He is barely coherent most of the time, but several of his ideas do resonate with people and are easy to understand:
1 - Other countries in the world have taken advantage of the US
2 - Illegal immigrants have changed the country for the worse and are taking jobs
#2 in particular has been framed as being racist. There IS a good deal of racism mixed in there, but the truth is that low skilled illegal immigrants DO compete for many of the same jobs as lower-skilled Americans.
None other than Bernie Sanders said as much about the subject right around 2007. His stance at that time was that we needed to do something about illegal immigration specifically to protect the jobs of American workers, but then later he changed his tune to fit in with the rest of the party.
If you address the majority of people's concerns and worries, they'll vote for you.
> 2 - Illegal immigrants have changed the country for the worse and are taking jobs
> #2 in particular has been framed as being racist. There IS a good deal of racism mixed in there, but the truth is that low skilled illegal immigrants DO compete for many of the same jobs as lower-skilled Americans.
There is only one group for which that is true -- men without a high school diploma. Otherwise, immigrants are generally taking jobs that Americans won't do.
Case in point, picking produce at farms. The last time they cracked down on immigration, a lot of those farms had to spoil a lot of crops because no one would pick them.
Do not insult a person’s honest earned livelihood that they work for to support their families.
There are tens of thousands of Americans who are forced to live in Trailer trucks or from their car who often do those sorts of jobs.
They just want an honest living and do not have the opportunities to get higher college education to land well paid white collar formal jobs.
That uber job is often their way to save up for their truck driving license so that they can move to a decent wage to get his/her kids a nice christmas gift, nutritious daily meals for their kids and other emotional needs.
To them, seeing their jobs being taken up by illegal immigrants for lower wages, no payroll taxes to pay, etc. is a very very very real issue to them and a zero sum game being played against their life.
People want prosperous livelihoods not just jobs. Do you think those working those low paying dead end jobs are just completely content with having zero mobility or financial security?
That uber driving might be living in their car but at least they are employed right??
if you are buying delivery food, taxis, and laundry services you are clearly an upper class net worth individual. surely you know what’s best for working class americans
A laundry machine today could be a risky investment as you don't know how many years it will last.
My old flat had a machine that broke down (It was less than 6 months old) and there was a known problem with the model which was to do with the input pad to set the settings. Luckily it was under warranty, but even still the stop was fighting hard to replace it :/ (I think it was fisher and paykel, they used to be good but they moved the manufacturing base from New Zealand to overseas).
Yeah this always surprises me when people compare the candidates. OK, Kamala was mediocre. But a ham sandwich is better than Trump's inane incoherent rambling. His positions are a vague protectionism.
Trump is a known quantity - people know what they are getting with him and have made their peace with him being how he is.
People expect more from Democrats. Harris would get dinged for saying things that Trump says, by the same people who are fine with Trump saying those things.
If that seems irrational and hypocritical, well, that's how people are, regardless of their politics.
Another model of how to think about the candidates is that human beings make decisions based on how the person or thing in front of them makes them feel - and afterward they come up with post-hoc rationalizations as to why. Even smart people do this. To some extent, we're all lying to ourselves about this.
So it makes sense that this time around both candidates ran campaigns focused on emotions, instead of policy specifics.
What would you propose if you were tasked with testing whether the ads are placed next to hateful content or not? Please explain how you would test that paying attention to the test being whether there is ANY such placement at all.
This is how I remember that 1728 = 12³. I remember getting puzzled looks from classmates in my elliptic curves class first when I was able to provide 12³ without a moment's delay and then again when I explained why I knew that.
