Every day I enter our expenses into a data-base that I created....about 50 different categories. Then, at the end of the month my wife and I go over the data. We are retired, so can afford this extra bit of time.
My point: Immigration, Inflation, increased crime because of progressive ideas, ideas about sexual identity presented in public schools, etc., all speak to the same underlying psychological dynamic as the approach my wife and I take with our finances.....except 180 degrees removed.
With our finances, we get a feeling that things are under control. And with Biden/Harris things felt out of control. It's a psychological need, not really a political position that people were trying to address in their voting.
Harris didn't communicate that feeling of things being in control or that she could provide that psychological need for people. Everyone knew (except her supporters who were in denial) that she was a mainline progressive, and that progressives make things out of control. Her "quick change" in positions communicates someone who is not even in control of herself. Trump communicates getting things under control.....making the world predictable. The guy even handled an assassination attempt by communicating that he was "still in control" of the rally.
It's reassuring and even comforting to feel this way. It's a powerful psychological need. Even his MAGA is a statement of getting things back under control.
Really interesting theory! Makes a lot of sense to me, and is consistent with what is known about how people make decisions. It's a gut feeling that may or may not be rationalized afterwards in terms of how the decision will benefit the buyer.
I do think one of the big missed opportunity was reminding voters how chaotic the Trump administration was and refute the "good ol' days of law and order" argument. Show images of chaos at airports when he passed his Muslim ban, the chaos of the Charlottesville rally, and of course, tons of images of J6.
May I respectfully suggest, people deciding between gas and groceries , or facing the prospect of their kids missing summer camp, yet again, due to inflation, never give the Muslim ban, Charlottesville or J6, a thought.
Likewise, for anyone hit in their car by an uninsured migrant driver, or whose child has lost teacher time in an already overwhelmed public school, suddenly facing a dozen new arrivals, who speak 4 different languages.
I apologize, but these are not good points, IMO. No question there was chaos in his first term, and he's as much admitted he was unprepared, but you can't make this statement in a vacuum. To not acknowledge the unprecedented, daily attacks from the media, (surely you've seen the reports over the years of the % negative to % positive stories, year after year), from pop culture, from you name it, and that didn't lend itself to a chaotic impression? My goodness, have you ever contrasted an Obama or Biden (when he did them) press conference with Trumps? What kind of press coverage do you think Trump would have received presiding over the tragic Afghan withdrawal, a son's laptop full of mischief (you can bet 50 former intel folks wouldn't have lied for him), 2 wars breaking out, inflation, etc? Take whatever negative press Biden received and times it by 3, and that would have been from just the browser/social media news so many rely on.
Then you mention the Muslim ban. I believe you are making my point, the media jumped all over this and crafted a narrative to make him look as bad as possible, when in reality it banned a handful of Muslim majority nations, almost all terrorist supporting, with an exception process that was upheld in the courts. You'll recall, at the time, terrorism threats from Muslim extremists were real and very heightened (ISIS was a real threat). The move was prudent.
Charlottesville, I can't believe Charlottesville is still mentioned as anything but exhibit A for why Biden was so deceitful (He kicked his entire 2020 campaign off on this lie that was so easily proven wrong, 'very fine people'), and it supports my first point on the unfair media treatment of Trump. It only took 5 years, I think, for all the left leaning news sources and 'fact checkers' to admit Trump wasn't praising racists.
Oh my, then there is J6, all I will predict is, over then next few years you will see how much the FBI, the Dems, Nancy's farce of a committee, etc. entrapped, exaggerated and made this into something it never was, a deadly (except for Trump supporters) insurrection. Just look at a fraction of the work Julie Kelly (on Substack) has done on this, and at least you'll see the other side of the story. Of course when this happens, and you google it, you'll need to go to page 3 to see it, but it will be there.
Please do not take my rebukes as an attack on your character, I have no doubt you guys are good folks, who just want justice and a strong America. All I'm saying is the Democrat led Establishment (which includes the majority of Repubs, who only care about money and power) mostly gave us a caricature, not the truth. Trump, like all Presidents deserves criticism, but he's a fighter, a patriot, and an imperfect tool that God is using for good (just ending federal support for 'gender affirming care for minors' is massive, as this is true evil) . As HE is oft to do, HE has given us a window, what are we going to do with it! God bless.
COVID craziness! Many independent voters didn't love lockdowns, long school closures, mandated mRNA shots for unwilling citizens- including in some instances pregnant women! Then the overblown, dishonest and censorship heavy covid narratives in the big media (like CNN, NY Times) changed every few months. Trust was undermined, gradually and then all at once. Trumpism is ALSO a rejection of the "elites", the "experts", the conflict of interest laden public health establishment.. And the media!
I don't know if Dems could have done this, but some sneaky PAC should have reminded people that those closures happened in Trump's term. Show images of him with Fauci, thank him for Operation Warp Speed, all trolling of course, but reminding people that COVID began on his watch.
Good idea, and if only that would make democrats less covid believing. I don't like the covid vaccine and don't think its anything to brag about, as Trump does. But at least he never mandated it for million of federal employees and contractors like Biden and the democrats did. That included people who already had gotten covid, as well as pregnant women. Unpardonable in my view.
Today in the Seattle Times, U.S. Rep Adam Smith spoke of a totally realistic period of self-reflection that the Dems need to do that mirrors ideas mentioned in this TLP post. On the other hand, U.S. Rep Pramila Jayapal doubled down on progressivism and said the Dems lost because they went too far to the right and "most of what we're going to be doing is launching a big resistance." Yikes. Talk about denial.
It's hard to see where Democrats go from here. The Democratic party is largely controlled by wealthy, highly-educated, white coastal elites and the academic, financial, media, and non-profit institutions they run. These groups provide the ideological agendas and funding for the party. It was no surprise, for example, that elites from academia, together with elite-favored progressives like Elizabeth Warren, developed and controlled the Biden administration's New Deal 2.0 domestic agenda. That progressive agenda was loudly cheered by the media and other elite institutions, notwithstanding that progressive policies, once deployed, do not enjoy widespread appeal among Democrats, much less the American public. I don't see how Democrats can reduce or eliminate the power of their elite backers. This is not like the situation in the late 1980s, where the DLC redirected the path of the Democratic party and recruited younger politicians like Bill Clinton. There was no broad coalition of powerful elite institutions who controlled the party to vanquish back then. And I don't see how individual Democratic politicians can carry out an insurgency against the progressive left. The best an individual Democratic politician can do nationally is to disguise himself or herself as a centrist. Obama and Biden employed that approach and, after their elections, tacked back to the progressive left. It's likely that a Gavin Newsom or other Democrat will try to pull off the same trick in 2028. That's not a durable solution. My guess is that the elite power centers in the party will continue to exert dominant ideological and financial control over the Democratic party until these institutions dramatically change their ideological orientation. That's a generational problem.
You could definitely see this online in liberal spaces, where the general consensus was they had been told there would be a red wave only for them to trounce Republicans in 2022. There was no awareness that the GOP had "won" in House voting by three points.
Though within the upper echelons of power (and I don't for a second believe that once very conservative Democrat Joe Biden, but current dementia patient, arrived at his administration's priorities on his own) I think it was less about ignorance and more about a continuation of that power. They have ideological agendas they want implemented , and they had a very pliable executive in the White House, that none of it polled very well was basically immaterial. While Delaware didn't run a particularly effective campaign, there's no reason to assume competence or intelligence from these people when they've never demonstrated much before. I honestly think the Democratic Party will benefit from a successful shake-up in Washington by Trump, they're tied down to too much corruption and incompetence in the institutions they're inextricably linked to.
Progressivism wears thin on people where both spouses work and have little time to relate to what the progressives are up to. When the lock downs occurred parents began to see what is being taught in the schools and took a stand. Educators were taking their ideology too far and people started rebelling and I think this is part of the picture the liberals are missing - that even if the agenda is going as they want, eventually their ideology is going to catch up and the populous is going to say "enough!"
Dem Party leaders missed the magnitude of inflation and immigration because, by and large, neither problem affects them, or anyone else they know, in their daily lives.
For those dwelling in upper middle class neighborhoods or gated communities, migrants are rarely encountered, let alone, a problem. Migrants simply cannot afford to live, shop, or dine amongst the ruling class. If migrants interact at all, it is mainly as domestics, that became far more plentiful, and affordable, thanks to Biden's open borders.
Migrant students certainly are not found in the private academies, where Dems educate their own children. Sheldon Whitehouse, famously avoided a Black person in his haughty Beach Club for decades. What are the chances the good Senator is sharing his beach, with new arrivals?
Migrant crime is becoming far more widespread, but it mainly effects the Middle and Working Class. Two days before the election, Dem Godfather, James Carville deemed migrant crime "infinitesimal", and irrelevant. Inexplicably, Carville made the comment as Laken Riley's murderer stood trial, and with two daughters, roughly Laken's age. The public lack of empathy, was stunning.
Likewise, for inflation. Dems made life $13K a year, more expensive for Americans. The increase devastated Working and Middle Class Americans. For those of certain incomes, the price increases were barely noticeable. Especially with stocks and home values, at all time highs. More so, for those on the receiving end of the trillions in government spending. For them, the inflation was, literally, manna from heaven.
Incest is blamed for the fall of many world monarchies. Dems have much the same problem, without the taboo sex. Ironically, Dems lack diversity of income and address, and they like it that way. It often means, they also lack concern and empathy, for problems not found in their upscale neighborhoods and private schools. That is what cost them the election.
1. "A reasonable read of those results might have been that voters were exhausted with Trump’s antics and simply wanted to return some stability to the government, but that they did not fully trust the Democrats enough to give them convincing majorities. " Or maybe the voters were exhausted with the COVID pandemic and wanted to see if Biden could live up to his vow to "end it." (Spoiler alert: he did not - and a lot of voters were dismayed by the means he used to try.)
2. "But while the party was focused on securing these wins, they were doing little address two key issues that became voters’ biggest concerns over the past few years: inflation and immigration." Well, that's just wrong. Inflation and immigration were non issues at the end of Trump's term, and instead of "doing little" about them, the Biden Administration and the Democrats in Congress worked really hard to turn both of them into national disasters. They were so impatient to put their governing theories into practice after four years in the wilderness that they forgot Galen's dictum, "first, do no harm" - advice as valuable for politicians as it is for physicians.
I remember being so disillusioned by Biden’s left turn after running as a "get back to normal" candidate that I was actively hoping the Reps did well enough but not too well in 2022 so that all of the Dems who were watching this happen and pretending this was all normal would get swept out.
It's fair to say the immigration issue 'festered' under Biden, but the US had the lowest inflation rate in the G20. That was likely lost on most people, and didn't net him anything electorally, but it's worth noting that, from the more objective, long-run standpoint of history, Biden's administration will probably be credited for the *best* performance on the inflation issue in the post-pandemic Western world.
This is a fair point, and you are correct about America’s standing vs. much of the rest of the world on inflation. I think had there been an incumbent in office who was able to effectively communicate about the hardship the country would endure for a few years coming out of COVID, it’s possible voters would have been more receptive to his cheerleading about the progress the US economy was making and wouldn’t have penalized his party to the same extent. As it stands, he seemed to want to tout how good the economy was at a time when many voters disagreed, which didn’t land well with them and likely made it seem like he didn’t care about their concerns.
Indeed, that was a major mistake in retrospect. I would also hazard a guess that it was also difficult for him to figure out a way to effectively message on the issue, since for going on thirty years political campaigns had played out against a backdrop of falling prices and declining interest rates, including his first election campaign in 2020. I don’t think the economy-related messaging strategies he was familiar with were well-suited to an economic context more reminiscent of the 1970s.
On a side note, one of the mysteries to me is how Trump and other Republicans manage to avoid paying a penalty for unpopular issues associated with the GOP (eg.) abortion bans, undermining the AHCA) whereas Dems get punished for unpopular positions pushed by the broader progressive Left.
It’s a good question. I’ve been thinking about it lately as well, but I’m not sure I have a great answer for it. A few assorted thoughts:
Trump vocally tried to distance himself from the two most unpopular policies coming from the right in this campaign: a national abortion ban and Project 2025. This is what many were hoping to see Harris do as well, though obviously she was more reticent.
Republicans in competitive states did seem to pay a penalty for abortion extremism (and general extremism) in the 2022 midterms, and there were a few instances of that again this cycle as well (Robinson in NC, Lake in AZ, etc.).
The country leans right overall—and most battleground states lean to the right of the nation as a whole—so it’s possible that Republicans can get away doing some unpopular things (or being associated with unpopular positions) more often than Democrats can.
As for undermining the ACA, I don’t really have an answer. I suppose one might point to the 2018 midterm as evidence that Republicans paid a penalty for doing that, but really the results that year were pretty in line with a standard Dem wave election and could be attributed to a lot of things. I’d be curious to go back and look to see how many of the House Rs who lost their seats voted to repeal it, but my guess is it was actually very few of them since many represented swing districts.
I have been wondering this as well. My best guess is that extreme conservative viewpoints mostly reside in the conservative echo chamber. They'll get amplified by Media Matters, but most normies won't hear them until they spill over to MSM, like the Madison Square Garden rally - and they are quite unpopular views.
But extreme liberal viewpoints have been incorporated into culture - entertainment, education, and even corporations. DEI is everywhere, we're all familiar with affirmative action, celebrities get "cancelled" all the time. So that stuff is out front and center and sucks up all the air in the room and gets attached to anyone left of center.
Also the conservative media ecosystem is great at making mountains out of molehills and messaging to the point MSM picks up on it too. The "ban" on gas stoves is a perfect example of that. Its hard to imagine a liberal media talking point going viral like that.
It has been a sad, sad time in America, IMO, because abortion bans are seen as unpopular positions. Are you familiar with my home state of CO? Where we just enshrined completely unfettered abortion into our constitution while giving the green light to the legislature for them to be paid by taxpayers. I've never talked to a person who openly supports abortion up to the day of birth for any reason, paid by the government, but it just passed overwhelmingly in CO. Most folks, can't even read about the procedure for a late term abortion without getting sick to their stomachs. It does not matter if they are rare.
Yet, so many on the left hold this as a sacred right. Many are Christians. One cannot be a Christian and support abortion. Life starts at conception (even atheist biologists admit this), and we are commanded not to take innocent life.
Why are we not focused on the cause? We live in a 'I do what is right in my own eyes' society, ubiquitous porn, the sexualization of youth younger and younger each decade, and even stretchy 'nothing left to the imagination' pants for all women! Don't laugh, I know that's funny, but don't laugh, our entire society seemingly revolves around sex! It certainly took me hook line and sinker for the majority of my life, sadly. Don't you think if we focused on this problem then abortion would again become rare, legal and safe (just making a point, I don't want it to be legal)?
Obviously, this is a passionate issue for me, and I hope I didn't give too much offense, God bless.
Roughly 35 States now have the same or more abortion access than under Roe. As Dobbs shakes out, more states will end up like Ohio, were tight abortion access, was refuted at the ballot box. Eventually, nearly all 50 states will have the same or more access, then under Roe. It is only a matter of time. In the meantime, the number of abortions has actually increased, each year since Dobbs.
Moreover, there is no chance of a national abortion ban, even with a burned filibuster, 50 Senate votes do not exist. Much in the same way Harris was never going to deliver a national abortion access law. Blue States were never going to agree on one standard. The 40 week States were not going back, and the 16-24 week States , were never going to 40 weeks.
Abortion is only a motivator for the Democrat base. Not moderates, independents or swing voters. They had red-faced fury from their base in 2022, not a winning issue for other voters. The post-election polls and other data show clearly what the reasons for the loss were:
1. Inflation/economy
2. Harris was a bad candidate/dishonest/phony/would do a bad job
3. The Democrats have moved too far to the extreme left on social issues and identity politics ("wokeness")
4. Immigration/crime
Those are the actual issues, in order, cited by people who voted for Trump.
Good column, Mr. Baharaeen. I agree with most, but with one important exception:
"...For Democrats, the path of least resistance heading into 2024 was sticking with an incumbent president who was decently popular among the party’s voters..."
On the contrary, I believe that 2022-23 polls showed that half or more of Democrats did NOT want to stick with Biden, and that % only increased as the months went by. We wanted the next generation that Biden had semi-promised, with an open primary starting in early 2023. Unfortunately, Joe, Jill, and Joe's small circle of close advisors thought they knew better than their own voters. The blame rests mainly on them, not on Dems in general.
'Trump is crazy and I am deeply concerned about his policies.'
Which policies are you referring to exactly? The ones that didn't give us an illegal immigrant problem highlighted by the Biden administration shipping an illegal on our dime to GA where he brutally raped and killed Laken (sadly, this is not an isolated event)? The policies that were antithetical to the far-left "progressive agenda" with respect to energy and DEI that you pointed out? Or are you referring to the policies that kept us out of any new foreign wars? If Obama would have gotten the Abraham accords, he would have received a second Nobel prize.
Look, obviously Trump had and will have some bad policies, but I believe it's just too easy for folks to claim he's 'crazy' when we all just experienced truly crazy policies (Just look at what the Biden admin has done and tried to do with the Title IX changes, find me one Trump policy this 'crazy'?). With all due respect, I do not think you are looking at this properly.
Every day I enter our expenses into a data-base that I created....about 50 different categories. Then, at the end of the month my wife and I go over the data. We are retired, so can afford this extra bit of time.
My point: Immigration, Inflation, increased crime because of progressive ideas, ideas about sexual identity presented in public schools, etc., all speak to the same underlying psychological dynamic as the approach my wife and I take with our finances.....except 180 degrees removed.
With our finances, we get a feeling that things are under control. And with Biden/Harris things felt out of control. It's a psychological need, not really a political position that people were trying to address in their voting.
Harris didn't communicate that feeling of things being in control or that she could provide that psychological need for people. Everyone knew (except her supporters who were in denial) that she was a mainline progressive, and that progressives make things out of control. Her "quick change" in positions communicates someone who is not even in control of herself. Trump communicates getting things under control.....making the world predictable. The guy even handled an assassination attempt by communicating that he was "still in control" of the rally.
It's reassuring and even comforting to feel this way. It's a powerful psychological need. Even his MAGA is a statement of getting things back under control.
Really interesting theory! Makes a lot of sense to me, and is consistent with what is known about how people make decisions. It's a gut feeling that may or may not be rationalized afterwards in terms of how the decision will benefit the buyer.
I do think one of the big missed opportunity was reminding voters how chaotic the Trump administration was and refute the "good ol' days of law and order" argument. Show images of chaos at airports when he passed his Muslim ban, the chaos of the Charlottesville rally, and of course, tons of images of J6.
May I respectfully suggest, people deciding between gas and groceries , or facing the prospect of their kids missing summer camp, yet again, due to inflation, never give the Muslim ban, Charlottesville or J6, a thought.
Likewise, for anyone hit in their car by an uninsured migrant driver, or whose child has lost teacher time in an already overwhelmed public school, suddenly facing a dozen new arrivals, who speak 4 different languages.
Good points. I saw some Harris ads and they were very ho-hum. Constantly showing Jan 6 thugs could have had a major effect.
I apologize, but these are not good points, IMO. No question there was chaos in his first term, and he's as much admitted he was unprepared, but you can't make this statement in a vacuum. To not acknowledge the unprecedented, daily attacks from the media, (surely you've seen the reports over the years of the % negative to % positive stories, year after year), from pop culture, from you name it, and that didn't lend itself to a chaotic impression? My goodness, have you ever contrasted an Obama or Biden (when he did them) press conference with Trumps? What kind of press coverage do you think Trump would have received presiding over the tragic Afghan withdrawal, a son's laptop full of mischief (you can bet 50 former intel folks wouldn't have lied for him), 2 wars breaking out, inflation, etc? Take whatever negative press Biden received and times it by 3, and that would have been from just the browser/social media news so many rely on.
Then you mention the Muslim ban. I believe you are making my point, the media jumped all over this and crafted a narrative to make him look as bad as possible, when in reality it banned a handful of Muslim majority nations, almost all terrorist supporting, with an exception process that was upheld in the courts. You'll recall, at the time, terrorism threats from Muslim extremists were real and very heightened (ISIS was a real threat). The move was prudent.
Charlottesville, I can't believe Charlottesville is still mentioned as anything but exhibit A for why Biden was so deceitful (He kicked his entire 2020 campaign off on this lie that was so easily proven wrong, 'very fine people'), and it supports my first point on the unfair media treatment of Trump. It only took 5 years, I think, for all the left leaning news sources and 'fact checkers' to admit Trump wasn't praising racists.
Oh my, then there is J6, all I will predict is, over then next few years you will see how much the FBI, the Dems, Nancy's farce of a committee, etc. entrapped, exaggerated and made this into something it never was, a deadly (except for Trump supporters) insurrection. Just look at a fraction of the work Julie Kelly (on Substack) has done on this, and at least you'll see the other side of the story. Of course when this happens, and you google it, you'll need to go to page 3 to see it, but it will be there.
Please do not take my rebukes as an attack on your character, I have no doubt you guys are good folks, who just want justice and a strong America. All I'm saying is the Democrat led Establishment (which includes the majority of Repubs, who only care about money and power) mostly gave us a caricature, not the truth. Trump, like all Presidents deserves criticism, but he's a fighter, a patriot, and an imperfect tool that God is using for good (just ending federal support for 'gender affirming care for minors' is massive, as this is true evil) . As HE is oft to do, HE has given us a window, what are we going to do with it! God bless.
LOL, you sound like a Trump voter, which is fine, but you would not be the audience for this ad.
COVID craziness! Many independent voters didn't love lockdowns, long school closures, mandated mRNA shots for unwilling citizens- including in some instances pregnant women! Then the overblown, dishonest and censorship heavy covid narratives in the big media (like CNN, NY Times) changed every few months. Trust was undermined, gradually and then all at once. Trumpism is ALSO a rejection of the "elites", the "experts", the conflict of interest laden public health establishment.. And the media!
I don't know if Dems could have done this, but some sneaky PAC should have reminded people that those closures happened in Trump's term. Show images of him with Fauci, thank him for Operation Warp Speed, all trolling of course, but reminding people that COVID began on his watch.
Good idea, and if only that would make democrats less covid believing. I don't like the covid vaccine and don't think its anything to brag about, as Trump does. But at least he never mandated it for million of federal employees and contractors like Biden and the democrats did. That included people who already had gotten covid, as well as pregnant women. Unpardonable in my view.
Today in the Seattle Times, U.S. Rep Adam Smith spoke of a totally realistic period of self-reflection that the Dems need to do that mirrors ideas mentioned in this TLP post. On the other hand, U.S. Rep Pramila Jayapal doubled down on progressivism and said the Dems lost because they went too far to the right and "most of what we're going to be doing is launching a big resistance." Yikes. Talk about denial.
https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/three-wa-members-of-congress-talk-strategy-ahead-of-trump-presidency/
It's hard to see where Democrats go from here. The Democratic party is largely controlled by wealthy, highly-educated, white coastal elites and the academic, financial, media, and non-profit institutions they run. These groups provide the ideological agendas and funding for the party. It was no surprise, for example, that elites from academia, together with elite-favored progressives like Elizabeth Warren, developed and controlled the Biden administration's New Deal 2.0 domestic agenda. That progressive agenda was loudly cheered by the media and other elite institutions, notwithstanding that progressive policies, once deployed, do not enjoy widespread appeal among Democrats, much less the American public. I don't see how Democrats can reduce or eliminate the power of their elite backers. This is not like the situation in the late 1980s, where the DLC redirected the path of the Democratic party and recruited younger politicians like Bill Clinton. There was no broad coalition of powerful elite institutions who controlled the party to vanquish back then. And I don't see how individual Democratic politicians can carry out an insurgency against the progressive left. The best an individual Democratic politician can do nationally is to disguise himself or herself as a centrist. Obama and Biden employed that approach and, after their elections, tacked back to the progressive left. It's likely that a Gavin Newsom or other Democrat will try to pull off the same trick in 2028. That's not a durable solution. My guess is that the elite power centers in the party will continue to exert dominant ideological and financial control over the Democratic party until these institutions dramatically change their ideological orientation. That's a generational problem.
You could definitely see this online in liberal spaces, where the general consensus was they had been told there would be a red wave only for them to trounce Republicans in 2022. There was no awareness that the GOP had "won" in House voting by three points.
Though within the upper echelons of power (and I don't for a second believe that once very conservative Democrat Joe Biden, but current dementia patient, arrived at his administration's priorities on his own) I think it was less about ignorance and more about a continuation of that power. They have ideological agendas they want implemented , and they had a very pliable executive in the White House, that none of it polled very well was basically immaterial. While Delaware didn't run a particularly effective campaign, there's no reason to assume competence or intelligence from these people when they've never demonstrated much before. I honestly think the Democratic Party will benefit from a successful shake-up in Washington by Trump, they're tied down to too much corruption and incompetence in the institutions they're inextricably linked to.
Progressivism wears thin on people where both spouses work and have little time to relate to what the progressives are up to. When the lock downs occurred parents began to see what is being taught in the schools and took a stand. Educators were taking their ideology too far and people started rebelling and I think this is part of the picture the liberals are missing - that even if the agenda is going as they want, eventually their ideology is going to catch up and the populous is going to say "enough!"
Dem Party leaders missed the magnitude of inflation and immigration because, by and large, neither problem affects them, or anyone else they know, in their daily lives.
For those dwelling in upper middle class neighborhoods or gated communities, migrants are rarely encountered, let alone, a problem. Migrants simply cannot afford to live, shop, or dine amongst the ruling class. If migrants interact at all, it is mainly as domestics, that became far more plentiful, and affordable, thanks to Biden's open borders.
Migrant students certainly are not found in the private academies, where Dems educate their own children. Sheldon Whitehouse, famously avoided a Black person in his haughty Beach Club for decades. What are the chances the good Senator is sharing his beach, with new arrivals?
Migrant crime is becoming far more widespread, but it mainly effects the Middle and Working Class. Two days before the election, Dem Godfather, James Carville deemed migrant crime "infinitesimal", and irrelevant. Inexplicably, Carville made the comment as Laken Riley's murderer stood trial, and with two daughters, roughly Laken's age. The public lack of empathy, was stunning.
Likewise, for inflation. Dems made life $13K a year, more expensive for Americans. The increase devastated Working and Middle Class Americans. For those of certain incomes, the price increases were barely noticeable. Especially with stocks and home values, at all time highs. More so, for those on the receiving end of the trillions in government spending. For them, the inflation was, literally, manna from heaven.
Incest is blamed for the fall of many world monarchies. Dems have much the same problem, without the taboo sex. Ironically, Dems lack diversity of income and address, and they like it that way. It often means, they also lack concern and empathy, for problems not found in their upscale neighborhoods and private schools. That is what cost them the election.
1. "A reasonable read of those results might have been that voters were exhausted with Trump’s antics and simply wanted to return some stability to the government, but that they did not fully trust the Democrats enough to give them convincing majorities. " Or maybe the voters were exhausted with the COVID pandemic and wanted to see if Biden could live up to his vow to "end it." (Spoiler alert: he did not - and a lot of voters were dismayed by the means he used to try.)
2. "But while the party was focused on securing these wins, they were doing little address two key issues that became voters’ biggest concerns over the past few years: inflation and immigration." Well, that's just wrong. Inflation and immigration were non issues at the end of Trump's term, and instead of "doing little" about them, the Biden Administration and the Democrats in Congress worked really hard to turn both of them into national disasters. They were so impatient to put their governing theories into practice after four years in the wilderness that they forgot Galen's dictum, "first, do no harm" - advice as valuable for politicians as it is for physicians.
I remember being so disillusioned by Biden’s left turn after running as a "get back to normal" candidate that I was actively hoping the Reps did well enough but not too well in 2022 so that all of the Dems who were watching this happen and pretending this was all normal would get swept out.
It's fair to say the immigration issue 'festered' under Biden, but the US had the lowest inflation rate in the G20. That was likely lost on most people, and didn't net him anything electorally, but it's worth noting that, from the more objective, long-run standpoint of history, Biden's administration will probably be credited for the *best* performance on the inflation issue in the post-pandemic Western world.
This is a fair point, and you are correct about America’s standing vs. much of the rest of the world on inflation. I think had there been an incumbent in office who was able to effectively communicate about the hardship the country would endure for a few years coming out of COVID, it’s possible voters would have been more receptive to his cheerleading about the progress the US economy was making and wouldn’t have penalized his party to the same extent. As it stands, he seemed to want to tout how good the economy was at a time when many voters disagreed, which didn’t land well with them and likely made it seem like he didn’t care about their concerns.
Indeed, that was a major mistake in retrospect. I would also hazard a guess that it was also difficult for him to figure out a way to effectively message on the issue, since for going on thirty years political campaigns had played out against a backdrop of falling prices and declining interest rates, including his first election campaign in 2020. I don’t think the economy-related messaging strategies he was familiar with were well-suited to an economic context more reminiscent of the 1970s.
Biden will be more popular than Trump or Harris in four years.
On a side note, one of the mysteries to me is how Trump and other Republicans manage to avoid paying a penalty for unpopular issues associated with the GOP (eg.) abortion bans, undermining the AHCA) whereas Dems get punished for unpopular positions pushed by the broader progressive Left.
It’s a good question. I’ve been thinking about it lately as well, but I’m not sure I have a great answer for it. A few assorted thoughts:
Trump vocally tried to distance himself from the two most unpopular policies coming from the right in this campaign: a national abortion ban and Project 2025. This is what many were hoping to see Harris do as well, though obviously she was more reticent.
Republicans in competitive states did seem to pay a penalty for abortion extremism (and general extremism) in the 2022 midterms, and there were a few instances of that again this cycle as well (Robinson in NC, Lake in AZ, etc.).
The country leans right overall—and most battleground states lean to the right of the nation as a whole—so it’s possible that Republicans can get away doing some unpopular things (or being associated with unpopular positions) more often than Democrats can.
As for undermining the ACA, I don’t really have an answer. I suppose one might point to the 2018 midterm as evidence that Republicans paid a penalty for doing that, but really the results that year were pretty in line with a standard Dem wave election and could be attributed to a lot of things. I’d be curious to go back and look to see how many of the House Rs who lost their seats voted to repeal it, but my guess is it was actually very few of them since many represented swing districts.
I have been wondering this as well. My best guess is that extreme conservative viewpoints mostly reside in the conservative echo chamber. They'll get amplified by Media Matters, but most normies won't hear them until they spill over to MSM, like the Madison Square Garden rally - and they are quite unpopular views.
But extreme liberal viewpoints have been incorporated into culture - entertainment, education, and even corporations. DEI is everywhere, we're all familiar with affirmative action, celebrities get "cancelled" all the time. So that stuff is out front and center and sucks up all the air in the room and gets attached to anyone left of center.
Also the conservative media ecosystem is great at making mountains out of molehills and messaging to the point MSM picks up on it too. The "ban" on gas stoves is a perfect example of that. Its hard to imagine a liberal media talking point going viral like that.
It has been a sad, sad time in America, IMO, because abortion bans are seen as unpopular positions. Are you familiar with my home state of CO? Where we just enshrined completely unfettered abortion into our constitution while giving the green light to the legislature for them to be paid by taxpayers. I've never talked to a person who openly supports abortion up to the day of birth for any reason, paid by the government, but it just passed overwhelmingly in CO. Most folks, can't even read about the procedure for a late term abortion without getting sick to their stomachs. It does not matter if they are rare.
Yet, so many on the left hold this as a sacred right. Many are Christians. One cannot be a Christian and support abortion. Life starts at conception (even atheist biologists admit this), and we are commanded not to take innocent life.
Why are we not focused on the cause? We live in a 'I do what is right in my own eyes' society, ubiquitous porn, the sexualization of youth younger and younger each decade, and even stretchy 'nothing left to the imagination' pants for all women! Don't laugh, I know that's funny, but don't laugh, our entire society seemingly revolves around sex! It certainly took me hook line and sinker for the majority of my life, sadly. Don't you think if we focused on this problem then abortion would again become rare, legal and safe (just making a point, I don't want it to be legal)?
Obviously, this is a passionate issue for me, and I hope I didn't give too much offense, God bless.
Roughly 35 States now have the same or more abortion access than under Roe. As Dobbs shakes out, more states will end up like Ohio, were tight abortion access, was refuted at the ballot box. Eventually, nearly all 50 states will have the same or more access, then under Roe. It is only a matter of time. In the meantime, the number of abortions has actually increased, each year since Dobbs.
Moreover, there is no chance of a national abortion ban, even with a burned filibuster, 50 Senate votes do not exist. Much in the same way Harris was never going to deliver a national abortion access law. Blue States were never going to agree on one standard. The 40 week States were not going back, and the 16-24 week States , were never going to 40 weeks.
Too much inside baseball.
Abortion is only a motivator for the Democrat base. Not moderates, independents or swing voters. They had red-faced fury from their base in 2022, not a winning issue for other voters. The post-election polls and other data show clearly what the reasons for the loss were:
1. Inflation/economy
2. Harris was a bad candidate/dishonest/phony/would do a bad job
3. The Democrats have moved too far to the extreme left on social issues and identity politics ("wokeness")
4. Immigration/crime
Those are the actual issues, in order, cited by people who voted for Trump.
Good column, Mr. Baharaeen. I agree with most, but with one important exception:
"...For Democrats, the path of least resistance heading into 2024 was sticking with an incumbent president who was decently popular among the party’s voters..."
On the contrary, I believe that 2022-23 polls showed that half or more of Democrats did NOT want to stick with Biden, and that % only increased as the months went by. We wanted the next generation that Biden had semi-promised, with an open primary starting in early 2023. Unfortunately, Joe, Jill, and Joe's small circle of close advisors thought they knew better than their own voters. The blame rests mainly on them, not on Dems in general.
Correct: Biden promised a "restoration of normality"
Also correct: He didn't do it.
Somewhere along the way he bought in the far-left "progressive agenda," especially with respect to energy and DEI.
I am a moderate center right Democrat.
I don't buy either and I choked when I voted for Kamala.
Trump is crazy and I am deeply concerned about his policies.
But not to worry: The chief crazy - himself - will make all the decisions.
'Trump is crazy and I am deeply concerned about his policies.'
Which policies are you referring to exactly? The ones that didn't give us an illegal immigrant problem highlighted by the Biden administration shipping an illegal on our dime to GA where he brutally raped and killed Laken (sadly, this is not an isolated event)? The policies that were antithetical to the far-left "progressive agenda" with respect to energy and DEI that you pointed out? Or are you referring to the policies that kept us out of any new foreign wars? If Obama would have gotten the Abraham accords, he would have received a second Nobel prize.
Look, obviously Trump had and will have some bad policies, but I believe it's just too easy for folks to claim he's 'crazy' when we all just experienced truly crazy policies (Just look at what the Biden admin has done and tried to do with the Title IX changes, find me one Trump policy this 'crazy'?). With all due respect, I do not think you are looking at this properly.