Sawfish <
[email protected]> Wrote in message:r
I've thought about this for a while, and I think it might be best to list reasons that have been used to explain the result that did not really have much effect.First and foremost, I do not think that the current US economy is in any traditional sense "
bad". Unemployment--maybe the most threatening negative factor for the bulk of the electorate--is well below any level historically worrisome level. It has actually been quite tame for at least 2 years, with hiring bonuses fairly common for in-demand
work.It's true that there was a sharp spike in inflation, and that the current generations voting have never really seen anything like late 70s/early 80's inflation--which this most assuredly was *not*--and it disoriented and frightened them somewhat,
but again, they still had their jobs. It was not "stagflation"--which truly *is* scary, and which *will* get a sitting candidate thrown out of office.Interest rates were raised to combat inflation (which largely worked as planned), but a negative side
effect was that it made housing less affordable almost overnight.But really, historically, none of this is enough for an incumbent party to lose an election. There would need to be something more.So maybe immigration? My guess is that while both the
economy and largely unvetted immigration did not actually directly affect the common voters' lives, allowing strangers into one's lebensraum has often been perceived as a vague threat. Too, making little official attempt to at least identify and
categorize immigrants *sounds* sloppy and most would view the current immigration regime as vaguely threatening and slipshod. A poor job of it...But again, this in itself would not be enough to throw out an incumbent.So if it wasn't the economy and/or
immigration, what *was* the reason that Trump beat Harris? Was it a bunch of smaller issues that, taken together, decided enough voters in favor of Trump? If so, what were they?Or was it...dare I say it?...a *conspiracy*? :^)Thoughts/comments...-- --
Sawfish~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~"Those are my principles, and if you don't like them...well, I have others."~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If a white woman couldn't, then surely a dark woman of poor morals who only entered race at the very last moment can't beat Trump either.
A white man could have defeated Trump though.
Of course, it helps that the elections weren't rigged like the last time.
Biden's popular vote in 2020 vs other candidates from both past and future elections stands out kinda like Nadal's FO record.
It's comically rigged.
This time, Jews, who control USA, allowed for relatively free election because they're desperate.
We know that Jews control or try to control both sides of the political spectrum in order to control the overton window.
At the moment they have problems with the democrats and their base, made up of dark people who are sensitive to Palestine genocide. Democrat base in the US is still not fully globalised and atomised, it's still people with their identity. They hate
whites, but they're still aware of the Jews and are not susceptible to holohoax stuff like the white people.
Due to that, it's easier for Israel to slaughter Arabs if the nominally right wing (white people's) party is in charge in America because such government won't feel pressure from its base.
Mind you, Trump is still not ideal for them, they'd rather have some truly evil "neocon" people like Bush or Romney but Trump showed he was willing to give them many concessions, he made pact with them. He made a deal.
You notice that with the impeachment hoax, Russia hoax, those Jewish hoaxes are silent now.
Personally I feel Trump will care much more about individual Arab lives, can't think of anyone in America who is more humane than Trump, he will stop the genocide, but will otoh much more brutally crush the collective rights of Palestinians as the people,
and will deny them any meaningful statehood, and they can forget freedom from Israeli occupation.
Basically he will end or try to end this 6 decades occupation and tragedy by formally ending Palestine as a state.
Remember Israel is Jewish ethno-state with DNA tests for citizenship.
And such Israel is already 25% Arab or so. Officially. Those Arabs have their passports.
Israel can't formally annex Palestine because then they will have to give citizenship to all Palestinians in Palestine and this would make Israel 50-50 Jewish and Arab.
So they're doing this 57 year occupation and treating Palestineans the same way US treated redskins. They can do whatever they want to them, kill them, destroy their homes, resettle them, you name it.
Jews already stole the land they've created Israel on, but the entire time, they wanted the rest of it, all of the region.
The goal for Israel is to annex Palestine and still keep ethnic majority in the expanded Israel. They just have couple of millions of people that stand in their way.
So in most radical scenario I envision Trump committing ethnic cleansing of parts of Palestinians and resettling them in some newly build cities in Saudi Arabia.
Saudis would pay for that. Trump is friends with Mohamed bin Salaman.
That would allow Jews to annex Palestine and end occupation.
They'd give civil rights to few Arabs that remain.
That's not absolutely preferred option for Jews, because Jews do want ethically cleanse Palestine, but Jews also want to brown Europe in the process to foster Kalergi.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/two-israeli-lawmakers-call-on-european-countries-to-take-in-gaza-refugees/
But I guess they'll be satisfied with just Palestineans being cleansed out.
--
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)