teskeinc said:

BF25394 said:

tbergs said:

The Juggler said:

Gern Blansten said:

OnWis97 said:

Gern Blansten said:

OnWis97 said:

BF25394 said:

The Juggler said:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/donald-trump-mandate-myth-175155368.html

It really is bizarre. For the eighth time in nine presidential elections since 1988, the Republican candidate failed to obtain 50 percent of the popular vote. Where are all the thinkpieces asking why Republicans have so much difficulty appealing to a majority of the electorate?

The fact of the matter is that we have a closely divided electorate. Obama's 53-46 win is probably about as much of a landslide as is possible under current conditions. Republicans are going to end up with 49.8 or 49.9 percent of the 2024 presidential vote and about 50.5 percent of the aggregate House vote. That's enough to win, but they would be wise to pay attention to the repeated lessons of the 21st century. Overread your "mandate" and the voters will turn on you in the next election, as they did on Bush in 2006, Obama in 2010, Trump in 2018 and Biden in 2022 (yes, Republicans won back the House majority in 2022 despite the common mischaracterization that the Democrats "won" in 2022-- they defeated expectations, but expectations are made up; they lost what matters, a majority of House seats). 

If we had a parliamentary system, Republicans and Democrats would each probably get around 45-46 percent of the vote and one of them would have to cobble together a governing coalition with minor parties. Under our dumb system, you don't even need to get 50 percent of the aggregate House vote to be the majority party. And the Senate is even dumber. Two senators for Wyoming's 600,000 people and two senators for California's 40 million. Two senators for Vermont's 750,000 people and two senators for Texas' 30 million.)

I remember in the 1990s within the 10 total minutes I spent listening to Rush Limbaugh, he ripped Clinton for not having 50% of the popular vote (which was obviously driven by Ross Perot, when no such third-party presence had been there for the Reagan/Bush wins). I suspect he stopped talking about that in 2000.

I was a dittohead and bought two of his books. It is interesting to think that he will be remembered for nothing. Yet trump gave him the medal of freedom.

I neither know nor care what he'll be remembered for. That said, I kind of consider him the grandfather of our current political climate. From the little that I heard (and I guess you'd know more than I) his entire schtick was whining about and villainizing the left/Dems/libs. And now that's pretty much the entire "news" that a huge chunk of the country gets.

Yeah that was it. He just had a really good radio presence. He was funny and not really evil like he became to be later in life. The schtick had to get more aggressive to keep people interested. He gave birth to the Mark Levin style of idiocy.

Ha....Gern, as a young teenager, I used to watch Limbaugh's show back then too. I think my parents got me his book as a xmas gift. 

BFS is right---there is no mandate by Trump. The guy has run three times and has never gotten more than 50% of the vote. There is no reason to build a cabinet made up of the most partisan unqualified dopes imaginable...yet here we are. 



I am curious what the 49.9% will say in the near future when they realize the price of their bacon continued to rise or that we wound in a massive recession. 

To you last sentence, I would say that they clearly don't care and won't care. There doesn't seem to be an actual interest in whether any of the stuff Trump said will actually happen. Many only seem to care that their person won. They don't care about his character, the character of his cabinet or if any of them will improve their lives. They like what he said he'd do and approve of these non-traditional picks because these are the people Trump needs around him to carry out some of his extreme agenda items. In 4 years, they'll just vote for which ever person yells louder about exaggerated issues. It will just be harder for the incumbent party to separate themselves from the mess he's going to create. I expect that the dems will sweep back all branches in 2028 as long as they go through a rigorous primary to nominate a strong candidate and SCOTUS doesn't uphold some new exception that fucks up things. 

The first chance to take back the House is in 2026, not 2028. Trump made headway with people who don't vote regularly. A lot of those people will not even be aware that every seat in the House is up for election in 2026. Republicans have 50.74 percent of the aggregate 2024 House vote at present. The party of the incumbent president typically faces major headwinds in the midterm election, and they don't have a large majority they are starting from.

All they have to do is run ads that Democrats fight for men who cosplay their sexual fantasies and dress and pretend to be women so they can hang out legally in women’s restrooms and they will never hold a majority again. 

Gern Blansten said:

Lol trump is selling guitars to his cult followers now. I bet teskeinc, shecky and Linda will form a band. 

teskeinc said:

BF25394 said:

tbergs said:

The Juggler said:

Gern Blansten said:

OnWis97 said:

Gern Blansten said:

OnWis97 said:

BF25394 said:

The Juggler said:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/donald-trump-mandate-myth-175155368.html

It really is bizarre. For the eighth time in nine presidential elections since 1988, the Republican candidate failed to obtain 50 percent of the popular vote. Where are all the thinkpieces asking why Republicans have so much difficulty appealing to a majority of the electorate?

The fact of the matter is that we have a closely divided electorate. Obama's 53-46 win is probably about as much of a landslide as is possible under current conditions. Republicans are going to end up with 49.8 or 49.9 percent of the 2024 presidential vote and about 50.5 percent of the aggregate House vote. That's enough to win, but they would be wise to pay attention to the repeated lessons of the 21st century. Overread your "mandate" and the voters will turn on you in the next election, as they did on Bush in 2006, Obama in 2010, Trump in 2018 and Biden in 2022 (yes, Republicans won back the House majority in 2022 despite the common mischaracterization that the Democrats "won" in 2022-- they defeated expectations, but expectations are made up; they lost what matters, a majority of House seats). 

If we had a parliamentary system, Republicans and Democrats would each probably get around 45-46 percent of the vote and one of them would have to cobble together a governing coalition with minor parties. Under our dumb system, you don't even need to get 50 percent of the aggregate House vote to be the majority party. And the Senate is even dumber. Two senators for Wyoming's 600,000 people and two senators for California's 40 million. Two senators for Vermont's 750,000 people and two senators for Texas' 30 million.)

I remember in the 1990s within the 10 total minutes I spent listening to Rush Limbaugh, he ripped Clinton for not having 50% of the popular vote (which was obviously driven by Ross Perot, when no such third-party presence had been there for the Reagan/Bush wins). I suspect he stopped talking about that in 2000.

I was a dittohead and bought two of his books. It is interesting to think that he will be remembered for nothing. Yet trump gave him the medal of freedom.

I neither know nor care what he'll be remembered for. That said, I kind of consider him the grandfather of our current political climate. From the little that I heard (and I guess you'd know more than I) his entire schtick was whining about and villainizing the left/Dems/libs. And now that's pretty much the entire "news" that a huge chunk of the country gets.

Yeah that was it. He just had a really good radio presence. He was funny and not really evil like he became to be later in life. The schtick had to get more aggressive to keep people interested. He gave birth to the Mark Levin style of idiocy.

Ha....Gern, as a young teenager, I used to watch Limbaugh's show back then too. I think my parents got me his book as a xmas gift. 

BFS is right---there is no mandate by Trump. The guy has run three times and has never gotten more than 50% of the vote. There is no reason to build a cabinet made up of the most partisan unqualified dopes imaginable...yet here we are. 



I am curious what the 49.9% will say in the near future when they realize the price of their bacon continued to rise or that we wound in a massive recession. 

To you last sentence, I would say that they clearly don't care and won't care. There doesn't seem to be an actual interest in whether any of the stuff Trump said will actually happen. Many only seem to care that their person won. They don't care about his character, the character of his cabinet or if any of them will improve their lives. They like what he said he'd do and approve of these non-traditional picks because these are the people Trump needs around him to carry out some of his extreme agenda items. In 4 years, they'll just vote for which ever person yells louder about exaggerated issues. It will just be harder for the incumbent party to separate themselves from the mess he's going to create. I expect that the dems will sweep back all branches in 2028 as long as they go through a rigorous primary to nominate a strong candidate and SCOTUS doesn't uphold some new exception that fucks up things. 

The first chance to take back the House is in 2026, not 2028. Trump made headway with people who don't vote regularly. A lot of those people will not even be aware that every seat in the House is up for election in 2026. Republicans have 50.74 percent of the aggregate 2024 House vote at present. The party of the incumbent president typically faces major headwinds in the midterm election, and they don't have a large majority they are starting from.

All they have to do is run ads that Democrats fight for men who cosplay their sexual fantasies and dress and pretend to be women so they can hang out legally in women’s restrooms and they will never hold a majority again. 

HughFreakingDillon said:

Gern Blansten said:

Name this band...

Flashing Pumpkins

OnWis97 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

teskeinc said:

BF25394 said:

teskeinc said:

BF25394 said:

tbergs said:

The Juggler said:

Gern Blansten said:

OnWis97 said:

Gern Blansten said:

OnWis97 said:

BF25394 said:

The Juggler said:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/donald-trump-mandate-myth-175155368.html

It really is bizarre. For the eighth time in nine presidential elections since 1988, the Republican candidate failed to obtain 50 percent of the popular vote. Where are all the thinkpieces asking why Republicans have so much difficulty appealing to a majority of the electorate?

The fact of the matter is that we have a closely divided electorate. Obama's 53-46 win is probably about as much of a landslide as is possible under current conditions. Republicans are going to end up with 49.8 or 49.9 percent of the 2024 presidential vote and about 50.5 percent of the aggregate House vote. That's enough to win, but they would be wise to pay attention to the repeated lessons of the 21st century. Overread your "mandate" and the voters will turn on you in the next election, as they did on Bush in 2006, Obama in 2010, Trump in 2018 and Biden in 2022 (yes, Republicans won back the House majority in 2022 despite the common mischaracterization that the Democrats "won" in 2022-- they defeated expectations, but expectations are made up; they lost what matters, a majority of House seats). 

If we had a parliamentary system, Republicans and Democrats would each probably get around 45-46 percent of the vote and one of them would have to cobble together a governing coalition with minor parties. Under our dumb system, you don't even need to get 50 percent of the aggregate House vote to be the majority party. And the Senate is even dumber. Two senators for Wyoming's 600,000 people and two senators for California's 40 million. Two senators for Vermont's 750,000 people and two senators for Texas' 30 million.)

I remember in the 1990s within the 10 total minutes I spent listening to Rush Limbaugh, he ripped Clinton for not having 50% of the popular vote (which was obviously driven by Ross Perot, when no such third-party presence had been there for the Reagan/Bush wins). I suspect he stopped talking about that in 2000.

I was a dittohead and bought two of his books. It is interesting to think that he will be remembered for nothing. Yet trump gave him the medal of freedom.

I neither know nor care what he'll be remembered for. That said, I kind of consider him the grandfather of our current political climate. From the little that I heard (and I guess you'd know more than I) his entire schtick was whining about and villainizing the left/Dems/libs. And now that's pretty much the entire "news" that a huge chunk of the country gets.

Yeah that was it. He just had a really good radio presence. He was funny and not really evil like he became to be later in life. The schtick had to get more aggressive to keep people interested. He gave birth to the Mark Levin style of idiocy.

Ha....Gern, as a young teenager, I used to watch Limbaugh's show back then too. I think my parents got me his book as a xmas gift. 

BFS is right---there is no mandate by Trump. The guy has run three times and has never gotten more than 50% of the vote. There is no reason to build a cabinet made up of the most partisan unqualified dopes imaginable...yet here we are. 



I am curious what the 49.9% will say in the near future when they realize the price of their bacon continued to rise or that we wound in a massive recession. 

To you last sentence, I would say that they clearly don't care and won't care. There doesn't seem to be an actual interest in whether any of the stuff Trump said will actually happen. Many only seem to care that their person won. They don't care about his character, the character of his cabinet or if any of them will improve their lives. They like what he said he'd do and approve of these non-traditional picks because these are the people Trump needs around him to carry out some of his extreme agenda items. In 4 years, they'll just vote for which ever person yells louder about exaggerated issues. It will just be harder for the incumbent party to separate themselves from the mess he's going to create. I expect that the dems will sweep back all branches in 2028 as long as they go through a rigorous primary to nominate a strong candidate and SCOTUS doesn't uphold some new exception that fucks up things. 

The first chance to take back the House is in 2026, not 2028. Trump made headway with people who don't vote regularly. A lot of those people will not even be aware that every seat in the House is up for election in 2026. Republicans have 50.74 percent of the aggregate 2024 House vote at present. The party of the incumbent president typically faces major headwinds in the midterm election, and they don't have a large majority they are starting from.

All they have to do is run ads that Democrats fight for men who cosplay their sexual fantasies and dress and pretend to be women so they can hang out legally in women’s restrooms and they will never hold a majority again. 

They ran those ads this year and still did not get 50 percent of the presidential vote. Good luck trying that approach after two years of the Trump shit show reminds the low-information people why they voted him out the first time, and after the return of sky-high inflation thanks to tariffs.

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 
We just lived through the sky-highest inflation of our lifetime!

And as you know , your guy mishandled covid and broke the supply chain, starting the inflation crisis.

Congrats on fooling America and stealing the govt!!!!

Nobody stole the government.
Elon Musk bought it.

teskeinc said:

BF25394 said:

teskeinc said:

BF25394 said:

tbergs said:

The Juggler said:

Gern Blansten said:

OnWis97 said:

Gern Blansten said:

OnWis97 said:

BF25394 said:

The Juggler said:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/donald-trump-mandate-myth-175155368.html

It really is bizarre. For the eighth time in nine presidential elections since 1988, the Republican candidate failed to obtain 50 percent of the popular vote. Where are all the thinkpieces asking why Republicans have so much difficulty appealing to a majority of the electorate?

The fact of the matter is that we have a closely divided electorate. Obama's 53-46 win is probably about as much of a landslide as is possible under current conditions. Republicans are going to end up with 49.8 or 49.9 percent of the 2024 presidential vote and about 50.5 percent of the aggregate House vote. That's enough to win, but they would be wise to pay attention to the repeated lessons of the 21st century. Overread your "mandate" and the voters will turn on you in the next election, as they did on Bush in 2006, Obama in 2010, Trump in 2018 and Biden in 2022 (yes, Republicans won back the House majority in 2022 despite the common mischaracterization that the Democrats "won" in 2022-- they defeated expectations, but expectations are made up; they lost what matters, a majority of House seats). 

If we had a parliamentary system, Republicans and Democrats would each probably get around 45-46 percent of the vote and one of them would have to cobble together a governing coalition with minor parties. Under our dumb system, you don't even need to get 50 percent of the aggregate House vote to be the majority party. And the Senate is even dumber. Two senators for Wyoming's 600,000 people and two senators for California's 40 million. Two senators for Vermont's 750,000 people and two senators for Texas' 30 million.)

I remember in the 1990s within the 10 total minutes I spent listening to Rush Limbaugh, he ripped Clinton for not having 50% of the popular vote (which was obviously driven by Ross Perot, when no such third-party presence had been there for the Reagan/Bush wins). I suspect he stopped talking about that in 2000.

I was a dittohead and bought two of his books. It is interesting to think that he will be remembered for nothing. Yet trump gave him the medal of freedom.

I neither know nor care what he'll be remembered for. That said, I kind of consider him the grandfather of our current political climate. From the little that I heard (and I guess you'd know more than I) his entire schtick was whining about and villainizing the left/Dems/libs. And now that's pretty much the entire "news" that a huge chunk of the country gets.

Yeah that was it. He just had a really good radio presence. He was funny and not really evil like he became to be later in life. The schtick had to get more aggressive to keep people interested. He gave birth to the Mark Levin style of idiocy.

Ha....Gern, as a young teenager, I used to watch Limbaugh's show back then too. I think my parents got me his book as a xmas gift. 

BFS is right---there is no mandate by Trump. The guy has run three times and has never gotten more than 50% of the vote. There is no reason to build a cabinet made up of the most partisan unqualified dopes imaginable...yet here we are. 



I am curious what the 49.9% will say in the near future when they realize the price of their bacon continued to rise or that we wound in a massive recession. 

To you last sentence, I would say that they clearly don't care and won't care. There doesn't seem to be an actual interest in whether any of the stuff Trump said will actually happen. Many only seem to care that their person won. They don't care about his character, the character of his cabinet or if any of them will improve their lives. They like what he said he'd do and approve of these non-traditional picks because these are the people Trump needs around him to carry out some of his extreme agenda items. In 4 years, they'll just vote for which ever person yells louder about exaggerated issues. It will just be harder for the incumbent party to separate themselves from the mess he's going to create. I expect that the dems will sweep back all branches in 2028 as long as they go through a rigorous primary to nominate a strong candidate and SCOTUS doesn't uphold some new exception that fucks up things. 

The first chance to take back the House is in 2026, not 2028. Trump made headway with people who don't vote regularly. A lot of those people will not even be aware that every seat in the House is up for election in 2026. Republicans have 50.74 percent of the aggregate 2024 House vote at present. The party of the incumbent president typically faces major headwinds in the midterm election, and they don't have a large majority they are starting from.

All they have to do is run ads that Democrats fight for men who cosplay their sexual fantasies and dress and pretend to be women so they can hang out legally in women’s restrooms and they will never hold a majority again. 

They ran those ads this year and still did not get 50 percent of the presidential vote. Good luck trying that approach after two years of the Trump shit show reminds the low-information people why they voted him out the first time, and after the return of sky-high inflation thanks to tariffs.

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 
We just lived through the sky-highest inflation of our lifetime!

Halifax2TheMax said:

mickeyrat said:

in my lifetime

https://www.federalreservehistory.org/essays/great-inflation

Well, in fairness, perhaps the OP wasn’t alive or born yet? Maybe they’re still not?