Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit
frereubu | on: Trump wins presidency for second time
How is this different from what Trump supporters were saying about Democratic voters? Genuine question - I'm not in the US and from my perspective the vitriol was pretty universal.
noobermin | parent | next
The right gets to hate, the liberals don't. Basically the media let Rs play on handicap and the electorate basically buys it.

You're right it's unfair but if you're not American and thus stuck in the political media stew then you can see it clearly.

loading story #42060725
loading story #42060582
Jensson | parent
If both sides spouts vitriol then you pick the side that doesn't pour it on you, that is the problem described by "one side is 1% less bad than the other". If you want voters then try to welcome them instead of blame them for all the problems, goes for both sides.
frereubu | root | parent | next
Sure, but then shouldn't the universal vitriol cancel itself out somehow? Democracts have been on the receiving end of a lot of name-calling too. This doesn't feel like a good enough explanation. It feels much more like the Democrats ignored (or were perceived to have ignored) a lot of substantive issues for a large section of the population.
loading story #42060204
loading story #42061448
fastball | root | parent | next
Well the Trump camp was mostly blaming illegal immigrants in this cycle, and illegal immigrants can't vote, so seems like that strategy works ok.
carlosjobim | root | parent | next
That is assuming half the country are Democrats and the other half Republicans. But the most important voting block considers themselves to be neither one nor the other, and then it becomes strategy to spit fire at your opponent.

And I don't know about other people, but I consider any rhetoric against a political party to be directed against their politicians, not against their voters - unless explicitly stated.

Dalewyn | root | parent
I think Trump and the Republicans did actually succeed in welcoming in a truly diverse base of new and former voters: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/11/06/us/politics/p...

This is the Red Wave that was promised in 2020 and 2022 but failed to materialize.

Why didn't Harris and the Democrats pull it off? Well, they could start by not playing identity politics or calling Americans deplorables, Nazis, and garbage. Godwin's Law was in full swing for them.

I'm Japanese-American, demographically I should be a bleeding heart Democrat, but truthfully I can't stand their constant victimizing and divisive rhetoric and is why I voted for Trump and the Republicans in 2016, 2020, and 2024.

loading story #42071313
cglace | root | parent | next
As someone who pays attention to politics exceptionally closely, I wonder what you would call Trump's rhetoric if not divisive.
Dalewyn | root | parent
I call it practical, on point, gruff, and charismatic.

Practical and on point because Trump talks about things that the common American actually gives a shit about in a way that the common American can understand and relate to. This also has a side effect of uniting people under a common cause despite outward appearances.

Gruff because that style of speech appeals to most Americans who don't like being sophisticated, or worse: Being politically correct. Remember that being politically incorrect was one of the reasons Trump won in 2016, and it's still one of the reasons he won again today.

Charismatic because, well, I think everyone has to at least admit that the man draws people in despite any and all odds.

GTP | root | parent | next
> uniting people under a common cause

If the common cause is being against other people, that's still divisive.

beezlewax | root | parent | next
"They're eating the dogs, they're eating the cats"

Is that gruff or on point?

loading story #42061327
cglace | root | parent
So when he calls the other side names and makes threats, he is practical and gruff.

His practical message was incoherent; it was more of an erring of grievances, conspiracy theories, and wild policy ideas that he seemed to have come up with while speaking.

I can't argue with the fact that it appealed to people, but you can't say it wasn't divisive because it was practical and gruff. Those two things don't rule out divisiveness.

BTW, I voted Republican in every election until Trump, and the reason why I didn't vote for him was due to how divisive he was.

I think you just happen to agree with his side of the divide.

loading story #42062385
Daishiman | root | parent | next
You literally voted for a guy who said things 1000x worse and this is your take?
loading story #42060887
mcphage | root | parent | next
> Well, they could start by not playing identity politics or calling Americans deplorables, Nazis, and garbage.

Why not, though? Clearly, it is a winning strategy for the Republicans. So why not adopt it as well?

bilekas | root | parent
The double standard for Trump vs ANYONE else is mind blowing.