Forum menu
So let’s think back to Trumps first tenure in office, what did he actually do? Short answer “**** all”
The Democrats were in control of Congress during his 1st presidency, Republicans are not going to vote against him so anything goes this time
To be fair Donald Trump did do quite a lot when he was president, whether or not you agree with what he did. And the US economy did reasonably well until the covid pandemic came along.
All of which explains at least in part why American voters have given a second term.
Zero (GDP?) growth and zero net consumption are going to be a struggle simply because it will probably fan the flames of the intergenerational problems we are already seeing.
Well we don't really have any choice on this one as eventually we'll run out of space and resources, civilisation will collapse and the human race will go extinct. Unless of course Elon manages to colonise Mars before then which I think even the most enthusiastic Musk acolyte will admit is unlikely.
Should be interesting to see what old scores he settles and how quickly.
I'd settle for locking up Nancy Pelosi. I have always despised that woman, the single greatest blockage to progressive policies and govt in the US (and beyond) in recent history. Although given she's one of the main instigators of the Harris candidacy Trump might give her a medal instead.
To be fair Donald Trump did do quite a lot when he was president, whether or not you agree with what he did.
He sure did:
https://seattlemedium.com/donald-trump-spent-almost-a-year-playing-golf-during-presidency/
Thank goodness they've reinstated a real grafter in the White House eh?
Trump does not give one flying fig for 'Green issues', the 'environment', 'controlling climate change', or nature. All the baby robins of this world are in jeopardy. This really is a huge problem.
Thank goodness they’ve reinstated a real grafter in the White House eh?
It has nothing to do with him being a grafter. The reality is that his administration did quite a lot during the period that he was president, and presumably quite a lot of people liked what he did - he has just been elected US president for the second time.
I would be reasonably happy if I thought that Trump will be mostly playing golf for the next 4 years and the US was left to cruise on autopilot, unfortunately I don't think that will be the case
Eerrr like what?
If you think that Trump did nothing more than play golf during his first term I am guessing that you don't think him winning a second term is a disaster?
I do agree that the claimed negative effect of his first term is probably exaggerated but I wouldn't go as far as dismissing it as inconsequential.
I suspect that the average American has a better idea of what Trump did in his first 4 years as US president than the average Brit.
Edit :
https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2021/01/29/how-america-changed-during-donald-trumps-presidency/
Trump’s policy record included major changes at home and abroad. He achieved a string of long-sought conservative victories domestically, including the biggest corporate tax cuts on record, the elimination of scores of environmental regulations and a reshaping of the federal judiciary. In the international arena, he imposed tough new immigration restrictions, withdrew from several multilateral agreements, forged closer ties with Israel and launched a tit-for-tat trade dispute with China as part of a wider effort to address what he saw as glaring imbalances in America’s economic relationship with other countries.
Getting the self-pardoning out the way should keep him occupied for about a year?
I would imagine that will be his primary consideration.
As we've heard, during his first term there were a lot of people either actively or passively working to slow down or stop the worst ideas he had. There also seemed to be a slight level of buffoonish incompetence around some stuff, remember "Space Force"?
This time around the project 2025 masterminds will have the plans all laid out and get exactly what they want. I'm sure they'll be perfectly happy to have Trump out of the way, down in Florida playing golf, while they get on with the real work.
Getting the self-pardoning out the way should keep him occupied for about a year?
I’m betting these will be the first parts of his great work and handled rapidly.
I’m wondering if Rudy will be getting his TV back and whether all his insurrectionists get released from prison.
I just can’t see him not having a night of the long knives.
What’s the point of having the rule of law when a criminal can rise to the top then exonerate themselves.
How much of this is on the democrats for putting forward someone not matching the job description?
Like what Labour did with Corbyn in the 2017 and 2019 elections.
That is, in the view of the wider electorate not just the party's own supporters.
ie - US president isn't a job for a youngish looking 2nd generation immigrant non-white woman, UK PM isn't a job for a socialist protester type.
Nasty stuff I know but these things are at play in the analysis of the fallout so we shouldn't avoid discussing it.
What are we all thinking about
- pollsters not spotting the huge swing to Trump - it was still neck-and-neck right until they started counting votes - and they counted bloody quick
- the Twitter discussion that the votes cast don't match the numbers of registered voters, are v different from 2020, and there must be some votes missing for Dems.......
Idiots excepted, we're all feeling pretty depressed about this. How should we react? Some thoughts here:
https://www.popehat.com/p/and-yet-it-moves
2nd generation immigrant non-white woman
not all trump voters are racist misogynists, but many racists and misogynists probably voted trump.
new levels of hypocrisy
You say hypocrisy, I say diplomacy. Let's call the whole thing off
One of the worst things in all this is we are forced to continue to hear his ****ing whiny ****ing disgusting voice going on with all of his bullshit, everyday on the daily narrative. For another four years! minimum.
And I'm already sick of him.
You say hypocrisy, I say diplomacy.
I am talking about David Lammy's intense attack on Teresa May's government for inviting Donald Trump to the UK, that is what I am calling hypocrisy.
Apparently diplomatic niceties are absolutely fine for a Labour government, but in the case of a Tory government they are a disgrace, according to David Lammy.
How much of this is on the democrats for putting forward someone not matching the job description?
There are many questions for the Democrats to answer, but given they kicked Biden out last minute, I thought Harris stepped up, did a pretty good job and surprised a lot of people, and ran a decent campaign with an energised and uplifting message. It's difficult to see what more they could have done under those circumstances.
We can talk all day about what if they did this, or what if they did that, but the fact is absolutely none of it seems to be resonating with a great number of people.
If there's anything to learn from any of this, it appears that we maybe need to take the current rule book and burn it, then start again from scratch. People feel there is something fundamentally broken in society (and I don't think that's limited to the far right, we all feel it to some extent or other) and the face you put in front of people is inconsequential unless they feel that face is going to do that.
We're at a point we're a lot of Trump supporters don't even like or trust him. They just know he's going to shake shit up and they want stuff to happen.
Can’t wait to see Sir Keir holding hands with him
pollsters not spotting the huge swing to Trump – it was still neck-and-neck right until they started counting votes – and they counted bloody quick
He’s sitting at 50.7% of the vote, that’s within the tolerance of the polls.
We’re at a point we’re a lot of Trump supporters don’t even like or trust him. They just know he’s going to shake shit up and they want stuff to happen.
To be fair that isn't totally dissimilar to many peoples attitude of Thatcher when she was prime minister. On a personal level not many people actually liked her but they were swayed by her message.
Edit : And putting the great back in Great Britain also isn't totally dissimilar to Make America Great Again :
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-wales-22063441
Maybe trumps stance on abortion has some logic.
if musks am is to repopulate mars, he’ll need candidates that can survive hurtling through space in a tin can for 15 years.
the spermatozoa that produced all the unwanted (unaborted) Americans have already outwitted every kind of birth control. What possible harm are some gamma rays on the barren planet mars going to do?
they’d have spent an equivalent amount of time in childhood neglect. Small beer?
He’s sitting at 50.7% of the vote, that’s within the tolerance of the polls.
that's the big # - but what about all the swing states that were on a knife edge, Iowa maybe going blue, but ended up with every state even the blue ones moving toward Trump across the vote - or do we need to wait a couple days for more granular breakdown
I wonder how many American women are in fear of being grabbed by the genitalia tonight - whether they want it or not...
There are many questions for the Democrats to answer, but given they kicked Biden out last minute, I thought Harris stepped up, did a pretty good job and surprised a lot of people, and ran a decent campaign with an energised and uplifting message.
Agreed.
It’s difficult to see what more they could have done under those circumstances.
Have some foresight not to put forward an 81 year old candidate in the first place, and a succession plan to have a suitable (in the eyes of the electorate) replacement ready to go.
Trump at 70 first time was way older than recent presidents, then Biden blew that out of the water at 78, and now we've Trump again at 78.
I agree with your assessment of the mood, but that doesn't change that they f'd up by the first being too old then the replacement the wrong type.
Let's be honest. Given Harris's gender and skin colour, she was never going to get over the line in a country where people are still named Cletus.
I think it is difficult to claim that Kamala Harris was the wrong skin colour for the US electorate when that electorate voted twice for a black US president before Trump's first tenure.
In Georgia’s Baldwin County 40% of voters are African American, it voted Republican for the first time in 20 years.
There is a lot of suggestion that accusing Trump supporters of being racists, xenophobes, and garbage, backfired on the Democrats. Insulting people isn't a good way to win them over, it turns out.
Similarly it would appear that the perceived notion that Kamala Harris was entitled to expect women to vote for her re-enforced this Democrat sense of entitlement/taking their core base for granted.
I am sure the reasons that Trump won and Harris didn't are many and varied, but I doubt the fact that Harris is a woman with slightly dark skin figured very high.
Are there any lessons for UK politicians to learn from this US election? Certainly imo. It is quite plausible that in 5 years time the UK will have a Tory-Reform coalition government headed by a black female prime minister.
It is quite plausible that in 5 years time the UK will have a Tory-Reform coalition government headed by a black female prime minister.
I wouldn't be surprised if the collective memory of the UK electorate was short enough to vote the Tories back in but I'd be surprised if Badenoch was still leader at that point.
There is a lot of suggestion that accusing Trump supporters of being racists, xenophobes, and garbage, backfired on the Democrats. Insulting people isn’t a good way to win them over, it turns out.
Funny that.
If you call Dems marxist, communist, low IQ, stupid, nasty radicals - the Trumpists all cheer and lap it up.
Almost like there's a significant percentage of the US population who are that thin skinned that they will condemn themsleves to another 4 years of ridicule by the rest of the world.
That, and they cannot bear the thought of a woman in charge.
It seems the middle ground voted purely based off the amount of money in their pocket and rising immigration whilst at the same time somehow believing Trump that he could fix both. I don't see how anyone rational can come to that conclusion, not see that there was a global economic slump post-Covid (with the US fairing better than most of the advanced economies) or not blame Republican's for killing of the border bill. But I guess if your only source of news is right-wing media or misinformation on social media it's not that hard to understand how it happened.
I don't actually know where the Democrats go from here, even if they can sort out their messaging and Trump screws up the economy with a trade war with China he's got so much power now with all the instruments of government effectively under his control it wouldn't surprise me even if he doesn't currently have plans to undermine the democratic system in the US he will do something if he starts losing popularity and Republican control of Congress looks to be in jeopardy come the mid-terms. At best there will be a staggering amount of gerrymandering and voter rights erosion, at worst - who knows?
I thought Harris stepped up, did a pretty good job and surprised a lot of people, and ran a decent campaign with an energised and uplifting message.
I thought after the initial good debate performance she campaigned and came across rather poorly, it was all about Trump and not enough vision for the future. Waltz carried the campaign IMO he was passionate and talked about the dems plans to improve peoples lives it was believable that he actually cared about everyone, he did muddle his words at times but he came across much better than Harris who seemed a bit artificial after that debate performance, she didn't connect it felt like she was debating a positions she didn't care about as an academic exercise rather than believing in a cause.
Not that I then understand why Trump then becomes the viable alternative, however bigging up such a poor performance from Harris doesn't reflect reality.
Is the issue that lots of folk didn't vote this time, as much as people voted differently?
I've come to the conclusion there is really no coherent strategy reliably deployable against Trump or those of a similar ilk. Even if one does work there is no guarantee it will work again in the future. Trump is the ultimate chameleon.
He's also an abberation and partly backed by what many would correctly deem a cult.
Harris could have done everything right but still lost this, that's the reality.
To appeal to the diverse groups he increased his vote share of, inherently meant his policies such as they are, are full of contradictions. If another politician tried to sell those same contradictions, they would rightly be torn apart. To Trump voters, they simply ignore the parts they don't want to hear.
I've no idea how you combat that. Either way, even after Trump is just a bad memory, America will never be the reliable ally we once had. Europe and the democracies under threat around the world need to build new alliances.
It's achievable and necessary.
In Georgia’s Baldwin County 40% of voters are African American, it voted Republican for the first time in 20 years.
Obvious maths is obvious.
If you think that Trump did nothing more than play golf during his first term I am guessing that you don’t think him winning a second term is a disaster?
Spending 25% of his term on the golf course is probably a net benefit to humanity, maybe you have a point. The trouble is he (like any politician) is the figurehead/rallying point for some more calculating and dangerous bastards:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c977njnvq2do.amp
https://www.aclu.org/project-2025-explained
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_2025
While the Donald is busy putting the Heritage Foundation will be busy doing all sorts in his name. Interestingly Liz Truss seems to be another of the useful idiots they appear to have in their pocket.
Who might have managed to win from the position Harris was in?
I think Michelle Obama could have. I think it would have taken a celebrity, not a politician. Which is sort of damning.
I’ve come to the conclusion there is really no coherent strategy against Trump or those of a similar ilk. Even if one does work there is no guarantee it will work again in the future.
It will always be impossible to beat a liar when so many people believe the lies and don't want you telling them they are lies.
kerley
It will always be impossible to beat a liar when so many people believe the lies and don’t want you telling them they are lies.
Yep, that's the near impossible problem at the heart of all this.
Europe and the democracies under threat around the world need to build new alliances.
We just walked out on ours.
As a result of stuff like:
It will always be impossible to beat a liar when so many people believe the lies and don’t want you telling them they are lies.
The isolating, looping algorithms of social media have created a new landscape. You can even tell different (and mutually incompatible) lies to different people. It is a problem we have not seen before.
Remember as you look for reasons that roughly half the electorate is of below average intelligence.
Just for fun now, I understand, and I may be wrong, that a sitting president is immune from prosecution and has the effective power to quash special investigations.
But Trump isn’t president until late January, so what if…?
But Trump isn’t president until late January, so what if…?
His team will tie up any litigation in appeals that could go on for years, not that they need to go on that long. A couple of months is enough.
Effectively, he just got given the ultimate get out of jail free card.
There is a lot of suggestion that accusing Trump supporters of being racists, xenophobes, and garbage, backfired on the Democrats. Insulting people isn’t a good way to win them over, it turns out.
Unfortunately very true.
Whilst USA may have deeper issues - here in UK it has been noticeable since Brexit when things had taken a very sinister turn. Previously people would grumble one way or the other for a day or two about who got in - they may rib a person they knew who voted a particular way. But since Brexit it got very nasty and those on the losing side sought to divide people like never before. First it was the thick racist working class ... then it was gammons/ old people ... and the last I read here it was the Putin supporters.
Insulting people may make those on the losing side feel better in the short term, but it is not a reliable way of winning them over to reconsider their lived experience influencing their vote in the future.
But since Brexit it got very nasty
That's the problem with politics based on lies and xenophobia (it tends to create division)
And as for supporting putin being an insult, and?
Welcome to the forum 1st time poster ?
But since Brexit it got very nasty and those on the losing side sought to divide people like never before.
That's a little biased imo. Remainers were definitely upset to put it politely but Leavers very much matched any insults given by the "elites". I never knew I was one of the elites. Which is nice.
The whole referendum was by it's very nature devisive, it could be nothing else. It was the bastard child dreamt up to (amazingly!) heal Tory party divisions that had been ongoing for decades. The ultimate party before country policy.
Instead it's gutted the Tory party and let to untold financial damage and restrictions placed upon the younger generations they never even got to vote upon.
Anyway, that's for another thread and it's been done to death.
butcher
Somebody else may or may not have won, but the same problems would remain. We need to stop and think deeply after this one.
I completely agree, particularly as this is a problem that many democracies are now facing including us. We could very well have a Tory/reform government in a few years time. We are no where near it of the woods sadly.
'Merica was never going to elect a black/brown woman as President.
I have worked for a US based company and I have worked with a lot of Americans.
The company didn't even see how institutionalist racist they were. The only black people employed, were in the lower paid warehouse roles, the well paid operational roles were 100% white.
America is still a deeply racist country.
they will condemn themsleves to another 4 years of ridicule by the rest of the world
They don't care. This doesn't even register for them.* They have been told since birth that the US is the greatest nation on earth so why should they care what other nationalities think? Plus, a significantly large proportion of Americans have never ventured outside the US, some, never outside their own state.
* These were the viewpoints provided by 2 unconnected Americans (so not a representative sample I know) - 1 I know reasonably well, the other a 'colleague' I've had a few dealings with, but their perspective is the same.
People seem to assume that racism and sexism are about consciously not liking black people or women, but it's about subconscious bias. If she'd been assertive and put forward strong arguments people's emotional response would be to think she was unpleasant and bossy which would be negative and harm polls. So yeah it's probably impossible at this point given the state of America. And you can't tell people they're being sexist because they say 'what do you mean? Some of my best friends are women!' etc.
It's quite a hard concept to put across because you have to tell people something that makes them feel bad about themselves and causes them to think - both of which are very difficult, particularly in America at the moment.
I think Michelle Obama could have.
Maybe, but there would have been so much of that vile "Big Mike" misinformation thrown at her, that it might overshadow her campaign. Demanding she releases her birth certificate, medical records etc to prove she was a woman, then claiming they were faked.
LBC are interviewing blue collar people in the rust belts etc and most say they voted for Trump due to the hike in prices compared to when he was last in power and also immigration. They don't factor in the Covid variable and care little that he's a criminal.
Well my work colleague sent me a message to see how the UK was taking the news, she voted for trump.
I asked her if she would lend him 100$$
"Hell no he's a criminal" came the reply.
I mean at this point (shrugs shoulders in a galic style)
Meh
There is a lot of suggestion that accusing Trump supporters of being racists, xenophobes, and garbage, backfired on the Democrats. Insulting people isn’t a good way to win them over, it turns out.
I think that's balls - the Dem campaign didn't do that, and were I an American citizen, my vote would not have been swayed by one set of voters thinking me a "libtard". As noted above, what campaign can beat a campaign built on lies?
roughly half the electorate is of below average intelligence.
Oh god, no. Let's not do that again.
Anyway - 14th amendment anyone?
America is still a deeply racist country.
And misogynistic. A sizeable proportion of people will have refused to vote for her simply because she is a woman.
The USA is still - outside of some slightly more developed east-coast cities - a backwards and largely third-world country.
“Hell no he’s a criminal” came the reply.
But he's not a black woman.
The democrats should never of put her up as a candidate.
The last election was really close, they should of planned for proper succession.
Harris was not a popular VP, everyone knew that. She was never going to win.
It's not just a rust belt thing though. My SiL is solid American middle class in Maryland and steadfastly against Trump but she said "inflation has been really bad my grocery bill went from 200 to 450 for 2 weeks so that is real) it has been easing this past year but it has impacted people significantly and interest rates have killed the housing market so my guess is people voted about $$". People often take a fairly limited view of matters when they're being squeezed
The last election was really close, they should of planned for proper succession.
That succession plan would’ve been for 4 years time. A second term is the norm, nobody had a plan for what to do when the sitting President starts malfunctioning on TV.
There were certainly weaknesses all over the place, but not sure who would’ve done better?
Does anyone really believe that Trump is going to do anything to help "ordinary" people in the USA?
He's got 4 years to tear up as much stuff as possible and give tax cuts to the rich.
It's a disaster for the US and hopefully it will make Europe sit up and realise that we have to sort our own defense out. Putin's Russia is a real threat to European security.
As Kilo says above, if people see their cost of living getting better then that’ll be a good thing in their eyes. That the rich are managing to absolutely coin it in is a world away
From the various post mortems I've read or listened to in the last day, the common theme seems to be it's angry, young, predominantly white men, although he definitely gained traction with younger African American and Hispanic males.
This group feels it's being left behind. They feel diversity and inclusion is limiting their opportunities. They feel marginalised and isolated. They see women becoming more independently successful. Go and read some of the vitriol these men post about women earning huge sums of money from Only Fans and similar. It's horrific misogyny. Look at their hatred for the likes of Taylor Swift, a strong, successful young woman, and similar female stars.
They feel bombarded by gender politics, despite the actual number of people who fall into these categories being a fraction of a percent, but the media makes them think it's on every corner of every street of every town, and it threatens them.
So they see what they perceive as strong role models in Trump and Vance. Hugely financially successful, boastful sexual exploits, ones a former marine etc. it resonates with them. A female, minority former prosecutor absolutely does not resonate with them.
Oh god, no. Let’s not do that again.
Sorry.
It’s a ridiculous statement that I made really, as given the particular average you choose, it is simply a statement of fact.
But it’s real in this debate, because people are making the “surely people thought about…” or “clearly this was never going to happen…” class of statement.
And the reality is that most people don’t think long and hard in sophisticated ways.
They go with one or two factors that resonate with them.
And most often that’s cash in pocket today, direction of travel of their standard of living.
As the saying goes - "It’s the economy, stupid." - Jim Carville strategist in Bill Clinton's 1992 U.S. presidential election. (Stupid referring to election workers / pundits not voters)
Sure Remainers indulged in a lot of insulting of Leavers but, however gratuitous the delivery and associated decoration, one main thing stood out.
Whilst a lot of stereotyping and insulting was simply gratuitous, I don't ever recall seeing a Remain voter resort to threats of physical/sexual violence against someone or their family. I recall several social media interactions with Leave voters escalating to actual threats within about three posts.
A quick dig into many Leave voters' profiles revealed some pretty disturbing racism, misogyny, and general hate - on open display.
Then, of course, there was the spelling, punctuation, and resorting to block capitals.
In any case - it's been done a million times already, so "meh".
I presume this has also been done on here, but Jonathan Pie gets it pretty much spot on. I watched supertanski's assessment too - a bit too hysterical for me, but not far off either.
It is a sad time for decency, joy and outward-looking optimism.
it is not a reliable way of winning them over to reconsider their lived experience influencing their vote in the future.
I don't want this to be lost in the noise, as I think it's a very pertinent point for the US and UK.
Quite how we get people to see the bigger picture and what has been delivered for society rather than simply believe the same old slogans, I don't know.
And to add some caveats - it's really hard to see a bigger picture when inflation is crippling your living standards, no one cares that inflation is a global issue as much as a government issue, and it seems a significant chunk of Americans, however much we don't understand or agree, really don't want their government to get involved in doing things to improve society as a whole, merely to get rid of the perceived problems of the society, so "stop immigration" but not "provide affordable healthcare".
It's very odd.
I think that’s balls – the Dem campaign didn’t do that, and were I an American citizen, my vote would not have been swayed by one set of voters thinking me a “libtard”
Biden was caught on camera referring to Trump supporters as garbage. That won't change anybody's mind, but is an enormously effective way to motivate casual Trump supporters to bother to get out and vote for Trump and so stick it to that nasty Dem who insulted them.
You are right it doesn't sway anyone, but it definitely motivates them to bother voting!
One of the things that has become evident from the more detailed polling is people want change, society is not happy with the status quo, and the democrats didn't offer that.
IMO any government that is serious about protecting democracy has to change political funding to remove the billionaires and lobbyists from the system, The populists will continue to win if policy offerings from mainstream politicians are already decided by their backers before the public even get to vote. In the UK we need to realise that reforming the HOL or bringing in proportional representation will only be windows dressing if we don't remove the back end money that is directing politics.
In any case, what's the point of 4 years of navel-gazing now?
This has (again) knocked my faith in people to be fundamentally decent. I simply don't think that is true for a majority of folk anymore.
There is a meme of Dr Suess's The Cat In The Hat that sums things up for me pretty well. It's a good job I can't figure out how to embed it as it would get me a ban.
How? Why? We scream in incredulity at Brexit, Trump, Johnson, Farage, Braverman, Orban, Meloni, Le Pen, Wilders etc.
At the very top level. Right at the end when you step back from it all...
Most People Are...
If you call Dems marxist, communist, low IQ, stupid, nasty radicals – the Trumpists all cheer and lap it up.
There is a significant difference between insulting politicians, which every one loves doing, and insulting their voters.
That, and they cannot bear the thought of a woman in charge.
That was once the perceived wisdom with regards to Tory Party members and Tory voters. We have had 4 female Tory Party leaders and 3 female Tory prime ministers, whilst not one single female Labour leader/PM
Kamala Harris lost the presidential election first and foremost because she was the Democrat candidate and a leading figure in the current administration, trying to deny that and looking for other excuses won't help to learn the lessons that need to be learnt.
And those lessons are also relevant to the UK if it is to avoid a far-right government after the next general election.
is people want change, society is not happy with the status quo, and the democrats didn’t offer that
But there are two very different ideas of "change"... one is about deportations, tax breaks for the rich, cutting off from other countries, ostracising minorities, reducing state support for the needy, putting fossil fuel profits ahead of climate change issues etc... the other is about redistributing wealth, cooperation across borders, human rights, public health, and slowing and preparing for more climate change... and the USA, like elsewhere, is split pretty much down the middle about which changes we need... with the majority this time around choosing the changing tide that Trump is travelling on.
The democrats spent about 3 times what the republicans did on this campaign.
Wrong - they raised about twice what the Republicans did over the same period (August-Nov) but didn't spend all of it. The numbers I saw were $1.1bn combined split £440m Rep and $760m Dem. BUT, Republican Superpacs raised the same if not more than the Dems and spent more. That's Presidential. The Republicans spent more than the Democrats on the House and Senate races. I don't know about the Gubernatorial races.