The government is only “too big” when the rules and regulations are there to protect the marginalized, under represented and vulnerable.

A smart approach would be to slowly dial stuff up so that manufacturers had, ya know, time to build and train for complex manufacturing plants in US.

But they’re not going to do that. The plants are where they are, they would take years to move, and American consumers will pay the new import taxes in the interim.

We are going to cost your countries, your economies, we’re going to cost your businesses billions, hundreds of billions of dollars if you think you’re going to poison Americans

They realize American manufacturers and consumers pay the tariffs, right? Not the other countries.

Yeah, just saying that the policies mentioned in the article were not what made those people win or made Harris lose. They basically had the same policies.

Yeah, but read the article, look at the policies those people campaigned on, and google whether or not Harris also backed those economic policies. She did. She supported and ran on most of those policies.

IMHO, this was probably more of an issue around how effective the candidates, and their opponents, were at getting the policies or “vibes” in voter’s minds.

If you read that article, all of those policies are economic policies that Harris was pushing. Punishing price gouging, lowering rent and mortgages costs by incentivizing building and banning price fixing algorithms, etc.

Those races either had more effective communicators, or shittier opponents. They were democratic candidates that ran on the Democratic Party’s policies.

If you looked at the districts / states where the has a big ground and ad game, those places performed a percent or two better than the places they didn’t campaign in.

The ground game worked, but the broader national message and messaging strategy didn’t work as well as the republican’s. In places where there was no aggressive campaign spend from the GOP or DNC, the Dems often underperformed by an extra percent or two.

Maybe it’s the new media landscape that the GOP is so good at controlling, or maybe the Dems core message wasn’t strong enough, or maybe it was because Harris had to do what Trump had been campaigning on for 4 years, or maybe people are hurting and think the grass will be greener. People will probably debate this shit for decades.

But, IMHO, the media and ground game did quantifiably move the numbers in Harris’ favor. But she was down by 3% or 4% and only clawed back 1 or 2 with media.

At the end of the day, the policies around homophobia, the border, religion are all just a grift to lock in reliable bigot voters.

These assholes just want money and power, and this is the red meat they throw at the crowds so they can get it.