Progressives/leftoids never want to take responsibility for a lose or a fuck up.
United States Trump v Kamala Harris 2024
- Thread starter Causeimboredrightnow
- Start date
- Status
Progressives/leftoids never want to take responsibility for a lose or a fuck up.
What's the sitch?
Well-known member
The head space of a lot of dems I think is as follows, "were right, we have justice, good plans, good people, the power of democracy tm and history on our side". So how did we lose, well it wasn't us, so who cheated/tipped the balance against us? If even one media is neutral or supports trump, in their mind that translate to most or all. So they have decided on that.
Never mind that despite their crying of why they don't have their own Joe Rogan and such, is because everyone is where they left them on their march to go even more left. Just you watch, if this keeps up and Trump doesn't push back, were gonna have them wanting cat ladies to get a vote for each of their cats. WHAT ARE YOU? AN ANIMALPHOBE!?
Never mind that despite their crying of why they don't have their own Joe Rogan and such, is because everyone is where they left them on their march to go even more left. Just you watch, if this keeps up and Trump doesn't push back, were gonna have them wanting cat ladies to get a vote for each of their cats. WHAT ARE YOU? AN ANIMALPHOBE!?
they received the patch notes for update 2024.11.12. they have learned how to shift with the narrative without thinking regardless of any position they have previously held. they don't have principals. they will say or do anything if they believe it will give them power. that is why they are dangerous and should not be allowed to have it.
Terthna
Professional Lurker
They didn't have to convince themselves; that's an argument they've frequently fallen back on whenever someone tries to point out to them that they're not underdogs fighting "the man", but rather "the man" themselves trying to suppress any and all resistance. That there are no left-aligned organizations. Not only does it shut down criticisms, it lets them feel way more important and powerful than they actually are; like heroes fighting the good fight on their own initiative, and not useful idiots acting on the orders of their thought leaders.
I am a tad bit concerned on what is the Don's definition of anti-Semitism. If it is like the general "all the Jews control the media" or defacing a monument of a person just because he was a practitioner of Judaism, but if it goes in the direction of classifying anti-semitism criticism of AIPAC and similar institutions or the fact that Israel constantly gets freebies or that as a foreign state Israel gets a lot of influence on the US Congress well.
On another topic, I am glad about the Kennedy nomitation!
While a lot of folks are giving you more generic answers, I think I might be able to shed light on how they justify this more specifically.
Firstly, Leftists inherently believe that certain ideas are memetic viruses, and all that entails. Thus, any media that even allows those ideas to be aired is, in fact, aiding and abetting those ideas no matter how much that media otherwise criticizes them because by the mere act of relaying those ideas, those ideas infect and spread. They ESPECIALLY see anything they label as "fascist" as being in this category, as one of the dominate underlying understandings of the rise of Fascism in the early mid-20th century is that it rose as a memetic virus in Italy and Germany driving otherwise normal/reasonable people "insane". This, by the by, is why they are so focused on the censorship of their opposition, they see it as quarantining bad ideas and also why they cancel people who begin to display them.
Anyway this underlying idea is why they see the media as being pro-Trump, what the media should have done, according to their understanding, is completely ignore Trump, refuse to air any of his own speech or speech by anyone on the Right. The only messaging allowed, if they were truly anti-Trump/the Right, would be by people opposed to the Right and/or people who are "immunized" against the memetic virus and can properly interpret it for the masses (IE people who can "read between the lines" or "decrypt the dogwhistles", etc.), who otherwise are not immunized from right wing speech and thus risk infection by it.
Buba
A total creep
Man, that's DEEP!
Trump's lead has shrunk to roughly 3 million votes in the popular and for some damn reason California is still not done counting can they hurry the hell up? I just want to know so I can stop looking for updates every few hours.
Buba
A total creep
The vote forging sweatshop is understaffed?
Last edited:
Typhonis
Well-known member
There's no point at this point. Kamala has conceded . There are no legal motions for presidential recounts.
Though we can now say, with certainty, France is better than California.
You partially underestimate how far the Dems may go so they can have one more thing to complain about or take for advantage the popular mandate is important you may not need it in this country to be the President but having it gives you the option to say you have a majority of the people backing your action and not having means having your enemies complain about how dictatorial your actions are over 'them', 'the majority' 'we the people'
We should still be watching California vote counting religiously for any possible foul play, just because we won doesn't mean we should half ass the aftermath that isn't a valid excuse.
Last edited:
California needs to be broken up into several new states, or have some neighbors expand their jurisdiction via referendum the same way the Greater Idaho movement is in Oregon and parts of northern Cali.
Same should probably be done for New York too.
Then we add in Puerto Rico and Guam, maybe American Samoa and the Marshall Islands too if they want, and well, a more representative America can be created.
Statehood for them also opens up new avenues of investment for the areas around them, breaks up the old power blocks, and helps reassert American power and presence in the Pacific by grating Statehood to several key territories we already have in the area.
Same should probably be done for New York too.
Then we add in Puerto Rico and Guam, maybe American Samoa and the Marshall Islands too if they want, and well, a more representative America can be created.
Statehood for them also opens up new avenues of investment for the areas around them, breaks up the old power blocks, and helps reassert American power and presence in the Pacific by grating Statehood to several key territories we already have in the area.
Vyor
My influence grows!
The lead was always going to shrink by about that much.
But considering Trump has hit 76 million votes, he's already done better in CA than I expected him to.
Basically all the coastal counties could be one state and everyone in the inland counties their own state.
Thay would make everyone over there happy. 80% of the people live in those coastal counties and they're blue as fuck. Pretty much the rest of tbe state except one county, went red this election.
Trump is the first GOP Presidential nominee to get 76 million votes. Guess Eisenhower, Nixon, Reagan are jealous LOL.
Lincoln is even more jealous. Trump got over FORTY TIMES the number of votes Abraham Lincoln got in 1860... And Lincoln was the OG Republican President!
Even in the 1864 election Trump's outperformed Lincoln in the popular vote over thirty four times over. Pretty clear that a Peacetime President beats out a Wartime one.
Chase Oliver of the Losertarians though... Outperformed by John Breckenridge and Stephen Douglas... Sad. Guess their National Divorce idea isn't working out as intended.
. . . Why would they be? Eisenhower had 35.5 million in his largest election, out of a population of 164 million, meaning he got 21.6% of Americans voting for him and 57.4% of the popular vote cast. Nixon in his biggest victory got ~41 million out of a population of 205 million, so 20% of the population and 60.7% of the total votes cast. Reagan got 54.5 million out of a population of 233 million, so 23% of the population and 58.8% of votes cast.
Meanwhile Trump's 76 million is out of a population of 342 million, so 22% of the population and 50.1% of votes cast.
In other words, Trump got about the same percent of the population voting for him as other popular Republican presidents, with Reagan pulling the largest percentage wise while Nixon managed the largest percent of votes cast, which Trump lags behind considerably compared to the others.
Every Republican President has generally gotten more votes in total than the prior winner... since, yanno, the population of the US has been consistently going up. This might change in the future but for all the cited Presidents it's been the trend.
------------------
Edit: Before folks jump to conclusions about how this is such a low percentage of the population, remember that the total population includes children, which account for anywhere from a quarter to a third of the population depending on the year (lower percentage as we get more modern), as well as those who have lost the right to vote, illegal and legal immigrants, those that choose not to vote, etc.
Last edited:
Arch Dornan
Oh, lovely. They've sent me a mo-ron.
Guess who's back?
stephen the barbarian
Well-known member
i think it was a joke. but ty for crunching the numbers anyways.
- Status