"I'm not sure why I'm bothering…you're wrong on a lot of counts here….Puhleez….Trump loves the uneducated. Cheers" Condescending language and tone - another lesson liberals should take to heart from this election. Acting elitist and talking down to the electorate turned off more than a few voters.philly1121 said:I'm not sure why I'm bothering but, here goes. You're wrong on alot of counts here.HKBear97! said:Actually, the metrics are not great. Inflation increased by over 20% during Biden's presidency with significant increases in food, gas and utilities. Yes, the most recent CPI numbers show the year-over-year increase at around the target of 2%, but that is just 2% above prices that increased significantly since 2020. A huge part of the inflation was caused by the $1.9 trillion stimulus passed shortly after taking office - way too much fiscal stimulus when it wasn't needed. Crime is also up - most recent FBI statistics show a 4.5% increase in violent crime in 2022. Look no further than here in California where voters just passed Proposition 36 with a 70% yes vote. And no one on the left wants. to admit that the influx of immigrants, along with restrictive building policies, are important contributors to increased housing prices. The rising cost of everything is a constant topic.philly1121 said:Yeah I ithink that's probably true. Dems spend too much time on race, gender and the god awful trans issue. (which probably is one of the main reasons Latinos voted for Trump, besides them seeing him as a "bro").HKBear97! said:Racism and misogyny - I believe that's a key lesson right there. Liberals cling to this view that so many people's daily existence revolves almost exclusively around race, gender and sexual preference. Yes, those are hugely important, but they are not THE determining factor in how someone will vote. People care about the economy, affordability, safety, maintaining their standard of living and almost all distrust career politicians. Say what you will about Trump, but he's managed to position himself as an outsider and a quasi third-party candidate with some of his economic positions that straddle the right and left. Kamala is a career politician who ran for president in 2020 and received no support. She was an unpopular vice president and at one point was even considered a liability for Biden's reelection. She was given the nomination, it wasn't earned, and then proceeded to change her positions in a very stereotypical politician flip-flop. As the original post states, she was a terrible candidate for the Democrats. Biden should have stood by his original intent of being a transitional candidate and let the party go through a proper primary. Hindsight is 20/20, but it's very doubtful she would have won the nomination and if the Democrats let the people choose as opposed to dictating the nominee to them, their candidate would have likely won yesterday.philly1121 said:Perhaps there are some complexities involved. But I think its obvious that the US is not ready to elect a woman as President. I think, as Tom describes, there is just a tendancy in this country to want a man to do this job. We can muse about whether Joe should have stepped aside earlier. I don't think he was up to the challenge and probably would have lost anyway. But if she had gone through the primary process and went head-to-head with a Josh Shapiro or Andy Breshear, I don't think she would have won. So I suppose its the Dems fault but what options did we have? We couldn't "redo" the primaries or have a floor fight at the convention.tequila4kapp said:There absolutely are a million lessons. If you can stomach the fact he's on Fox go find some clips from Harold Ford, Jr. I thought he made some pretty insightful comments about what the election lessons are and where his party needs to go from here.concordtom said:I dunno what else to conclude. I mean, Trump is an outrageous character, a cultural terrorist, a blatant scofflaw and criminal. He's as horrible a candidate imaginable.HKBear97! said:If this is the only lesson liberals take away from this result, then they will continue to lose elections going forward.DiabloWags said:While Latino males are attracted to breasts, they are largely sexist and won't vote for a WOMAN.concordtom said:
That, and the fact that she has a vagina, breasts, and dark skin.
I mean, let's be real. America is not so deep.
Let alone a BLACK woman . . . and especially one who is championing women's reproductive rights/abortion.
Yes, welcome to Dumberica!
Lessons? You think there are profound lessons here? Give me a break.
As for the "why" that so many men, women - both whites and minorities - feel a woman can't do the job. I think its masculinity. Its faith based. Its probably anti-feminism and certainly racism as well. I mean, what it all comes down to is that Trump won with a dip**** campaign. He was fellating a microphone. Held a Nazi type rally at MSG. Has Project 2025 as a map for all to see. No one cared. So, if its ok to be that openly crass - what else is there to turn to except the base instincts of racism and misogyny?
You say people care about the economy, safety and affordability. Each of those metrics is good right now. So, with the exception of housing costs, why do you suppose people are concerned about the economy? Because these positive indices are not filtering down to the working and middle class? This is a big point because the tax rate for each of these classes is likely to go up, not down. And if tariffs are in place, you can expect a minimal 3% rise in costs for goods. Imported goods.
My point is, if the economy is good. If crime is down. If inflation is lowering. If unemployment is low. There have to be other factors in play here. And its the factors that are perhaps uncomfortable to talk about because we have to look at ourselves when we do it. I think your argument about the nomination process has merit. I doubt she would have won the nomination. But make no mistake as to the main reason why a Gavin Newsom or Josh Shapiro or Andy Beshear would have done better. And yes, Newsom would have done better than Harris.
Anecdotally, I was listening to KNX1070 this morning and they interviewed two Latino men in Los Angeles that voted for Trump. When asked why they didn't vote for Harris, one responded that she was in office for four years already and didn't do anything about prices then, so why would you think another four years would be different? The other complained about rising grocery prices. Those outside the upper middle class and above certainly do not believe all is well.
Stimulus
Are you forgetting the two stimulus packages totaling $3.1 trillion dollars that Trump enacted? Yeah. No, that had no effect on inflation. lol But let's move on.
Economists from Brookings, Cato, Reserve Bank have studied this and there is no one conclusion that the stimulus caused inflation. What is generally agreed upon is that it did contribute to inflation but the scope of it and how long it contributed are debated What is clear is this:. #1 reason was the pandemic. The shutdown. And the quick attempt at a restart. Productivity declines, prices increase. #2 Consumer spending. Since we couldn't go out and spend, we saved. Couple those savings with the Cares Act enacted in March 2020. that was $1200 to people making under $75k. At the end of 2020, your hero enacted another stimulus measure. $600 to most Americans. With money in their pockets, demand exploded on goods. Production couldn't keep up. #3 - Ukraine war. Supply and demand repercussions from this war and the associated banning of Russian oil. #4 Timing. People spent their money fast. This contributed to white hot demand which the supply chain could not keep up with. Add into int'l events (that ship that got stuck in the Suez Canal), climate events, and aging supply chain infrastructure. It couldn't keep up.
The numbers that are generally accepted is that the stimulus packages (all 4 of them) contributed between1-4% inflation, with most economists arriving at 1-2%. The length of that contribution is also a question. Many conclude that these packages were immediately felt in 2020-21 but then the effects tapered off. But, what is your counterargument? That we should have done nothing? If that were the case we would have had rabid unemployment. is that your solution?
Crime
This one comes up and up and up all the time. For the last time, violent crime is down. This is from the FBI:
https://www.fbi.gov/news/press-releases/fbi-releases-2024-quarterly-crime-report-and-use-of-force-data-update-q2#:~:text=A%20comparison%20of%20data%20from,aggravated%20assault%20decreased%20by%208.1%25.
It basically says that between comparative months January to June in the years 2023 and 2024, violent crime decreased by 10.3%. Murder decreased by 22.7%, rape decreased by 17.7%, robbery decreased by 13.6%, and aggravated assault decreased by 8.1%. Reported property crime also decreased by 13.1%. Give this a rest.
Prop 36 does not address violent crime. It addresses shoplifting and drug use. Theft/larceny is also down. The only metric that has increased is auto theft.
immigration and restrictive building policies. Hmm...in our beautiful central valley, houses are being built at an incredible clip. Bay Area folks are buying it all up. So, how would an immigrant afford homes like these? Apartments? Theyre not being built. And few communities want them. And the ones that are being built by builders like RH Community Builders here - well they only let out a certain percentage for low income housing. So I'd like to know who you blame for that since most of this is market based? Puhleez.
As for the Latinos on KNX (I'm assuming you live in LA). Perhaps they would want to know that grocery corporations had a hand and admitted so to purposefully rising egg and milk prices. See link below:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/errolschweizer/2024/02/07/why-your-groceries-are-still-so-expensive/
Look especially at the header - Workers Get Disproportionately Blamed for High Prices
Low education/informed voters. Trump loves the uneducated. Cheers.
There is certainly debate on the amount of inflation caused by the stimulus, but there is no question it contributed to the initial high bought of inflation during Biden's presidency. And as pointed out by others, the $1.9 trillion in 2021 was a much debated move that seemed unwarranted by the economic conditions at the time. You may recall Larry Summers statement ""There is a chance that macroeconomic stimulus on a scale closer to World War II levels than normal recession levels will set off inflationary pressures of a kind we have not seen in a generation." Here's another statement from a May 11, 2023, article in The Economist "Mr Biden's stimulus did, however, put a rocket under inflation. In April "core" consumer prices, which exclude energy and food, were 13.4% higher than when he came to office. They have risen more than in other g7 countries, and their acceleration coincided with the introduction of Mr Biden's stimulus. Research suggests that, even by September 2022, the largesse was pushing up core inflation by about four percentage points."
On crime, the data you highlighted was later revised in October and actually showed an increase from 2021 to 2022. As others pointed out, the data set also changed which resulted in additional adjustments over time. You can also look at the DOJ's Bureau of Justice Statistics to show their National Crime Victimization Survey showed instances of reported violent crimes increased from 5.6 per 1,000 individuals aged 12 and over in 2020 to 8.7 per 1,000 in 2023. More importantly, look at what the voters here in California have done. In June 2022, San Francisco District Attorney Chesa Boudin was recalled due to frustration on crime. This week Los Angeles District Attorney George Gascon was voted out due concerns on crime. And as mentioned, Prop 36 was just passed as well. In a state that voted overwhelmingly for Harris, there is significant voter concern about safety.
Regarding housing, your comment about the central valley may be true, but that's not the case nationally. Most recent estimates from Freddie Mac put the housing shortage nationally at around 1.5 million units and from my most recent role with an affordable housing-focused firm that number is considered low. And your comment on luxury apartments is spot on speak to developers in big cities across the nation and you'll find that housing regulations make building affordable housing uneconomical.
In terms of groceries, the situation is more complex than you suggest. Profit margins in the supermarket industry are very low typically 1% to 2% of sales and that has changed very little. In August, the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City reported that the major contributors to rising grocery prices were job growth and wage increases. Grocery stores and suppliers have raised prices, taking advantage of supply/demand conditions which is simply how markets work. If you want to argue they are price gouging, then utilize the laws on the books to make that case. Bottom line, grocery prices have increased over the last four years and voters noticed.
And going back to the point about misogyny, I just came across this statistic: "In 2016 Hillary Clinton won Hispanic voters by a margin of 38 percentage points, according to exit polls. By 2020 Joe Biden's margin had shrunk to 33 points. This year early exit polling conducted by CNN suggests that Ms Harris's margin of victory among Hispanic voters is just eight percentage points a remarkable collapse". That change suggests there is more than simply misogyny at play.
I appreciate the dialogue, however I politely ask you to dial back the condescending tone.
