I mean it’s mostly bullshit. They gambled and it paid off b/c enough people bought the nonsense about prices and their outside money guy ran ratfuck campaigns to keep prior Biden voters home. Neither trump’s people were as brilliant as they and Politico claim nor where Harris’ staff as incompetent as many here (and Politico) claim. It wa…
I mean it’s mostly bullshit. They gambled and it paid off b/c enough people bought the nonsense about prices and their outside money guy ran ratfuck campaigns to keep prior Biden voters home. Neither trump’s people were as brilliant as they and Politico claim nor where Harris’ staff as incompetent as many here (and Politico) claim. It was much more about the fallout from global pandemic economy and good ole’ misogyny and racism.
I maintain the Harris campaign did well for the most part with a tough hand, but I do think the points above are all pretty solid. While Harris did try to stick to simple slogans "Forward" . ."Won't Go Back" "When We Fight We Win" . . they're so opaque as to not really drive enthusiasm, especially for a quasi-incumbent. But the question then becomes . . what was the alternative? I don't think there were many good options.
And her ads were indeed all over the place in terms of message-focus. Now, from one vantage point that's smart targeting, but from another it's a muddled, uncentered campaign.
Who said they were lucky? They assumed there would be an expanded persuasion universe and maybe were right. But treating guys like Fabrizio as some sort of genius is just laughable.
The media always treats a winning campaign as total geniuses and a losing campaign as being flawed from the start. The truth is more nuanced and complex.
As Carville or someone from Clinton's campaign said, "it's the economy, stupid". Trump talking about Haitians eating dogs was not brilliant, it was a sideshow.
Wasn't really a gamble. The American people wanted to hear about fixes for the economy and the border and Democrats wanted to talk about reproductive rights and January 6, 2021. Hard to imagine a scenario where the opposition party doesn't win in that circumstance.
I mean it’s mostly bullshit. They gambled and it paid off b/c enough people bought the nonsense about prices and their outside money guy ran ratfuck campaigns to keep prior Biden voters home. Neither trump’s people were as brilliant as they and Politico claim nor where Harris’ staff as incompetent as many here (and Politico) claim. It was much more about the fallout from global pandemic economy and good ole’ misogyny and racism.
I think brushing off Trumps campaigns at this point as "lucky" is the absolute wrong takeaway. Especially this last one.
Point is they were seeing things the Harris campaign did not and were running a very different type of media game that was, ultimately, effective.
That is the takeaway.
I maintain the Harris campaign did well for the most part with a tough hand, but I do think the points above are all pretty solid. While Harris did try to stick to simple slogans "Forward" . ."Won't Go Back" "When We Fight We Win" . . they're so opaque as to not really drive enthusiasm, especially for a quasi-incumbent. But the question then becomes . . what was the alternative? I don't think there were many good options.
And her ads were indeed all over the place in terms of message-focus. Now, from one vantage point that's smart targeting, but from another it's a muddled, uncentered campaign.
It wasn't perfect but it wasn't bad. She had a weak hand to play.
Who said they were lucky? They assumed there would be an expanded persuasion universe and maybe were right. But treating guys like Fabrizio as some sort of genius is just laughable.
The media always treats a winning campaign as total geniuses and a losing campaign as being flawed from the start. The truth is more nuanced and complex.
As Carville or someone from Clinton's campaign said, "it's the economy, stupid". Trump talking about Haitians eating dogs was not brilliant, it was a sideshow.
Trump's in-person campaign was a disaster, but his media campaign was pretty effective considering all forms of media.
Yes, that I’d agree with
Wasn't really a gamble. The American people wanted to hear about fixes for the economy and the border and Democrats wanted to talk about reproductive rights and January 6, 2021. Hard to imagine a scenario where the opposition party doesn't win in that circumstance.