That reminds me of an old joke.
A traitor, a rapist and a convicted felon walk into the bar, and the bartender says, “Good Evening, Mr. Trump!”
What’s funny about that is that trump doesn’t drink. Which is odd, because he acts like he’s pickled half the time.
“Trump isn’t losing because Kamala Harris is being hyped by the press and fluffed up to kingdom come. He isn’t losing because the press is being unfair to him. He’s losing because he’s a weak, unpopular, undisciplined candidate running at the head of a weak, minority electoral coalition. That’s the truth, whether anyone wants to hear it or not,” Wright concluded.
Damn. The National Review is not pulling its punches on Trump.
Yes they are. They forgot to call him a rapist, felon, traitor, and wanna-be dictator.
Yeah, but they’re also busy trashing Kamala too.
“Is Harris an ideal candidate? Is she an incredibly talented orator? Is she deft on her feet and nimble in debate? Is she a famous wonk? Does she have a long track record of competence at the state and federal level? Has she been scrutinized by a tough no-nonsense press and come out stronger on the other side?” wrote Wright. “No, of course not — but she’s an alternative to Trump/Biden, and that’s probably going to be enough.”
I’ll just leave this here
Platform wise some of them are republican as we know them now even if their circles are blue. I think Clinton and Carter are what we’d consider current democrats
The “Lost popular vote” angle is only going to get worse over time. As the Senate/EC gets more and more comically lopsided in popular representation and climate change eats into the bigger Gulf Coast states, you’re going to see people winning the White House with 10-15M popular vote deficits in the next few decades.
California alone constitutes more than 12% of the total population but less than 10% of the EC.
Carter was pre-Reagan. This was before the neoliberals took over the Democratic Party.
Clinton mostly accepted Republican framing of the economy, that taxes on the rich need to be low for… Reasons.
The main argument of the neoliberals is that while conservatives are “right” about a bunch of their policies and shit, they’re just bad at running everything.
Carter was before that shit. Back when we said that conservative policy was heartless and evil.
Some in the Democratic Party are coming back to this simple idea.
“Presidential Circles of Suck”
Presidents that sucked. So how did Carter suck? Losing his second term means he sucks? No.
So again, how does Carter suck?
"Trump’s weakness only remained hidden for much of this year because…
Only for “much of this year”? Are you kidding me?
His many, many flaws were/are invisible to his selectively blind cult members. Those people were, however, loud and obnoxious enough to force their opinion on the weak Republican Party, and the party was too ineffectual to come up with an alternative. Boo fucking hoo.
His flaws aren’t invisible to his cult members, they’re why they follow him in the first place.
If He can a be racist, bigoted piece of shit that can do no wrong then they can be racist, bigoted pieces of shit that can do no wrong.
His sexism justifies their sexism. His constant grifting justifies their constant grifting.
But above all else, in my humble opinion, is that he’s an absolute fucking moron that likes to think he’s the smartest person in the room. And when you’re an absolute fucking moron that doesn’t understand how pronouns work or why masks were important or anything like that, well that’s okay because actually you know better because you’re smart, you’re the smartest guy in the room, you know better than all those experts, just like Trump.
The fact that the party was basically forced to run him again just tells me that the republicans are in big trouble after Trump leaves. Their voter base is declining and they don’t have another populist to take his place.
So their options after this are either to try and get another populist and push trash candidates over the line, which won’t work. Or they can do the right thing and give up on their social positions against minorities and abortion. The outcome of the first option is they lose a lot of elections, the outcome of the second option of changing positions is to split the party. I just don’t know how they move forward when Trump loses.
Their voter base is declining
This has been true for literally decades and it hasn’t stopped them yet. When you can gerrymander, suppress voters, take advantage of the Electoral College, and pack the Supreme Court with cronies, you don’t really care about demographics.
Well sure, but there is a critical point at which they can’t use those to compensate anymore and that point is already passed them I think. That’s why you’re seeing them try to steal elections, they know there is no legitimate way to win them now. So unless democrats do some really stupid things, they may not have the population to gain the minority of votes they need to keep power.
Bad candidate, bad businessman, bad father, bad husband … it’s almost impressive how much he sucks.
this is the most confusing thing to me, why are so many people still voting for him?
i swear the RNC could run a fucking rock they found on the road as a candidate and it would get 40% of the votes.
Brainwashed is all I can say. I run in some circles with conservative folks, and you can point out every reason why trump is a shit show, and you’re still gonna get "well uh bengazi er that pizza place uh Hunter Biden’s laptop. They hear what they want to hear, they don’t dig for the truth, and they buy any of the shit fox news shovels in their mouth.
When reading your list my mind went to ‘bad cellmate’ and I suddenly realized that if Trump were ever convicted, he would have a cell mate. Can you imagine the sheer horror at finding out you would be spending years locked in a cage with Trump?
Trump has been convicted, 34 times, actually. Will he go to prison is the question. If he does, I doubt he’d have a cellmate. He’ll probably be in a Four Seasons version of prison.
