this is why I think it's good to cast a vote for Kamala even in a safe blue state (or a red one) - the national narrative WILL change depending on margin, and a world where Trump came thisclose to winning again and a world where Kamala won by a lot play very differently with how his loss is treated
Reposted from
Andy Craig
True, though very marginally. But also, running up the score matters for how strong the perceived repudiation of Trump is. Tipping point there if she beats the 2020 NPV margin, that's not just a win but a crushing win. That plays very differently than possibly winning with a margin below even 2016.
Comments
The latter would be materially worse and even darker
Everyone asks why shit doesn’t get done forgets Congress and Senate need big wins.
"Loser" sense.
I kind of wish I'd voted for Biden last time, though I knew our candidate and like her personally.
Voted Mondale in NJ in 1984' :-)
Although I would completely enjoy watching Trump and all the heads in MAGA nation explode if by some chance he lost the electoral college but won the popular vote.
Moreover, vote downballot! Local elections not only more directly affect your everyday life, but the more you can do to dry up the bench of future national GOP candidates, the better.
Harris wins narrowly - anti-trans ads effective
Harris wins big - because she abandoned the trannies
Harris loses big - anti-trans ads effective
Harris loses narrowly - should have abandoned the trannies harder
we shouldn't be pretending that voters have any real control over media narratives, its cruel to make this out to be the fault of ordinary people
but Idr many telling him enough with the trans bashing.
Racism and misogyny, lil bit. Trans bashing? Meh.
my hope is that this has material effects on how Dems treat the subject
I do honestly think that this might arrest some of the backslide, or at least give more wiggle room to yell at Dems about it
here's hoping anyway
"Leftists" who want Harris to lose want Donald to win. It's a coin toss, and you want heads to win if you're hoping for tails to lose.
Here the deal making and compromise happens within the parties in the process of coalition building. In multi-party democracies it happens in the back rooms after elections. Not much difference.
That's because we have a multiparty system, unlike the US, so some parties will get a good percentage of the vote even if they never hold power.
So any government that wants to govern still needs to generate majorities.
There is no way around the US being a two-party state and only two viable candidates on the ballot.
In the US we do that at the party level so some party always wins the House and Senate. In multi-party parliamentary systems it is back room deal making.
The problem is that it makes the state and national Dem organizations think that there are way fewer Ds than actually exist and so they send funding elsewhere.
Because I sympathize with you - that’s really counterproductive action by the national Dem Org
Every cycle is a chance to demonstrate that more should be deployed in our area, though.
How wild would that be, though?