3 ms·

I'm a firm believer in the horseshoe theory, so I'm really not interested in a radical left or a radical right. Give me more Bidens, Harrises, Clintons and Obam

I'm a firm believer in the horseshoe theory, so I'm really not interested in a radical left or a radical right. Give me more Bidens, Harrises, Clintons and Obamas. I'll vote for them every time. > Democrats have had since 2016 to learn that lesson Biden won in 2020 pretty resoundingly, so the lesson they learned from 2016 was enough to win decisively in 2020. Parties don't stay in power indefinitely, conditions change and incumbents all across the world — not just the US — lost in 2024.

bonzini 2y ago
At this point it's basically three states deciding the election (Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan). Both Biden and Trump won or loss based on those three, and with a ridiculously low margin each time.
- nozzlegear 2y ago
  It's more than those three states, but I get your point. We need electoral college reform, and we need to uncap the house of representatives like the founders intended. Until then it's going to keep coming down to those purple states with razor thin margins, and safe red/blue states will just be used to run up the popular vote count.
  - bonzini 2y ago
    Well yeah, there's North Carolina, Arizona, Nevada and Illinois too. But they seem to be less likely to be the tipping point, plus AR/NV are too small to undo republican vote in MI/WI/PA which have provided 50 electors to the winner and zero to the loser for the last three elections.
    - DiggyJohnson 2y ago
      How many elections do you remember and followed closely? These things shift all the time.
- DiggyJohnson 2y ago
  That's only true if the period of analysis is extremely, extremely short.
  - bonzini 2y ago
    Well yeah I mentioned the last 8-9 years. But a lot of the shift already occurred with Bush: "Bush flipped 11 states that had voted Democratic in 1996: Arkansas, Arizona, Florida, Kentucky, Louisiana, Missouri, Nevada, New Hampshire, Ohio, Tennessee, and West Virginia" (source Wikipedia); 8 of those have turned very much Republican since then. So while the number of swing states has reduced a lot in 2016, the strength of republicans in the south hasn't changed a lot since 2000.
rdm_blackhole 2y ago
> Bidens, Harrises, Clintons and Obamas Not too get too political but if the these people had done their jobs in the first place, there would be no Trump in the WH presently. The problem with them is that they are all for the status quo which to the average voter means "more of the same". See the current compete U-turn from the German conservatives who less than 24H after being elected decided to break their main campaign promise and renege on doing what they said they would do. The far right and the far left are not growing in a vacuum, they are growing because people are getting tired of being lied to.
- baud147258 2y ago
  > German conservatives [...] decided to break their main campaign promise and renege on doing what they said they would do. what kind of promise was it?
  - rdm_blackhole 2y ago
    Tighter border controls.
- nozzlegear 2y ago
  > The problem with them is that they are all for the status quo which to the average voter means "more of the same". I vote for them because they represent change and progress at a steady, measured pace — not stagnation and status quo. You're discounting big campaign achievements like Obamacare and Biden's infrastructure plan.
  - rdm_blackhole 2y ago
    I am not discounting anything. I look at what we are seeing today. Trump is more powerful than he as ever been. In Europe, European-skeptic parties are rising, the far right and the far left are rising as well and the center is slowly crumbling. Those are facts. So the question is why are the center right/left politicians not acknowledging the problems and trying to find adequate solutions? Why do they let the far right and the far left being seen as the ones who are/will be doing something? The horseshoe theory is real. If you look at France, the far left and the far right merged their votes and forced the previous government to resign. If that is not a sign that something is seriously wrong, then I don't know what to tell you.

bonzini 2y ago

At this point it's basically three states deciding the election (Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan). Both Biden and Trump won or loss based on those three, and with a ridiculously low margin each time.

nozzlegear 2y ago
It's more than those three states, but I get your point. We need electoral college reform, and we need to uncap the house of representatives like the founders intended. Until then it's going to keep coming down to those purple states with razor thin margins, and safe red/blue states will just be used to run up the popular vote count.
- bonzini 2y ago
  Well yeah, there's North Carolina, Arizona, Nevada and Illinois too. But they seem to be less likely to be the tipping point, plus AR/NV are too small to undo republican vote in MI/WI/PA which have provided 50 electors to the winner and zero to the loser for the last three elections.
  - DiggyJohnson 2y ago
    How many elections do you remember and followed closely? These things shift all the time.
DiggyJohnson 2y ago
That's only true if the period of analysis is extremely, extremely short.
- bonzini 2y ago
  Well yeah I mentioned the last 8-9 years. But a lot of the shift already occurred with Bush: "Bush flipped 11 states that had voted Democratic in 1996: Arkansas, Arizona, Florida, Kentucky, Louisiana, Missouri, Nevada, New Hampshire, Ohio, Tennessee, and West Virginia" (source Wikipedia); 8 of those have turned very much Republican since then. So while the number of swing states has reduced a lot in 2016, the strength of republicans in the south hasn't changed a lot since 2000.

rdm_blackhole 2y ago

> Bidens, Harrises, Clintons and Obamas Not too get too political but if the these people had done their jobs in the first place, there would be no Trump in the WH presently. The problem with them is that they are all for the status quo which to the average voter means "more of the same". See the current compete U-turn from the German conservatives who less than 24H after being elected decided to break their main campaign promise and renege on doing what they said they would do. The far right and the far left are not growing in a vacuum, they are growing because people are getting tired of being lied to.

baud147258 2y ago
> German conservatives [...] decided to break their main campaign promise and renege on doing what they said they would do. what kind of promise was it?
- rdm_blackhole 2y ago
  Tighter border controls.
nozzlegear 2y ago
> The problem with them is that they are all for the status quo which to the average voter means "more of the same". I vote for them because they represent change and progress at a steady, measured pace — not stagnation and status quo. You're discounting big campaign achievements like Obamacare and Biden's infrastructure plan.
- rdm_blackhole 2y ago
  I am not discounting anything. I look at what we are seeing today. Trump is more powerful than he as ever been. In Europe, European-skeptic parties are rising, the far right and the far left are rising as well and the center is slowly crumbling. Those are facts. So the question is why are the center right/left politicians not acknowledging the problems and trying to find adequate solutions? Why do they let the far right and the far left being seen as the ones who are/will be doing something? The horseshoe theory is real. If you look at France, the far left and the far right merged their votes and forced the previous government to resign. If that is not a sign that something is seriously wrong, then I don't know what to tell you.