• Sanctus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    26 days ago

    No, this was our last chance to fix the climate. Among the infinite amounts of problems we now face. No matter what wild regime we are under at the end of this four years will have 25 years at max to conquer, pillage, and rape before the climate ends it all. We’re fucked.

  • TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    26 days ago

    The economy right now is doing very well…

    And yet the economy, and people’s fears about it, were the main reason Trump won. Until liberal elites like this guy get it through their thick fucking skulls that how the majority of people FEEL about the economy is INFINITELY more important than what the economic indicators say, they will continue to lose. If people tell you they don’t feel good about the state of the economy, believe them. Don’t ignore them, don’t wave them off, don’t dismiss them as ignorant morons, believe them and listen to them.

    • Billiam@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      26 days ago

      And how do you explain to someone that how they “feel” about the economy is factually wrong? That all indicators show a healthy economy that has mostly recovered to pre-COVID levels of production, inflation is a global (not US localized) event, and even accounting for greedflation wages and purchasing power were up compared to the last 20 years?

      You can’t. The same way you can’t tell them that the government isn’t doing free sex change operations on prisoners or that children aren’t pissing in litter boxes in school- they want to believe those things are true, because their authority figures have told them those things are true. The second you point out that the US has had significantly less inflation than other countries because of what the Fed did, or that the record-high stock market and low unemployment rates indicate an economy that is expanding, or that there’s been a severe bird-flu outbreak that has impacted chicken and egg stocks which in turn has increased their prices, you get called a “liberal elite” who doesn’t care about how Joe Q. Flyover feels about his grocery bill.

      So the Joe Q. Flyover votes to give power to the asshole oligarchs who caused this whole mess in the first place, because he “feels” that they do better on the nebulous “economy”.

      • TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        26 days ago

        And how do you explain to someone that how they “feel” about the economy is factually wrong?

        There is no such thing as a factually wrong feeling. This is everything that’s wrong with the liberal elites. The people say they don’t feel great about things and the elites simply look down their nose at them and say, “you’re factually wrong.”

        all indicators show a healthy economy

        Fuck.Your.Indicators.

        If a majority of people don’t FEEL like the economy is doing well, then it’s not doing well. Period.

        • PorradaVFR@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          26 days ago

          This is mental.

          There is empirical reality. If its raining your feelings that it’s sunny are just fucking wrong.

          The root problem is people being isolated within media and social bubbles where they are not being told the truth. Being barraged by “your feelings are knowledge”. They’re not.

          Did the Democrats reach those voters? Clearly not. But the fact remains the economy is not a legitimate reason to opt for policies that are all but certain to make it worse. Quantifiably so.

          To wit - I feel like there’s no rational basis for the outfome of the election. Does that change the fact? Is embracing my feelings going to make them real? How then to refute aside from “no, that’s wrong?”

          • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            26 days ago

            We are not dealing with an electorate that believes in empirical reality. Anyone who runs a campaign expecting people to believe statistics over their own lived experiences is bound to lose. As we saw on Tuesday.

            • PorradaVFR@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              26 days ago

              Agreed - but how then do you reach someone not acknowledging the reality of their world?

              If Timmy believes with all his heart there’s a monster under his bed is the answer to agree with him or show him time and again that, no there isn’t until he realizes it to be true?

              Are we supposed to embrace it’s now a post-factual world?

              • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                26 days ago

                Apparently we do if we want to win elections.

                As for Timmy: I’d find a shiny rock and have him participate in a ceremony to make it monster repellent. Then when he’s scared he can rub the rock and the monster will go away.

                If you want someone’s support you need to meet them where they’re at, not where you’d like them to be.

                • PorradaVFR@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  26 days ago

                  I sadly think that’s an excellent point. I truly believed a message of hope and compassion woukd resonate far more than grievance and retribution. I believed most of my fellow citizens want optimism in leadership.

          • TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            26 days ago

            But a person’s feelings about their economic and financial situation is not something that can be proven “wrong” empirically. If a person feels stressed about making rent, or frustrated about higher grocery prices, or pessimistic about their job prospects, there is no study or experiment you can conduct that can empirically prove those feelings or anxieties are “wrong.”

            It’s not so much that people are claiming that the economic indicators are false or incorrect, because that is something that can be definitely disproven, it’s that they don’t feel great about the economy DESPITE the indicators being good, which means the economic indicators might not be very good at actually indicating how people are going to feel about the economy.

            • PorradaVFR@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              26 days ago

              Sure and I get it. I’m not on a yacht to be sure.

              But how do you respond to a nebulous feeling? Biden took millions of loans off people’s shoulders. Kamala was specifically citing lower tax bills and home loan support. The GOP will deliver no such relief.

              I heard time and again the economy is stable - AND people are still struggling. Hell she pointed out high prices and corporate profiteering. It wasn’t ignored.

              That’s where I slam into a wall. Opting for “likely way worse” when “ok but could be better” was on the table.

              Some people just want to watch the world burn.

              • TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                26 days ago

                I don’t know what messaging would have worked better, and I don’t know why people chose Trump over Kamala. I don’t believe Trump will make their situations better, in fact I think he likely will make them worse, but a majority of voters didn’t see it that way. Again, I don’t know why that is, other than at some point it became a popular idea that Trump was simply “better on the economy.”

                What I really, really want people to understand is that while I don’t understand why people chose Trump that doesn’t mean the economic anxieties that drove them to do it are not real. They are real, and their feelings about the economy should not be dismissed because they don’t necessarily align with what the economic indicators seem to be telling us.

        • Billiam@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          26 days ago

          Thank you for proving my point better than I ever could.

          As a famous right-wing grifter said, “Facts don’t care about your feelings.”

          If a majority of people don’t FEEL like the economy is doing well, then it’s not doing well. Period.

          Is there a fediverse version of /r/confidentlyincorrect?

          • TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            26 days ago

            Thank you for proving my point better than I ever could.

            You’ve proven nothing. Feelings are not hypotheses that can be tested through experimentation or research. There is no objectively right or correct emotional reaction to a situation or experience. If someone feels anxiety or stress about their economic situation, there is no objective, verifiable way of proving that feeling is “factually wrong.”

            • Billiam@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              26 days ago

              You’re conflating how someone feels about a situation, with whether that feeling is rational, then screaming about the “lIBeral ELiteS!” when that is pointed out to you.

              People can feel whatever they want about the economy. The question is, should they feel that way? And by literally any possible way to measure that, the answer is no.

              Or to put it another way, if I asked you why you feel the economy is bad, and you can’t point to anything to explain that it is (or flatly refuse to accept any explanation) that I give, then you should rightly be told you’re wrong, because you are.

              • TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                26 days ago

                People can feel whatever they want about the economy.

                Yes, that’s true.

                The question is, should they feel that way?

                You’re making a normative claim. It’s the is/ought distinction. There is no objectively true way to determine how someone ought to feel. You think they shouldn’t feel that way. Yet, they feel that way regardless. It’s not up to you, you are not an all powerful god who gets to decide how people should feel.

                Or to put it another way, if I asked you why you feel the economy is bad, and you can’t point to anything to explain that it is (or flatly refuse to accept any explanation) that I give, then you should rightly be told you’re wrong, because you are.

                I’m sure if you asked them they would give you a number of reasons for why they feel the economy isn’t doing well. They might say they feel housing prices are too high, or that they’re struggling to pay their bills, or that they feel pessimistic about their employment prospects, or that they’re worried they won’t be able to save enough for retirement, or that healthcare costs are too high, etc, etc.

    • Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      26 days ago

      And yet the economy, and people’s fears about it, were the main reason Trump won. Until liberal elites like this guy get it through their thick fucking skulls that how the majority of people FEEL about the economy is INFINITELY more important than what the economic indicators say,

      I cannot stress how true this is, and it’s something I’ve been saying for years.

      If you are in an election, and your opponent is saying that monkeys are flying out of your ass and terrorizing the city, logic tells you you should ignore his crazy antics and tell him to go back to the park and preach to the pigeons. But here’s the problem. If 51% of the people you need to vote for you believe that monkeys flying out of your ass is their #1 problem, you had better come up with a plan to handle monkeys flying out of your ass. I mean sure, you can try using logic and reasoning to say “Look, there are no flying monkeys coming out of my ass and not a single one has been seen in the city.” But if those 51% really believe in flying monkeys, you’ll be using that logic during your concession speech.

      It’s one of those situations where you can do everything right and just lose anyway. Kamala Harris just found that out the hard way.

  • chakan2@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    26 days ago

    It wasn’t a landslide, but we can’t minimize the fact that it was a real setback.

    Uh, what? That was the worst possible outcome of all the outcomes…I don’t know what other word than “Landslide” is appropriate there.

    We should all be happy to see tens of millions of workers sharing in the gains of faster productivity growth.

    Yes yes…enjoy not being paid overtime, praying your next customer tips you, and instant bankruptcy if you get sick at work. Oh…and don’t worry about retiring, you can’t afford it.

    • JaggedRobotPubes@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      26 days ago

      America doesn’t really have landslides.

      It was a ratio of 68 to 73, with low voter turnout. 100% not a landslide. Anything less than a ratio of…I don’t know, 50 to 70? doesn’t really deserve the term. And that’s generous.