*illegal immigrants, namely those who don’t want to assimilate. Again, see Europe
One reason Harris lost - angry anti-male rhetoric
Non-Running
-
42
-
Mikeh33 wrote:
“If we don't get this election right, your wife, your daughter, your mother, we as women will become collateral damage to your rage.”
“So fellows, before you cast your votes, ask yourselves, what side of history do you want to be on?”
“…we are more than just baby-making vessels.”
Rhetoric like this appeals to narrow group of young single women. Everyone else - especially men - regard it as bizarre, reflecting a hatred of any man that doesn’t think like Mrs. Obama.
The Democrat strategy seemed to be to berate and hector people, especially men, into voting for them. What madness made them think it would work? What voter wants to be lectured like this?
A small number of single women agree that The Handmaid’s Tale “is getting closer every day!” To the rest of the country that is transparent nonsense. Mrs. Obama’s speech alone probably cost Harris votes.
Ah, like the time she said that all you gott'a do is grab a guy by the balls to have your way with them?
33 -
Gcgxfxzd wrote:
Gcgxfxzd wrote:
I think you are missing the point of this thread. The OP simply said that Democrats should have toned down the anti male rhetoric or better yet, not do that at all, in order to win.
He is questioning the strategy.
The result is that she lost. That’s a fact.
Did she get more votes than lost votes by attacking men is the question that the OP is posing.
If she gained more votes, then it was the right strategy (so she did as good as she could). If she lost more votes than it was a mistake.
She got 90% of the black women vote it seems, so that’s good.
The problem is that only 13.6%, so black women only represent 7% of the population. I don’t know what percentage of them actually go vote.
…also what some men may have heard is:
Hey, we all think that you men are all POS. …and by the way, we were/are thinking of sending you to war so we don’t have to deal with you for a little while
…and actually, not only are all men POS, but in addition, 55% of them are actual garbage.
Off to war you go…
25 -
Sub-9:00 guy wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
It doesn't compare with the anti-female sentiment that motivates a lot of American males and especially Trumpers.
It’s kind of ironic that three generations of women in my own family voted for Trump then I guess while I did not?
Americans don’t want to be Europe with its silly little cups of coffee and high tax welfare state and overrun by immigrants. That’s precisely not what America is, and I would invite anyone who wants that to move to Europe. I’m in Iceland right now as I write this actually. Great place, nice collective mindset overall, gas is expensive. But I wouldn’t want to live here. But it’s wide open for the “intellectual caste” to retire to.
People weren’t accepting the media’s carefully curated version of who Kamala is and what she represents. The media were complicit in the coup while others on here said it was no coup at all, Biden went willingly. Lol. Jill had something to say about that, and now, as per usual, the egg is on the face of the press and the Hollywood elite.
People voted overwhelmingly in favor of a strong border, defend and fund the police, low taxation, free speech without a gatekeeper, and, perhaps, a little more diplomacy on the global war front. I don’t know why liberals on here can’t do a little introspection today instead of just calling their fellow Americans stupid. This lack of introspection is why we are here in the first place. I tried to warn all of you, even as I am somewhat surprised by Trump’s win, especially the magnitude of it.
You aren't speaking for Americans. Those who didn't vote for Trump - and they make up half the country - don't share your views or those of the women you are related to about what matters in America or they, too, would have voted Trump. But whatever you say your family were voting for they were also voting for a moral and criminal degenerate who has been described by America's top military as the greatest danger your country has faced. But narrow self-interest can make one oblivious to the bigger picture.
This post was edited 8 minutes after it was posted.28 -
Riptide00 wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
Yet you're the one who can't stop talking about him. But the rise of a fascist dictator in a former democracy gets attention all around the world. I don't think I'm alone in that.
He's still living in your cranium post after post, keep reaffirming what I posted;)
So why are you here?
17 -
bah. wrote:
stay angry wrote:
What are you supposed to say if a huge segment of the nation is voting to take away your rights? Are you mad they didn't say pretty pretty please with a cherry on top? I'm so tired of scared angry idiots running the show here.
Not talk about abortion so much. It’s a red herring in American politics.
A right to conveniently terminate pregnancies later or without travel just doesn’t have the jingle to carry an election through.
So the reversal of the rights in Roe v Wade is just a "red herring". Only a male without a brain could suggest that.
16 -
Gcgxfxzd wrote:
You are gross wrote:
Yeah, Trump supporters definitely aren’t bigots.
I think you are missing the point of this thread. The OP simply said that Democrats should have toned down the anti male rhetoric or better yet, not do that at all, in order to win.
He is questioning the strategy.
The result is that she lost. That’s a fact.
Did she get more votes than lost votes by attacking men is the question that the OP is posing.
If she gained more votes, then it was the right strategy (so she did as good as she could). If she lost more votes than it was a mistake.
She got 90% of the black women vote it seems, so that’s good.
The problem is that only 13.6%, so black women only represent 7% of the population. I don’t know what percentage of them actually go vote.
Very thoughtful post, thank you. Yes, I was talking strategy. I am certainly no leftist, and I find Mrs. Obama’s rhetoric to be repellent, but I will not ever vote for Trump either. I guess I am just a non-voter when it comes to President.
The left is going to have to resolve a very fundamental contradiction in its rhetoric. If women are to be strong and fearless and leaders, you can’t then blame men for their problems. You can’t suggest that men are in control of the fate of women.
21 -
more like fragile male egos...but trump in the WH isn't going to get you any more dates.
15 -
GORP wrote:
Mikeh33 wrote:
“If we don't get this election right, your wife, your daughter, your mother, we as women will become collateral damage to your rage.”
“So fellows, before you cast your votes, ask yourselves, what side of history do you want to be on?”
“…we are more than just baby-making vessels.”
Rhetoric like this appeals to narrow group of young single women. Everyone else - especially men - regard it as bizarre, reflecting a hatred of any man that doesn’t think like Mrs. Obama.
The Democrat strategy seemed to be to berate and hector people, especially men, into voting for them. What madness made them think it would work? What voter wants to be lectured like this?
A small number of single women agree that The Handmaid’s Tale “is getting closer every day!” To the rest of the country that is transparent nonsense. Mrs. Obama’s speech alone probably cost Harris votes.
Ah, like the time she said that all you gott'a do is grab a guy by the balls to have your way with them?
What’s the point of your post? “Trump is even worse so don’t you dare complain about Kamala!” Elections don’t work that way.
You think my original post is intended to defend Trump? I think I’ve made clear my views of Trump. My point is that Kamala’s rhetoric, and that of her primary supporters, repels voters they need. I would never vote for Kamala, and I won’t vote for Trump, but it does America no good to have a political movement sporting such anti-man rhetoric.
42 -
Mikeh33 wrote:
Gcgxfxzd wrote:
I think you are missing the point of this thread. The OP simply said that Democrats should have toned down the anti male rhetoric or better yet, not do that at all, in order to win.
He is questioning the strategy.
The result is that she lost. That’s a fact.
Did she get more votes than lost votes by attacking men is the question that the OP is posing.
If she gained more votes, then it was the right strategy (so she did as good as she could). If she lost more votes than it was a mistake.
She got 90% of the black women vote it seems, so that’s good.
The problem is that only 13.6%, so black women only represent 7% of the population. I don’t know what percentage of them actually go vote.
Very thoughtful post, thank you. Yes, I was talking strategy. I am certainly no leftist, and I find Mrs. Obama’s rhetoric to be repellent, but I will not ever vote for Trump either. I guess I am just a non-voter when it comes to President.
The left is going to have to resolve a very fundamental contradiction in its rhetoric. If women are to be strong and fearless and leaders, you can’t then blame men for their problems. You can’t suggest that men are in control of the fate of women.
Actually Harris’ loss because of “angry anti-male rhetoric”, although sounds plausible, is more narrative than fact.
Compared to 2020, the group that inverted and helped Trump the most was Latino men (and also women but without inversion).
White men voted 23 percentage points more for Trump in 2024, same as in 2020, and *less* than the 31 points in 2016.
Men as a whole voted 13 points more for Trump in 2024 compared to +11 in 2016 (and +8 in 2020) but women *dropped* from +13 Clinton (+15 Biden in 2020) to just +8 in 2024, so counterintuitive as it might be, women dropped support for Harris much more than men fell behind Trump, which is hard to explain as being largely because of “angry anti-male rhetoric” (but it could be “one reason” of course).
32 -
Sub-9:00 guy wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
It doesn't compare with the anti-female sentiment that motivates a lot of American males and especially Trumpers.
It’s kind of ironic that three generations of women in my own family voted for Trump then I guess while I did not?
Americans don’t want to be Europe with its silly little cups of coffee and high tax welfare state and overrun by immigrants. That’s precisely not what America is, and I would invite anyone who wants that to move to Europe. I’m in Iceland right now as I write this actually. Great place, nice collective mindset overall, gas is expensive. But I wouldn’t want to live here. But it’s wide open for the “intellectual caste” to retire to.
People weren’t accepting the media’s carefully curated version of who Kamala is and what she represents. The media were complicit in the coup while others on here said it was no coup at all, Biden went willingly. Lol. Jill had something to say about that, and now, as per usual, the egg is on the face of the press and the Hollywood elite.
People voted overwhelmingly in favor of a strong border, defend and fund the police, low taxation, free speech without a gatekeeper, and, perhaps, a little more diplomacy on the global war front. I don’t know why liberals on here can’t do a little introspection today instead of just calling their fellow Americans stupid. This lack of introspection is why we are here in the first place. I tried to warn all of you, even as I am somewhat surprised by Trump’s win, especially the magnitude of it.
You have to move to the voters to a degree but the point of elections is to have a choice. Liberals are not wrong for offering different policies and opinions. They have been rejected in favor of import tariffs and cuts in government spending.
22 -
This quoted post has been removed.
The appalling thing about you is that you aren't joking.
03 -
bah. wrote:
Mikeh33 wrote:
Very thoughtful post, thank you. Yes, I was talking strategy. I am certainly no leftist, and I find Mrs. Obama’s rhetoric to be repellent, but I will not ever vote for Trump either. I guess I am just a non-voter when it comes to President.
The left is going to have to resolve a very fundamental contradiction in its rhetoric. If women are to be strong and fearless and leaders, you can’t then blame men for their problems. You can’t suggest that men are in control of the fate of women.
Actually Harris’ loss because of “angry anti-male rhetoric”, although sounds plausible, is more narrative than fact.
Compared to 2020, the group that inverted and helped Trump the most was Latino men (and also women but without inversion).
White men voted 23 percentage points more for Trump in 2024, same as in 2020, and *less* than the 31 points in 2016.
Men as a whole voted 13 points more for Trump in 2024 compared to +11 in 2016 (and +8 in 2020) but women *dropped* from +13 Clinton (+15 Biden in 2020) to just +8 in 2024, so counterintuitive as it might be, women dropped support for Harris much more than men fell behind Trump, which is hard to explain as being largely because of “angry anti-male rhetoric” (but it could be “one reason” of course).
Perhaps “anti-male” isn’t the right term. Perhaps it should be “anti-masculinity.” Leftist women support a certain kind of man, and most men (and quite a few women) do not want those men in leadership positions.
50 -
bah. wrote:
Mikeh33 wrote:
Very thoughtful post, thank you. Yes, I was talking strategy. I am certainly no leftist, and I find Mrs. Obama’s rhetoric to be repellent, but I will not ever vote for Trump either. I guess I am just a non-voter when it comes to President.
The left is going to have to resolve a very fundamental contradiction in its rhetoric. If women are to be strong and fearless and leaders, you can’t then blame men for their problems. You can’t suggest that men are in control of the fate of women.
Actually Harris’ loss because of “angry anti-male rhetoric”, although sounds plausible, is more narrative than fact.
Compared to 2020, the group that inverted and helped Trump the most was Latino men (and also women but without inversion).
White men voted 23 percentage points more for Trump in 2024, same as in 2020, and *less* than the 31 points in 2016.
Men as a whole voted 13 points more for Trump in 2024 compared to +11 in 2016 (and +8 in 2020) but women *dropped* from +13 Clinton (+15 Biden in 2020) to just +8 in 2024, so counterintuitive as it might be, women dropped support for Harris much more than men fell behind Trump, which is hard to explain as being largely because of “angry anti-male rhetoric” (but it could be “one reason” of course).
I’m not sure that comparing one election to the next would help us in that assessment. Even focus groups would end up being biased. Logically, it’s hard to believe that men would have found that rhetoric very appealing. After hearing that, it’s hard to believe that at least some men would say. “that’s a bit too much hate towards me. More specifically from someone who has the power to send me to the front lines”. They went “all in” on the women vote. That was their strategy. You can hear it today. A lot of women who listen to the main stream media are very angry at the women who voted for Trump today. They can’t believe it. They are not mad at the men (because they are all POS anyway, you would not expect anything else from them). A lot of women drank the Kool Aid. Not enough for Harris.
10 -
This quoted post has been removed.
🤔 what?
11 -
Gcgxfxzd wrote:
bah. wrote:
Actually Harris’ loss because of “angry anti-male rhetoric”, although sounds plausible, is more narrative than fact.
Compared to 2020, the group that inverted and helped Trump the most was Latino men (and also women but without inversion).
White men voted 23 percentage points more for Trump in 2024, same as in 2020, and *less* than the 31 points in 2016.
Men as a whole voted 13 points more for Trump in 2024 compared to +11 in 2016 (and +8 in 2020) but women *dropped* from +13 Clinton (+15 Biden in 2020) to just +8 in 2024, so counterintuitive as it might be, women dropped support for Harris much more than men fell behind Trump, which is hard to explain as being largely because of “angry anti-male rhetoric” (but it could be “one reason” of course).
I’m not sure that comparing one election to the next would help us in that assessment. Even focus groups would end up being biased. Logically, it’s hard to believe that men would have found that rhetoric very appealing. After hearing that, it’s hard to believe that at least some men would say. “that’s a bit too much hate towards me. More specifically from someone who has the power to send me to the front lines”. They went “all in” on the women vote. That was their strategy. You can hear it today. A lot of women who listen to the main stream media are very angry at the women who voted for Trump today. They can’t believe it. They are not mad at the men (because they are all POS anyway, you would not expect anything else from them). A lot of women drank the Kool Aid. Not enough for Harris.
Wejo was kind enough to restore this thread. Thank you Gcgxfxzd for your post. I agree that a lot of men found Harris’ rhetoric to be repellent. The “you go girl” feminism is hard to take seriously. Men simply don’t want to be lectured and told all the time that they are the only problem.
22
2 posts were removed from this page.
What People Are Talking About On LetsRun
No top threads at the moment. Check back soon.