Trump supporters are primarily racists.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/11/06/trump-harris-reckoning-2024/

Opinion : Democrats can’t blame anyone but themselves this time
Harris and her party must accept responsibility for Trump’s success among a diverse coalition.
By Shadi Hamid
November 6, 2024 at 7:26 p.m. EST

Eight years ago, after Donald Trump’s first presidential victory, Democrats could at least take solace in having won the popular vote. Trump’s win was a fluke, an asterisk in the broader march of progress. That narrative has now been shattered. This is who we are. This is a country in which Hispanics, Blacks and perhaps even Puerto Ricansbroke toward Trump just enough to grant him another four years in power.

Trump won, in other words, by building an unusually diverse, multiracial coalition, with the backing of 46 percent of Hispanics, 39 percent of Asians and 21 percent of Black men, according to national exit polls. Where, in 2016, Democrats could blame White supremacy and elide their own responsibility, now they can — and probably should — blame themselves.

There’s an irony, of course. In the final stretch, the Trump campaign trafficked in casual racism, demonized immigrants and generally appeared unhinged. There will be a temptation to dismiss the expanding share of Trump voters as irrational and oblivious to their own real interests. This should be resisted. The responsibility should be put squarely at the feet of the Harris campaign and the Democratic Party for failing that most basic of tests: the test of persuasion.

Even if Kamala Harris should have won — against a Trump campaign that was increasingly adrift and undisciplined — she didn’t deserve to win. In a democracy, no one is entitled to anyone’s votes. Votes must be earned, and she failed to earn them.

Instead of tending to her base, Harris spent her final few weeks courting a constituency of never-Trump Republicans that no longer really exists. Her string of high-profile appearances with former Republican congresswoman Liz Cheney (Wyoming) seemed designed to please no one in particular. On several occasions, the campaign’s leading surrogate, former president Barack Obama, criticized Black men for having doubts about Harris, as though by the sole virtue of being Black, there was only one right way to vote. “Part of it makes me think that, well, you just aren’t feeling the idea of having a woman as president,” Obama lectured, “and you’re coming up with other alternatives and other reasons for that.”

Meanwhile, at a rally in Michigan, former president Bill Clinton adopted a similarly patronizing tone toward Arab and Muslim Americans, chiding them for not lining up behind Harris. This was a version of the Democratic Party that was arrogant and dismissive, taking minority voters for granted and treating them like misbehaving children.

If minority voters — or anyone else for that matter — choose not to vote blue, they presumably have a reason for doing so. Not all grievances are legitimate, but many of theirs were. With the stock market reaching all-time highs and economic growth chugging along at an impressive clip, the system worked — but not for everyone. Given high interest rates, a housing crunch, an affordability crisis and crime still elevated relative to pre-pandemic levels, it was perfectly reasonable for poor and working-class Americans to question whether more of the same was good enough.

Even with ample time to prepare, Harris repeatedly struggled to answer the challenge of how her administration would differ from President Joe Biden’s. Unsurprisingly, 80 percent of voters who said their financial situation was worse than four years ago went for Trump. As sociologist Musa al-Gharbi notes in his new book, “We Have Never Been Woke,” the 2020 reckoning over racial injustice raised expectations for a new era, but little changed materially. If anything, he writes, the country witnessed an “exacerbation of inequalities,” with upper-income liberals “exploiting desperate and vulnerable people, whose poverty and precarity are prerequisites for the elite lifestyles [they] enjoy.” If tens of millions of Americans don’t believe the system is working for them, maybe it’s because it isn’t.

Today, another reckoning is in order. Election defeats as devastating as this one are an occasion for despair, but they can’t only be that. They must transform into a collective demand that the Democratic Party look inward and learn lessons rather than searching for scapegoats.

Democrats began the campaign season by peddling the fiction that Biden was physically and mentally fit to serve another four years in one of the world’s most demanding jobs. When that pretense collapsed, there was a mad rush to anoint Harris as the nominee and quash any suggestion of a “mini-primary” that might have tested her mettle — despite nearly universal concern that she was a weak successor to Biden. As Post columnist Jason Willick asked in July: “Does anyone really believe Harris is the Democratic candidate most likely to block another Trump term?”

What followed was several months of wishful thinking that “good vibes” could propel Harris to victory. In the campaign’s final weeks, Harris’s case was simple enough: Trump is really, really bad and a racist to boot. Which he is. But this line of attack was an old one that voters had been hearing for more than eight years. And perhaps, this time, they wanted to be inspired beyond lesser-of-two-evils arguments. Yet the affirmative case for a Harris presidency always seemed slightly out of reach.

As I wrote in a recent column, no one should cry over an election. We get the leaders we deserve. That’s the beauty of democracy. People have the right to make the wrong choice. And they made it. For the rest of us, the urgent question is whether we will respond with wisdom and much-needed self-criticism. Will we condemn our fellow Americans for their choice — or will we make a genuine effort to understand how the Harris campaign and the Democratic Party lost their way? For the sake of the country, I hope it’s the latter.

Opinion by Shadi Hamid
Shadi Hamid is a Post columnist. He is also a research professor of Islamic studies at Fuller Seminary and the author of several books, including "The Problem of Democracy" and "Islamic Exceptionalism."follow on X @shadihamid
​

 

Did this writer just tell us that 73 million voters made the wrong choice. Lol

 

What type of political candidate do Democrats chose because they get called terrorist supporters?

Because apparently when a conservative feels insulted they just have to vote in a fascist.

So Democrats chose candidates based on how insulted they feel?

Like is that why leftists like Bernie Sanders? Because he "owns the right wing cucks"?

 

I think the point you are missing is, most conservatives could care less what leftist think...the lack of self awareness, real world intelligence, and constant projection is evidence of where they're minds are. I'm sorry you are hurting, have you heard of the T clinic, they may be able to alleviate some of your issues.

 

But that is the thing I never heard the idea of leftists altering the type of political candidate they support based on feeling insulted. I hear it all the time with conservative voters. They also say how them feeling insulted made them like someone like Trump.

I'm just curious to why conservatives dictate whom to support to run the executive branch of the federal government based on how insulted they felt on online forums?

Can you explain this phenomenon of why conservative voters are more sensitive like this? Is it the hormone therapy due to feelings of insecurity because of their T levels making them seek hormonal treatment and that treatment can elevate emotions and sensitivity? Is that a plausible explanation?

 

Calling someone a racist or a nazi is extremely charged and inciteful language. It's language as bad as it gets in the modern lexicon.

If you call someone that, which the left has done to every Republican for decades, they will be not want to speak with you, they will not want to make deals with you, they will not want to broker any type of rapprochement with you and they sure as hell aren't going to be inspired to join you or your political movement.

They will hate you for horrible insult and batten down the hatches.

They will burn the ships and you'll have no rapprochement or productive dialogue at all.

So, that's where we sit, in a deeply antagonistic and polarized world.

Mostly because irresponsible, reckless and inciteful rhetoric being used by people like you for decades now.

 

But that's what I don't get. Why don't leftists alter who they vote for because they got called terrorist supporters or Islamic terror apologists, unAmerican, Maoists all these decades?

 

Dude, I get it, take your victory lap, but act like you've won before (Past 16 years you have had 4 years)

I think even if you're on the other side of either party, there are super nice gop folks, we dont agree but we talk civil......................you seem more like a maga bro, who just wants to flex, and TBH I don't care about what you think either so where does that leave us..........were just going to act like a prick when each win?

Just remember this could be cyclical and in 4 years when the USA is under deluge from tariffs and draconian tactics, the people will want a change...................so like I said, take your victory lap, have some fun, hats off to ya but act like you know how to win........

 

Because that rhetoric isn't as pervasive or all consuming from the right. Nor is it nearly as inciteful or charged for most people.

Leftist cannot go three sentences without calling Republicans Nazis or racists and haven't for decades.

Calling someone "unAmerican" isn't in the same universe as calling someone a "nazi" - which has happened to every Republican of the 21st century.

 

Well "Nazi" is a term reserved for extreme right wing politics in a colloquial sense so it makes sense that you'll find some rando somewhere on the planet calling GOP politicians Nazis just like you'll find someone somewhere on the planet calling any Democrat politician a commie. It's a pointless exercise examining the claims of random people on the planet calling candidates Nazis or commies. Democrat political leaders haven't called any Bush jr era politicians Nazis. I'm sure you can find countless examples of GOP politicians calling Democrat politicians commies though.


But this is irrelevant to the most disturbing aspect of hate rhetoric when it comes to right wing politics and left wing politics. Right wing hate is centered around attacking core traits like ethnicity and creating fear campaigns targeting ethnic and minority groups while the left will have harsh rhetoric like labeling people Nazis based purely on traits that people chose for themselves like their political affiliation. A Hatian American cannot escape his or her ethnicity and the blood libel stereotypes right wing politicians spread of their ethnicity. A person born into a Muslim family can't escape the GOP label of them being inherently more dangerous people who need to be surveilled more because they are more prone to terrorism.

If a MAGA person doesn't want to be called a Nazi, don't defend presidential candidates that say migrants poison the blood of the country.


It's the type of hate that inspires mass shootings in a Hispanic majority neighborhood Walmart.

 

It's crazy to me that conservatives are talking about unity when they insult people too.

Meanwhile...
https://www.independent.co.uk/life-...reproductive-rights-us-election-b2643207.html

I could pull an @AroundTheWorld and post nothing but republicans and conservatives saying clearly CLEARLY hateful things and yet we are all just supposed to sit there and take it.

In fact. Here is more.





Like this is everyday. All the time. Yet you have people here going "No, it doesn't exist." trying to gaslight you andthese won't even be small accounts.

Let me say this again. Not. Small. Accounts.

These accounts are big, sometimes monetized, not some rando with 20 likes on a comment but someone with a megaphone.

A woman literally BLEW up on conservative media for saying the n-word and being blatantly racist. No other reason. The right platformed her BECAUSE she was racist.

Like it really isn't hard to find ANY form of hate. Maybe I'll just post it down here constantly to remind others it exists since people keep going "Gee, why are we being called racist and sexist? I don't get it."

 

calling half the country racist is wild, this talk is part of the reason DNC lost. maybe try to appeal to white male voters instead of talking down to them?

 

How can I make white people who defend presidential candidates who say migrants poisoning the blood of the country feel comfortable and welcomed? I'm here to make sure people who defend fascists don't feel threatened or felt left out.

 

bro i want the DNC to win lol.

 

https://www.dispatch.com/story/news...eing-reported-in-multiple-states/76110486007/

Trump wins and this starts happening. Coincidence?

 

Andrew Tate and Nick Fuentes are ****ing idiots. They are Republican?