Liz Peek
  • Articles
  • Videos
  • Radio
  • About
  • Contact
Three reasons Trump triumphed
November 6, 2024

Three reasons Trump triumphed

Liz Peek Articles

Donald Trump has just accomplished the most stunning political comeback in the history of the United States. The former president, who lost his bid for re-election in 2020, was impeached twice, convicted on multiple (flimsy) felony counts, investigated, sued, harassed without end, denounced as a fascist, blasted as too old, “deranged” and “unstable,” not only won another four years in the Oval Office but pulled Senate and House candidates along with him. Though we don’t know for sure, it looks like the GOP may win control of all three branches of the government.

How did the former president pull off such a resounding victory? We can point to three reasons:

  1. Some 70% of Americans, according to exit polls, thought the U.S. was on the wrong track and wanted change. Kamala Harris promised none;
  2. Trump broadened his appeal and his outreach, eating into the so-called “Obama coalition” by winning sizable numbers of minorities and young people;
  3. Harris ran a lousy campaign.

In 1980, Ronald Reagan, running to unseat Democrat incumbent Jimmy Carter, famously asked voters, “Are you better off than you were four years ago?” The answer to that question has always been consequential, and so it was this year. A telling Gallup poll conducted just weeks before the election showed 52% of the country felt they were worse off under the Biden-Harris administration than they were under Trump; only 39% indicated they were better off. In addition, Gallup reported that their economic confidence indicator, at negative 26, was a bad sign for Democrats. That low a reading normally has shown up only during recessions, signaling deep unease about the economy.

Numerous surveys showed voters, fed up with inflation, unchecked immigration and rising crime, wanted a change; Harris was unable to say how she would “turn the page” as she put it. When asked on “The View” what she would do differently than Joe Biden, she could not think of a “single thing.” More than any other utterance made on the campaign trail, that unprepared and unimaginative response cooked Kamala’s goose.

She could have reversed some of the policies infuriating to common sense voters, by, for instance, promising to ban men playing in women’s sports or saying she would roll back the EV mandates that will force Americans to buy cars they don’t want. She could have vowed to secure the border, and promise she would not again open the gates to millions of migrants, criminal gangs and hundreds of people on the terror watch list. But she didn’t.

By contrast, Trump campaigned with purpose, promising to reduce inflation, roll back harmful regulations, deport criminals in the U.S. illegally, dump unpopular climate mandates and lower taxes. Moreover, he held rallies in Democrat-run New York City and California in defiance of political norms, helping down-ballot races but also expanding his appeal and his reach.

He won over a shocking 54% of Hispanic men compared to 44% who went for Harris; four years ago, Joe Biden won that group by a 23-point margin. Trump also greatly improved his standing with Black voters, and especially in key swing states. In Wisconsin, for instance, NBC exit polls show Trump doubled his share of the Black vote, winning 20% of that contingent, up from 8% in 2020. He also attracted more than 40% of Jewish voters in Florida, New York and Nevada.

Trump campaigned for all Americans, instead of the “slicing and dicing” favored by Kamala Harris.

Meanwhile, Kamala’s campaign relied on joy and “vibes,” rather than substance. She coasted initially on Democrats’ relief that Joe Biden was no longer their candidate, and then, when that approach stalled, turned savagely negative on Donald Trump. She shunned interviews and unscripted appearances because she couldn’t handle either. She was flummoxed by even the mildest of inquisitions, such as that posed by CBS’ Bill Whitaker, who reasonably asked why she flip-flopped on issues she embraced in the 2019 Democratic primary, like “Medicare-for-all” and banning fracking.

Harris always appeared caught in the headlights with such questions, even though she should have seen the car coming from miles away. How could she not be ready with answers?

The most consequential campaign decision made by Kamala Harris was her pick of Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz as her running mate, instead of popular Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro. Choosing one of the most progressive governors in the country confirmed that she remained the far-left San Francisco liberal who showed up in 2019, embracing the Green New Deal, banning fracking, and decriminalizing illegal immigration. Shapiro was not only a political moderate, who would have balanced the ticket, but also would have appealed to Jewish voters. And, he might well have delivered key swing state Pennsylvania. It was a critical mistake made by an insecure candidate.

Harris warned that Trump was a threat to democracy, but voters saw his opponents weaponize the Department of Justice and try to lock up their political adversary, stiff the 14 million Democrats who voted for Joe Biden to be their candidate in the primaries, propose to “reform” the Supreme Court and do away with the filibuster, and persuade social media companies to censor their opposition. 

Ultimately, voters repudiated not only Kamala Harris but also the decades-old Democratic leadership. Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and other longtime Democrat power brokers pretended that President Joe Biden was just fine, even though his steady mental decline was obvious. Only after the entire nation witnessed the extent of that deterioration during his disastrous debate with Donald Trump in late June, did they acknowledge that he was not capable of governing for four more years. Because they hid the truth, the party then had no time to hold a primary contest; they were stuck with Kamala Harris. As one of our country’s most unpopular vice presidents ever, political analysts had long considered her unfit to run. That view proved correct.

Ultimately, voters did defend democracy; they elected Donald Trump.

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/three-reasons-trump-triumphed

Published on Fox News

If men don’t vote, Harris wins Investors cheer Trump’s economic agenda, defying gloomy media 

Related Posts

Screenshot 2025-05-16 at 8.43.36 AM

Articles

DOGE isn’t meeting its goals — you can thank the political establishment

Democrats’ bizarre affection for illegal aliens

Articles

Democrats’ bizarre affection for illegal aliens

Republicans need to grow a spine and support Trump’s agenda

Articles

Republicans need to grow a spine and support Trump’s agenda

Recent Posts

  • Screenshot 2025-05-16 at 8.43.36 AMDOGE isn’t meeting its goals — you can thank the political establishment
  • Democrats’ bizarre affection for illegal aliensDemocrats’ bizarre affection for illegal aliens
  • Republicans need to grow a spine and support Trump’s agendaRepublicans need to grow a spine and support Trump’s agenda
  • Screenshot 2019-06-26 07.54.58What Kamala Harris buzz is telling us. Read between the lines, America

Tweets by Liz

Unable to load Tweets

Follow

Liz on Facebook

Comments Box SVG iconsUsed for the like, share, comment, and reaction icons

Liz Peek

7 hours ago

Liz Peek

My Morning Rant:
I am alternately peeved and sympathetic with Chip Roy, Ralph Norman and the others who torpedoed Trump’s Big Beautiful Bill. But after reading the fine print this morning and realizing that reforms to Medicaid don’t kick in until 2029 !!!! I am disgusted. I get that states need some time to adjust to a change in rules regarding Medicaid eligibility – maybe a year or 18 months — but do they really need four years? No, they do not. The extended timeframe is an obvious play to put political repercussions off until after the midterms. Legislators from swing districts fear losing their seats because able-bodied adults lose their free ride. They want to put off any change as long as possible.
On the other hand, those vulnerable legislators will almost certainly get canned if the 2017 tax cuts don’t get extended and Trump’s agenda crashes. We need both to get the bill passed, and to make it tougher.
The conservatives calling for bigger spending cuts are completely correct. Just ask Moody’s, which in recent days downgraded U.S. debt. Imagine, the United States of America has lost its triple-A status. (The other two major ratings agencies had already made this downgrade.) This would be a wake-up call except that most of our country is asleep, lulled into a false sense of complacency by hours spent on Tik-Tok or watching the NFL. We all need downtime, for sure, but we also need to pay attention to what’s happening with our country’s fiscal outlook. It isn’t good. Even the Fed, no friend to the Trump administration or to fiscal austerity, has announced it will cut staff and overhead. Of course, why the Fed has a headcount of 24,000 is a mystery. How can they employ so many people and still get it wrong most of the time? This is the group that never spoke out against Biden’s reckless spending; it’s quite the switch.
Simply put, the country endorsed a huge surge in government spending to compensate for the wrong-headed directives during Covid that shut down schools, businesses and churches. The government under Trump wanted to keep Americans employed and the economy ready to rebound, which it did. Biden kept the spending at max level, refusing to let a crisis go to waste. Democrats in Congress and the Fed went along, spurring the highest inflation in decades.
Now we have to go back to the trend-line pre-Covid spending; the bill on the table doesn’t do that. Republicans must do better if they want to keep the majority.
… See MoreSee Less

Share

Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare on Linked InShare by Email

  • Likes: 26
  • Shares: 3
  • Comments: 8

Comment on Facebook

Right on, as usual! Thanks for all your clear-headed messages.

We need a balanced budget amendment! Deficit spending needs to end!

Liz Peek Well written, my friend!

Nailed it

Just sick of BOTH parties. Neither are there for the Working Americans. BOTH parties responsible for the theft going on. Repubs should have read the bills that gave away money..

Convention of States is looking better everyday.

Honestly you should be somewhere in Trumps administration Liz.. Just sayin

Is TERM LIMiTS in this big beautiful bill? Everything else is.
If not, why not?
Past time to cut the deadwood and get “servants” of We the People seated who will do the job more responsibly..

View more comments

Liz Peek

1 day ago

Liz Peek

What happened to DOGE???
… See MoreSee Less

Link thumbnail

DOGE isn’t meeting its goals — you can thank the political establishment

DOGE chief has been thwarted at every turn — by judges, Democrats and their media allies, even Republicans.

Share

Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare on Linked InShare by Email

  • Likes: 5
  • Shares: 0
  • Comments: 2

Comment on Facebook

The Uniparty doesn't want their gravy train turned over.

Democrats are Americas virus.

Liz Peek

3 days ago

Liz Peek

My Morning Rant:
John Hawley, Senator from Missouri, is out with a blistering attack on Republicans in Congress who want to “cut” Medicaid spending. He declares those in favor of Medicaid reforms contained in the House bill “a noisy contingent of corporatist Republicans — call it the party’s Wall Street wing” who are not on board with working-class Americans and who want to “build our big, beautiful bill around slashing health insurance for the working poor”. www.nytimes.com/2025/05/12/opinion/josh-hawley-dont-cut-medicaid.html
What rot. Working Americans of all classes are sick and tired of an ever-growing amount of their hard-earned taxes going to fund those who are not working. This is not a Wall Street issue- it’s a fairness issue. Though some groups say most Medicaid recipients are working, that is not true. A study by AEI showed that “In December 2022, 44 percent of non-disabled working age Medicaid recipients without children worked at least 80 hours” per month, compared to 72% not receiving Medicaid. Focusing on “prime working ages of 25 to 54, the share working at least 80 hours was 51 percent among Medicaid recipients and 84 percent among non-Medicaid recipients.” So why would 49% not be working?
Here’s the problem: the Medicaid changes that GOP legislators want to make don’t target “the working poor”, they target able-bodied men and women who are not working, and who historically would not have qualified for Medicaid benefits. Only when Obama rescinded the work requirements for Medicaid did the program blow up entirely and become the drain on the fiscal purse that we see today. As he states in his op-ed, Hawley’s problem is this: “Today [Medicaid] serves over 70 million Americans, including well over one million residents of Missouri, the state I represent.” Hawley, who was elected last fall by a 14-point margin, fears he’ll lose ground with those million recipients if he embraces fiscal common sense. Or maybe he fears losing the support of healthcare professionals, who donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to his campaign. www.opensecrets.org/members-of-congress/josh-hawley/summary?cid=N00041620
Our country has seen a long-term decline in able-bodied men working. The labor participation rate for that group is 89.1% which sounds high until you realize that it was 97.1% in 1960. That’s a huge slide, with troubling implications for U.S. productivity. If you believe, as I do, that work is healthy, it is also bad news for the individuals who are, at least in some cases, gaming the system.
Instead of railing about sincere efforts to reform an out-of-control entitlement, why doesn’t Hawley turn his attentions to improving job opportunities and training in his state? Or attracting more employers? And, where are his ideas for cutting federal spending, which is too high and which is hurting our nation? Some $50 billion in Medicaid outlays funds fraud or constitutes “improper payments.” What is Hawley doing to confront that?
Maybe I would be more impressed with his arguments but for his having published his screed in the New York Times- is that the most efficient way to speak to working-class Americans? Bernie Sanders probably thinks so, and so does Josh Hawley.
… See MoreSee Less

Link thumbnail

Sen. Josh Hawley – Campaign Finance Summary

Fundraising profile for Sen. Josh Hawley – Missouri

Share

Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare on Linked InShare by Email

  • Likes: 4
  • Shares: 1
  • Comments: 2

Comment on Facebook

We have to end the idea that working for McDonalds at the counter is the end game career wise. It’s what you do in high school and college to pay your bills. If you want to be in that industry, you need to think manager then owner as that is the career.

Uniparty in action. They are there to Take money, not help The People.

LOAD MORE

Tags

AGENDA AIR FORCE BIG GOVERNMENT BORDER WALL CHINA CLINTON CONGRESS CYBERWAR DEMOCRATS DRAIN THE SWAMP E-VERIFY ECONOMY ELON MUSK FILLIBUSTER FREEDOM CAUCUS FREEDOM WATCH GOP GORSUCH GRADUATION HACKING HEALTH CARE HILLARY IMMIGRATION INFRASTRUCTURE KUSHNER MEDIA MIDDLE EAST MOODY'S NUNES NYC OIL RAND PAUL STOCK MARKET SUPREME COURT SUSAN RICE TAXES TAX REFORM TECHNOLOGY TED CRUZ TERROR TRUMP TURKEY WALL STREET WEATHER WELLESLEY
[themify_map address="233 78th Street New York, NY 10032" width=100% height=250px zoom=14]
  • Articles
  • Videos
  • Radio
  • About
  • Contact
©2017 LizPeek.org. All Rights Reserved.
Site by Steeplechase Strategies