The Republicans won a special South Carolina House election on Tuesday, but the Democrats overperformed by double digits compared to their performance in the 2024 presidential election.
Republican John Lastinger won 62.3 percent of the vote in the election for the 88th district seat, beating Democrat Chuck Hightower, who secured 37.7 percent. This gave the Republicans a net win of +24.6 percent over the Democrats.
This represents an improved performance for the Democrats compared to the 2024 presidential election, when President Donald Trump beat Kamala Harris in the district by 67 percent to 32 percent, according to The State newspaper. In that election, the Republicans won with a net margin of +35 percentage points.
Crazy thing…
When you don’t hoard all the wealth from state parties and prevent them from fighting in every election, we win less seats than if we put a legit effort into winning every possible elections.
But it takes billions to have a coin flip chance at convincing voters a neoliberal is better than a Republican, that’s just been the reality of American politics for decades.
If we stop shoving neoliberalism down voters throats, we don’t have to continuously rob the state Dem parties to pay for the one presidential campaign every four years.
OR… Populists easily win votes by promising to do things they can’t (lower prices) or by promising that great things will come from things they can do (deport immigrants, raise tariffs). Voters are now waking up for the second time that Trump can’t deliver what he promised, so they are willing to look at alternatives.
The left could also nominate populists who promise everyone two acres and a mule, but is that really what’s good for the country? There are plenty of leftist populists elected in South America, yet those countries stay poor and crime-ridden. Some here use US interference / the World Bank / globalists as a boogeyman excuse, but the truth is that populists are good at getting elected and then fucking everything up.
BLUF: you know we can just run someone who authentically wants to help Americans … Right?
…
It’s just unfathomable to you, that we could run someone who authentically will help now that the DNC isn’t literally funded by Hillary’s personal fundraising machine she built…
Like, are you just unaware of all that?
Yeah…
Mainly due to the fucking CIA, again, both under Republicans and neolibs.
Don’t forget, just because we always wait a couple decades to declassify shit, doesn’t mean we perpetually just stopped that long ago. There’s always a giant backlog of shit they’re waiting till we don’t care as much.
Clinton flat out told journalists she wouldn’t have let Palestine have an election, and the only way she would have, would be if it was rigged:
https://mondoweiss.net/2016/10/palestinian-elections-determine/
But obviously the reason leftwing governments don’t work in South America, is the United States of America.
Liars are good at lying…
Again, we could just pick someone that doesn’t lie, how is that such an alien concept to you?
And even if that is your logic, how the ever loving fuck do you not understand why voter turnout is a huge problem? And that the fix is just running someone authentic?
The logic in your comment just isn’t consistent. The only thing consistent is saying anything in the moment that doesn’t make neoliberalism look like the cause. It’s literally like talking to a trumpet.
Authentic people say, “Look, we need to do more of this thing. But there are consequences for doing it, and it is going to lead to the following problems. We will have to make tradeoffs.”
Voters look at that and the other guy, who promises only good things, and they vote for the other guy.
Not exactly South America, but Mexico disagrees. Bolivia too. Leftist populists aren’t miracle workers, but they do have a pretty good track record.