Writes Steve Waldman on data that suggest those getting their news via social media were far more likely to vote for Trump:
"...if we want to grasp the meaning of this election, we can’t ignore one of the biggest forces that shaped the electorate — or how the collapse of local news has changed the political equation."
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/11/09/social-media-traditional-news-elections-00188548
According to the Financial Times, X lost one-fifth of its U.S. daily active user base from Sep. 2023 to Sep. 2024.
It lost one-third of its UK users over the same period.
This doesn't take into account the increased X-odus that's occurred since the election.
https://www.ft.com/content/65961fec-a5ab-4c71-b1c8-265be3583a93
Vance is already lining himself up for a Putin assist in 2028:
The week prior to Election Day only 23% of Republicans polled believed the vote would be fair.
Now, 77% say that it was.
Funny how their widespread (and unproven) claims about noncitizen voters evaporated in an instant.
c/o Kevin Drum.
I also agree with many here that tacking to the right to win over conservatives dissatisfied with Trump was a Democratic misstep.
In an election where optics trump substance, having courage of your convictions mattered. Twisting the campaign's message rightward lacked spine, and it showed.
...the deep-seated racism, misogyny and xenophobia of many voters obviously played a role as well.
I keep reminding myself to never underestimate the political power of American bigotry.
Trump presented himself as the change candidate at a time of deep public dissatisfaction with the status quo.
Too few voters cared enough about the despicable content of the changes Trump is proposing. The change-candidate posture—in & of itself—was enough for them to vote to return him to the White House.
