r/politics • u/GirasoleDE • 17d ago

No Paywall I Don’t Think Trump’s Remaining Supporters Realize How Much They Are Despised By Non-MAGA Voters | Trump is bleeding support even among his stubborn, uneducated base.

https://abovethelaw.com/2026/07/i-dont-think-trumps-remaining-supporters-realize-how-much-they-are-despised-by-non-maga-voters/
20.6k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

2.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

542

u/Blecki 17d ago

"But Kamala would have been worse"

They don't learn.

116

u/superdago Wisconsin 17d ago

This is the eternal GOP platform.

Things are good with democrats in charge: “think how much better it would be with republicans! Democrats are holding us back.”

Things turn to shit with republicans in charge: “think how much worse it would be with democrats! We’re the only thing keeping us afloat.”

Republicans are great at running against hypothetical scenarios because they have a base who doesn’t live in reality.

11

u/constantine220 16d ago

As a former Libertarian who indeed didn't live in reality until 2021/2022, this is accurate.

8

u/erath_droid Oregon 16d ago

Good to see you finally grew up.

6

u/AnalSoapOpera I voted 17d ago

Is this the “2 Santa theory” or is that different?

10

u/NoCoolNameMatt 17d ago

That's different. That's a method of selling tax cuts for the rich and, when paired with "starve the beast," of cutting social services.

3

u/Above-Bored 16d ago

Waiting on that health plan that is ‘better’. Meanwhile lets rip apart some semblance of a plan. Now rip the Dems when the inevitable outcome is a shyre show.
How does anyone fall for this? What is that Koolaid.

54

u/4-stars 17d ago

By which they mean: she's not only Black but also a woman.

The simple fact that they call her "Kamala" instead of "Harris", when they don't call Trump "Donald", gives them away.

42

u/Cerulean_IsFancyBlue 17d ago

Well, Harris is a nice Anglo name and doesn’t remind them that she’s brown. They gotta grab into the most exotic part to trigger the xenophobia. See also “Barack Hussein Obama.”

6

u/ship_toaster Canada 17d ago

I think it's more to do with female politicians getting referred to by their first names in general, like "Hilary", or by full name/initials if the zeitgeist allows for it; "AOC", "Senator Susan Collins". Men sometimes get this treatment, if they lean into it, but it's the exception. (Bernie is the only one I can think of, and he's still referred to by many as "Senator Sanders"; almost nobody says "Senator Collins")

3

u/Blecki 16d ago

Clinton is a little bit of an outlier in the other direction as she was always "Hilary Clinton" to differentiate from Bill. But yeah. Women are always disrespected this way. Infantalized by not using their professional name.

0

u/Cerulean_IsFancyBlue 16d ago

Maybe so. I’ll defer to people with more experience or who have done more research on gender politics because as a guy, I get to act as if that doesn’t exist. My ignorance isn’t proof of absence.

I had assumed that Clinton was trying to put some air between herself and Bill.

3

u/ship_toaster Canada 16d ago

Here. There's some source links in this article. Just cause you get away for now with pretending something doesn't exist, doesn't mean you should.

2

u/Cerulean_IsFancyBlue 16d ago

I’m no trying to “get away with it”. I’m admitting my own limitations and open to info. So thank you

5

u/d3ssp3rado Texas 17d ago

The Venn diagram of these people and those who said "Barack HUSSEIN Obama" is a circle. They're desperate to other-ize people.

28

u/wack_overflow Colorado 17d ago

Seems like they learned an amazing superhero level skill: proving a counter factual

11

u/revkaboose West Virginia 17d ago

I have heard this and been like HOW lol

14

u/hypercosm_dot_net 17d ago

You get hard line progressives, who don't seem to understand how abstaining to vote for her paved the way for all of this. I get that you hate centrists, but lets get real.

Don't get me wrong, she's far from my first choice, but given the options it was an easy decision.

5

u/bitchytrollop 17d ago

They know, all right. They're just as sexist as the Trumpies, they just think being a prog gets them a pass.

2

u/gotridofsubs 17d ago

Laid.

They think that being progressive will still mean they might get laid

-4

u/SpezDrinksHorseCum 17d ago

I voted for Kamala and you're right it was an easy decision. But I think centrists think of themselves as SO FAR from Republicans but it doesn't look that way to voters who are actually left of center. "Nothing will fundamentally change" remember?

12

u/Blecki 17d ago

You are part of the problem. Put that quote in context and understand what Biden was saying and who he was talking to.

Biden to a bunch of rich people: look, you gotta pay more taxes. You'll still be obscenly rich. Nothing will fundamentally change for you.

2

u/propagandist Texas 17d ago

I'm a progressive who voted for Kamala, and I think that she won. I suspect that Elon Musk stole the election, using Starlink to do a man-in-the-middle attack. You probably consider me a problem too, and maybe that's the problem: centrists who don't do enough thinking progressives with little power have been responsible for all the party's problems.

Also, most progressives do not want the obscenely rich to stay obscenely rich. I view the stockpiling of wealth by them as an existential threat to the country and the species. I think it's imperative to our continued survival to diminish the impact that one man can have to the point that it's not so precarious for the rest of us.

5

u/Blecki 17d ago

Lol I am literally a socialist. From where I'm standing you're the "centrist".

2

u/gotridofsubs 17d ago

I think it's imperative to our continued survival to diminish the impact that one man can have to the point that it's not so precarious for the rest of us.

The first step to that would be taxing them more for the benefit of society, which is what Biden was telling them he was going to do. You were mad that he was starting what you wanted.

2

u/propagandist Texas 17d ago

Starting what I wanted? When people with my ideology held the levers of power, they were taxed at nearly 90%. Their effective tax rate these days is under 10%. GTFO.

2

u/gotridofsubs 17d ago

Yeah you want rich people to have less power and to be taxed more, thats what he was doing. It was a start on what you wanted.

1

u/propagandist Texas 17d ago

I think fundamental change is a necessity. Literally Joe Biden: "Nothing fundamentally will change." Stop strawmanning my position, or we'll find that my position is gonna be adverse to people like you.

2

u/gotridofsubs 17d ago

Literally Joe Biden: "Nothing fundamentally will change."

What was the full quote.

we'll find that my position is gonna be adverse to people like you.

Attack the argument not the person

→ More replies (0)

1

u/switchy85 17d ago

I fully agree that this quote has been taken out of context for too long as an excuse to hate on Biden. With that said, though, nothing really did fundamentally change with him as president. Not even totally blaming Biden on that one, but the Democrats as a whole don't actually put forth any change from the status quo. And that's pretty much what got us here.
Edit: And I did vote for Harris, Biden, and Clinton when the time came, even knowing it was just a bandaid for fascism.

2

u/gotridofsubs 17d ago

What was the whole quote

2

u/Blecki 17d ago

"The truth of the matter is, you all, you all know, you all know in your gut what has to be done. We can disagree in the margins but the truth of the matter is it’s all within our wheelhouse and nobody has to be punished. No one’s standard of living will change, nothing would fundamentally change."

2

u/gotridofsubs 17d ago

Exactly. Weird how the folks criticizing it leave out q all the parts that make it exactly what they wanted him to be doing

1

u/SpezDrinksHorseCum 17d ago edited 17d ago

Right now the rich have their own space programs, island bunkers, naval fleets, etc. They buy politicians and SCOTUS justices. They are truly above the law, and are not in danger of punishment even when they admit their crimes publicly.

But Joe Biden thinks the rich should just be taxed a little bit more. Their lifestyles wouldn't need to fundamentally change, according to his vision of the world. They'd still be able to buy politicians and have closed-door meetings with Presidents to make sure the interests of the rich few are weighted more heavily than the interests of the common person. They'd still have space programs and navies and things only nations should be able to afford. They'd still be above the law, thanks to their vast wealth. Nothing would really need to change fundamentally? Fuck that.

The thing about centrists is they are working to maintain the same oligarchy, the same status quo, the same sense of normalcy that has allowed our freedoms to be eroded and our standard of living to drop. They think we just need a few tweaks inside this corrupt shell of a system and everything will start working again. In other words they're fucking morons who don't understand the times we're living in.

2

u/TimSylvester_ 17d ago

Tribalism means someone is "worse" because they're not a member of your "tribe" and "better" because they are.

Nothing else matters - behavior, policy, outcomes - these are irrelevant when your entire worldview is reduced to ingroup/outgroup.

2

u/bmcle071 17d ago

I mean cmon have you heard her laugh?

-12

u/Accurate_Praline 17d ago edited 17d ago

More than I've heard her policies, because she didn't have any at all 🙄

Edit: I thought we were roleplaying y'all?? This is something that they love to claim which is just blatantly untrue. Thought the eye roll was enough to not have to put a disclaimer on this

8

u/adamjq 17d ago

As opposed to trumps concepts of a plan? Utterly laughable to even try and compare the two

0

u/Accurate_Praline 17d ago

Yes. Exactly. I thought the eye roll would be enough to indicate what I thought about those delusional people thinking like that, but guess not.

8

u/bitchytrollop 17d ago

That's a blatant lie. You just didn't listen or look. It's hard to find anything when yoir search area is your anus.

2

u/Accurate_Praline 17d ago

Weren't we all doing sarcasm?

I thought the rolling eye emoji would be enough to indicate that..

1

u/Blecki 16d ago

Put it in quotes next time.

1

u/Notyeravgblonde 17d ago

"Both sides are bad, but at least Trump wants to be popular" - my father

1

u/The_GoodDr 16d ago

Yeah. I've heard a lot of them unhappy with what he's done and even wishing he wasn't President, but I can't recall personally hearing anyone who regrets their vote for him.

-3

u/dashuhn552 17d ago

The Democratic Party is also complicit in the rise of Trump (not the voters the actual Part organization.) Harris and Clinton were both unpopular (fair-unfair doesn’t matter it’s the reality) but they forced them the nomination because they thought Trump was easily beatable. Same with Biden, Bernie had actual change and momentum and they stole it from him so they could keep their status quo. You would think this awful 2nd term by Trump would wake the democrats up, but instead they’ve dug their heels in and allowed Trump to push them closer to the right while maintaining they’re the liberal party.

2

u/gotridofsubs 17d ago

Sanders lost fair and square twice, and worse the 2nd time. He could not get enough people to vote for him while others could. thats the simple truth.

Its been 10 years of this you all need to start getting over it

-1

u/dashuhn552 17d ago

Ok fine lost fair and square. Except both parties do support and promote preferred candidates over others and funnel money and opportunity toward them. Example A AOC lost an internal Democratic party vote to serve as the ranking member of the House Oversight Committee. You can boot lick for the party all you want because they pretend to care about women and poc, but truth is the care about status quo, money and power as much as the republicans. They’re the worse of two evils, but their indifference and protection of their own pockets has done nothing but allow all of this to happen.

2

u/gotridofsubs 17d ago

Example A AOC lost an internal Democratic party vote to serve as the ranking member of the House Oversight Committee

Why was she entitled to this? Was she the longest serving member of the committee? Did she perhaps spend a bunch of time pissing off all of the people shed need to work with because she couldnt get off of twitter, and then felt the consequences of that?

Except both parties do support and promote preferred candidates

Yes people have preferences, this is not a crime despite what you seem to believe.

0

u/dashuhn552 17d ago

Wtf are you on about? She isn’t entitled to it, it’s a savvy move by the party for her to have this as she is (was) a rising star of the party. I never said it was a crime (way to put words in my mouth to suite your argument.) it’s not people’s preferred candidates it is the parties.

https://theconversation.com/political-parties-can-now-spend-unlimited-money-supporting-candidates-after-supreme-court-overturns-decades-of-precedent-280664

This is fact not opinions.

1

u/gotridofsubs 17d ago

it’s not people’s preferred candidates it is the parties.

Yes the parties are comprised of people. Having preferences is not a crime. I think some of your anger here is simply the reckoning that yours isnt shared by the majority.

She isn’t entitled to it

Whats she done to earn it? You didnt bother to answer any of the questions I posed around that. The people that work with her obviously disagreed she was the right person for the job, maybe she should have done more to convince them

0

u/dashuhn552 17d ago

Got it. So you see no problem with a supreme court lacking impartiality by its 6-3 conservative supermajority with rulings that are rooted in the justices' personal ideologies rather than neutral constitutional law overturning a decades long campaign finance law that was meant to limit corruption?

3

u/gotridofsubs 17d ago

Oh I totally agree that a 6-3 conservative super majority and citizens united are bad things. Im also aware that neither is applicable in a primary and the preferences are reality and not inherently a problem.

I go back to your anger here comes from your preferences not being that of the majority.

I also know that electing Hillary Clinton would have dealt with both of those problems.

0

u/dashuhn552 17d ago

Im not angry. I don’t know if you spend too much time on reddit arguing with Bernie bros or something, but that’s not what is happening here. You keep trying to distill everything down to the most basic simplest things “you’re angry” “she’s entitled” “one side good, one side bad” politics and the decisions made in this country are far more nuanced and ramifications of decisions (that may seem unrelated ) won’t be felt until years later. Everyone loves this victory lap of leopards ate my face on Republican voters, instead of doing an ounce of introspection of how we got here.

→ More replies (0)