Trump - The positives - (see Mod note in OP)

Huh? The whole point about medians is that they don't account for extremes at both ends.

The median of the series 1, 5, 9 is 5.

The median of the series 4,5,6 is 5.

The median of the series 1, 5, 5.00001 is 5.

The median of the series 5, 5, 999,999 is 5.

In other words, medians tell you precisely nothing about distribution, and changes in medians over time tell you precisely nothing about changes in distribution over time.

If you want to know why the US as a whole has been getting wealthier while individual Americans typically feel that they have not, income distribution and changes in income distribution is very far from a tangent; it's absolutely at the heart of it. Data about medians serves, if anything, to obscure this, and will be cited by people who either aren't interested in considering income or wealth inequality, or are actively trying to avoid considering it.

US income inequality did improve under Biden, but only fractionally. It got worse under Trump I thoug, again, not by very much.

My suggestion here is that the election of Trump is primarilly a result, not of what happened in in the US under Biden, but of what has been happening in the US for the past 40 or 45 years.

\US income inequality got dramatically worse under Reagan and Bush I, got dramatically worse again under Clinton, got worse still under Bush II, stabilised somewhat under Obama but did not improve, got slightly worse under Trump I, got fractionally better under Biden, but not to a material degree.

Since this has now been going on for more than a generation, as far as most voters are concerned it's not an aberration; it's normal — it's a feature of the system. And it's not a partisan thing, since it happens under both Republican and Democratic administrations — again, it's a feature of the system. The only variable is how fast it happens and, on the whole, even this doesn't correlate very well with the party in office.

After more than a generation of this, what you have now is a generation of voters who have no expectation that, over time, the growing wealth of the US will mean that their situation or that of their children will improve significantly. That's a huge change in a society in which every previous generation, pretty much since the US was founded, took for granted that things would continuously improve for the typical or average family. And this generation of voters doesn't see living standard stagnation as the fault of the Republicans or the fault of the Democrats; they see it as a characteristic of the US's political and economic system that operates regardless of which party is in power.

I think this is why they are so open to a disruptive, destructive candidate like Trump. They see, and like, the disruption; they close their eyes to the destruction.

Its not that you are bad, its just that like many on here you haven't the slightest clue what you are talking about, See #97 below, there was a huge swing of young voters to President Trump in 2024. In fact that is what won it for him.

The thing is, for better or for worse (and I'm a Sanders supporter), he's not a Democrat. He's and Independent. And the Democratic party is not as hijackable as the Republican party.

The only positives about Trump to me are:

The electric vehicle mandate is gone. I think personally it should be up to the customer to decide on what car they buy.

The gender-madness is also gone. The whole gender and diversity and inclusion madness often discriminated me in job life.

Other than that, there are not many other positives I can see about Trump.

…yea, cause fcuk the environment, thats somebody else's problem!

I believe that there are numerous positives for Americans in the election of Trump. I have little doubt but that he will prioritise the enrichment of America to the detriment of every other country in the world, be they friend or foe. He has the military and economic strength to achieve that outcome imo. For Europe, with our tens of individual presidents, prime ministers and foreign ministers; differing social and economic policies; economies of varying strength; our vulnerable currency; lack of our own energy sources etc, I personally don't see many if any positive. To make it worse, ireland is probably the most vulnerable European country to significant negative impacts arising from his MAGA policies.

This depends also very much on personal circumstances. Range is still a grave issue with EVs for those who drive long distances. But there doesn't need to be a government mandate as by when what percentage of cars are to be EVs or by when the EV would cover all new car sales. Ultimately the customer and how far the product develloped should decide. One single charge and 1200 km range at whatever temperature at a price for a conventional vehicle would do the job, but that's far away these days.

The DNC had their thumb on the scale though, both in terms of announcing the allocation of Super Delegates ahead of the primaries, and overruling the actual results of them using Super Delegates. That was legal, given they are a private organisation, and not bound to follow results, but still scummy. I think they would have won comfortably with Bernie, both times. He energised people in a way Clinton and Biden didn't, and he was hated by large swaths of the country the way Clinton is. The DNC chose otherwise and here we are

She won yea, but the DNC did everything they could to undermine Sanders ahead of voting, it was never a fair contest. Same again in 2020, when he was leading going into Super Tuesday. They have always hated the progressive wing of the party, which is one of the main reasons for their losses to Trump. Folks either don't vote or are taken in by his populism.

Not casually ignoring anything at all, neither the 75m votes Harris got last year nor the (huge) majority that Clinton got in 2016 matter in terms of winning the presidency

Take it up with Wikipedia from where I deliberately copied the definition from higher up if you disagree

Not sure what you are arguing against since the whole point of the median was to not have it distorted by extreme wealth and poor on either end like the mean would be

And yet you hilariously went off on about the extremes of inequality

So how much you willing to pay then? We are already taxed to the hilt, and then the money is spent on bike shelters and multimillion euro huts etc. essentially squandered everywhere instead of the average citizen getting any benefit from it.

That’s what a lot of Irish people need to realise, we aren’t right about everything we do politically. There’s a reason America is the most successful country in the world and their mindset and ‘psyche’ has a lot to do with it.

Apparently there are legal challenges from the states on some, or maybe all, of Trump's executive orders

So he probably won't be able to get all the changes he wants

That's a positive