REASON(S): Trump's win tracks back to 1965!

 WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 11, 2024

We were there at the start: Like President-elect Abraham Lincoln, we've accepted "a task greater than that which rested upon [General or President] Washington."

Lincoln was headed off to D.C. in order to save the Union. As for us, we've accepted the challenge of convincing Blue America that we ourselves may have "earned our way out" over the past sixty years.

We Blues! Could our own behavior help explain the remarkable vote totals shown below? We've accepted the task of trying to make that case:

Nationwide popular vote, 2016
Hillary Clinton (D): 65,853,514 (48.2%)
Donald J. Trump (R): 62,984,828 (46.1%)
Nationwide popular vote, 2020
Joe Biden (D): 81,283,501 (51.3%)
Donald J. Trump (R): 74,223,975 (46.8%)
Nationwide popular vote (to date), 2024 
Donald J. Trump (R): 77,300,739 (49.8%)
Kamala Harris (D): 75,014,534 (48.3%)

In 2016, 136.7 million people cast votes for president. That was already a lot of votes—but along the way, the number of people casting votes has become substantially larger. 

How many people voted each year? We'll throw in 2012:

Nationwide total vote, presidential elections
2012: 129,085,410
2016: 136,669,276
2020: 158,429,631
2024: 155,203,911 (and counting)

The total number of votes will be slightly down this year. That said, turnout jumped from 58.6% in 2012 to 66.6% in 2020. Turnout this year will probably be something like 65%. 

Now we report the kicker:

Candidate Trump was the Republican nominee in each of these elections. This year, in his third time around, Candidate Trump didn't scrape by in the electoral college. This time, the highly unusual Republican candidate actually won the nationwide popular vote! 

This leaves our own Blue America facing a difficult challenge. How do we explain the fact that a person like Candidate Trump has somehow actually won the nationwide popular vote?

More to the point, we also find ourselves struggling to answer this question:

How do we explain the fact that a candidate like Trump ever got any votes at all? How do we explain the fact that he even got 63 million votes way back in 2016, in the first time around?

Why would anyone vote for Trump? Over here in Blue America, many of us are inclined to fall back on explanations which may make us feel most secure.

We deny that there could be any imaginable way a decent person could possibly have made that decision. Alo, we reject the unpleasant claim which we've put forward at this site:

We reject the idea that we ourselves—those of us in Blue America—could possibly have earned our way out, even in some small way. 

We tend to reject the strange idea that we ourselves may have contributed to this (potentially disastrous) defeat. We may find ourselves leaning toward explanations which sound more like this

HARTMANN (11/17/24): Well, I think what that reflects is the deep racism that is still extant among white people in America, you know. And certainly, the Trump presidency, and even his successful campaign in 2016, frankly shocked me.

[...]

I don't have an explanation beyond for this very clear racial division which has existed since 1964, beyond just the shocking reality that at least half of America, and arguably a little more than that, is just deeply racist.

Arguably, "a little more than half of America" is just deeply racist! Sometimes, we find ourselves saying things which sound a great deal like that.

At this site, it seems blindingly obvious to us that we Blues, however well intentioned, have in fact contributed to this year's election defeat. It seems to us that we've done so in a wide array of ways, dating back to an event in 1965.

We were physically present at that event, which may in fact have taken place in the spring of 1966. But that's where Candidate Trump's election win actually got its start. It was on that day that those of us in Blue America began to earn our way out.

For the record, what President Clinton recently said is also probably true. We recorded what he said in yesterday's hurried report:

Bill Clinton on the Election, D.E.I. and One of His Regrets

A month after losing the presidential election, Democrats are still unpacking what went wrong. Speaking at the DealBook Summit on Wednesday, former President Bill Clinton blamed a lack of time.

When President Joe Biden dropped out of the race, he said, “nobody had a plan because nobody knew what was going to happen.” He added that a primary “would have been total chaos.”

Ultimately, he said, Vice President Kamala Harris wasn’t able to adequately introduce herself as a presidential candidate. “What happened was Kamala Harris was a stranger to them,” he said of voters.

That's quite possibly part of it too! We'll assume that Candidate Harris may well have been able to garner more votes if she'd only had "world enough and [a bit more] time."

Provisionally, we'll agree that Harris lost votes due to her late entry into the race. On the other hand, we also think that former president Donald J. Trump made at least one accurate statement when he spoke at length with Kristen Welker for this past Sunday's Meet the Press.

As is his wont, the former candidate made one disordered remark after another. Faced with the usual onslaught, Welker did her best with the difficult task of trying to keep up.

As usual, he made one bogus claim after another—but we think he got this right:

TRUMP (12/8/24): I'm looking to make our country great. I'm looking to get—bring prices down. Because, you know, I won on two things, the border and—more than immigration. 

You know, they like to say immigration, I break it down more to the border, but I won on the border, and I won on groceries. Very simple word, groceries. Like almost—you know, who uses the word? I started using the word—the groceries. When you buy apples, when you buy bacon, when you buy eggs, they would double and triple the price over a short period of time, and I won an election based on that. 

This time around, he even won the nationwide popular vote. This time, 77.3 million people (and counting) did in fact vote for Candidate Trump. 

Did he, at least in large part, "win on the border" but also "on groceries?"

We'd have to say that he pretty much did! And we're forced to restate our previous claim, unpleasant though it might be:

He also won "on President Biden"—on his policies at the border, on his failure to explain those policies.

On his failure even to try to explain those policies. On his remarkable silence concerning such matters—a silence which may have been caused by an apparent condition we Blues kept trying to wish away.

It seems to us that Candidate Trump also may have won President Biden's failure to explain the sources of the rise in the cost of those groceries. On his repeated failure to speak to the nation regarding the challenges every western nation faced as we emerged from the dislocations of the Covid years.

On the way Vice President Harris herself said the border was secure. On the way Vice President Harris, and quite a few others, said that President Biden was still sharp as a tack.

We'd have to say that Candidate Trump probably gained votes—votes which Candidate Harris lost—in other ways as well.

He may have gained votes because of the specific ways our tribunes kept trying to get him locked up. He may have gained votes in the way we Blues kept calling the Others names. (In some precincts, it's one of our favorite pastimes.)

Nor dos the story end there! He may have gained votes—votes which Candidate Harris lost—thanks to some of the policy stances and policy ventures which came to carry the moniker "Woke." 

That includes policy views stated by Candidate Harris herself back in 2019. It also involves policy stances adopted by the public figures and interest groups who are an unmistakable part of our imperfect Blue America.

The woods are lovely, dark and deep, but our own tribe, like all human tribes, hasn't always been stupendously sharp and has sometimes perhaps been unwise. We've sometimes said and done things which helped show our candidates the door—but in the face of our own defeats, we keep denying that fact.

On Blue America's cable channel, our highly educated Blue elites kept trying to get the other guy locked up. As our Ahabs pursued that goal, they tried to disappear events at the southern border. 

Those events were highly visible somewhere else, on a competing "cable news" channel which reaches a much larger audience.

They disappeared the videotape from the southern border. Until northern mayors began to scream, they disappeared the concomitant data.

Our tribe ignored the rise in prices and the rise in costs. We made almost no attempt to explain where those rises came from.

As we engaged in these behaviors, we insisted on calling the Others names. We seemed to have no idea about the way we look to such people.

Beyond all that, a tragedy:

Our nominee for re-election seemed to perhaps be undergoing some sort of cognitive decline. We kept disappearing the videotapes which were shown on Red America's cable news channel—the videotapes which may have seemed to indicate some such decline.

We denied it until June 26. After that, denial came much harder.

We earned our way out a million different ways. But the whole thing started back in 1965, or possibly in the spring of 1966.

We happened to be there at the time! Tomorrow, we'll describe what we saw on that occasion, back when it all began.

This year's (narrow) defeat could quite possibly turn into a deeply tragic disaster. As a result of a narrow election, Blue America has largely been shorn of the power to stop the actions which may emerge from the other guy's playroom of broken toys.

Things may turn out extremely poorly. We Blues can possibly make matters worse if we insist on maintaining our preferred forms of tribal denial.

We saw some of that on cable last night! Or at least, we thought we did.

Tomorrow: It started in '65

110 comments:

  1. Factors such as late entry into the race by Kamala Harris, and Trump's focus on border security and rising grocery prices could have been reasons people voted for Trump. If they were, Blue America may need to confront their own shortcomings and tribal denial in order to address their defeat and emerge stronger.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So, you are saying that people thought it was worth Trump letting Space-X continue to pollute the regions where it operates (South Texas, Southern Memphis) because Trump vaguely promised to lower grocery prices (Harris did the same)?

      Delete
    2. You kind of are.

      Delete
    3. I don't attribute voter's motivations to specific environmental policies. Saying that I kind of do is misrepresenting the position in order to make it easier to attack.

      Delete
    4. No one was talking about you. The topic was other people's choices.

      Delete
    5. 11:13, also I understand Haitians are eating our dogs and cats. They're eating our pets and geese.

      Delete
  2. "We deny that there could be any imaginable way a decent person could possibly have made that decision."

    Somerby has not yet mentioned a single reason why a decent person would have voted for Trump. Clinton and DEI are certainly not such a reason. Denying people who are minorities inclusion and equity is not a reason that any decent person would support, and yes, it does suggest deeply held racism to oppose such efforts.

    If Somerby is serious about his claim that Blue America elected Trump, he needs to finally explain the reasons why a decent person could have voted for a convicted felon, racist, lying piece of shit who caused hundreds of thousands of needless deaths through his mismanagement of covid and is now promising to deport legal citizens by eliminating birthrite citizenship (ignoring our constitution), and did I mention that he fomented an insurrection when he lost in 2020? This guy needs to be in jail, not president-elect, and Somerby needs to stop needling Democrats and either explain himself or move on. This series of essays is obscene because it insults the victims at a point where our country is facing deep peril because it is being run by a demented wannbe autocrat, surrounded by billionaires manipulating him for their own benefit. That places us all in danger.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Here are the reasons mentioned in this essay that a decent person might have voted for Trump, which you seem to have overlooked:

      Concerns Over Inflation and Groceries
      Immigration and Border Issues
      Perceived Weakness of Blue Candidates
      Cognitive Decline Concerns
      Blue America's Disconnection from Red America
      Perceived Arrogance and Name-Calling
      "Woke" Policies and Social Stances
      Lack of Clear Communication on Challenges
      Perception of Media Bias

      Delete
    2. These are not reasons to vote for Trump.

      Delete
    3. Does Trump have a plan to end arrogance and name calling?

      Delete
    4. Does a good decent person place ending woke ahead of the damage to our economy Trump will do with tariffs? Are good decent people OK with eliminating special ed funding by abolishing the Education Department? Has Somerby seriously listed any actual reasons or is this just his own complaint list?

      Delete
    5. "Does Trump have a plan to end arrogance and name calling?"

      Why would he if it was driving voters to his camp?

      Delete
    6. "Does a good decent person place ending woke ahead of the damage to our economy Trump will do with tariffs?"

      For many voters, their concerns may not be about 'ending' anything but about specific policies and cultural changes they find troubling. But yes, they may deprioritize or misunderstand the economic trade-offs that may occur when they cast their vote based on that reason. Or they may not interpret Trump's tariff policies as 'damaging'.

      Delete
    7. There are a lot of stupid voters out there. Somerby said it himself: Americans just aren’t that sharp. Heaven forbid someone besides Somerby says it though.

      Delete
    8. Demographics are no longer the best predictor of voting choices. It is now education. Educated people vote Democratic and those without college vote Republican. That may be due to the increasing complexity of society, as may be the anger felt by those on the right. Society is harder to navigate for those who are underprepared to deal with life's challenges. That isn't the fault of Democrats, and it doesn't make the left "arrogant". It makes the right inept, and that is not our fault but the result of their own choices, including anti-intellectualism and disdain for knowledge/expertise.

      Delete
    9. Educated people vote Democratic and those without college vote Republican.

      I read the other day that Florida came in #1 for states banning books and #48 on SAT scores recently. Dems have no chance of winning FL in the near future.

      Delete
    10. 11:41/11:47 - I'm wondering: Has anyone designated you as the one who decides what constitutes an "actual" reason to vote for Trump? Or can each voter decide for himself or herself what the actual reason might be?

      Delete
    11. Anonymouse 12:40pm, level of education is a demographic. The demographics of the Democratic Party is people with college degrees and minorities. You’ve never won the much of the middle and poor white class vote. Now Republicans may be making in roads into the minority population.

      Delete

    12. Or can each voter decide for himself or herself what the actual reason might be?

      Of course, it's a free country. When they figure it out will you let us all know?

      Delete
    13. Trump's DOJ secretly obtained phone and text message logs of 43 congressional staffers and 2 members of Congress
      The Justice Department's investigations into leaks of classified information were far broader than previously known, according to the department's internal watchdog.

      I also understand many of trump voters were mad at the deep state. eh?

      Delete
    14. Do they like Trump’s lies? His enriching of himself at the expense of the public trust? Do they like his unfulfilled promises? He promised recently not to touch the ACA, but now says he will. Do they like the bulk of tax breaks going to the top 1%, at the expense of the middle class? The GOP are all over the media talking about cutting SS and Medicare. That all happened or is happening. How can you get people to understand that truth?

      Delete
    15. Cecelia, minorities are voting Repub so being a minority no longer predicts their vote or party.

      Delete
    16. It is untrue that dems have never won white poor or working class votes.

      Delete
    17. Anonymouse 6:00pm, I didn’t say that.

      Delete
    18. You said: “ You’ve never won the much of the middle and poor white class vote. ”

      Delete
    19. Perceived Arrogance and Name-Calling?

      For most "decent" people, that was a reason to vote for someone other than Trump. He's the national distributor of arrogance and name-calling.

      Delete
    20. 11;55,
      Exactly. Trump isn't in the business of solving the problems Republican voters perceive they have.
      It's why he's leaving the borders wide-open, like he did last time. His real constituents, corporate elites, like the cheap labor that pads their bottom lines.
      Trump's outright disdain for Republican voters (remember, he called them "losers") continues to be the best thing about him.

      Delete
  3. Bob, in 74 years, Democratic presidential candidates (Johnson, Carter, and Clinton) have won the white vote three times. Why in the world are you puzzled by what is happening at the border?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 킹카지노 지노 먹튀December 11, 2024 at 12:27 PM

      Nice information, so unique and informative. Thanks for sharing.

      Delete
  4. People have stopped watching cable except for Fox. Somerby seems unaware of that.

    ReplyDelete
  5. What does “earned our way out” mean?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We've engaged in behaviors (e.g., promiscuously calling Others racists and sexists, among other behaviors) that have led to our inability to win elections, even against a demented con-man.

      Delete
    2. The Democrats win plenty of elections. Losing an election isn’t the end of all future elections.

      Delete
    3. I'm not defending it, I'm just telling you what "earned our way out" means. It means we've engaged in behaviors that have led some who might have voted Dem to vote Republican instead.

      Delete
    4. Some Dems love to scorn, and the scorned then tend to vote Republican.

      Delete
    5. In that way we earn our way out of power.

      Delete
    6. Of course, the “scorned” who vote Republican (whatever that means) get the shaft from Republicans when they’re in power, (unless they’re wealthy), but they just don’t seem to know or care. Democrats need to do a better job hammering this point home.

      I think by the way that it’s a made up fantasy that Democrats “scorn” the voters. We do scorn the GOP, and rightly so.

      Delete
    7. We “earn our way out of power.”
      Is that what happens when Republicans lose elections? There are always wins and losses, especially in a closely divided country.

      Delete
    8. Of course the scorned get shafted. They should be voting Dem. But the sneering contempt of one who calls them a racist-sexist may tend to push them into voting against their own interests.

      Delete
    9. I see an awful lot of sneering contempt from Republicans directed at liberals and Democrats, in prominent right wing media outlets. I really don’t see much of that directed towards right wingers in the mainstream media.

      Delete
    10. Wouldn't it be easier and better for them if they just stopped being racist and sexist? I know habits are hard to break, but damn.

      Delete
    11. Sneering contempt works for Republicans; it doesn't work for Dems. That's because there are more conservatives than liberals. So Republicans want to consolidate their base by mass scorning of the Other; but if we consolidate our base by mass scorning of the Other, we lose. Duh.

      Delete
    12. Look at the way Somerby joins the right in demonizing the left.

      Delete
    13. I think Somerby tries pretty hard NOT to demonize people, and that's why he tends to say that they're good and decent.

      Delete
    14. That’s funny, 7pm. I can quote Somerby demonizing liberals. Somehow, his famous pity only extends to lying right wingers.

      Delete
    15. Anonymouse 8:47pm, that’s why you excoriate Bob for lambasting Fox News?

      Delete
    16. He isn't here to lambaste Fox. He is here to revile liberals and so-called blue America.

      Delete

  6. "Why would anyone vote for Trump?"

    Simple. Because everyone wants to make America great again. And because everyone hates slimy Democrats.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Many may be turned of by what they perceive as moral condescension and bad-faith intolerance of dissent by the left.

      Delete
    2. That must be why Biden and Harris campaigned on a bipartisan outreach, with Harris accepting endorsements and campaigning with Republicans, because the Democrats hate the “others” just so much. Contrast with Trump, who declared his political opponents “vermin.”

      I guess if you look at the campaigns of Tester in Montana and Sherrod Brown in Ohio you won’t find a scintilla of condescension there. Your theory of Democrats is just disconnected from reality.

      Delete
    3. The problem with the thesis that voters wanted to make America great again, is that Trump didn't do that during his first term. Then you have to examine what is meant by that phrase. It turns out it is all about race and sex, not about any actions Trump took in his first term. Making America great means getting rid of minorities and putting women back in second-class citizenship. And that is racist and sexist, whether Somerby will admit it or not.

      Democrats aren't slimy or condescending. We are supportive of minorities, equity and social justice. That is what Republicans find so disgusting. You cannot be that way and still claim to be good decent people, because racism and sexism are not good or decent. If Republicans are going to ally with white supremacists, that label is going to attach to them too, and it is not arrogant or condescending to point that out. It is the truth.

      Getting rid of woke and DEI means rolling back civil rights. Democrats don't support that but Republicans do. These terms (woke, DEI) have been made into negatives by Republican propaganda. There is nothing inherently wrong with them except that they promote equality and inclusion of minorities, immigrants, those with disabilities, and so on, all people the right would like to exclude. Democrats are not going to apologize or go along with the roll back of civil rights advances. Somerby needs to stop pushing that, because it is a Republican talking point and anathema to Democrats.

      Somerby says, in essence, if we Democrats would just stop being so in-your-face about civil rights, we would win more elections. Maybe we would attract all those white male supremacists and incel bros, but at what cost? Our integrity, our soul, and the hopes/dreams of those who take the promise of democracy seriously. Somerby has sold out to Republican demands, most likely because he himself is racist/sexist, but we aren't going to join him in knocking the most important planks in our party. And no, we didn't make Trump who he is, we don't find him a viable alternative, even if we are less than progressive, and we can see how terrible he is. The right seems to be blinded by its own vices, and that does not make them good decent people with valid reasons for voting for cretins and criminals.

      Delete
    4. 12:30 Then what is the plan to consistently win elections and mandates?

      Delete
    5. Well, 12:37, we’ve seen that serial lying, grifting, insults, and unrelenting propaganda aimed at low information voters works for the Republicans. It’s despicable, of course, because the GOP has practiced a bait and switch on their voters since at least 1968, so the working class always gets stiffed by them. It’s tough to fight against this plus willful ignorance of the electorate. I wouldn’t necessarily recommend that Democrats adopt this approach, but it does complicate the path for a party that wants to appeal to truth and genuine concern for good governance.

      Delete
    6. Shorter 1:05 - There is no plan. So let's just keep on calling them racists and sexists, and see if that works out next time.

      Delete
    7. I didn’t hear a single Democratic candidate call anyone racist or sexist. Did you hear Harris say that? That is, while she was courting Republican votes? You’re a wrong, broken record, 1:33. It’s a stupid take.

      Delete
    8. 2:56. No, it's not politicians, it's you and your ilk. You call people racists and sexists every single day in comments here. You just can't help yourself.

      Delete
    9. So anonymous commenters at an obscure blog outweigh actual candidates and official policy and determine the outcomes of elections? That sounds insane.

      Delete
    10. No, there are plenty of Dems all over the country who rabidly call the Others racists and sexists. They are well-represented here, but they exist everywhere.

      Delete
    11. You mean people walk around just calling these others racists and sexists for no damn reason? How come I never see that/

      Delete
    12. Our politics has become so polarized these days that all of us, across the political spectrum, seem so quick to assume the worst in others unless they agree with us on every single issue. We start thinking that the only way to win is to scold and shame and out yell the other side. And after a while, regular folks just tune out, or don’t bother to vote at all.

      That approach may work for the politicians who just want attention and thrive on division. But it won’t work for us.

      -- At least, that's what Barack Obama thinks.

      Delete
    13. Obama is right, plus the Haitians are eating the cats and dogs.

      Delete
    14. BTW, that sentiment seems to fit the facts. Three million people who voted in 2020 didn't vote in 2024. So, regular folks "tuned out" and "didn't bother to vote."

      Delete
    15. Also might have something to do with ever more devious voter suppression laws republicans enacted between 2020 and 2024. Just spit balling here.

      Delete
  7. "This time, the highly unusual Republican candidate actually won the nationwide popular vote! "

    What is different this time, compared to the others Somerby lists? It is that the Democratic candidate was both black and female. It is also that the original candidate was pushed off the ticket (because of age, even after winning the primaries at that same age), which may have upset some Dem voters and confused others. Yet Somerby will not acknowledge that the race and sex of the candidate may have affected those vote totals. He seems to think that a steadily deteriorating Trump, showing more and more signs of dementia, was just so much more convincing than Harris, who largely said the same things as everyone before her. When all else is held constant and only race and sex vary, one must conclude that those characteristics were causal of the difference in results. Trump didn't suddenly become less of an outrage to thinking people. JD Vance doesn't have more gravitas than Pence. It is a farce to deny that Harris's race and sex mattered, especially when Somerby himself bent over backwards manufacturing reasons to diss her.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Easier to call names than address arguments.

      Delete
    2. Anonymouse 12:20pm, four years after the 2020 election you’re still issuing the very same insults and whines to Somerby that you did when he was fretting over Biden’s age in the Democratic Presidential Primary.

      Delete
    3. Somerby is issuing the same whines and insults himself.

      Delete
  8. IMO Dems did earn their way out over the last 90 years — by succeeding. They enacted just about every reasonable measure that was good for the country: Social programs, regulations, equal rights for blacks, gays, etc. Their success removed most of the positive reasons to vote for Dems. It’s harder and harder to find new government programs that will do more good than harm. E.g., Harris proposed new programs, but nobody cared.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Please explain what "earn their way out" means. Somerby keeps using that term but has never explained it. I think Republicans have earned their way out of the category of "good decent people" by their attitudes toward Trump and his wrongdoing. What does Somerby think Democrats have earned their way out of?

      Here is the main program I think Harris was suggesting that would help our country: long term care as part of Medicare. We all have grandparents who are elderly. Unless there is some help with their care, that will fall on young families, making it harder for them to also send their kids to college and buy houses. The prosperity of all families rests on the ability to care for old people, who are a very large segment of our population, getting older and living longer due to advances in health care. Harris tried to deal with that reality and Trump did not. It would have been an important expansion of social help for those in the middle and working classes.

      A second program that she proposed was help for those trying to buy starter homes. That would address the housing crisis by expanding construction of housing (by increasing the market for new homes). That was a good idea and Trump has nothing like it.

      A lot of us cared about those programs, just not the yahoos on the right, who are more interested in keeping women from having reproductive health care to keep them alive (Texas is refusing to report how many women have died because of its strict policies).

      You may not have cared about this, David, but that doesn't mean no one else did.

      Delete
    2. Remember how Roe was settled law? And how Republicans would never touch SS and Medicare? Joke’s on the libs, I guess.

      Delete
    3. Remember when Dickhead in Cal insisted Trump had nothing to do with Project 2025 and called Harris a liar for claiming the opposite. I remember.

      Delete
    4. D in C - I think the points you make are quite valid. Dems can win if Trump's policies lead to the economy getting screwed up - which is a distinct possibility. To add to it, if there is some scandal, or his craziness sinks in more, and dems can come up with a plausible candidate, someone with real political skills like B. Clinton.

      Delete
    5. @12:37 - I hope you can see the fundamental difference between LBJ's Civil Rights Law and the government paying certain retirees or certain homebuyers. The programs you mention are merely giving money to two particular groups.

      Furthermore, the government doesn't even have the money to give. On the contrary they're running an unsustainable deficit

      Delete
    6. Trump imposed tariffs on imports from China, China retaliated, and farmers here cried foul. Trump then took my tax dollars and sent them to the farmers.

      Go fuck yourself, Dickhead.

      Delete
    7. One thing they have in common, Dickhead in Cal, is that republicans opposed them equally. Still chipping away at voting rights as we speak. Go fuck yourself.

      Delete
    8. @2:25 my memory is that LBJ’s Civil Rights Act got more support from Reps than Dems on Congress.

      Delete
    9. You must mean all the reps who became dems supported it, Dickhead? And all the Dems who became Reps opposed. See (Southern Strategy, Nixon) for details, Dickhead.

      Delete
    10. Original House version:[1]

      Democratic Party: 152–96 (61–39%)
      Republican Party: 138–34 (80–20%)
      Cloture in the Senate:[38]

      Democratic Party: 44–23 (66–34%)
      Republican Party: 27–6 (82–18%)
      Senate version:[2]

      Democratic Party: 46–21 (69–31%)
      Republican Party: 27–6 (82–18%)
      Senate version, voted on by the House:[3]

      Democratic Party: 153–91 (63–37%)
      Republican Party: 136–35 (80–20%)

      Nope, you're still wrong, Dickhead.

      Delete
    11. You appear to be confirming that the civil rights. act got more support from Reps on a percentage basis.

      In any event the claim that Reps opposed that act are wildly wrong.

      Delete
    12. You pull the same shit all the time, Dickhead. Progressives supported LBJ, racist southern conservatives opposed the civil rights legislation. They still do to this day. Those are the base of the current rendition of your fucking party. Stop pulling your stupid shit. Next you'll brag that Abraham Lincoln was a Republican, right, dickhead?

      Delete
    13. Shall we just kill all the people who are too old and sick to work? Hitler did that. Money is meant to be accumulated by the wealthy, not used to help others.

      Delete
    14. Democrats kill the ones who are too young and inconvenient. 65 million and counting. Hitler did that.

      Delete
    15. @7:51, you don’t know what you are talkng about

      Delete
    16. "Furthermore, the government doesn't even have the money to give. On the contrary they're running an unsustainable deficit"

      David in Cal,
      I get that the USA is a deadbeat nation, that can't even afford to pay its own bills. But then, why do people want to give me shit when i don't stand and respect its flag when they play the National Anthem?

      Delete
  9. Turns out people don't like to be lectured to by Democrats, whom they regard as their moral inferiors driven by hate for their white race, male sex, normal families, heterosexual inclination, and intact genitalia.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymouse 2:40pm, they got ya back. Voted you out.

      Delete
    2. This is what people sound like when they only care about “winning”, even when all they’ve won is a turd like Trump. No one moral would vote for Trump.

      Delete
    3. Republican voters already accepted Trump keeping the borders open to provide cheap labor to his real constituents, corporate elites.
      So, let's take the borders off the table as one reason they voted for Trump.

      Delete
  10. 2:28 above is Exhibit A why trying to talk to maggots is an impossible task.

    ReplyDelete
  11. In case anyone is interested, looks like FBI Director Wray has been purged. Kind of reminds me of Sadam Hussein taking power.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Emulating Hussein is a good start?

      Delete
    2. Yet another of Trump's "best people" turns out to be a no-good, lazy turncoat. Funny how often that happens.

      Delete
    3. The likelihood that the clown Trump wants to replace him will get through is low. His rhetoric about his plans for the agency will be difficult for moderate Republicans to swallow.

      Delete
  12. Your website is really awesome. The level of detail on your blog is impressive.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I shared your website on my social media accounts!

    ReplyDelete
  14. You did a fantastic job researching this subject!

    ReplyDelete
  15. I appreciate all the fantastic stuff and the time you put into this.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Hello. fantastic work. I didn't anticipate this. This is an amazing tale. Thanks!

    ReplyDelete
  17. Donald Trump's electoral success from 2016 to 2024 is partly the fault of the Democratic Party, including their failure to understand Trump voters and acknowledge their own role in his rise. Their focus on issues like racism, immigration, and "wokeness" alienated some voters, while ignoring concerns about the border, rising grocery prices, and Joe Biden's potential cognitive decline bolstered Trump's appeal. Democrats need to confront their own shortcomings and tribal denial if they want to avoid further political disasters.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's ok, we'll just watch the billionaire boy's club fix everything.

      Delete
    2. The only people who aren't responsible for Trump becoming President are the people who voted fir him.
      I am not a crank. I'm a member of the mainstream media.

      Delete