You guys are taking a very slim win after an inflation bath to mean a whole bunch. The Pubs lost elections in 2020 and 2022 with pretty much the same line up of ideas and media. It’s pretty clear there was no massive ideological shifts. Everyone has an opinion though.
Republicans and traditional conservatism lost. We elected the most liberal pacifist isolationist in decades. He’s a throwback to Monroe.
Massive rightward shifts across the board. No GOP candidate has ever marshalled such a diverse coalition.
I was under the assumption that threads about the election were discouraged because it was "over". Perhaps that only applies to certain perspectives.
MEH, just seems like more of the same old line. maga good, media bad. Fake news, yada, yada, yada. Maga folks justifiably celebrating, but after every election pundits proclaim major shift in the electorate and then the midterms hit.
A much smaller shift in the swing states where Democrats engaged in massive widespread fraud again. They got caught a lot in Michigan and Pennsylvania because Whitmer and Shapiro wanted Kamala to lose.
Where does everyone get their news? I know some stay with sites more biased or attempt to get info from content creators on X they follow. But below are the most popular news sites. These lists vary in the way it’s compiled but the main providers are in the top. Most popular news websites U.S. by monthly visits 2024 | Statista
Just like a lot of people voted against Trump in '20 and not for Biden and his agenda, a lot of people voted for Trump to get back to the 2019 economy. We will see if Republicans misread the results of this year like Biden and Democrats did '20.
That leaves out podcasts, which I think more and more people are getting their news from. Every major paper has several podcasts, as do most opinion magazines. I think a lot of people who commute are getting most of their news from podcast.
2004 comes immediately to mind and interestingly that was the last time the Republican presidential candidate received a majority of the popular vote. Following George W. Bush's victory Karl Rove who managed Bush's campaign stated that there was now (at the time) a permanent Republican majority. Two years later the Democrats regained control of both the House and Senate, picking up 31 votes in the House and 6 in the Senate. Part of the reason is that Bush thought that he had a mandate for major structural changes most significantly his proposal to privatize social security which backfired in a big way not to mention his appointments of unqualified political cronies to FEMA including Michael Brown who had absolutely no experience in emergency management the net result being a disastrous response to Hurricane Katrina. I detect a similar arrogance among MAGA nation and their Dear Leader with the orange complexion.
I watch CNN for political coverage because I enjoy watching them hyperventilate, sensationalize, and ultimately cry.
Traditional media has obviously been losing its impact for years now. And presidential elections tend to swing back and forth between Democrat and Republican. So it's a bit absurd to claim that 2024 was a rejection of that media anymore than 2020 was a rejection of Fox and other rightwing media. Or that 2016 meant this about the media while 2008 and 2012 meant something else.
I located and read the incomplete quote on the biased DailySignal article cited in the OP. It was excerpted from Bezos's Washington Post column explaining why he refused to allow the WP to endorse a candidate. "In the annual public surveys about trust and reputation, journalists and the media have regularly fallen near the very bottom, often just above Congress. But in this year’s Gallup poll, we have managed to fall below Congress. Our profession is now the least trusted of all. Something we are doing is clearly not working. … Most people believe the media is biased. Anyone who doesn’t see this is paying scant attention to reality, and those who fight reality lose. Reality is an undefeated champion." _________ The grammatical ellipsis got my attention as necessary context was missing from the truncated quote. I located Bezos WP column to learn what was omitted and fill in the missing gap. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/10/28/jeff-bezos-washington-post-trust/ Below is the Bezos quote, unedited, with the lacuna (missing portion) bolded and restored (I'm not missing the irony but this thread is not the time nor the place for further comment). "In the annual public surveys about trust and reputation, journalists and the media have regularly fallen near the very bottom, often just above Congress. But in this year’s Gallup poll, we have managed to fall below Congress. Our profession is now the least trusted of all. Something we are doing is clearly not working. Let me give an analogy. Voting machines must meet two requirements. They must count the vote accurately, and people must believe they count the vote accurately. The second requirement is distinct from and just as important as the first. "Likewise with newspapers. We must be accurate, and we must be believed to be accurate. It’s a bitter pill to swallow, but we are failing on the second requirement. Most people believe the media is biased. Anyone who doesn’t see this is paying scant attention to reality, and those who fight reality lose. Reality is an undefeated champion.// It would be easy to blame others for our long and continuing fall in credibility (and, therefore, decline in impact), but a victim mentality will not help. Complaining is not a strategy. We must work harder to control what we can control to increase our credibility." _____________________ Bezos was quite clear with the reasons he thought it better to forego any endorsement, returning to the newspaper's former long standing policy of endorsing no candidate. Excluding that segment of the quote contextually alters Bezos's intent as implied by the author of the DS article, who abridged it to suit his agenda. https://www.washingtonpost.com/style/media/2024/10/28/post-editorial-board-resignations/ "Bezos — who did not block presidential endorsements in the two campaigns since he bought The Post in 2013 — called his move to halt presidential endorsements “a principled decision” and also cast doubt on their usefulness. Bezos said his decision is aimed at restoring public trust in the news media. “'Presidential endorsements do nothing to tip the scales of an election,” he wrote. 'No undecided voters in Pennsylvania are going to say, ‘I’m going with Newspaper A’s endorsement.’ None. What presidential endorsements actually do is create a perception of bias. A perception of non-independence.'” Bezos wants to restore public trust in the Media. His refusal to endorse was a step in that direction.
This first election was just a trial run for bigger, better elections to come. With billionaires and brilliant minds that see how to defeat LIES in new media. It's easier than you think, but because the RINOs were in bed with the Dems, no one wanted the real truth to be told, until Trump. The RINOs are a dying breed that cannot die fast enough. They along with the commies will soon disappear into oblivion and in the coming years the Golden Age of American exceptionalism truly does begin. And the rest of the world will come along with us for the ride.
