I’m not from the US, so I’m curious why Americans still wants him back. I always see him as a bad mouthed guy and was worse when he lost in 2020. But feel free to change my mind. This question is also for non-trump supporters who can think of one thing (if you can) on why he’s good for the top position.
That is a very good explanation right there. Very comprehensive, emphatic.
I would love to hear a design, a plan from the progressive left to solve these problems, a narrative that somehow manages to adress these fears these issues and offer another way for “disgruntled right wing conservative Christian average joe” and make left ideas more attractive and understandable to them. Because in the end, a progressive left has better solutions to problems than the right. Unfortunately it seems as though there is no such thing in the U.S.
Thank you.
Many of these things aren’t really “problems.” For example,
However, if there’s one place Hillary really messed up, it was further alienating blue collar, fly-over country Americans. She mainly appealed to the coasts, and white collar workers. Kamala is going to have to double down on Biden’s efforts to win back the Unions, and really appeal to blue collar. Promising them new, better paying jobs in emerging technology sectors; new training without forcing them into higher-ed white collar office jobs. Not everyone wants to sit an office and work on a computer. But you can still promise to bring construction and manufacturing jobs for things like windmills and solar panels. Promise to put every effort into opening opportunities maybe not in exactly the same industry, but the same type of work. Lots of folks like working with their hands; if Kamala is smart, she’ll campaign on bringing new jobs that pay higher, with high skill overlap to what they’re doing now.
I honestly don’t think people like being coal miners. But they might like that lifestyle: hard, reliable work with consistent, reliable hours, and the ability to live in rural communities where their neighbors are people they work with and know.
Cops like prosecutors. While there are absolutely bad cops, and bad cop culture, when police work in the neighborhoods where they live, they tend to be compassionate and want to resolve issues. Problems start when you bring cops who live in the suburbs and have them police inner city neighborhoods: they don’t know the community, and the community doesn’t know them. When the majority of their interactions with a community are with criminal elements, they start to see everyone in the community as a likely criminal. Plus, there are often race issues, as the suburb and inner city demographics widely differ. She could focus on that, although she really wouldn’t have any direct control over local law enforcement policies, she could campaign to have task forces working on incentivize good policy.
I certainly don’t have all the answers, but I think Harris’s path to success is to try to appeal to as many sectors as possible (as I’ve described in examples above) without sacrificing the core liberal value of tolerance. She can’t win over the intolerant directly, but she might be able to convince some people that they’d rather have economic growth and opportunities than to stick it to some brown people.
Thank you for taking the time and effort to add something substantial to the political discussion. I think designing and discussing actual plans to improve peoples situation in a constructive manner is what’s needed.
The greatest danger lies in simplification of multi-faceted political issues and appealing to strong emotions such as fear and anger.
It’d be nice to see more constructive, balanced, respectful dialogue.