The signs look good, and I think Trump will lose, but he should be losing women by 90 points. I don't understand women who would vote for him. Is it brainwashing?

Oh sure - there are good indications she can win, maybe by a margin which shatters most of the deadlocked polls.

But - it needs to get done and we can't take anything for granted. He *could* win. So, hedge your bets just in case.

Hah!

Well. I am cautiously optimistic. But you can never tell. Hopefully we will be able to see what the heck most pollsters got wrong in assumptions, IF they were wrong, which seems likely given so many .2, .4 and 1% margins.

We will see on Tuesday. But, you made it alive out of that chicken game :)

I love that Trump is having conniptions because A POLL puts him behind in Iowa. One poll. Sure, an influential and well-regarded poll, but all his staffers are running around trying to appease the Emperor and putting out press releases that that pollster is wrong. Imagine the scene if he ACTUALLY loses (as I hope and believe.) There’ll be more than ketchup on the walls. Imagine the staff. (“I wouldn’t change places with Ed Exley now for all the whisky in Ireland” ~ LA Confidential.)

This suggests that "the West blocked it" is just Putin's propaganda. — Michael

Yet many here enthusiastically and repeatedly promote these falsehoods. And notably simply disregard every other aspect, like the russification and things like Putin declaring more Oblasts to be part of Russia, not just the now occupied territories. Yet but selectively picking your narrative one can say nearly anything.

The Ukrainian situation might have started in some (out of sight) way between 1991 and 2009. — jorndoe

It surely started then. We just didn't notice as first the restoration/reconquest of the Empire wasn't so evident, even if many especially in the Baltics and in Eastern Europe warned about this. Perhaps we thought that Russia could move on like Great Britain or Austria once the empire collapsed.

Certain people wouldn't accept a wholly independent Ukraine. That independence itself meant that Crimea wasn't for the Kremlin to control, and their empowering influence over Ukraine would diminish. Loss. "Must regain." — jorndoe

At first, this was rather delusional and talk that fringe politicians could say. Until it wasn't anymore.

But of course, this is for another thread.

Yet the obvious issue here is to understand that the objective of Russia is the reconquest of lost territories and to break the link of Atlanticism between the US and Europe. Russia's hostility towards the EU is logical consequence of this. The more broken and disunified Europe is, the more influence Russia has here. This is a far more hostile attack towards the US and the EU than China has ever done (at least after the involvement in the Korean War). How this isn't seen as overtly hostile and people have these delusional hallucinations of Russia and the US getting together against China is incredible. Russia's hostile policies are clear and have been long term. And similarly Trump's idea that he can end this war immediately is silly campaign talk just for on niche of voters.

That North Korean troops are now at the Ukrainian front is extremely telling just where things are going.

Addendum to.
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/944276

WHETHER THE MAGA CIRCUS LIKES IT OR NOT, WE'RE GOING TO REJECT THE CLOWN. :mask:

>>> Roevember 1

I don't understand women who would vote for him. Is it brainwashing? — RogueAI

Echo chambers, conspiracy narratives, christian evangelism, low education and so on.

The general human condition is that we are always prone to bias and avoid complex thought. It takes effort to stay educated and informed, to think and be vigilant.

Everyone is like this, which means that the general public are inclined to follow the herd, follow what emotionally feels right, and with the right narrative, truth and reality does not matter. It is relative.

To generalize... everyone is basically stupid and populists and demagogues take advantage of this by both constructing false narratives, appeal to emotion and flood elections with so much conflicting information that truth doesn't matter anymore.

It's why it's impossible to use rational arguments with these people. Within these groups, truth has eroded so much and been replaced by emotional chanting that it basically is a fundamentalist religion. If you listen to his crowds, they're chanting as a cult. Meaning, they don't even seem to understand what they're chanting, what the implications are of the words they say. They blindly follow him.

It's the same mechanics that transformed morally good people in Germany to follow Hitler into death.

And with online social media, the speed at which this stupidity spreads, there's no wonder we've seen an uprising of this type of mindless cult behavior in many countries around the world.

If you are a person with power and you reach out your hand to stupid people and tell them that they are the best people in the world, you're giving them dreams and hopes they have never felt. They don't understand world politics, they don't understand economics or the justice system, they are fundamentally lost in their existential struggles and then this powerful figure, who's name is on many things in society, who's up there at the top, but behaves just like them, reaches out a hand... it's like a divine experience to them.

It's the SAME mechanisms as cults. Someone with power who "sees you" and tells you that you are chosen to be the new elite and that everyone who called you stupid in your past will be punished. Every family member who cut ties with you will return back and tell you they're sorry for not believing you. You're part of the promised people, the kings and queens in the new world order.

I have no problem understanding why people follow Trump, regardless of his behavior. People are more stupid than they think and it demands effort to always be vigil of your own biases. These people have no such abilities and thus are open to a total annihilation of their inner agency, making them into zealots and drones.

If 2016 was any indication, people know what will happen should Kamala lose. I wager she will win, but better safe than sorry when the participants of a moral panic still have a chance to receive that last, crushing blow to their psyche.

The bipartisan Trump team is a big FU to the establishment uniparty, but also the inevitable result of the political triangulation made popular by bill Clinton and its most recent representative, Kamala Harris. The two parties were nearly indistinguishable since then until now. Whatever the results, new parties are emerging from the old ones.

It's a nine ketchup packet storm for sure.

:100:

[ ... ] I have no problem understanding why people follow Trump, regardless of his behavior. People are more stupid than they think and it demands effort to always be vigil of your own biases. These people have no such abilities and thus are open to a total annihilation of their inner agency, making them into zealots and drones. — Christoffer

:100:

Satire:

Nice. I resemble that remark.

So it’s obvious to anyone paying attention, but just so it’s explicit and can easily be referenced:

If Trump loses (and I think he wins), he will claim victory before all votes are counted, scream about fraud and cheating without evidence, claim early votes or delayed counts (which are totally predictable) are illegitimate, and that the election was stolen from him again. Why? Because Trump is not psychologically capable of losing; that would make him a loser.

Given how obvious this is, and the fact that I’m calling it right now, you would think everyone would take these claims with a huge grain of salt— if not ignore them completely (the rational choice). The 2020 behavior is also quite enough to warrant waving it off as nonsense. But just watch — IF he loses, this is what will happen, and his gullible, irrational followers will go along with it.

Let it be noted. Quite pathetic, but clear as day. I’d bet anything on it.

Women got pro-choice amendments passed in Kansas and Ohio, of all places. I think they're going to turn out in droves to put one of their own in and send a message to the pussygrabber and his mouthbreathing supporters.

A republic, if you can keep it. — Benjamin Franklin, 17 September 1787

In America on the ballot today there is a simple, yet fateful question: FOR TYRANNY (Trump-Vance) OR AGAINST TYRANNY (Harris-Walz)?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Tyranny

Roevember is here! :fire: :party: :hearts:

Roevember is here! :fire: :party: :hearts: — 180 Proof

Are you nervous?

Do you think there will be surprises in the so-called swing states?

Oh buddy, I hope women just help this one out, as you hope they do.

I have a bad feeling people are just redoing the same mistake as 2016. I'm seeing a lot of "Trump is screwed" kind of material that just comes off as denial. As far as I can see, I'm seeing a lot of this day leaning in favor of Trump. So I'm already setting my expectations for a Trump victory. I'm not even sure I can end it with "if I'm wrong that's a nice surprise", which feels like a cop out. I can only hope that this time around, the Trump voters will suffer enough to understand that Trump doesn't give a shit about anyone but himself. The christian evangelists won't care, they're zealots, but he's not winning because of them, he's winning because of people who fall for propaganda narratives.

Actually, why does anyone ever think that their elected president is going to fix their life? So far, elections over decades just show how society swings back and forth. It's usually just about people having hope of change and getting disappointed. So they swing back and forth, without a thought in their head that their lives are unimportant to any president. That they're just meat to be herded.

The problem is direction, vision. There are no visions. True visions. There are just scam narratives. A true visionary president who has a real plan for making society better and people agreeing to that vision not out of propaganda, but out of a will to work for a change that is properly thought through. That will change things to the better.

But the system is set up to rewards scammers and narcissists, because those people knows how to play around with people's emotions rather than being forced to confront their intellect through systemic guardrails.

How I'd wish democracy was in actual serious trouble. To the point of people seeing that danger head on, not in some abstract analysis by experts, but in society. That way people would want to change the system because they would realize what the current system can lead to.

People are too comfortable at the moment.

Actually, why does anyone ever think that their elected president is going to fix their life? — Christoffer

They do not vote wishing their lives would be fixed but saved. The political slogans have mottos such as 'democracy is in danger' 'save America', 'Israel or Palestine existence', and the delicate topic of abortion and pro-life. One side of the voters thinks that if their opponents win, their lives are at risk. So do the others otherwise.

They do not vote wishing their lives would be fixed but saved. The political slogans have mottos such as 'democracy is in danger' 'save America', 'Israel or Palestine existence' and the delicate topic of abortion and pro-life. One side of the voters thinks that if their opponents win, their lives are at risk. So do the others otherwise. — javi2541997

Doesn't matter. The principle I described is the same. Swing voters goes back and forth expecting change, but their lives do not change. All they're doing is lowering the propaganda narratives down to even further polarized language.

People don't know what they want in life, or what they need, people just dream nightmares or utopias and fall into the narratives of those who can scare or give them hope.

My point is that democracy isn't in danger... it's in some ways already dead. And people need to realize this in order to rebuild it.

Today’s the day we get 4 more years of the old degenerate climate-denying corporatist con man. It’ll do irreversible damage and lock in 50 years of a reactionary Supreme Court and judiciary generally— and put the brakes on the little climate policy we managed to pass— but hey, Americans are fairly stupid and easily brainwashed, and the Democrats should have known better. The lesson they’ll take away from this is that they should move farther to the right, which is insane.

Of course, we may not know the results tonight.

The lesson they’ll take away from this is that... — Mikie

People do not learn lessons on a sociological scale. Individuals learn lessons, if the population is inclined and willing to listen to those who learned lessons about past events, they can change. If they reject these lessons, they will repeat history.

Society didn't learn any lessons from WWII, individuals did and their lessons were taught to the rest. Fortunately those lessons shook enough to form a consensus on where history should go.

Today, however, people do not seem to listen to individuals who want to teach. People are so called, "fed up with experts". They will only listen when they, themselves, face the consequences that would gives the lessons the experts already learned.

For something like climate change, this is what will happen. People won't want any change until storms and catastrophes absolutely destroy their lives. When the heatwaves, hurricanes, floods and stuff keeps coming and don't stop. When relatives and friends die because of this, then they will start to learn the lessons. And when the rest of us have said "we told you so" and they finally agree, only then will change come into play... far too late to make a difference.

And seen as more and more individuals who learned lessons from WWII disappear, there's no wonder that the mechanics of what enabled WWII to happen will start to appear again.

The fundamental stupidity of humanity as a whole and over history is staring back at you.

My point is that democracy isn't in danger... it's in some ways already dead. And people need to realize this in order to rebuild it. — Christoffer

I agree. But a large number of Americans think otherwise. I was watching the news, and experts on this matter said Trump supporters really believe that if Kamala wins, American democracy and security are in danger, when they are already flawed, as are most of the Western countries. Maybe spreading fear in the eventual lack of national security and individual freedom is a successful political strategy. I can't imagine the individual rights and freedom of people like Elon Musk and WASP families at risk, but surprisingly, millions of voters do.

I don't think Trump will win. And I don't think his stolen claims get as much traction, though tensions will arise, no doubt.

Let's see how my comment ages. My feeling is that he will get trounced in the EC.

Clown on me if I am wrong, as I should deserve it.

Clown on me if I am wrong, as I should deserve it. — Manuel

I won’t. I hope you’re right.

Toss a coin. There's your winner.

:sweat:

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/942675