7 ms·

Not super worried from a European perspective, it might even spur on some cooperation in our own union, which I support. Just a bit nervous for Ukraine... I wi

Not super worried from a European perspective, it might even spur on some cooperation in our own union, which I support. Just a bit nervous for Ukraine... I wish Europe could step up on that front but we just don't have the capacity for it. Which is entirely our own fault, Trump is right to call us out on our reliance on the US. It's our continent we should be the one spearheading this. Hopefully that will change in the near future. But that doesn't help Ukraine now. The democrats need to do some serious introspection on their policies and priorities. And perhaps just return to running a white male as candidate... Oh well at least it's a very clear victory, so no weeks or months of anxiety over the results.

Yaina 2y ago
I'd be nice if the EU would step up and become more self sufficient with Trump in the White House. Though I am nervous. I think Trump could still do us a lot of harm.
- doublerabbit 2y ago
  The EU was holding world peace. This destabilisation is in part caused by America. Iraq, war on oil. Isreal funded by US arms Russia owns Trump and Russia wants the EU dead. By no means should the EU get cosy with the US. Why shouldn't the US get cosy with the EU?
  - gg82 2y ago
    Why would Russia want the EU dead. They were selling 10's of billions of dollars of oil and gas to it each year. Russia is however a bit paranoid about its own security, having being invaded numerous times over the centuries and wants to keep control of its own economic destiny. Provide a way where security of both Europe and Russia can be provided for and peace will quickly follow.
    - account42 2y ago
      > Russia is however a bit paranoid about its own security, having being invaded numerous times over the centuries and wants to keep control of its own economic destiny. In soviet Russua, Russia is the one constantly being invaded.
    - microtonal 2y ago
      Russia is however a bit paranoid about its own security, Every rational actor (including Putin) knows that not a single NATO country is interested in invading Russia. He might have been worried about a democratic uprising in his country like Ukraine in 2014, but given how much an autocracy Russia has become, that's pretty unlikely now. Provide a way where security of both Europe and Russia can be provided for and peace will quickly follow. It's very clear that Putin wants to annex countries that he considers Russia's property (mostly former Soviet states). He has wars in Ukraine, Chechnya, and Georgia to back it. Putin's word in a peace treaty will be worth as much as him saying that he wouldn't invade Ukraine up till the invasion. Nada. The only thing that will work is military deterrence.
      - hackinthebochs 2y ago
        >It's very clear that Putin wants to annex countries that he considers Russia's property Nothing more than fantasy that justifies the warhawk stance among liberals. It is completely disconnected from reality. What Russia wants is safety from NATO. NATO in Ukraine would have been a strategic noose from which Russia would never escape. Ukrainian neutrality lead to peace. Ukraine with NATO aspirations lead to this war. The simplest answer is the right one in this case.
        microtonal 2y ago
        This is a false narrative that Putin propagates all the time (besides that Ukraine is run by nazis) and is not supported by history. He did attack Georgia and Chechnya. There was no danger at all of these countries joining NATO anytime soon. At any rate, it has been a severe miscalculation on Putin's part. He thought they could take Ukraine in days and the aggression led Finland and Sweden to join NATO.
        hackinthebochs 2y ago
        >This is a false narrative that Putin propagates all the time It turns out that bad people do speak the truth sometimes, at least when the truth is in their corner: https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/comments/1ghs32m/ru_pov_jeffrey_sachss_view_on_the_lead_up_and/ https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/comments/1ghs32...
    - athrowaway3z 2y ago
      > Provide a way where security of both Europe and Russia can be provided for and peace will quickly follow. So if i'm following you correctly, Russia's nuclear arsenal wasn't enough to provide security. Only thing we haven't tried for more security is to have every European nation be in control of their own nuclear arsenal? Its a bold claim, but by golly you've snorted enough foreign-sourced talking points that you might actually be right!
    - int_19h 2y ago
      If EU dies, Russia will keep selling its oil and gas to European countries, but the latter will be more divided when it comes to negotiating prices. As a large business, you want your customers to be as powerless as possible so that you can jack up prices as high as you can.
  - blashyrk 2y ago
    > The EU was holding world peace. I can't fathom where you got that from. > Iraq, war on oil. Isreal funded by US arms All true, and the EU complicit in all of those. Maybe not by choice (see remark about sovereignty at the end), but complicit nonetheless. You also forgot Syria, Yemen, Yugoslavia and probably a few others as well. > Russia owns Trump and Russia wants the EU dead. Sorry, but this is not Reddit. > By no means should the EU get cosy with the US. The EU has no choice other than be "cosy" with the US. It's called Pax Americana. In simple terms, the deal is this and always has been this since WW2 ended: the EU has traded political sovereignty for security, to and from the US.
    - doublerabbit 2y ago
      > Russia owns Trump and Russia wants the EU dead. What's Reddit to do with anything? Trump is a failed businessman. His business have failed and Russia bought him out. This was evident back in 2008 and it's evident now and ever since the 80's. https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/12/21/how-russian-money-helped-save-trumps-business/ https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/12/21/how-russian-money-helpe... https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_projects_of_Donald_Trump_in_Russia https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_projects_of_Donald_... Russia wants Trump as his backhand man and that's what they got. America wants freedom yet at the same time they're happy to accept brokerage from a man who dreams of an neo-USSR. > I can't fathom where you got that from. world peace was a rush mix of words. What I mean at least they held stability of the world stage. > EU is complicit I'm not saying the EU is a saint. The EU has an agenda and evils of its own. But as a figurehead and representation of many countries up on the world stage it held a positive power. Countries could count on the nation for relief unlike any other.
doublerabbit 2y ago
From the British side of things, we are now a ballistics rag doll. We had Brexit, a catastrophe in itself. And with that we've sold ourselves to the US for "alliance" means; meaning that we will be dragged through everything the US wants. When we were tied to the EU, at least we had a some sort solidarity.
- Lutger 2y ago
  Well, you and Germany are one of the few influential western countries left that has some sort of stable center-left government. Almost everything else is rightwing conservative, neoliberal or slowly descending into fascism.
  - Tainnor 2y ago
    Spain has a left-wing government, Poland is back to being centrist after getting rid of PiS, Switzerland has its own distinct government where all major parties are represented in perpetuity, ... Also to call the current German government "stable" is... a choice.
    - torlok 2y ago
      Poland isn't stable either. PiS may come back at any point. You'd think that consolidating power, destroying relations with all neighbours except for the totalitarian Hungary, and implementing a total abortion ban would do them in, but no. PiS can run a campaign entirely on anti-LGBT and anti-immigration rethoric and win. Poland turned into Florida every recent election. The anti-LGBT nonsense is already coming back ahead of the next presidential election.
    - Tainnor 2y ago
      > Also to call the current German government "stable" is... a choice. Just hours after I wrote this, the German government basically imploded.
    - Lutger 2y ago
      Those are the few yes. And it looks like the goverment of Germany is about to fall. AfD is set up for a big win, so that will be that. We're trending very far to the right as a whole, with the edges getting bigger and more extreme by the year.
jltsiren 2y ago
Trump is wrong in that. Europe relies on the US, because the American world order is built that way. That's what the US has traditionally wanted. They are the hegemon that maintains the world order and pays for it. Europe usually supports the US, both for ideological reasons and because it benefits from the American world order. But if the US is no longer committed to their world order, I can see the return of a more selfish Europe. One that is willing to work with both the US and BRICS and does not automatically favor either.
- pyrale 2y ago
  > But if the US is no longer committed to their world order, I can see the return of a more selfish Europe. One that is willing to work with both the US and BRICS and does not automatically favor either. I don't see this happening unfortunately. The much more likely scenario is that the US diplomacy in EU will adopt a partisan stance, favoring far-right parties. Anyone who has followed far-right EU movements in the last two decades can't seriously believe that US conservatives talking about isolationism means they will stop pushing their views in Europe.
  - jltsiren 2y ago
    What you call "far-right" is not a unified movement. Nationalism is one of those ideologies where ideological alignment can make you just as easily allies as enemies. If the US wants to work with European nationalists, it must simultaneously increase military support to Ukraine, isolate Russia even further, restore normal relations with Russia, and make cheap Russian natural gas available again.
    - pyrale 2y ago
      So far, the policy differences between the different far-right parties in Europe hasn't really prevented them from cooperating. Besides, a lot of the meddling by US conservatives pushes on specific issues, so they don't mind funding two parties with opposed views on orthogonal topics.
      - 2y ago
dgellow 2y ago
The US leaving NATO would be terrible for Europe. Ukraine is very likely fucked with that result. I’m European and extremely worried.
- piiritaja 2y ago
  Should not have to worry about US pulling out of NATO. Trump is stupid, but even he realizes that it would not benefit US in a any way. Significantly reducing funding might happen, but hopefully that will make EU countries increase their defense spendings as a reaction.
  - dgellow 2y ago
    There is absolutely no reason to expect Trump to act like a responsible leader. If he feels like leaving NATO he will do it.
    - sirbutters 2y ago
      If Putin orders him to, he will.
  - kelnos 2y ago
    That assumes that Trump is a rational actor when it comes to these sorts of things, and I'm not sure we can rely on that. The question is how much of his leaving-NATO rhetoric was sincere, and how much of it was empty threats to try to get other NATO countries to devote more money toward defense.
- timomaxgalvin 2y ago
  I don't see this. France and UK have nuclear submarines. We need fewer boots on the ground interventions, not more.
ossobuco 2y ago
> Just a bit nervous for Ukraine... > The democrats need to do some serious introspection on their policies and priorities. And perhaps just return to running a white male as candidate... Considering that one of the main points of Trump's campaign was a swift end to Ukraine's war, and considering the large vote margin by which he won, I believe the lesson the democrats should learn is that most USAers don't want the USA to be involved in foreign wars. By definition the democratic party should be able to read the population, right?
- max51 2y ago
  >By definition the democratic party should be able to read the population, right? In the 2016 elections, they literally went to court to argue that they are a private company and their internal processes (eg. the primaries) don't need to be democratic.
- kelnos 2y ago
  This is why GP is nervous: Trump's "swift end" will likely be trying to broker a deal where Ukraine gives up all the disputed territory, and Russia effectively wins, validating Putin's approach to territorial expansion.
audunw 2y ago
Europe in total has contributed twice as much to Ukraine as USA. And much of that is spending that actually affects their economy, not just “we’re going to give a billion dollars of equipment that we were going to have to replace soon anyway”. I’m not trying to dismiss USAs contribution here but it’s a fact that much of it is really more of a program to modernise the stock of US military weapons and ammunition, which incidentally frees up old stock for Ukraine. Also keep in mind that Europe now supports Ukraine by setting up arms production within Ukraine, which gives more weapons per dollar spent than donating weapons made in USA or Europe. That said, while European military spending has improved a lot since the invasion, there’s still a bit further to go and it’s not such a bad thing if Europe is forced to become more self-reliant militarily. Will be very short sighted for USA though. They benefit on so many levels from Europe being so dependent on USA.
- microtonal 2y ago
  Will be very short sighted for USA though. They benefit on so many levels from Europe being so dependent on USA. This is the part that I don't get with the USA's recent obsessions with isolationism. One of the reasons the US is so rich is because it is a world power with a lot of loyal allies. We align a lot of our policies with the US when we are asked (see blocking ASML exports to China). If the US is not willing to step up for its allies [1], it becomes a regional power, and the loss of influence will result in worse economical outcomes. China is happy to fill the void. [1] Also don't forget that (most) allies stepped up when the US asked (Afghanistan, Iraq, etc.), even when much of their population thought it was not the best idea.
MaxHoppersGhost 2y ago
> And perhaps just return to running a white male as candidate... This isn’t why people aren’t voting dem. Did you forgot that Obama was elected? People don’t want to vote dem because Dems have moved significantly to the left and are supporting crazy policies.
- wvbdmp 2y ago
  Obama was elected because that election followed 8 straight years of Republicans in power, in which they squandered the world’s sympathy after 9/11 by starting two retarded wars, opening guantanamo, curtailing freedoms, going after journalists etc. Bush Jr. and the GOP was lambasted 24/7 at home and abroad by the likes of the Daily Show, (much more mildly but) not unlike Trump is today. Obama was charismatic and his platform of hope and change was powerful, but it did hinge on the GOP being absolutely unelectable. Kamala Harris may have won this year if Trump had won in 2020, although it’s easy to imagine the Dems squandering that as well, by explicitly running on not-being-the-other-guy, which Obama didn’t do.
  - MaxHoppersGhost 2y ago
    We basically had the same scenario then. Trump should be easy to beat if the Dems put up anyone with charisma who seemed normal and likeable. Kamala didn’t have these things and many believe she didn’t deserve the nomination in the first place because of how it went down (no primaries). Dems also pandered to the far left way too much and weirded out many never trumpers and independents but that’s another issue entirely.
bamboozled 2y ago
You have to find some good in all things and I think this is the most likely good. Other countries and continents realizing it's time to move on from America and start to stand on their own two feet. I'm really tired of American being the center of everything, especially after this fiasco. It would be nice if it was a more progressive country for a change. By progressive I mean, a country who believes in climate change, renewables and nuclear and women's reproductive rights.

Yaina 2y ago

I'd be nice if the EU would step up and become more self sufficient with Trump in the White House. Though I am nervous. I think Trump could still do us a lot of harm.

doublerabbit 2y ago
The EU was holding world peace. This destabilisation is in part caused by America. Iraq, war on oil. Isreal funded by US arms Russia owns Trump and Russia wants the EU dead. By no means should the EU get cosy with the US. Why shouldn't the US get cosy with the EU?
- gg82 2y ago
  Why would Russia want the EU dead. They were selling 10's of billions of dollars of oil and gas to it each year. Russia is however a bit paranoid about its own security, having being invaded numerous times over the centuries and wants to keep control of its own economic destiny. Provide a way where security of both Europe and Russia can be provided for and peace will quickly follow.
  - account42 2y ago
    > Russia is however a bit paranoid about its own security, having being invaded numerous times over the centuries and wants to keep control of its own economic destiny. In soviet Russua, Russia is the one constantly being invaded.
  - microtonal 2y ago
    Russia is however a bit paranoid about its own security, Every rational actor (including Putin) knows that not a single NATO country is interested in invading Russia. He might have been worried about a democratic uprising in his country like Ukraine in 2014, but given how much an autocracy Russia has become, that's pretty unlikely now. Provide a way where security of both Europe and Russia can be provided for and peace will quickly follow. It's very clear that Putin wants to annex countries that he considers Russia's property (mostly former Soviet states). He has wars in Ukraine, Chechnya, and Georgia to back it. Putin's word in a peace treaty will be worth as much as him saying that he wouldn't invade Ukraine up till the invasion. Nada. The only thing that will work is military deterrence.
    - hackinthebochs 2y ago
      >It's very clear that Putin wants to annex countries that he considers Russia's property Nothing more than fantasy that justifies the warhawk stance among liberals. It is completely disconnected from reality. What Russia wants is safety from NATO. NATO in Ukraine would have been a strategic noose from which Russia would never escape. Ukrainian neutrality lead to peace. Ukraine with NATO aspirations lead to this war. The simplest answer is the right one in this case.
      - microtonal 2y ago
        This is a false narrative that Putin propagates all the time (besides that Ukraine is run by nazis) and is not supported by history. He did attack Georgia and Chechnya. There was no danger at all of these countries joining NATO anytime soon. At any rate, it has been a severe miscalculation on Putin's part. He thought they could take Ukraine in days and the aggression led Finland and Sweden to join NATO.
        hackinthebochs 2y ago
        >This is a false narrative that Putin propagates all the time It turns out that bad people do speak the truth sometimes, at least when the truth is in their corner: https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/comments/1ghs32m/ru_pov_jeffrey_sachss_view_on_the_lead_up_and/ https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/comments/1ghs32...
  - athrowaway3z 2y ago
    > Provide a way where security of both Europe and Russia can be provided for and peace will quickly follow. So if i'm following you correctly, Russia's nuclear arsenal wasn't enough to provide security. Only thing we haven't tried for more security is to have every European nation be in control of their own nuclear arsenal? Its a bold claim, but by golly you've snorted enough foreign-sourced talking points that you might actually be right!
  - int_19h 2y ago
    If EU dies, Russia will keep selling its oil and gas to European countries, but the latter will be more divided when it comes to negotiating prices. As a large business, you want your customers to be as powerless as possible so that you can jack up prices as high as you can.
- blashyrk 2y ago
  > The EU was holding world peace. I can't fathom where you got that from. > Iraq, war on oil. Isreal funded by US arms All true, and the EU complicit in all of those. Maybe not by choice (see remark about sovereignty at the end), but complicit nonetheless. You also forgot Syria, Yemen, Yugoslavia and probably a few others as well. > Russia owns Trump and Russia wants the EU dead. Sorry, but this is not Reddit. > By no means should the EU get cosy with the US. The EU has no choice other than be "cosy" with the US. It's called Pax Americana. In simple terms, the deal is this and always has been this since WW2 ended: the EU has traded political sovereignty for security, to and from the US.
  - doublerabbit 2y ago
    > Russia owns Trump and Russia wants the EU dead. What's Reddit to do with anything? Trump is a failed businessman. His business have failed and Russia bought him out. This was evident back in 2008 and it's evident now and ever since the 80's. https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/12/21/how-russian-money-helped-save-trumps-business/ https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/12/21/how-russian-money-helpe... https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_projects_of_Donald_Trump_in_Russia https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_projects_of_Donald_... Russia wants Trump as his backhand man and that's what they got. America wants freedom yet at the same time they're happy to accept brokerage from a man who dreams of an neo-USSR. > I can't fathom where you got that from. world peace was a rush mix of words. What I mean at least they held stability of the world stage. > EU is complicit I'm not saying the EU is a saint. The EU has an agenda and evils of its own. But as a figurehead and representation of many countries up on the world stage it held a positive power. Countries could count on the nation for relief unlike any other.

doublerabbit 2y ago

From the British side of things, we are now a ballistics rag doll. We had Brexit, a catastrophe in itself. And with that we've sold ourselves to the US for "alliance" means; meaning that we will be dragged through everything the US wants. When we were tied to the EU, at least we had a some sort solidarity.

Lutger 2y ago
Well, you and Germany are one of the few influential western countries left that has some sort of stable center-left government. Almost everything else is rightwing conservative, neoliberal or slowly descending into fascism.
- Tainnor 2y ago
  Spain has a left-wing government, Poland is back to being centrist after getting rid of PiS, Switzerland has its own distinct government where all major parties are represented in perpetuity, ... Also to call the current German government "stable" is... a choice.
  - torlok 2y ago
    Poland isn't stable either. PiS may come back at any point. You'd think that consolidating power, destroying relations with all neighbours except for the totalitarian Hungary, and implementing a total abortion ban would do them in, but no. PiS can run a campaign entirely on anti-LGBT and anti-immigration rethoric and win. Poland turned into Florida every recent election. The anti-LGBT nonsense is already coming back ahead of the next presidential election.
  - Tainnor 2y ago
    > Also to call the current German government "stable" is... a choice. Just hours after I wrote this, the German government basically imploded.
  - Lutger 2y ago
    Those are the few yes. And it looks like the goverment of Germany is about to fall. AfD is set up for a big win, so that will be that. We're trending very far to the right as a whole, with the edges getting bigger and more extreme by the year.

jltsiren 2y ago

Trump is wrong in that. Europe relies on the US, because the American world order is built that way. That's what the US has traditionally wanted. They are the hegemon that maintains the world order and pays for it. Europe usually supports the US, both for ideological reasons and because it benefits from the American world order. But if the US is no longer committed to their world order, I can see the return of a more selfish Europe. One that is willing to work with both the US and BRICS and does not automatically favor either.

pyrale 2y ago
> But if the US is no longer committed to their world order, I can see the return of a more selfish Europe. One that is willing to work with both the US and BRICS and does not automatically favor either. I don't see this happening unfortunately. The much more likely scenario is that the US diplomacy in EU will adopt a partisan stance, favoring far-right parties. Anyone who has followed far-right EU movements in the last two decades can't seriously believe that US conservatives talking about isolationism means they will stop pushing their views in Europe.
- jltsiren 2y ago
  What you call "far-right" is not a unified movement. Nationalism is one of those ideologies where ideological alignment can make you just as easily allies as enemies. If the US wants to work with European nationalists, it must simultaneously increase military support to Ukraine, isolate Russia even further, restore normal relations with Russia, and make cheap Russian natural gas available again.
  - pyrale 2y ago
    So far, the policy differences between the different far-right parties in Europe hasn't really prevented them from cooperating. Besides, a lot of the meddling by US conservatives pushes on specific issues, so they don't mind funding two parties with opposed views on orthogonal topics.
    - 2y ago

dgellow 2y ago

The US leaving NATO would be terrible for Europe. Ukraine is very likely fucked with that result. I’m European and extremely worried.

piiritaja 2y ago
Should not have to worry about US pulling out of NATO. Trump is stupid, but even he realizes that it would not benefit US in a any way. Significantly reducing funding might happen, but hopefully that will make EU countries increase their defense spendings as a reaction.
- dgellow 2y ago
  There is absolutely no reason to expect Trump to act like a responsible leader. If he feels like leaving NATO he will do it.
  - sirbutters 2y ago
    If Putin orders him to, he will.
- kelnos 2y ago
  That assumes that Trump is a rational actor when it comes to these sorts of things, and I'm not sure we can rely on that. The question is how much of his leaving-NATO rhetoric was sincere, and how much of it was empty threats to try to get other NATO countries to devote more money toward defense.
timomaxgalvin 2y ago
I don't see this. France and UK have nuclear submarines. We need fewer boots on the ground interventions, not more.

ossobuco 2y ago

> Just a bit nervous for Ukraine... > The democrats need to do some serious introspection on their policies and priorities. And perhaps just return to running a white male as candidate... Considering that one of the main points of Trump's campaign was a swift end to Ukraine's war, and considering the large vote margin by which he won, I believe the lesson the democrats should learn is that most USAers don't want the USA to be involved in foreign wars. By definition the democratic party should be able to read the population, right?

max51 2y ago
>By definition the democratic party should be able to read the population, right? In the 2016 elections, they literally went to court to argue that they are a private company and their internal processes (eg. the primaries) don't need to be democratic.
kelnos 2y ago
This is why GP is nervous: Trump's "swift end" will likely be trying to broker a deal where Ukraine gives up all the disputed territory, and Russia effectively wins, validating Putin's approach to territorial expansion.

audunw 2y ago

Europe in total has contributed twice as much to Ukraine as USA. And much of that is spending that actually affects their economy, not just “we’re going to give a billion dollars of equipment that we were going to have to replace soon anyway”. I’m not trying to dismiss USAs contribution here but it’s a fact that much of it is really more of a program to modernise the stock of US military weapons and ammunition, which incidentally frees up old stock for Ukraine. Also keep in mind that Europe now supports Ukraine by setting up arms production within Ukraine, which gives more weapons per dollar spent than donating weapons made in USA or Europe. That said, while European military spending has improved a lot since the invasion, there’s still a bit further to go and it’s not such a bad thing if Europe is forced to become more self-reliant militarily. Will be very short sighted for USA though. They benefit on so many levels from Europe being so dependent on USA.

microtonal 2y ago
Will be very short sighted for USA though. They benefit on so many levels from Europe being so dependent on USA. This is the part that I don't get with the USA's recent obsessions with isolationism. One of the reasons the US is so rich is because it is a world power with a lot of loyal allies. We align a lot of our policies with the US when we are asked (see blocking ASML exports to China). If the US is not willing to step up for its allies [1], it becomes a regional power, and the loss of influence will result in worse economical outcomes. China is happy to fill the void. [1] Also don't forget that (most) allies stepped up when the US asked (Afghanistan, Iraq, etc.), even when much of their population thought it was not the best idea.

MaxHoppersGhost 2y ago

> And perhaps just return to running a white male as candidate... This isn’t why people aren’t voting dem. Did you forgot that Obama was elected? People don’t want to vote dem because Dems have moved significantly to the left and are supporting crazy policies.

wvbdmp 2y ago
Obama was elected because that election followed 8 straight years of Republicans in power, in which they squandered the world’s sympathy after 9/11 by starting two retarded wars, opening guantanamo, curtailing freedoms, going after journalists etc. Bush Jr. and the GOP was lambasted 24/7 at home and abroad by the likes of the Daily Show, (much more mildly but) not unlike Trump is today. Obama was charismatic and his platform of hope and change was powerful, but it did hinge on the GOP being absolutely unelectable. Kamala Harris may have won this year if Trump had won in 2020, although it’s easy to imagine the Dems squandering that as well, by explicitly running on not-being-the-other-guy, which Obama didn’t do.
- MaxHoppersGhost 2y ago
  We basically had the same scenario then. Trump should be easy to beat if the Dems put up anyone with charisma who seemed normal and likeable. Kamala didn’t have these things and many believe she didn’t deserve the nomination in the first place because of how it went down (no primaries). Dems also pandered to the far left way too much and weirded out many never trumpers and independents but that’s another issue entirely.

bamboozled 2y ago

You have to find some good in all things and I think this is the most likely good. Other countries and continents realizing it's time to move on from America and start to stand on their own two feet. I'm really tired of American being the center of everything, especially after this fiasco. It would be nice if it was a more progressive country for a change. By progressive I mean, a country who believes in climate change, renewables and nuclear and women's reproductive rights.