What he said was basically what I’ve heard from two friends this morning, both of whom aren’t British. It’s not Brit-splaining; it’s actually just one of many correct diagnoses
I think I'd feel similar to @Ruth, @The_Riv and @Nick Tamen if we'd just elected a pathological and narcissistic liar as PM (it has been known to happen) and US Shipmates started pontificating about it from a distance.
I'm not saying that it's intrinsically wrong for us to comment - any more than it would be for US posters to comment about politics here. But some tact and sensitivity is surely required, particularly given what we are all now up against. I'm sure there will be lessons for the US Democrats but now isn't the time to lecture them about that.
Just my two happ'orth and I feel I may have been insensitive myself earlier.
What he said was basically what I’ve heard from two friends this morning, both of whom aren’t British. It’s not Brit-splaining; it’s actually just one of many correct diagnoses
Which is irrelevant. The problem with man-splaining/Brit-splaining/whatever-splaining isn’t accuracy. It may be very well be accurate. The problem is the underlying attitude that people with first-hand experience and knowledge need someone with second-hand experience and knowledge to explain things to them.
He didn’t strike me as suggesting that we need his analysis.
Look, I get being sore. But I don’t think it’s appropriate to chew his head off. This is a discussion site, he offered his analysis. This isn’t a support thread.
Look, I get being sore. But I don’t think it’s appropriate to chew his head off. This is a discussion site, he offered his analysis. This isn’t a support thread.
I wouldn’t call saying “Thanks for the Brit-splaining” chewing his head off. That’s not how I chew heads off.
But then, I also wouldn’t go onto a thread the day after a British election that I knew left many British shipmates reeling to offer my opinion on what the problem was.
Any flavor of -splaining demonstrates a profound lack of awareness. It's not always laid on as thickly as we've enjoyed here, but the cluelessness remains.
The problem is the underlying attitude that people with first-hand experience and knowledge need someone with second-hand experience and knowledge to explain things to them.
It’s frequently been my experience that those who have been most insightful about problems I’m experiencing have been those with enough distance from those problems to evaluate them (relatively) dispassionately, while I and others directly affected have been too closely and/or emotionally involved to think clearly about them.
The problem is the underlying attitude that people with first-hand experience and knowledge need someone with second-hand experience and knowledge to explain things to them.
It’s frequently been my experience that those who have been most insightful about problems I’m experiencing have been those with enough distance from those problems to evaluate them (relatively) dispassionately, while I and others directly affected have been too closely and/or emotionally involved to think clearly about them.
Just saying.
And it’s almost always been my experience that when someone wants or would benefit from the opinion of the dispassionate party with some distance, they ask for that opinion.
@The_Riv My back is broad. And what I wrote was a paraphrase of my Pennsylvania-born good friend A's reaction, after a cold drink and with expletives deleted.
@Nick Tamen You'd be happier if I kept schtum - point taken: I'll retire to re-read a useful pamphlet on free speech.
Even Americans can face the consequences of their own free speech. 1A Speech is not absolute. If you're in Britain you have even more to worry about on that score. What you seem to need more, though, is something closer to a pamphlet on appropriate speech.
The problem is the underlying attitude that people with first-hand experience and knowledge need someone with second-hand experience and knowledge to explain things to them.
It’s frequently been my experience that those who have been most insightful about problems I’m experiencing have been those with enough distance from those problems to evaluate them (relatively) dispassionately, while I and others directly affected have been too closely and/or emotionally involved to think clearly about them.
Just saying.
And it’s almost always been my experience that when someone wants or would benefit from the opinion of the dispassionate party with some distance, they ask for that opinion.
Just some thoughts on the voting numbers. Best available information I think.
Currently
Harris 69.1m Trump 73.4 m
Projected total vote 152 m compared with 156 m in 2020
Projected vote share
Harris 74m Trump 78m
(Most uncounted votes in California)
Swing to Trump cf 2020 of about 3%.
And finally, the forecast polls underestimated Trump’s support.
Those overall projected vote figures suggest to me that Harris did pretty well, given the current unpopularity of the Biden regime and the relatively short time to turn things around.
The electoral college result will be almost a mirror image of Biden v Trump. I don’t like the EC because it places too much emphasis on swing states, but Trump would win comfortably on a total vote system as well. Harris did lose the swing states and I guess folks will analyse the detailed effect of her strategy there, but the swing to Trump was pretty uniform across all the states.
Yes, and the uniformity of it is, in the short term, the cause of most concern. It is eerie in its totality. It's odd. It's off-putting. It's confounding. And yet, no one is foisting any kind of conspiracy about it whatsoever. Courts across the country aren't bracing. Government buildings remain unmolested.
The electoral college result will be almost a mirror image of Biden v Trump. I don’t like the EC because it places too much emphasis on swing states, but Trump would win comfortably on a total vote system as well. Harris did lose the swing states and I guess folks will analyse the detailed effect of her strategy there, but the swing to Trump was pretty uniform across all the states.
Not entirely uniform. The swing towards the Republicans was about 6 points nationally and only 3 points in swing states. It's hard to parse out individual factors, but it seems like states where the Harris campaign had the strongest presence had the smallest shift towards the Republicans. The reverse argument could also be made, that the more an electorate saw of Trump in person the more it counteracted whatever anti-incumbent party sentiment seems to be at work in the general electorate.
Fair enough Croesos. On uniformity I hadn’t had a look at the state by state figures, was repeating a commentator. Thanks for the correction and observation.
The swing towards the Republicans was about 6 points nationally and only 3 points in swing states. It's hard to parse out individual factors, but it seems like states where the Harris campaign had the strongest presence had the smallest shift towards the Republicans.
And we'll never know if that was a ceiling for Harris or if she would have done better with more time. One conclusion the Pod Save America guys drew was that Democrats need to do something about their organic messaging, about the stuff that's just kind of floating around out there outside the states where campaigning is concentrated.
I note that the gap in the votes between Harris and Trump has narrowed to 2.5% with the votes counted from Calfornia having an impact. It won't change the result and Trump now looks very likely to get the 11 Arizona electoral votes. But it wouldn't surprise me, looking at the numbers of votes still to come from California, New York, Washington State and Illinois to see that gap close to under 2%. This loss isn't anything like a landslide.
On the other competitions, I think Kari Lake will just lose the Senate race in Arizona and the Democrats may spring a late surprise in the House. I hope they do.
Washington state went for Harris 58 to 42, which mirrored the Biden Trump percentages. My particular county remained blue while the Congressional District went Red--our district involves several counties, about 1/4 of the state.
I know the new Republican congressman elect. He is quite conservative fiscally, but he has a heart for social issues as well. I am hoping while he parroted the Trump line, he will move away once he gets in Washington. I know he will get several letters from me in the next couple of years
Remember, even though the national popular vote may be close, it is the electoral college vote decides the election.
@Gramps49 I know that, but not much else about the process. Are you saying there is even a chance the electoral college would reverse the result?
No, but there have been several times when one opponent gets the popular vote but loses the electoral college.
The best way I can explain it is the President is the president of the united states. While we follow the national popular vote, what matters are the votes within each state that will determine where its electoral vote will go. The problem with the electoral college is it favors the rural states more than the urban states.
Quick numbers update. Based on a bit of proportional analysis on outstanding votes, I now think Harris will top Trump’s total vote of 74.2 million in 2020, on a lower overall total vote in 2024. Don’t think Trump will get close to Biden’s 81.3 million. Despite the fairly obvious prejudices in play, that’s a pretty decent result for Harris. Trump will undoubtedly win the popular vote, by about 2%.
Speaking of the Democrats' chances re: the House of Representatives, pundits have been using the phrase "technically still have a path to 218 (House Members)" which seems to me the kiss of death.
Not sure. The slow count in California and the extent of split ticket voting is clouding the result. But I think the GOP will get a narrow majority.
Trump’s lead in the popular vote is down to 2.1% and now seems very likely to fall below 2%. Harris, at just under 72 million, looks likely to get a further 1.8 million from California, 0.3 million from Washington, quarter of a million from New York. Oregon and Arizona together will probably add another quarter of a million. It’s now odds on that Harris will get more votes this time than Trump did in 2020.
I’ve seen some discussion that the slow counts, primarily in states which vote Democrat, provide fuel for accusations of cheating and inflated views of the scale of the results. That seems fair to me. Trump has definitely won and public interest moves on.
But I’m not sure much can be done about that. The procedures to verify mailed in ballots are slow and can be complicated. The aims to count every ballot, and count them fairly, seem laudable to me. The 24/7 news cycle is probably not compatible with patience and thoroughness. Nor is the social media rumour factory.
On Saturday, I started reading Sanders 2023 book "It's OK to be Angry with Capitalism". Amongst other things , he argues that The Dems have been ignoring the concerns of the working class and become a party of elites.
Policy-wise that isn't true. Strong majorities of Americans choose progressive policies when given a safe, free, blind choice. Maybe it's behavioral -- elitism. One function of higher education is a perceived elitism. Conservatives have been railing against intellectual achievement and Academia for decades. Remember all of the utter bullshit about Jill Biden's PhD? Academic rigor and achievement is hated by the Right because it leads to people thinking their way out of stunted policy.
All of this stuff about elitism is just disguised anti intellectualism. How dare anyone know more about this than me? How dare they question the sovereignty of my ignorance,???
All of this stuff about elitism is just disguised anti intellectualism. How dare anyone know more about this than me? How dare they question the sovereignty of my ignorance,???
Which starts clear back when we're in school and athletes get more attention, including from adults, than good students.
All of this stuff about elitism is just disguised anti intellectualism. How dare anyone know more about this than me? How dare they question the sovereignty of my ignorance,???
So you think all those ignorant idiots should just know their place and meekly do whatever (and vote for whomever) their betters tell them?
All of this stuff about elitism is just disguised anti intellectualism. How dare anyone know more about this than me? How dare they question the sovereignty of my ignorance,???
So you think all those ignorant idiots should just know their place and meekly do whatever (and vote for whomever) their betters tell them?
That appears to be a false dilemma; what Thunderbunk says does not imply what you say.
But what do you suggest if the far-right is putting misinformation into the public sphere and proposing policies based on that misinformation?
Because it seems to me that if the Left challenges that misinformation - if it says that global warming is a real problem or that immigrants are not eating cats - then it's laying itself open to charges of treating the voters as ignorant idiots from people like yourself, and if it doesn't challenge the misinformation then it's committing itself to accepting far-right policies - to not addressing global warming or to trying to solve the non-existing felivore problem.
1 may be the only numbers nerd interested in this, but ……
Based on state by state trends, I’m forecasting a final populat vote at follows. Harris 48.3%, Trump 50%, others 1.7%. Harris gets close to 75 million votes, Trump about 77.5 million votes. Harris will definitely top Trump’s 2020 total.
We probably won’t know the real figures for at least a couple of weeks.
It’s pretty clear the GOP will win the House, but not by much.
Tangentially, Gaetz has resigned immediately, neatly blocking the publication of the House ethics committee report on his sexual and financial conduct. A real “two fingers to the DOJ” appointment as Attorney General. The journey to confirmation of his appointment looks interesting. I suspect the FBI have a file on him.
It has been pointed out (by Ken White aka Popehat) that Gaetz is who you appoint as a "fuck you", but not who you appoint if you actually want to weaponise the DOJ. He's too lazy and incompetent to get much done beyond modest wanton destruction.
It has been pointed out (by Ken White aka Popehat) that Gaetz is who you appoint as a "fuck you", but not who you appoint if you actually want to weaponise the DOJ. He's too lazy and incompetent to get much done beyond modest wanton destruction.
I realise I missed the best part of the analysis: "clown shoes are better than jack boots".
It has been pointed out (by Ken White aka Popehat) that Gaetz is who you appoint as a "fuck you", but not who you appoint if you actually want to weaponise the DOJ. He's too lazy and incompetent to get much done beyond modest wanton destruction.
Well maybe that is the point. Maybe Trump is looking for a fight and wants to demonstrate that he can drive through whomever he wants as an appointment. He can always fire Gaetz later if he decides he wants someone competent.
Any thoughts on Mike Huckabee as (checks notes) US ambassador to Israel?
Mike Huckabee is a Southern Baptist minister and former governor of Alabama who fully supports Israel and has said "there is no such thing as a Palestinian." He has stated support for Israel completely taking over the West Bank and doesn't regard it as occupied land.
It has been pointed out (by Ken White aka Popehat) that Gaetz is who you appoint as a "fuck you", but not who you appoint if you actually want to weaponise the DOJ. He's too lazy and incompetent to get much done beyond modest wanton destruction.
Well maybe that is the point. Maybe Trump is looking for a fight and wants to demonstrate that he can drive through whomever he wants as an appointment. He can always fire Gaetz later if he decides he wants someone competent.
Another theory is that this is a way to get Gaetz out of Congress without having to complete the criminal inquiry. Nominate him for AG. He resigns from the House. Nomination then shot down by the Republicans. All nice and tidy.
Gaetz coulda resigned without a nomination, but I guess this preserves, I don't know, something? It's not like he has character or a reputation worth having.
Gaetz coulda resigned without a nomination, but I guess this preserves, I don't know, something? It's not like he has character or a reputation worth having.
A real “two fingers to the DOJ” appointment as Attorney General.
Just noting that in an American context, since this is about an American election and American politics, that would be a real “middle finger” at DOJ, or “giving the bird” to DOJ. To an average American, two fingers means “peace,” or maybe “victory.” (Or simply “two.”) Two fingers carry no rude, obscene or confrontational meaning at all here.
Comments
I'm not saying that it's intrinsically wrong for us to comment - any more than it would be for US posters to comment about politics here. But some tact and sensitivity is surely required, particularly given what we are all now up against. I'm sure there will be lessons for the US Democrats but now isn't the time to lecture them about that.
Just my two happ'orth and I feel I may have been insensitive myself earlier.
Look, I get being sore. But I don’t think it’s appropriate to chew his head off. This is a discussion site, he offered his analysis. This isn’t a support thread.
But then, I also wouldn’t go onto a thread the day after a British election that I knew left many British shipmates reeling to offer my opinion on what the problem was.
It’s frequently been my experience that those who have been most insightful about problems I’m experiencing have been those with enough distance from those problems to evaluate them (relatively) dispassionately, while I and others directly affected have been too closely and/or emotionally involved to think clearly about them.
Just saying.
Just saying.
I think it’s best for everyone, especially me, if I just avoid the US political threads here for the foreseeable future.
Even Americans can face the consequences of their own free speech. 1A Speech is not absolute. If you're in Britain you have even more to worry about on that score. What you seem to need more, though, is something closer to a pamphlet on appropriate speech.
Currently
Harris 69.1m Trump 73.4 m
Projected total vote 152 m compared with 156 m in 2020
Projected vote share
Harris 74m Trump 78m
(Most uncounted votes in California)
Swing to Trump cf 2020 of about 3%.
And finally, the forecast polls underestimated Trump’s support.
Those overall projected vote figures suggest to me that Harris did pretty well, given the current unpopularity of the Biden regime and the relatively short time to turn things around.
The electoral college result will be almost a mirror image of Biden v Trump. I don’t like the EC because it places too much emphasis on swing states, but Trump would win comfortably on a total vote system as well. Harris did lose the swing states and I guess folks will analyse the detailed effect of her strategy there, but the swing to Trump was pretty uniform across all the states.
Not entirely uniform. The swing towards the Republicans was about 6 points nationally and only 3 points in swing states. It's hard to parse out individual factors, but it seems like states where the Harris campaign had the strongest presence had the smallest shift towards the Republicans. The reverse argument could also be made, that the more an electorate saw of Trump in person the more it counteracted whatever anti-incumbent party sentiment seems to be at work in the general electorate.
And we'll never know if that was a ceiling for Harris or if she would have done better with more time. One conclusion the Pod Save America guys drew was that Democrats need to do something about their organic messaging, about the stuff that's just kind of floating around out there outside the states where campaigning is concentrated.
On the other competitions, I think Kari Lake will just lose the Senate race in Arizona and the Democrats may spring a late surprise in the House. I hope they do.
I know the new Republican congressman elect. He is quite conservative fiscally, but he has a heart for social issues as well. I am hoping while he parroted the Trump line, he will move away once he gets in Washington. I know he will get several letters from me in the next couple of years
Remember, even though the national popular vote may be close, it is the electoral college vote decides the election.
No, but there have been several times when one opponent gets the popular vote but loses the electoral college.
The best way I can explain it is the President is the president of the united states. While we follow the national popular vote, what matters are the votes within each state that will determine where its electoral vote will go. The problem with the electoral college is it favors the rural states more than the urban states.
Trump’s lead in the popular vote is down to 2.1% and now seems very likely to fall below 2%. Harris, at just under 72 million, looks likely to get a further 1.8 million from California, 0.3 million from Washington, quarter of a million from New York. Oregon and Arizona together will probably add another quarter of a million. It’s now odds on that Harris will get more votes this time than Trump did in 2020.
I’ve seen some discussion that the slow counts, primarily in states which vote Democrat, provide fuel for accusations of cheating and inflated views of the scale of the results. That seems fair to me. Trump has definitely won and public interest moves on.
But I’m not sure much can be done about that. The procedures to verify mailed in ballots are slow and can be complicated. The aims to count every ballot, and count them fairly, seem laudable to me. The 24/7 news cycle is probably not compatible with patience and thoroughness. Nor is the social media rumour factory.
Which starts clear back when we're in school and athletes get more attention, including from adults, than good students.
So you think all those ignorant idiots should just know their place and meekly do whatever (and vote for whomever) their betters tell them?
But what do you suggest if the far-right is putting misinformation into the public sphere and proposing policies based on that misinformation?
Because it seems to me that if the Left challenges that misinformation - if it says that global warming is a real problem or that immigrants are not eating cats - then it's laying itself open to charges of treating the voters as ignorant idiots from people like yourself, and if it doesn't challenge the misinformation then it's committing itself to accepting far-right policies - to not addressing global warming or to trying to solve the non-existing felivore problem.
Based on state by state trends, I’m forecasting a final populat vote at follows. Harris 48.3%, Trump 50%, others 1.7%. Harris gets close to 75 million votes, Trump about 77.5 million votes. Harris will definitely top Trump’s 2020 total.
We probably won’t know the real figures for at least a couple of weeks.
Tangentially, Gaetz has resigned immediately, neatly blocking the publication of the House ethics committee report on his sexual and financial conduct. A real “two fingers to the DOJ” appointment as Attorney General. The journey to confirmation of his appointment looks interesting. I suspect the FBI have a file on him.
I realise I missed the best part of the analysis: "clown shoes are better than jack boots".
Well maybe that is the point. Maybe Trump is looking for a fight and wants to demonstrate that he can drive through whomever he wants as an appointment. He can always fire Gaetz later if he decides he wants someone competent.
Mike Huckabee is a Southern Baptist minister and former governor of Alabama who fully supports Israel and has said "there is no such thing as a Palestinian." He has stated support for Israel completely taking over the West Bank and doesn't regard it as occupied land.
We can only hope.