don't know yet is what these Latino men read that made them think tax cuts for billionaires are better. But they probably don't think that. I'm eager to learn more about what they do think. Lichtman is essentially arguing that "disinformation" spoiled The Keys. Because too many people were influenced by guys like Trump and Musk who just lie all the time. The latter is true. But that's not new. Come on, Alan. It is a reason to be concerned about the growing oligarchy in America, with Trump and Musk as poster children. But insulting voters is NOT the way to address that. Democrats have to listen to Latinos and come up with someone and something better. Sorry, but I don't think that is rocket science. In 2020 Biden won by 7 million votes, and about 4.5%. Most of the votes out still are in liberal bastions of California. By the time all those votes are counted, Harris will probably lose by about half of what Trump did in 2020. And for the most part the money and enthusiasm and joy she brought saved lots of Democrats who won or are winning narrow races. I am proud that I backed a lot of good moderate candidates like Jon Tester who lost. We're now in a place where Democrats can and should back moderation and compromise. And play to the better angels of people like Susie Wiles, who seems to be able to keep her pit bull on a leash. At least some of the time. We need to push hard for things like child tax credits that millions of Latino Moms and Dads want. But if Trump takes this as a mandate for cruelty, hate, lies, legal crime for oligarchs, cop beating, and "dictatorship on day one", the resistance will be massive and immediate. As it should be. Why are you so cruel?

Since I am on a roll, one more and then I will stop. In 2006, everyone said home prices never go down. They were wrong. In 2010 people said home prices will never go up again. I bought homes. In 2008 people said the Republican Party was dead. In 2010 people said the Democratic Party was dead. Now people are saying Latinos and Blacks will soon all be Republicans. Give me a fucking break. So one report says Harris got 53 % of the Latino vote. That is slightly worse than Jimmy Carter did, in another inflation election. Note that in 1980 Reagan did win in a landslide. Trump won by about half of Biden's winning margin in 2020. Older White men and women like me did very well in the Biden/Harris years, and our net worth and often incomes soared. That is why Harris came close to winning despite a working class, disproportionately non-White, that struggled because of inflation. It also particularly impacted younger voters who rent and want to buy homes. Is this the new normal? Probably not. The two Democrats who did best above were Clinton and Obama running for a second term, who could talk about how they fought for Latinos. This is despite the fact that Obama was attacked as "Deporter In Chief." So Democrats need to think about whether child tax credits that help Latino Dads and cut child poverty in half are worth fighting for, I think. Unless we want to argue that tax cuts for billionaires lift everyone's boat, so let's just make Elon Musk richer. That's one other piece of evidence that "cultural liberalism" was a problem for Harris. It definitely did not help with Hispanic Catholics. I think before Democrats train our rifles on the faces of transgender people, or "the illegals", we need to remember that it really was the economy, stupid. But I will end by hyperlinking a few of Ruy Teixeira's awesome articles. He and lefty John Judis, who have been fighting for a liberal working class populism for decades, have nailed this topic. The Democrats’ Common Sense Problem Voters Think They’ve Abandoned It Election 2024 The Progressive Moment Is Over Four reasons their era has come to an end. 1. Loosening restrictions on illegal immigration was a terrible idea and voters hate it. 2. Promoting lax law enforcement and tolerance of social disorder was a terrible idea and voters hate it. 3. Insisting that everyone should look at all issues through the lens of identity politics was a terrible idea and voters hate it. 4. Telling people fossil fuels are evil and they must stop using them was a terrible idea and voters hate it. The two conservative policy ideas that voters said were mostly likely to get them to vote for a candidate were a crackdown on immigration and more domestic production of natural gas and oil. The two liberal policy ideas that voters said were most likely to get them to vote for a candidate were raising taxes on the wealthy and corporations and restoring the child tax credits. Anyone who has read Teixeira or his Democratic colleague in crime Stan Greenberg for decades would not be surprised.

Thanks, Alan. I'm referring to Alan Lichtman of course. His main explanation for why he called this one wrong is that it is historically unprecedented for a party to attack their own nominee. It makes sense. Democrats threw Biden under the bus. And then had to say, "But vote for his Vice President." Who his staff spent three years trashing. That sure didn't help. We can argue any counterfactual we want. But I think it is almost obvious that Biden would have done far worse. I think Pelosi was smart to stab him in the back, in the interest of her party. The House as of right now has almost NO change. The fact that Democrats could still take back the House, or at least basically have a tie, is not an indicator of a landslide against Democrats. I strongly agree with you that this was mostly about the economy, stupid. And Biden and Harris were always going to lose an election that was a referendum on inflation. I disagree with you about January 6th. I think the polls actually prove it. This is my interpretation of facts. Not a fact. There has been a very clear pattern in these exit polls for 24 years. People who are better off vote about 2 to 3 for the incumbent party. People who are worse off vote about 2 to 3 against the incumbent party. People who feel they are the same as four years ago split their vote. You can see that pattern in 2016. But it has been the same pattern going back to 2000. Almost every time people who feel the same as four years ago split their vote. That pattern changed in 2020. In 2020 people who felt the same as four years ago voted overwhelmingly against Trump. I think that is why he lost. In 2020 almost twice as many people said they were better off than worse off compared to four years ago. Despite that, Trump lost. Most people who felt the same as four years ago voted against him. That had never happened before, going back to 2000. The one exception was "compassionate conservative" George W. Bush in 2000, who was way better liked than Gore. So that time Bush won the "same as four years ago" voters by almost 20 points. That was why W. won a very close race. My John McCain loving brother, who voted for Trump in 2016 and says he would have voted for Trump in 2020 if he voted on the economy, voted against him in 2020 because he decided Trump was a "megalomaniac." He voted for Harris in 2024. He's not going to change his mind. If Trump does act like a dictator on Day One, as he promised, it will send my moderate Republican brother around the bend. I hope I am wrong. But I think Trump is going to alienate people, just like he did from 2017 to 2021. Why did the normal pattern from 2000 to 2016 change so dramatically in the last two cycles? Compare how Harris did in 2024 to Clinton in 2016 among people who felt the same financially as four years ago. I think it is because people do see Trump as a liar, a felon, a sexist, a racist, and unhinged. That's really just a fact. The polls all say it. He won by about half of Biden's margin in 2020. If Trump is smart, he will reach out to these people, and not be a dictator on Day One. Don't hold your breath. Why did Harris lose? I think Never Trump Republican Mike Murphy nailed it a few months ago when he said Harris has a "wall of lava" coming at her. Meaning all the anger and pain about inflation, higher costs, high rent, high mortgage rates. 45 % of voters said they felt worse off financially than four years ago. You can see above they broke very hard against Harris. That was a wall of lava. Or, a wall of Latino men who care about their pocketbooks. She tried hard to outrun it. But I think Murphy was right. Would Biden have run faster and smarter? I very much doubt it. I'd love to see Andy Beshear be the Democratic nominee in 2028. If Harris were the 2024 nominee, after a primary, and she came out swinging for how the Biden/Harris tax credits cut Latino child poverty in half, she may have won. If a Latino man like AMLO were the nominee, he would have won. His party did hold power in Mexico precisely because he did all kinds of stuff to help the Mexican working class, despite COVID. Beshear has done all kinds of stuff to help Kentucky's working class. If she had picked him rather than Walz it would have probably helped a little. But I am glad she didn't, actually. It leaves a wide opening for him in 2028. That is a debate Democrats are now open to, I think. By the way, here's another prediction that failed. Everyone thought that because Democrats did well in 2023 and 2024, before Tuesday - like Beshear winning in Kentucky - it was a good omen. But maybe the better lesson is that if Democrats want to win, we need to realize that a lot of cultural moderates were turned off by Harris, but would vote for Beshear. That's going to be a very hard discussion, because it goes to racism. I am a California White liberal who voted for Harris every time her name has been on my ballot. I was really looking forward to her being our first Black female President. But it is just a fact that immigration drove people nuts, including lots of Democrats. She said and did all the right things by saying we worked with conservatives on a conservative immigration bill. But it was too little, too late. More generally, what did the ads that ran all over the swing states attack Harris for? Being a liberal from San Francisco who supported what lots of moderates simply see as an extreme cultural agenda. That's a fact. There are plenty of women and Black moderates out there. Obama managed to navigate around these issues almost flawlessly, even though he is a liberal. But right now is a very good time to think about why a White guy like Beshear might be a great candidate, if Democrats want to win. And I gotta say. If Democrats had fought like hell a few years ago to keep that child tax credit, so Harris could win a primary and campaign on cutting the rate of child poverty among Blacks and Latinos in half, would Latino Dads have voted differently? Probably. It was not about Harris. She was a good pop up candidate with very little time to push back against an economy that left lots of Americans struggling. Especially Latinos and Blacks and the white working class. I am proud of the race she ran.

You're sick. Deeply cruel. You are. What a mean-spirited jerk. You and @Moses belong together. He comes here to defend genocide and divide people, You come here to say beating the shit out of a cop defending democracy is patriotism. That is cruel and sick. Susie Wiles would be ashamed of having to explain away cruel, sick statements like you make all the time. What will you guys do this inauguration day? Kill some cops and call it patriotism? This is cruel and sick. You are already over reaching. At least you are not promoting genocide - yet. When Trump and Bibi The Baby Killer start levelling Gaza, you'll be the Genocide Clown, no doubt. Explaining away mass slaughter. The part of this that feels worst is that Trump got away with being a felon and criminal. Lots of people, especially Latinos, overlooked that. As well as his racist and sexist jokes and behavior. The polls say that loud and clear. Because they were pissed about inflation and immigration. It doesn't change the fact that Trump unleashed his mob on cops at the Capitol. Or that the Republican Secretary of State in Georgia and his wife were getting MAGA death threats because Trump tried to steal the 2020 election. Trump won by way less than Biden did in 2020 - maybe about half, when all the votes are counted. Democrats have grace, and care about democracy. You say that beating the shit out of cops defending democracy is patriotism. That is cruel and sick. I'll think of how cruel and sick you are when I'm having wine in LaJolla with my Trump supporting niece. She is a conservative who doesn't like the immigration and inflation. She's a kind person, and I love her. You represent the cruel wing of the MAGA party. Congratulations! You are an embodiment of how and why Trump will probably repulse people very quickly, just like he did from 2017 to 2020. Enjoy your cruelty while you can. If and when Trump unleashes his cruelty, like by deporting the legally American children of "the illegals", the cruelty will repulse the majority of America. Especially Latino men and women, who oppose the idea. Savor your cruelty while you can. And this is not an ad hominem attack. It is cruel and sick to defend beating police to overturn an election Trump lost in 2020 by twice as much as Harris just did in 2024. Cruel Sick YOU! The part of this election that feels best is that Democrats like me got what we wanted - a vibrant multi-racial liberal democracy. There is no question Latino men changed the outcome of this election. There is no question they did it based on their pocketbooks. Biden and Harris now join almost every Western leader in the world who COVID+inflation got fired. Including Trump, ironically, who got fired in 2020 because of COVID. So if we want to talk about winners in this election, and not just be cruel sick fucks, can we give a shout out for Latino and Black men? And let's start by applauding Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi. The Republican Party used to the be the White guys who said Blacks can't even vote. Now one of Trump's pals is Black conservative House member Byron Donalds. That's change! When Democrats elected Barack Obama, and Nancy Pelosi engineered a massive wave of women who rejected Trump in 2018 and brought in Democratic House members of every race and gender, that was change! And this is not me saying it. Kevin McCarthy said repeatedly he realized the Republican Party could not survive as a party of old White men. So he went out and recruited guys like Donalds. And then McCarthy got fired by his own team. LOL. Talks about losers! So I'm happy to lose this one, to the extent it means we have a more vibrant and fair multi-racial liberal democracy. Trump has never proven he actually cares about that, with his crimes and cruel sexism and racist jokes and vicious cop beatings. Let's see whether he can change. I ain't holding my breath. But I do know what every Latino in America wants is more tax breaks for billionaires, and a mass deportation of legally American children - or at least their parents! Cruel. Sick. If we want to talk about why Trump won, I encourage everyone to watch the clip above from 34:00 to 40:00. There is something cool about watching a Black Democrat ask a sitting Black conservative US House member to explain what Trump and MAGA offer Black (or Latino) men. This is not the America of Strom Thurmond and George Wallace! It is not the "Make America Sick And Cruel Again" Party! Donalds is eloquent, and hard not to like. His answer is great, as far as it goes. The key line is that lots of Black men remember making money when Trump was POTUS. And with higher prices and ESPECIALLY higher rent they have been struggling. Clearly, for Black men who voted for Trump, that trumped their concerns about Trump the racist landlord and Trump and the Central Park Five. That pretty much says it all, I think. That said, Donalds gives us a litany of how a growing economy is good for Black men, more US energy production is good for Black men, and higher prices are not good for Black men. Great! But isn't this the same "a rising tide lifts all boats" policy that Democrats have repeated for decades, that Black men and women said doesn't really speak to them? Maybe that's why Black men and women voted overwhelmingly for Harris. There's no question that if the 2028 election is about a red hot economy with low inflation and the lowest poverty among Black and Latino children ever, that's good for whoever runs after Trump. Here's the thing. We cut Black and Latino child poverty in half when Biden and Harris were President. That's a winner! Harris's proposal to restore that child tax credit for Black and Latino working class families was wildly popular. It helped tens of millions of working class families get through a period of high inflation allover the world. If Democrats want to win Black and Latino votes in 2028, that is exactly what we have to fight like hell for when Trump proposes and wins more tax cuts for himself. And his billionaire cronies and oil company CEOs. While Donalds says "But, hey, a rising tide lifts all boats." This is democracy at work. I'm lovin' it. America wins! Beating cops to steal an election is cruel and sick. @EmmetK comes here to promote cruelty, sickness, and division.

Great. Unexpected trip. My niece who is the all in Trumper emailed me and said she's making an unexpected business trip to the coast. Fun in LaJolla with a swell gal who is happy her MAGA dude won. We have fun here in America. We're not about slaughtering women and kids like you are, Genocide Freak. But Trump is doin Putin's dirty work already. You and your genocide freaks should be happy!

Yup. By losing an election to Vlad's crony dictator wannabe by about half the number of votes Biden won by in 2020, we are almost as bad as your mass murdering Genocide Man, I guess. Thanks for making me laugh, Genocide Freak!

Glad you are modeling the grace that Mark Halperin is hoping Donald Trump exhibits. Which Trump basically did last night, like when he won in 2016. We'll see how long that lasts. Here's two reasons you shouldn't be such a graceless clown. Which means nothing, of course, since you are what you are. Just like Trump. Trump did not win by a 5 million vote landslide, as you stated on another thread. Harris is beating him by about 2 million votes in California, with about half the vote there in. So I'm guessing Trump wins by maybe 3 million votes when it is all counted. And probably just under 50 % of the vote. Which is a very nice symbol of the fact that the country is split in half. Just like the swing states, and the Senate races in them, have flipped back and forth on the edge of a knife for three election cycles in a row. The nice part about Trump winning a clear electoral college and popular vote victory is we don't have to go through four years of lies and psychodrama about a "stolen election". Not that anyone would ever do that. 😲 Congratulations, and enjoy your celebration. For what it's worth, I did send an email to a niece who is all in on MAGA, congratulating her. It was sincere. And the kind of thing I've done a lot in my life. My only hesitation in offering congratulations is that it was inherently also a critique of her, as well. Since she, like most MAGA folk, could never accept the fact that Biden won by 7 million votes in 2020. She of course won't see it that way. You won't see it this way either. But it is kind of funny that when Biden wins 51 % of the vote, and a 7 million vote margin, it's a stolen election. When Trump wins by 3 million votes, it's a landslide. It would actually be very funny. But for the fact that Trump's lies were a threat to democracy, and did result in the Jubilant Patriotic Cop Beating. I'm hoping Trump just stays focused on his priority, which is delivering tax cuts to himself and his billionaire donors. But if we do get to the stuff about Cheney and guns pointed at her face or Pelosi and arrest, all your grace and warmth will have been for naught. So sad. And thanks for the compliment on my money well spent. Lots of Republicans, including Team Trump analysts and consultants, have been saying that with so many people saying the country and their personal finances are worse off, any other Republican would have won a race like this by five or ten points. A real landslide. They have a point. But for Kamala Harris and all the money and volunteers she brought in, I do think this could have been a lot worse.

Thank you. I'm going to just keep ranting. There was a brief period of time between Nov. 2016 and Jan. 2017 when there was a palpable fear among Democrats that Trump would turn out to be a secret moderate. He was a right of center Democrat at least for some period of time. Maybe just because he lived in New York. By Jan. 2017 we had "American carnage". Then tax cuts for billionaires, and let's just kill Obamacare. And that was the easy part. Jan. 6th and patriotic cop beatings were just a vision of love off on the horizon. So Trump 2024 is older, more tired, and way more unhinged than Trump 2016. He failed to do most of the shit he promised in 2016. Which is why he was fired. On immigration, he did not build a wall. Fentanyl deaths went right through the roof while Trump was President. Over 100,000 dead - American carnage - thanks to Trump's incompetence at stopping the flood of fentanyl. So the idea that Trump will fix immigration policy is probably a delusion. But let's just be good Americans for a minute and say, "Hey, maybe he can." Maybe Trump will stop calling Harris a stupid bitch and instead focus on immigration policy. Republicans now have a very good reason why. They now know if you want to be President, better listen to those Latinos. I actually do believe that in itself is good for democracy. So let's put this is context. Trump is 1000 % certain to do dumb authoritarian and fascist shit. He can't help himself. He is older, and more unhinged. Biden's age problems may look like child's play compared to this unhinged narcissist felon three years from now. So I think the optimistic way to think about it is that if we are ONLY thinking about mass deportations of undocumented immigrants, and maybe we just throw in a million or so legally American Latino kids to deport for kicks, that's good for America. Because it actually could be a lot worse. Maybe he really tries to arrest and jail every Democrat in Congress. He really is THAT unhinged. So I'll just focus on deport all those criminals. He did say that last night I think. That may go down well. If he just does that, Democrats are not against getting rid of rapists and murderers, are we? Obama, aka "Deporter In Chief, did that. Best of luck to Trump fixing the fentanyl crisis, which absolutely blew up and killed over 100,000 Americans under Trump 1.0. Trump has never been accused of being good at policy, or governing. So Pew says 33 % of Hispanics are for increasing deportations, compared to 55 % of non-Hispanics. But that understates the massive difference between Republicans and Latinos. This poll says 79 of % of Republicans favor what Trump has proposed: rounding up the illegals - or their legally Americans kids, or whatever - and putting them in militarized camps. 22 % Democrats, and fewer than half of Independents favor this. And how many Hispanic Catholics favor this? 33 %. Hispanics are way closer to Democrats than Republicans on one of the centerpiece ideas of Trump 2.0. And that is BEFORE the separation of parents and children begins. My guess is Trump will go for some low hanging fruit, and shit can the mass deportation rhetoric now that he has won. But if he doesn't, he's going to send lots of Latinos running, literally, into the night. Since it's Trump, without the guard rails, it is probably going to be a cruel unhinged ugly mess. But one can hope. When Obama tried to do immigration reform, the Republican Party position, especially in the House, was "just say no" to compromise. All those Republicans in mostly White rural districts have constituents who are riled up. They want to round up the illegals and put 'em in camps. @EmmetK is already salivating, like Pavlov's dog. Or is it Trump's pit bull? If Trump proposes, let alone wins, a compromise immigration bill, I'll be shocked. He'll mostly focus on tax cuts for billionaires. Which is pretty much what every Latino Mom and Dad with some undocumented relative wants. So I think barely winning 50 % of the vote, thanks to young Latino men who like Joe Rogan or the "bro" vibe, is probably about as good as it gets.

Here's a weird thing, which is probably just overthinking. Because, in the end, none of this matters now. Trump won the people who decided in the last week of the election. If it was up to everyone who decided BEFORE the last week, meaning 93 % of the electorate, Harris would have won. The best month for Harris was September. Of the 7 % who say they decided in September, she won them 55/42. The reason I bring that up is that some people will say she spent too much time attacking Trump, and not enough talking about the economy. I just disagree. I'd argue the opposite. If she spent more time ripping Trump a new asshole, like she did during the debate, she might have barely eked out a victory. Claire McCaskill made an utterly sensible argument on Morning Joe the morning of the election. She said the people who decide at the last minute are "feel" voters. They are not really looking into, or even aware of, what Trump or Harris say about the economy. McCaskill arguably knows more about how to win in a red state than anyone else alive in America today. She said that Trump blew it, because he looked like a gloomy old nut compared to Harris's optimism and positive energy. Except Harris lost because of the people who broke for Trump in the last week, if the exit polls are right. Why? Trump won the last week vote 52/44. So McCaskill may be partly right. Maybe some voters, especially women, liked how Harris felt. Or maybe Trump's sexist ranting and crude dildo pumping was designed to appeal to the "bro" vote. Maybe it was designed to simply deter people from voting at all, by saying Harris is a stupid "b----". Maybe it was just Trump being the crude idiot he is. Who knows? I think we know this. Trump's base decided they were with Trump a long time ago. And they are not a majority. I keep coming back to Never Trump Republican Mike Murphy's "wall of lava". We will never know. But it makes sense to me that a lot of people who don't follow debates about tariffs or child tax credits, or have a clue what Trump did to shower tax cuts on billionaires in his failed first term, just thought Trump would somehow make things better for them after years of inflation and higher prices. As much as I am a fan of policies like child tax credits, precisely for this reason, I find it very hard to believe Harris could have changed the outcome if she had just focused more on policy in the last week. And all that excellent turnout work that happened in the swing states was just not enough. And, again, name leaders in the West - other than AMLO - who were NOT punished for inflation that happened on their watch? So I think the wise thing for Democrats is to think long and hard about a pro-working class policy. And use Trump's pro-billionaire policies to actually show we FIGHT for the working class. So we are hopefully never in this position again.

That's true. And since you like to divide and attack America, let's add this. The electoral college is rooted in slavery. It was designed in large part to empower slave owners. So if you want to attack America for that, Genocide Freak, go ahead. But if you don't mind, let's focus on this century. It would really piss me off if, for the third time in my lifetime, I had to "lose" an election that my team would have "won" in almost any other democracy in the world. I mean Gore in 2000, and Clinton in 2016. In Genocide World, it doesn't matter because only Genocide Man can win. Everyone else is jailed, killed, or exiled. But in democracies it matters. So there are two things about the 2024 election that make the pain hurt less. First, Trump will win the popular vote. My guess is when California is 100 % counted he will have less than 50 % of the popular vote. So it was not a landslide, like some of the conservatives on Fox were claiming last night. But he won fair and square. Let's just cut out all the bullshit about stolen elections and go directly to, "How do Democrats need to change to attract the US working class?" Second, he did not win because Whites are racist. Whites voted more for Harris than they did for Biden. So I hope we just skip the whole, "Are White Trump supporters racist?" thing. Yes, obviously a lot of them are racist and anti-Semitic and truly deplorable hateful people. Just look at the flags they carry, and the words that come out of their mouths. And how they beat up cops when they try to steal elections. Many of them support full on violent fascism. But there is no great upside in branding them all as deplorables. (See Clinton, Hillary, 2016). There is upside in branding their actions as horrific, when they are. (See Jan. 6th, which did hurt Trump in 2024, I think.) So let's instead focus on why Latino men and women voted for Trump. And what we need to do to persuade them to vote for Democrats instead.

I think the first thing is millions of people have to process their grief and anger. One person I have enormous respect for is David Axelrod. When I was a young man, I took off a term of college to go elect Harold Washington as Chicago's first Black Mayor. Axelrod was a Chicago Tribune reporter always stalking City Hall for stories the summer I interned in the Mayor's office after Washington won. Axe paid close attention. That led to Obama, who won twice. That led to Harris, who lost once. Ya win some, ya lose some. It is clear to me that Axelrod has some of the same feelings I do about wanting America to be a liberal multi-racial democracy. And last night he was just pissed. For a mild-mannered geeky guy, he let his rage out as much as he ever does on TV. So I think the first thing is we have to deal with that. A lot of people are hurt, and pissed. That said, I think the saying "Be careful what you wish for" applies here. I wanted a multi-racial democracy. Last night, I got it. Latino men and women, and ONLY Latino men and women, put Trump over the top. And they are not particularly liberal. Teixeira is the expert on that. They are culturally moderate patriots. Yeah, there was a tiny bit of slippage among Black men. Really I think the best way to think about it is "multi-racial working class". We have a problem, Democrats. But having a multi-racial democracy is NOT the problem we have. Again, I will repeat ad nauseum that we do have the problem of resisting Trump's clear fascist and authoritarian tendencies. But that is going to make Trump WILDLY UNPOPULAR. If you forgot, like many young Latino men did, check the results of the 2018 and 2020 elections. Trump is going to overreach. So it's too soon. But here are some ways Trump will overreach: 1. TAX CUTS TO BILLIONAIRES 2. TAX CUTS TO BILLIONAIRES 3. TAX CUTS TO BILLIONAIRES 4. TAX CUTS TO BILLIONAIRES 5. TAX CUTS TO BILLIONAIRES That really deserves to be the top five items on the list. Because as far as legislation goes, that was the big priority and the big win in Trump 1.0. It was not, and is not, popular. Teixiera (and Stan Greenberg) have been BEGGING Democrats to focus on this. Which is a little bit of a problem for billionaire Democrats. The polls said Harris' idea of an expanded child tax credit was wildly popular. It was one of the top policies that made working class voters want to vote FOR a candidate. (An immigration crackdown was also wildly popular). So when Republicans have their debt-inflating billionaire hog feed, Democrats damn well better be pushing for child tax credits for Hispanic Moms and Dads instead. Even if we lose. If Republicans are smart, they will steal the idea and run with it. Did I ever accuse Republicans of being smart? 6. LET BOBBY KENNEDY TELL YOU HOW TO RAISE YOUR CHILDREN. If there is something worse than telling Moms their daughters have to compete with women who were men, I think it is the idea that Bobby Kennedy wants to take vaccines and fluoride away. Megan McCain is the poster child. She has been freaking out about the transgender women in sports things for months. On Halperin, she was already freaking out about Bobby Kennedy last night. Again, be careful what you wish for. But women did not vote for Trump, or Bobby Kennedy. This will send them running screaming into the night. As will empowering Republicans to push even further on abortion. 7. FASCISM. Trump will push this, for sure. He does want to be a fascist. He won't be able to resist. So now he will do shit that proves what Democrats were warning all along was correct, just like Jan. 6th did. 8. TARIFFS. This is last on my list because I don't think Trump will actually do it. Every right wing economist that is for it says that it will be SHORT TERM PAIN for theoretical long term gain. What does this mean for the working class? Next time you go to Walmart, shit will cost a lot more. How did this solve the problem of higher costs for Hispanic men? Which is why I don't think Trump will do it. But if he does, it will be wildly unpopular. Last night was an absolute disaster. The part that will be hardest to fix, if it can ever be fixed, is the idea that America is an unreliable ally. That said, the Trump people will double down on China being the real threat. So it mostly shifts the nature of the global alliances. But on domestic politics, Trump 2024 has the same problem as Trump 2016, and Biden 2020. I think all three of those elections were more about people voting against something, than for something. Latino men simply did not vote for tax cuts for billionaires. Harris ran a great campaign. My hope was that she might prove to be good at mediating and finding a center left majority somehow. Precisely because she really doesn't have an agenda she could explain to people in a convincing way. Those kind of leaders can sometimes be better, because they are not rigid and stuck. But for the wall of lava of inflation, I think she would have won. So the positive thing is it opens the door for someone who can put a majority together, like Clinton and Obama did, to step forward and fight. The Democratic Party needs to redesign who we are, and how we are for the working class. Sorry. We have always been better at that than Republicans. Trump is no FDR. Trump is no Truman. Trump is no JFK. Trump is not LBJ. Trump is no Clinton. Trump is no Obama. I'd say he's most like Biden. Old, and tired, but less effective at governing. Republicans who think this will be an easy path to a Republican majority are kidding themselves.

Hey, Genocide freak! Congratulations. I'll say it again. Vlad Putin, Genocide Man, won an extremely important battle he toiled hard for last night. Congratulations. That is how we do it in democracies. We don't jail people, or poison them. But you are still a Genocide Freak. You still come here to promote division, and rationalize Putin's death machine. It is who you are. It is what you do. Genocide, genocide, genocide. If you think Americans voted for Putin or genocide, you are not racist. You are just really fucking stupid. I can't find that quote you attributed to me. But, basically, you are saying Ronald Reagan and Susie Wiles are racists. Please debate that with them, okay? Reagan and Wiles both identified a specific racial group, Latinos, and made efforts to attract them to the Republican Party. Mostly by playing off their grievances about an economy that they feel is not working well for them. Teixeira, a Democrat and architect and author of The Emerging Democratic Majority, thinks Democrats should do the same. I emphatically agree with him, and think last night proved he is right. I don't think that is racist. If you do, call Susie Wiles. It just proves, yet again, that you are here to promote division and death. And you are stupid. And you are losing. You will always be a Genocide Freak, okay? I wonder what would happen if a Russian ethnic group, the Chechen people, changed the outcome of any fake Russian election by unseating Genocide Man? Would Genocide Man congratulate them, and try to understand why they voted the way they did? Duh! Of course not. He would kill them all. In fact, he already did. That is the difference between America and Genocide World. That has not changed. But calling me a racist for trying to understand why Latino men voted for Trump is funny. Keep doing that. It's stupid, but less cruel than promoting genocide. Chechen genocide Personally, as an American, I think it is great that Latino men can vote as they wish, without fear of being the victims of Genocide Man's murderous whims. The challenge for America now, as @reader said, is to resist Trump's efforts to inch America further into authoritarianism and oligarchy.

Exactly! That's not a theory. That's a fact. There's been lots of polling on that. It's not black and white, pun intended. But Latinos generally identify as "White". Including in Mexico, I'd argue. Turn on a telenovela and it tends to be handsome "White" looking men and women. Not Black looking Mexicans. But that is a whole separate thing. I think the positive way to say it is that America is a melting pot. And there is definitely backlash against what people see as extreme versions of identity politics, where they are reduced to their race. I am not saying Democrats do that, or Harris did it. I think she did a great job of NOT doing that. The better example is what I viewed as the complete fucking nonsense about "Latinx." It was wildly stupid. And probably a good example of "woke" college-educated idiots who speak no Spanish trying to make some stupid fucking cultural statement. Polls said almost all Spanish speaking Hispanic Americans did not like the idea. That said, I don't think "Latinx" was why Latino men voted for Trump. And they did not vote for Trump because they want more tax cuts for billionaires who funded Trump's campaigns. What we learned about Latinos and immigration is that it is very complicated. I will not repeat the whole anecdote. But my Mexican American immigrant hair stylist was not buying what some White Gay guy who was the customer before me was selling about how Trump is a monster who attacks all Mexican immigrants as rapists. She said some Mexican immigrants are rapists and murderers. I think Harris did a very good job of taking a conservative line on immigration. Turns out it was too little, too late, I think. I'm actually more worried about one of my friends who I just got off the phone with. The discussion now is, "Do I cut off friends who voted for Trump? Do I cut off family members?" That was the question he was asking. For me the answer is NO. I'll congratulate them. It's still a democracy, and they won. If Trump overreaches and does fascist things, the resistance will be immediate and fierce and unrelenting. That said, @reader was absolutely right. Can America withstand Trump's fascist tendencies? Check back with me in 2026. The one who comes out of this smelling like a rose is Mark Halperin. He is the person I have listened to the most, for months. In part because he has his 2Way daily. I posted that when Dan Turrentine, his Democrat co-host, said Republicans would win 54 Senate seats a few days before the election, I was shocked. But he was close to correct. Thankfully, as of now, maybe it is more like 52? I feel sorry for Alan Lichtman and Ann Selzer. They are both highly respected experts, who always get it right. Or at least are only off by a little bit, when it really matters. They were both WAY OFF on 2024. Why that is could be a thread in itself. But as I posted repeatedly, I had every reason to think they were right. This is splitting hairs, but I will say this. Selzer was not wrong about older White women. Trump won them by 11 points in 2020, and 5 points in 2024. If that was the ONLY change, Harris would have won. So we really do need to talk about Latinos, who drove Trump's victory. The part of Lichtman's analysis I have wondered the most about was the economy, stupid. In 1992 he counted one key against Bush 41, because he said the economy was in recession in early 1992. Technically, that is true. His key literally says that if the economy is in recession for one week in the year of a Presidential election, you lose that key. I think the 1991 recession technically ended in January 1992. Technically, there was no recession in 2024. But the overwhelming reality that we all heard ad nauseum is that lots of Democrats - LIKE LATINOS AND BLACK MEN IN PARTICULAR - felt like this was a recession, even if it wasn't. So that gets you into an obscure debate about whether Lichtman misjudged his own Keys. Once the dust settles, I'll be curious what Lichtman says. Last night he was just stunned. He literally almost could not speak. I just spent a few minutes clicking through hours of him just being stunned and useless. He lost a lot of his cache last night.

I answered the question already. But now that it has happened, I will answer it again. I will resist. I will repeat several other things I said above. This is obviously a big win for Putin. Congratulations, Genocide Man. That said, winning the battle is not winning the war. Trump will not end the Ukraine War in the next 24 hours. In fact, it's hard to imagine Trump will agree to the terms Putin and Ukraine will want. We'll see. As I said above, Putin and his foreign policy staff all understand this quite well. Trump's win, which had almost nothing to do with Ukraine or Putin, does not change the fact that NATO is stronger and Russia is despised. It further ensures the question of whether Ukraine joins NATO now becomes frozen, for years or decades to come. Genocide Man does not want Ukraine in NATO, and Ukraine does not want to be part of Genocide World. So at best there is a cold peace. The economy of Genocide World is still everything I said it is. Putin was running out of money, and Russian men to process into meat. So there is no question that he just won a huge battle. Probably the most important thing is he exposed America as an unreliable ally. Congratulations. But that still isn't going to stop Genocide World from collapsing of its own rot, death, and stench. Sorry.

I'm going to just cut and paste the first comment on Ruy Teixeira's essay above. Anyone who wants to understand why Donald Trump was elected thanks to Hispanic men should read this: David Gonzales Oct 3 Just wanted to add that I'm second generation Hispanic, and always voted Democratic until I voted for Trump in 2016, the first Republican I ever voted for. I did so because when I taught English in Mexico, I learned that Mexico has very stringent rules on obtaining an employment visa. When I complained to my supervisor, he said that "every country has immigration laws and we have to obey them." What a joke!!! So I came back and voted for Trump. I also liked that the wanted to bring back manufacturing jobs to America. But the main reason I will vote for Trump in 2024 is that I hate all that woke nonsense: racializing everything, allowing transgender "females" to compete against real women, DEI, cancel culture, defund the police...Anyway, I'm ready to vote for Trump, and if for some reason Trump isn't the candidate, I'll readily vote for JD Vance.

That was an eloquent summary. My emotional reaction is that the biggest disaster here is the thing the election had NOTHING to do with, really. Putin wins. Ukraine loses. And America is now an unreliable ally. We can't just walk that back in four years. I'm not sure I agree this is the worst possible outcome for democracy. Is it bad for democracy that we are a melting pot, and Latino men voted for Trump? That's hard to argue, I think. The second part of what you said is very true. Whether America can withstand Trump's fascist tendencies remains to be seen. I'll double down on what I said yesterday. The resistance will be massive, and it starts today. I think Trump is way more likely to prioritize tax cuts to billionaire donors than jailing his political opponents. Time will tell. This was NOT a vote for oligarchy. But we are one step closer to oligarchy, whether we voted for it or not. It may be slightly more accurate to say Ronald Reagan knew the electorate better than Dems. Trump, an idiot with feral political instincts, just stumbled into it. Susie Wiles is the mastermind. She did it in Florida. Now she did it in America. Whether they can make it last is a whole different question. But the blueprint is being tested in Florida, and it sure held in Florida yesterday. It took close to half a century. But Ronnie turned out to be right. 2024 is when Latinos, especially men, got the memo. Here's one way to address whether Dems know their own party. In 2002 Ruy Teixeira and John Judis, both quite leftist, wrote a book called The Emerging Democratic Majority. Nobody believed it at the time. For years now, Ruy Teixeira has been warning the Democratic Party, particularly about Latinos. Add Bernie's guy, Chuck Rocha, who argues Democrats need to focus on economic populism and pocketbook issues, and moderate on or downplay culture war issues. The Democrats’ Hispanic Voter Problem Deepens It really is getting worse. That was written one month ago by Teixeira. So we can not say we did not see this coming. Teixeira, who loves his Democratic Party, has been screaming it for years. Here's a thought. Let's listen to him and debate what he is saying. He is a liberal patriot who loves America. The good news is that we really don't have to waste time on understanding what happened, or what horrible thing Democrats or Harris did. Harris ran a great campaign. Way better than Biden would have. And Democrats didn't do any horrible thing. This all boils down to a roughly 3 % swing in the electorate. Which can be completely explained by one thing: Latinos. Especially Latino men. Last night David Axelrod and Van Jones both tried to do "racism" on CNN. I get it. Because I feel the same gut level anger they obviously displayed that we could not see fit to elect a Black woman. Karl Rove absolutely clocked Juan Williams on Fox when he tried to do a version of "Black men are racist." I agree with Rove. It makes absolutely no fucking sense to argue that Whites, who voted for Harris more than they did Biden, are "racist" or "fascist" for doing so. Are Latino men "racist" or "fascist" for making a massive swing to Trump, that handed him his victory? I think that is a losing argument for Democrats. If we make that argument, we will make Reagan's wish a permanent reality. Let's not do that. Let's face facts. America is a vibrant democratic melting pot, just like we were two days ago. On this one, Latino men had their say and changed the outcome of the election. I'll respect that, even if I disagree. Pendejos! 😉 It is much easier for me to respect it when I try to understand why it happened. And I think the explanation is incredibly obvious and undeniable. Never Trump Republican Mike Murphy summed this up best when he said a month or so ago that Kamala Harris had a "wall of lava" coming at her. And the wall of lava was all the stuff we have been hearing for several years about inflation, higher rent, unaffordable homeownership, high interest rates. Ironically, that is objectively worse today BECAUSE TRUMP WON. Because long term interest rates on bonds just went up A LOT because everyone knows Trump will massively increase America's debt. Mortgage rates, which were bad yesterday, are a bit worse today. This is NOT what Latino men voted for. Was this a wise decision? No. I feel fine saying it was a stupid decision, that was all knee jerk and reactive. But I still have to respect it. It sets up Trump to overreach, just like it set up Biden to overreach. Latino men did NOT vote for tax cuts for billionaires. They voted for help. What they will get is tax cuts for billionaires. Game on. The resistance started last night. Mike Murphy was not saying that Harris was doomed. Two days ago he predicted she would win. Like me, he got caught up in the enthusiasm of a campaign Harris ran really well. To me, it just proves his original point. This has happened to almost every leader or incumbent party that presided over COVID+inflation. It is ironic as hell that America fired Trump due to COVID in 2020. And then hired him back in 2024 due to the inflation COVID caused. But it is what it is. The one notable exception is Lopez Obrador, who like Biden tried to shuffle the deck (in Mexico, for constitutional reasons) and let a woman create an image of change. And she won. AMLO is a Trumpy, but lefty, populist. If America had a Democratic AMLO, which we really don't, would Latino men have voted for him instead of Trump? Maybe. But mostly I think a "wall of lava" is what it is. Harris was way more agile than Biden could be. I don't blame her for not being able to outrun it. I see it as a tragedy for America and the world. Trump is going to overreach. For sure, he will have a hog feed tax cut for billionaires that will be yet another Trump bankruptcy. This time he will bankrupt America, for a billionaire hog feed no one voted for. "Tax cuts" were almost the only policy he mentioned last night. The resistance is on. It is principled resistance, based on deeply American values. Latino men did not vote to enrich billionaire Trump donors. Get ready for THAT fight. I went to bed thinking we would lose Democratic Senate seats in all the swing states. Today it looks way less bad. Maybe Michigan, Wisconsin, Nevada, and Arizona are saved. Will Rollins, the Gay lawyer in Palm Springs who is the only House candidate I fought for and donated to, may still eke out a narrow victory. It was a very bad night. But it sets up Democrats to finally listen to smart liberals like Teixeira and Judis. Who have been warning us for a long time.

Ann Selzer's canary in the coal mine turned out to be a hologram. Neither race has been called. But the Republican incumbents are leading in the two Iowa House races her poll showed the Democrats would take, in one case by double digits. Iowa of course has been called for Trump.

What's your number, @Moses? I'm gonna have Kamala call you. Maybe you can vote for her. Oh, that's right. You're stuck with Genocide Man. At least maybe you two can figure out what to do with the losing felon after he is convicted.

I'm just going to post videos I find particularly inspiring. Happily, I think we can solve this problem right here. Having due process in the US, we first have to wait for Trump to be sentenced for all his crimes. Like leading an insurrection to beat the shit out of cops and steal a federal election. Or to steal a state election in Georgia. Once the felon is found guilty, @Moses can put in a good word to Genocide Man. And we can send Trump to Russia. Let them all be failing losers together. As long as Genocide Man promises us not to process Trump into meat, like so many Russians are being processed into meat. I mean, it makes sense. Who the fuck would want to eat a Trump steak anyway? 😲

Thank you for at least being honest. For Genocide Man to even have a hope of making his mass slaughter work, he needs to divide America and fuck up democracy. That is the plan. Here is the thing, you genocidal freak. Like all genocidal freaks, you really can't think clearly. I guess you have too much blood or genocide in your brain. So let me help you out here. First, when 700,000 Russians are sent to be processed into meat by Genocide Man, they are dead. That which kills us ................ kills us. They are dead. And you have a whole fucking corrupt and crumbling nation of people who fear Genocide Man and don't want to be turned into meat and would love to not be in Genocide World. in America, that which does NOT kill us .............makes us stronger. You can't understand this, because you are a weak genocide freak. But it is true. We will have record turnout today. People will vote Republican. People will vote Democrat. E pluribus unum. Whereas in Russia, it's more like, "Out of many, we are processed into meat." So Democrats and Republicans want your corrupt, rotten, genocidal nation to fall apart under the rot of Genocide Man. We are united enough on that. And your genocidal freak of a mass murderer united us. Thank you. Genocide Man wanted less NATO. He got more. Genocide Man wanted to weaken America. He made us stronger. You are a genocide freak. Or maybe a Genocide Bot. You are failing. You can't see it, or admit. Please go ahead and let your murderous nation disintegrate. The Soviet Union was a better nation. Whatever follows after your murderous shit hole crumbles will be better. Good fucking riddance.

Eat your heart out, genocide freak. We have freedom. We have debate. We have compromise. We have a growing economy that The Economist says is "the envy of the world." You have Genocide Man. You have a rotten economy. And your national wealth is being spent to send 700,000 Russians off to be processed into meat. We have millions of Americans voting for Republicans today, who they feel speak for them. You have millions of Russians being sent off by a corrupt genocidal sadist to be processed into meat. Why do you think people want to live in America, not Russia? You have little freedom. You have lots of death and genocide. This is why your rotten economy and your corrupt political system is going to collapse. The Soviet Union was a great nation compared to Putin's genocidal shit hole. PLEASE do the world a favor and collapse soon. We all can not wait! P.S. In fairness I should mention the economy and political system in Russia is better than in North Korea as long as Genocide Man does not send you off to be processed into meat.