I dont want to get into a flame war, 50% is a generous number, since many times he isn’t speaking full intelligible sentences. Trump gets a pass on absolutely outrageous things, which he creates by the second. I feel that he is so bad, and so incessant with his content creation., that he causes an integer overflow in the audience. At that point, he is once again assessed with an average rubric.

I feel that his success here suggests that this is a strategy that will succeed globally, and that many political candidates are going to be emulating his “style”.

I think you perceived that because you expected Trump to lead the election and her to follow in his wake. She deflected to the things she wanted to talk about to a usual degree, and did not lie more than usual for core-Democrat politicians, which is not a lot. They just don't address what they don't want to talk about.

Ultimately she lost, and probably should have even more aggressively emulated him by promising things that aren't even real. Like how do you circle the promise that the war in Ukraine will be over tomorrow. I'm not making it up, that was repeated ad nauseum on the campaign trail. I guess all that matters is winning.

> I saw a lot more deflection, misdirection, lies/mistruthes and non-answers than I did from trump

Yup, it just came without the crass jokes and the mannerisms but I guess the confidence was pretty high that people would forgive her because she's just "not trump".

I think they totally bungled the messaging and stuck their head in the sand. With all the billions of campaign money, they spent most of it calling trump a fascist or orange idiot a bunch more times, hoping that's enough to bump voter numbers. There is a dose-response curve there and after some point it just doesn't yield linear results.

All politicians lie. They're only ever called out by the "other side".