Pretty sound advice from my point of view (the initial post).

I am not sure what the logical reasoning is but people on the left come across insanely aggressive even to those who agree with them on a large number of issues. 

Remember the following post from Sept. 13 (Page 79 of this thread, 4th down)

LMAO !!!

Sorry, that is a massively bullshit take. First of all, you find reasons why the Dems were doomed from the start. But the truth is, that in every election you will find reasons that are unfortunate for one party or another. So why not pack it in from the start, why raise 1 billion dollar from donors, who probably could use it better? Nah, you can win every election. Is it hard? You bet it is, but even if the basics are in your favor.

A longer campaign may not seem so fresh, but political stances are often pretty set in stone. A longer campaign helps to slowly grind away at these positions, a longer campaigns helps to solidify talking points that are beneficial for a party. The republicans did that, you see they always were on about border policies and immigrants. This sets in over time so that even for people who at the start didn't take this topic too seriously will think it is a serious issue at the end. That is what a long campaign does for you. If you set the talking points (which I would argue the democrats also did badly by choosing talking points that were irrelevant for a majority of people).

And you all have to stop calling people idiots who are different from you. Do you really think calling everyone idiots will make them vote your way the next time?

But the biggest blunder is blaming people not understanding economy. Bernie Sanders said 60% of americans live paycheck to paycheck. What does understanding the economy help these people exactly? Living paycheck to paycheck is a majorly shitty situation and all your insight into worldwide economic development doesn't help.

Let's make up a story. What if, the Democratic presidency instead of telling everyone to suck it up because worldwide economic situation is bad, would be understanding of the problems the working class people face. What if they create programs to help the people that are poor and are hardest hit? What if they supported their people instead of big corporations? Well, Democrats would win the presidency, many terms in succession. They would withstand the sirens call of fascism while the rest of the world gives in and elects or nearly elects fascist governments.

How do I know this? I know this, because this isn't a hypothetical about now, it is a history lesson. The world was hit by a major economic crisis about a hundred years ago. President Franklin D. Roosevelt created programs to help the working americans like the New Deal. The result was that FDR won four consecutive terms as president and the US withstand fascism while most of the world became fascist regimes.

So stop telling people to suck it up, stop telling them they "need to understand the economy", instead do something to help these people, and please for the love of god stop telling working class people they are idiots and start taking them seriously. Because they may have a different live path than you, but that doesn't mean you are in any way better than them.

EDIT: And because I know that people will come in here and scream at me: WHY DO YOU NOT CRITICIZE THE RIGHT? Simple answer: criticizing is a way to make better, and I am not here to improve the right. They are doing well enough on their own, probably because some strategists have recognized things I said here and used it in their favor. Or maybe they just lucked out. I don't know. But they don't need my help and I am unwilling to give them help.

Excellent post.  Just well said my friend.  Exactly right.  

Trump Picks Kristi Noem to Lead Homeland Security, CNN Reports

"Donald Trump is tapping South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem to head the Department of Homeland Security, CNN said, selecting a loyalist once seen as a potential vice presidential candidate for a job that includes securing the US border and carrying out a promised mass deportation.

Noem would join Tom Homan, Trump’s pick for White House “border czar,” and Stephen Miller, an immigration hardliner, in the administration after the president-elect takes office Jan. 20, CNN said, citing two people familiar with the decision who it didn’t identify. Unlike Homan and Miller, however, Noem’s position requires Senate confirmation."

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-picks-kristi-noem-to-lead-homeland-security-cnn-reports/ar-AA1tVpUg?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=8667a7b4cdc345b48163f313ff6c3c8a&ei=11

Another good take:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lrbcIu3Sh5U

"Vice President Kamala Harris’s resounding defeat at the hands of former President Donald Trump is not only a rejection of the Democratic Party and what it stands for, but also of the mainstream media, and the narrative they created for Harris. 

Why is that? Quite simply, because both Harris and Democrats fundamentally mistook the mood of the electorate. The mainstream media went along with the illusion that Harris and the Democrats operated under, despite substantial evidence to the contrary. 

Specifically, Democrats came to believe that by turning over the campaign to Harris’ “new way forward” and “politics of joy,” without a primary process or any serious discussion of the issues, they could somehow circumvent two key facts about the electorate. The first was that President Biden’s approval rating (36 percent per CNN) rivaled that of former President Jimmy Carter on the eve of his overwhelming 1980 loss to Ronald Reagan (37 percent per Gallup polling). 

Second, the share of voters believing the country is headed in the “right direction” was nearly identical between that 1980 election and the 2024 election, and not in Democrats’ favor. Less than one-fifth (17 percent) of Americans felt that way in a pre-election Ipsos poll, and a similar 20 percent said the same ahead of the 1980 election, according to the Roper Center. 

Taken together, the fact that the American people wanted a new direction, new policies, and new leadership, doomed Democrats in 1980 as it doomed Kamala Harris this week."

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/opinion-how-kamala-harris-and-the-media-got-it-so-wrong/ar-AA1tSTVZ?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=96bebebf354746f58ec093a330d59bb1&ei=15

I wanted to point out another weakness of the Harris Campaign.

One of Biden's big talking points was the cancellation of student loan debt. I think many younger people were mobilized and ended up voting for something that would actually affect them personally. Biden ended up failing to uphold his promise for mass cancellation of the student loan debt. Harris couldn't talk about it, and didn't have a talking point nearly as strong as that. Not only was trust in a democrat president eroded, but also trust in any president since the Republicans were clearly against the cancelling of student loan debt. Thus, turnout ended up worse.

I think the next candidate needs to come up with another impossible promise like that to get turnout to be as great as it was in 2020.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/movies/news/school-classes-canceled-support-offered-to-students-following-trump-win/vi-AA1tU91H?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=5f1f8ed20a324b35d9e2a34f899e7b1c&ei=19

LMAO !!!

Seems like a small thing, but I personally believe crap like that is pushing middle America to GoP.  Middle America really doesn't like the "snowflake" attitude.  

I wasn't happy at all with the results and went to work the next day.

edit

60% of Americans are living paycheck to paycheck, many doing hard backbreaking work...  and a bunch of kids at Ivy League are too upset to go to class.  I can only imagine what most Americans think of that nonsense.