My question is why? Biden actually did many things for those people. Do they rely on alternative media too much or are they simply disconnected from the kinds of information that would have guided them to make voting decisions that are more beneficial to themselves?
I'm a white liberal who thinks that economic inequality in the US is too high because oligarchs control all of the tech industry, most of the banks and real estate market, insurance companies, and the healthcare industry. Biden's policies put bandaids on a system in which money only flows up.
Ironically, societal upheaval and wars are effective toppling oligarchs and monarchs. So, I guess we'll see.
Stephen, excellent points here--I'd add a few reactions:
1) I remember having similar conversations with white liberals during the whole debate over whether "Defund" was a good idea. They argued that "clearly this is what black people want because that's what their activists want" even though activists don't necessarily speak for the group they claim to represent, and polling showed black and Hispanic voters absolutely rejected "defund" and wanted MORE policing, and BETTER policing--they just didn't want the police to commit abuses against them. (There's also the point that if you have to explain your slogan, it's not functioning as a slogan)
2) I hate the constant blame game where liberals often say "the problem is the white vote" or "the problem is the Hispanic vote" or what have you--voters are individuals, they vote as such, and the blame is on EVERYONE who voted for this. Being black, Hispanic, gay or a woman doesn't immunize you from voting for fascism! These are people with opinions, for better or for worse, and compartimentalizing based on what group you're in assumes people have no agency. Whatever arguments you'll have to make to win over white voters will likely have to be made with nonwhite voters as well, and it's worth taking a realistic look at them if we hope to win over a majority.
3) Finally, your point about claiming Trump is racist isn't going to work--spot on. I'm leery of that argument that "well he's obviously a bigot and no one will vote for someone who hates them". I guarantee you the people voting for him do not think he hates them. Other Hispanics I talk to will nitpick at every statement or policy Trump made to argue that no, he's not a bigot, he just wants strong borders, etc., he doesn't like criminals, etc, and you'll just not convince them he hates them. But also, voters don't even really care much about the character of the politician compared to what they think the politician will do for them. Case in point--the black vote didn't shift towards the Democrats for the first time in the Civil Rights Era--it began in the 1930s in response to the New Deal--at a time when southern Democrats clearly hated them and northern Democrats--including FDR--were just fine with that. "Will my life improve under these people" matters far more than "do these people hate me". It's hard to grasp because it seems like people who hate you will make your life worse, but sometimes voters can differentiate the two. So at least my theory is that a lot of voters who think their life will be better under Trump will rationalize their support for him by denying that he could hate them.
Iirc, Sarah Longwell over at the Bulwark heard some of this in focus groups as well, and went 'whoa'. But as you said, it seems to have just been shelved until it all blew up. Great--if depressing--analysis, SER.
Stacey Abrams had a podcast episode about misinformation campaigns targeting Black communities, and I gotta say it scared the shit out of me because I could see it peeling off way too many voters.
And right after the election I sat next to some Latina women at the bus stop, one of whom was explaining to the others how the schools are turning kids trans.
There’s nothing special about POC that makes them immune to bullshit. All humans are susceptible to wishful thinking, and to caring only about the oppression that affects them, and to believing that that their status on one axis of oppression will protect them when they’re at risk on another.
The Dems absolutely HAVE to get a handle on misinformation and stop assuming every dipshit uncle can recognize the danger of racism when he’s being fed a big pile of misogyny.
Most Hispanics and younger Black people get their news from social media. Meanwhile, liberal publications sneer at TikTok and YouTube (yes, I remain salty about that)
I am certain a very large component of this is rampant misinformation too (especially with the stories trickling in of buyers' remorse.) out of the rightwing media human centipede. Liberals are going to need a big answer to that too, because I tell you what...that's IT now for any progressive policy for generations in the USA. And forget about any environmental stewardship from here on out.
And in the end minority groups aren't monoliths either. It could well be that a number of people do believe that Democrats are too inclusive and they want to start punching up on other minority groups they don't like.
We'll get to see how their view works out in any event and hey, the Democratic "plantation" got defeated. Let's now see if any of those folks want to join in on the harm.
The only thing I want is for no more Black women to be pushed off the glass cliff. I've said this elsewhere, but you know what? This is the time for an Andrew Cuomo to go, pair him with Newsom. Because nothing really matters. And I'd rather see those guys run up against the rightwing media human centipede.
And to think people wanted to subject Michelle Obama to this.
I appreciate the perspectives people here are sharing. Defunding the police was such a ridiculous term to use when what it actually meant was police reform, which has been absolutely necessary for years. Why there weren’t enough politicians working to course correct this I’ll never truly understand.
It’s not enough to think racism is bad, no duh, but one has to actually take that idea steps further. I’ve known plenty of white liberals that aren’t willing to do the work that being an anti-racist requires.
"They’re stunned that Black people don’t want to defund the police just reform it."
Can ANYONE point to someone other than an extremely online prog-bro who actually ran on this? This was never a mainstream Dem position. I've encountered a lot of folks claiming that the Dems were campaigning on this, but no actual evidence of any doing it. I am prepared to be enlightened, but I'll be stunned if anyone running for office above a city councol seat did.
Did you listen to the interview clip? As they love to do, CNN heavily edited it, and tortured her comments into a “Kamala says she supports ‘defund the police!’” claim. If she’d outright said “yes, I support defunding the police”, it’d be something to consider. But she didn’t, and she certainly didn’t “run on it.”
It seemed to go hand-in-hand with the ludicrous “ACAB” tag at the time. Whenever I would push back on this at a certain blog by pointing out that police are a lot like lawyers—Fun to ridicule and criticize, until you need one—I’d get piled on. For being insufficiently “woke,” I guess. Whatever.
The primary problem still seems to be white people and men.
But right now, I'm so angry, I just want to check out and say, "If this is what America wants, so be it. I hope everyone who voted for him chokes on it."
I mean, I want to help people who didn't vote for him survive this, but fuck everyone who did.
But I know in 2026 or 2028, when everything is shit, voters will look to Democrats to be adults and clean up the fucking mess AGAIN, and then when things are better, but not all of the problems in the economy and nation are fixed, they'll vote to fuck it all up again. And Democrats will keep trying to kick that football anyway.
You know, assuming Trump doesn't make it so we never have to vote again.
Readers should bear in mind that the majority of Black and Latino voters went for Harris/Walz. This article is about the defectors, who represent a small fraction of all voters in that demographic. And specifically we’re talking about male Black and Latino voters. Black women were there for Harris and slightly grew their percentage.
This is where I lose the thread of your argument, Stephen. If Harris didn’t address the issues of Blacks and Latinos, why did she win most of their votes and why did she do well with women in these groups? This can’t be about issues, or messaging about issues, except as it addresses male issues. Not the economy, not public safety, both of which affect women as well as men.
Perhaps it’s as simple as: more men than we’d like to think prefer strongman rule than a Black woman in the highest seat of power. And, more white women than I wish are happy with the patriarchy, judge women who are raped, have no sympathy for women needing abortion, and despise trans people. The number of white women who feel this way overwhelm the number of Black and Latino male voters who went for Trump.
This is an issue that is beyond what Democrats can do while maintaining their principles. Harris tried to connect with a shared humanity in people. That’s impossible when more than half the voters do not share your values. You can’t make people care about something they don’t care about. I wish this was just about messaging or addressing issues. That would be a piece of cake, by comparison.
Completely agree. Lower prices (not that they'll happen) are kind of irrelevant when you've been deported. Latinos aren't exempt from being racist and misogynist, forgetting that most white Americans apparently think they're trash. Black mean aren't exempt either. And the Muslims who voted for this? I can't even.
I think it comes down to this: We are a misogynistic and racist country. I worried when Biden dropped out, because my first thought was, there’s no way a Black woman will become president in the US. After seeing the spontaneous, robust support for Harris occur literally overnight, I was more than happy to consider that my perspective must be outdated (I’m nearly 72 years old, so I’ve been studying this stuff for a long, long time). Turns out the kids are NOT all right, and the usual suspects are as racist and misogynistic as they ever were.
Democrats should worry about *trends.* People tend to vote based on cultural and traditional habits. It takes a lot for them to break from a firm party affiliation. Note that despite a full-press Never Trump push, Harris didn’t win over more Republicans than past Democratic candidates while Republicans, esp. Trump, did significantly better among key Democratic groups.
My father grew up during the Civil Rights movement. He’s a lifelong Democrat despite living in the rural south -- but it’s not a guarantee that the Gen X or Gen Z version of himself will remain with the party.
If Dems aren’t winning Latino, Asian, and Black voters overwhelmingly, they can’t win most swing states with just a minority of the white vote. 2024 was an example where the gains made in college educated whites did not counteract the losses among working class minorities.
If you read liberal publications, the focus was on “democracy at stake,” more so than the economy is not working for everyone and rising petty crime/homelessness in cities. It’s clear from the results that those latter issues were major drivers for Latino voters in districts that shifted hard to Trump. Yet, I’ve seen claims that this only happened because they’re racist or sexist. But I’ve spoken with working-class Black, Latino, and Asian people for whom those issues are real.
'more so than the economy is not working for everyone and rising petty crime/homelessness in cities"
You'll note Trump ran on these fears and simply claimed "Only he can fix it!" Democrats have this weird thing about ACTUAKKY FIXING THINGS.
By any great measure the economy is doing as well as it has for the 99% as it has since the 70's. Unempliyment is at historical record lows, median income is up, healthily above inflation.
The sticking points were the memory of low gas prices during the pandemic (which was, of course due to the enormous drop in demand) and higher grocery prices (thanks to events like bird flu and price gouging by the handful of major grocery chains remaining in this country.)
The first is entirely out of the control of the President, and the latter largely due the decades long defanging of the FTC.
I am not saying these things were not a problem for voters, but what the hell were Harris and Biden supposed to do about it? (remember Trump is just straight-up lying about being able to 'fix it'; hell he caused the surge in gasoline prices by convincing everyone to cut production to raise prices...
Biden could've just sucked at communication (always possible) and a better messenger could've sold the administration's strengths (Buttigieg always did a good job, I thought).
OR voter discontent was inevitable post-covid and the incumbent party was doomed. In which case, Biden made a huge mistake with Garland bc it's one thing to lose to the other party but not one led by a fascist.
Brian Tyler Cohen said that too about incumbents *worldwide* losing due to inflation and the runoff from the COVID economy, so even if we'd done better, no good deed goes unpunished if it doesn't help everyone. So there probably was no way out of this.
Manchinenema did even more damage than we thought with their fuckery.
I'm not even sure Garland matters because Letitia James and Fani Willis got cases against President Klan Robe too and yet no consequences came from those. (And James won her case outright).
So do you think that the reasonable blanket distrust some people of color have towards white people means what I have often heard asserted, that overt racists are to be preferred to those who don’t recognize their own racism but who try not to be overtly racist? So voting for Trump is the same thing as voting for Harris?
Because I hear you, but I’m not sure what to do with that information. It feels like part of this white “don’t you shame me for something my ancestors did” failure to acknowledge the structural racism that continues to benefit white people because white people can still be poor. It feels like a reduction of racism to Yes or No, and while addressing that is definitely a white people problem, the election of Trump on a white nationalist platform seems to have been the result.
Sure, in my personal professional experience, openly conservative white people have been easier to work with sometimes than the most “woke” white liberal. It’s similar to what Malcolm X said about preferring people who “practice what they preach.”
I should stress that some white liberals do "practice what they preach,” which I do appreciate.
Perhaps some thought a vote for Trump would keep them from being deported? The old give in to fascism in advance thing? I don't know, and I'm starting to care less. If they are deported we might be looking at a different electorate in 2028. Unfortunately they made their bed and will have to lie in it. Not sure what else to do, but losing interest in trying to protect people from Trumpism when they vote for Trumpism or decide to stay home. As someone said, this isn't our lesson to learn. It will just be tough to watch.
Do you believe everything they tell you? Smh
My question is why? Biden actually did many things for those people. Do they rely on alternative media too much or are they simply disconnected from the kinds of information that would have guided them to make voting decisions that are more beneficial to themselves?
Even though Trump was declared winner the whole world label Trump a loser !
Born a loser gonna die a loser .
I think there was. A lot of foul play during the election and some unfair results!
I'm a white liberal who thinks that economic inequality in the US is too high because oligarchs control all of the tech industry, most of the banks and real estate market, insurance companies, and the healthcare industry. Biden's policies put bandaids on a system in which money only flows up.
Ironically, societal upheaval and wars are effective toppling oligarchs and monarchs. So, I guess we'll see.
Stephen, excellent points here--I'd add a few reactions:
1) I remember having similar conversations with white liberals during the whole debate over whether "Defund" was a good idea. They argued that "clearly this is what black people want because that's what their activists want" even though activists don't necessarily speak for the group they claim to represent, and polling showed black and Hispanic voters absolutely rejected "defund" and wanted MORE policing, and BETTER policing--they just didn't want the police to commit abuses against them. (There's also the point that if you have to explain your slogan, it's not functioning as a slogan)
2) I hate the constant blame game where liberals often say "the problem is the white vote" or "the problem is the Hispanic vote" or what have you--voters are individuals, they vote as such, and the blame is on EVERYONE who voted for this. Being black, Hispanic, gay or a woman doesn't immunize you from voting for fascism! These are people with opinions, for better or for worse, and compartimentalizing based on what group you're in assumes people have no agency. Whatever arguments you'll have to make to win over white voters will likely have to be made with nonwhite voters as well, and it's worth taking a realistic look at them if we hope to win over a majority.
3) Finally, your point about claiming Trump is racist isn't going to work--spot on. I'm leery of that argument that "well he's obviously a bigot and no one will vote for someone who hates them". I guarantee you the people voting for him do not think he hates them. Other Hispanics I talk to will nitpick at every statement or policy Trump made to argue that no, he's not a bigot, he just wants strong borders, etc., he doesn't like criminals, etc, and you'll just not convince them he hates them. But also, voters don't even really care much about the character of the politician compared to what they think the politician will do for them. Case in point--the black vote didn't shift towards the Democrats for the first time in the Civil Rights Era--it began in the 1930s in response to the New Deal--at a time when southern Democrats clearly hated them and northern Democrats--including FDR--were just fine with that. "Will my life improve under these people" matters far more than "do these people hate me". It's hard to grasp because it seems like people who hate you will make your life worse, but sometimes voters can differentiate the two. So at least my theory is that a lot of voters who think their life will be better under Trump will rationalize their support for him by denying that he could hate them.
Iirc, Sarah Longwell over at the Bulwark heard some of this in focus groups as well, and went 'whoa'. But as you said, it seems to have just been shelved until it all blew up. Great--if depressing--analysis, SER.
Stacey Abrams had a podcast episode about misinformation campaigns targeting Black communities, and I gotta say it scared the shit out of me because I could see it peeling off way too many voters.
And right after the election I sat next to some Latina women at the bus stop, one of whom was explaining to the others how the schools are turning kids trans.
There’s nothing special about POC that makes them immune to bullshit. All humans are susceptible to wishful thinking, and to caring only about the oppression that affects them, and to believing that that their status on one axis of oppression will protect them when they’re at risk on another.
The Dems absolutely HAVE to get a handle on misinformation and stop assuming every dipshit uncle can recognize the danger of racism when he’s being fed a big pile of misogyny.
Most Hispanics and younger Black people get their news from social media. Meanwhile, liberal publications sneer at TikTok and YouTube (yes, I remain salty about that)
I am certain a very large component of this is rampant misinformation too (especially with the stories trickling in of buyers' remorse.) out of the rightwing media human centipede. Liberals are going to need a big answer to that too, because I tell you what...that's IT now for any progressive policy for generations in the USA. And forget about any environmental stewardship from here on out.
And in the end minority groups aren't monoliths either. It could well be that a number of people do believe that Democrats are too inclusive and they want to start punching up on other minority groups they don't like.
We'll get to see how their view works out in any event and hey, the Democratic "plantation" got defeated. Let's now see if any of those folks want to join in on the harm.
The only thing I want is for no more Black women to be pushed off the glass cliff. I've said this elsewhere, but you know what? This is the time for an Andrew Cuomo to go, pair him with Newsom. Because nothing really matters. And I'd rather see those guys run up against the rightwing media human centipede.
And to think people wanted to subject Michelle Obama to this.
I appreciate the perspectives people here are sharing. Defunding the police was such a ridiculous term to use when what it actually meant was police reform, which has been absolutely necessary for years. Why there weren’t enough politicians working to course correct this I’ll never truly understand.
It’s not enough to think racism is bad, no duh, but one has to actually take that idea steps further. I’ve known plenty of white liberals that aren’t willing to do the work that being an anti-racist requires.
PS Maybe my second paragraph answers my first.
"They’re stunned that Black people don’t want to defund the police just reform it."
Can ANYONE point to someone other than an extremely online prog-bro who actually ran on this? This was never a mainstream Dem position. I've encountered a lot of folks claiming that the Dems were campaigning on this, but no actual evidence of any doing it. I am prepared to be enlightened, but I'll be stunned if anyone running for office above a city councol seat did.
“Can ANYONE point to someone other than an extremely online prog-bro who actually ran on this?”
Kamala Harris, for one, at least according to CNN.
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2024/07/26/politics/kfile-kamala-harris-praised-defund-the-police-movement-in-june-2020
Did you listen to the interview clip? As they love to do, CNN heavily edited it, and tortured her comments into a “Kamala says she supports ‘defund the police!’” claim. If she’d outright said “yes, I support defunding the police”, it’d be something to consider. But she didn’t, and she certainly didn’t “run on it.”
It seemed to go hand-in-hand with the ludicrous “ACAB” tag at the time. Whenever I would push back on this at a certain blog by pointing out that police are a lot like lawyers—Fun to ridicule and criticize, until you need one—I’d get piled on. For being insufficiently “woke,” I guess. Whatever.
True, but cons ran with ALL Dems running on "Defund the police," and the media helped to spread it. Dems need to learn to push back against the lies.
Misinformation is key.
"Instead, most pursued the anti-Trump white suburban Holy Grail, and they chose poorly." I like what you did here, SER. 🙇🏻♂️
The primary problem still seems to be white people and men.
But right now, I'm so angry, I just want to check out and say, "If this is what America wants, so be it. I hope everyone who voted for him chokes on it."
I mean, I want to help people who didn't vote for him survive this, but fuck everyone who did.
But I know in 2026 or 2028, when everything is shit, voters will look to Democrats to be adults and clean up the fucking mess AGAIN, and then when things are better, but not all of the problems in the economy and nation are fixed, they'll vote to fuck it all up again. And Democrats will keep trying to kick that football anyway.
You know, assuming Trump doesn't make it so we never have to vote again.
Readers should bear in mind that the majority of Black and Latino voters went for Harris/Walz. This article is about the defectors, who represent a small fraction of all voters in that demographic. And specifically we’re talking about male Black and Latino voters. Black women were there for Harris and slightly grew their percentage.
This is where I lose the thread of your argument, Stephen. If Harris didn’t address the issues of Blacks and Latinos, why did she win most of their votes and why did she do well with women in these groups? This can’t be about issues, or messaging about issues, except as it addresses male issues. Not the economy, not public safety, both of which affect women as well as men.
Perhaps it’s as simple as: more men than we’d like to think prefer strongman rule than a Black woman in the highest seat of power. And, more white women than I wish are happy with the patriarchy, judge women who are raped, have no sympathy for women needing abortion, and despise trans people. The number of white women who feel this way overwhelm the number of Black and Latino male voters who went for Trump.
This is an issue that is beyond what Democrats can do while maintaining their principles. Harris tried to connect with a shared humanity in people. That’s impossible when more than half the voters do not share your values. You can’t make people care about something they don’t care about. I wish this was just about messaging or addressing issues. That would be a piece of cake, by comparison.
Completely agree. Lower prices (not that they'll happen) are kind of irrelevant when you've been deported. Latinos aren't exempt from being racist and misogynist, forgetting that most white Americans apparently think they're trash. Black mean aren't exempt either. And the Muslims who voted for this? I can't even.
I think it comes down to this: We are a misogynistic and racist country. I worried when Biden dropped out, because my first thought was, there’s no way a Black woman will become president in the US. After seeing the spontaneous, robust support for Harris occur literally overnight, I was more than happy to consider that my perspective must be outdated (I’m nearly 72 years old, so I’ve been studying this stuff for a long, long time). Turns out the kids are NOT all right, and the usual suspects are as racist and misogynistic as they ever were.
Democrats should worry about *trends.* People tend to vote based on cultural and traditional habits. It takes a lot for them to break from a firm party affiliation. Note that despite a full-press Never Trump push, Harris didn’t win over more Republicans than past Democratic candidates while Republicans, esp. Trump, did significantly better among key Democratic groups.
My father grew up during the Civil Rights movement. He’s a lifelong Democrat despite living in the rural south -- but it’s not a guarantee that the Gen X or Gen Z version of himself will remain with the party.
If Dems aren’t winning Latino, Asian, and Black voters overwhelmingly, they can’t win most swing states with just a minority of the white vote. 2024 was an example where the gains made in college educated whites did not counteract the losses among working class minorities.
If you read liberal publications, the focus was on “democracy at stake,” more so than the economy is not working for everyone and rising petty crime/homelessness in cities. It’s clear from the results that those latter issues were major drivers for Latino voters in districts that shifted hard to Trump. Yet, I’ve seen claims that this only happened because they’re racist or sexist. But I’ve spoken with working-class Black, Latino, and Asian people for whom those issues are real.
And they expect dump will fix it? That's where I get lost. NO Republican has ever tried to fix it.
'more so than the economy is not working for everyone and rising petty crime/homelessness in cities"
You'll note Trump ran on these fears and simply claimed "Only he can fix it!" Democrats have this weird thing about ACTUAKKY FIXING THINGS.
By any great measure the economy is doing as well as it has for the 99% as it has since the 70's. Unempliyment is at historical record lows, median income is up, healthily above inflation.
The sticking points were the memory of low gas prices during the pandemic (which was, of course due to the enormous drop in demand) and higher grocery prices (thanks to events like bird flu and price gouging by the handful of major grocery chains remaining in this country.)
The first is entirely out of the control of the President, and the latter largely due the decades long defanging of the FTC.
I am not saying these things were not a problem for voters, but what the hell were Harris and Biden supposed to do about it? (remember Trump is just straight-up lying about being able to 'fix it'; hell he caused the surge in gasoline prices by convincing everyone to cut production to raise prices...
Yes, that is the dilemma.
Biden could've just sucked at communication (always possible) and a better messenger could've sold the administration's strengths (Buttigieg always did a good job, I thought).
OR voter discontent was inevitable post-covid and the incumbent party was doomed. In which case, Biden made a huge mistake with Garland bc it's one thing to lose to the other party but not one led by a fascist.
Brian Tyler Cohen said that too about incumbents *worldwide* losing due to inflation and the runoff from the COVID economy, so even if we'd done better, no good deed goes unpunished if it doesn't help everyone. So there probably was no way out of this.
Manchinenema did even more damage than we thought with their fuckery.
I'm not even sure Garland matters because Letitia James and Fani Willis got cases against President Klan Robe too and yet no consequences came from those. (And James won her case outright).
So do you think that the reasonable blanket distrust some people of color have towards white people means what I have often heard asserted, that overt racists are to be preferred to those who don’t recognize their own racism but who try not to be overtly racist? So voting for Trump is the same thing as voting for Harris?
Because I hear you, but I’m not sure what to do with that information. It feels like part of this white “don’t you shame me for something my ancestors did” failure to acknowledge the structural racism that continues to benefit white people because white people can still be poor. It feels like a reduction of racism to Yes or No, and while addressing that is definitely a white people problem, the election of Trump on a white nationalist platform seems to have been the result.
Sure, in my personal professional experience, openly conservative white people have been easier to work with sometimes than the most “woke” white liberal. It’s similar to what Malcolm X said about preferring people who “practice what they preach.”
I should stress that some white liberals do "practice what they preach,” which I do appreciate.
Easier to work with in what regard?
Perhaps some thought a vote for Trump would keep them from being deported? The old give in to fascism in advance thing? I don't know, and I'm starting to care less. If they are deported we might be looking at a different electorate in 2028. Unfortunately they made their bed and will have to lie in it. Not sure what else to do, but losing interest in trying to protect people from Trumpism when they vote for Trumpism or decide to stay home. As someone said, this isn't our lesson to learn. It will just be tough to watch.
Giving in in advance never works, but those who do it think that they will be the exception.