Kamala Ran A Good Campaign

[Baron2024]

It is really not Kamala's fault that she lost. She ran an excellent campaign. It is the fault of an electorate that is ignorant and votes against its own self interest. It is a fault of "The Bros" in the mid-west swing states. White males without college educations who voted for Trump.

And don't doubt that there is an element of misogyny. White Bros that could not bring themselves to vote for a woman, even though she would have been good for them. Macho stupidity supporting Trump.

Also, one reason that they did not show up in the polls prior to the election is that I think a lot of Trump supporters do not answer to poll questions. Trump always had a few percentage points hidden by the fact that Trump supporters would probably just hang up on pollsters who called them. So there were always going to be a number of "Hidden Trump Voters'".

In any case Kamala ran a good campaign. The problem is that there are a lot of stupid and ignorant people in this country who like the idea of Trump MAGA Fascism. There is a large number of people who do not care about democracy. So now we have a Trump Fascist Regime coming in. We must resist and we shall resist.

[JCMach1]

1. Good campaign for 1996

We have to be willing to use social media tools in new ways going forward.

We shouldn't have been trying to bring MAGA's into the tent... Instead we should have been micro targeting with information (real or fake) to get them to stay at home and NOT vote.

It absolutely killed us this cycle.

[brush]

2. Come on. 1996? Give credit where it's due. Her campaign was excellent...

and she had only three months after being dropped into an unprecedented situation. trump ran for two fucking years, trying to stay out of jail.

Big difference. If she had had two years I think the results would've been different.

[LisaL]

3. She'd still be a female whether she run for two years or three months.

So I don't think it would have made a difference because of misogyny that is so obvious in this country.

[brush]

8. Misogyny is there, but two years instead just three months IMO...

would've made a diffence as she would've had time to introduce herself to the voters and promote the many accomplishment of the Biden/Harris admin.

Maybe you've forgotten that Hillary was way ahead in 2016 until that damn Comey sent that letter to Congress that he was reopening theinvestigation of her emails. It was interntional. He had a grudge against her and ruined her campaign. She would've won otherwise.
We have to agree to disagree. A woman will win the presidency here. After trump's upcoming dictatorship...if there's another election.

[Elessar Zappa]

7. Yes!

I saw much more Republican activity on social media than Democrat activity. I believe social media outreach is far more necessary than television ads.

[JCMach1]

10. My feeds are completely different the last two days

vs. the last months.

I was getting whatever targeting they were sending at 57 yo GenX WM liberal to left.

Gaza, prices, masculinity stuff, etc and much more that would even be hard to identify.

They (Musk/Thiel/Russian operatives) were highly gaming this.

[Jk23]

40. She would have bankrupted America in 1996

I mean I recall paying like 25 cents per an incoming text....

[ck4829]

4. Early on, for sure. But I was cringing at all the Republican outreach at the end.

"Weird" and "Brat" felt energizing. Dick Cheney? Not so much.

[BeyondGeography]

5. Well, in hindsight

I’m sure she would do some things differently.

The big bet on emphasizing abortion rights and growing her share of moderate suburban women did not pay off. Liz Cheney is not an effective Democratic vote getter. Biden’s lower numbers with nonwhite men persisted with Harris and more (and earlier) attention should have been paid to that problem.

And she and Biden should have put their heads together and agreed and how she could handle the inevitable what would you do differently question in ways that were acceptable to Joe and gave her some more independence.

[Quiet Em]

34. abortion rights needed to be emphasized.

But that was not her only emphasis.

I don't get the knock on emphasizing abortion rights. Women have died, more women will die. It is a pretty big issue.

[BeyondGeography]

50. She underperformed Biden with women

She tried to get voters to believe that Dobbs was just the beginning but it didn’t work. All Trump had to do was distance himself from Project 2025 and deny he would back a national abortion ban.

Donald Trump’s defeat of Vice President Kamala Harris in the 2024 United States presidential election has signalled women’s rights – specifically the right to an abortion – was less of a key issue than expected for voters.

This was the first presidential election since the Supreme Court overturned the landmark 1973 Roe v Wade court ruling, which ended a woman’s right to terminate a pregnancy. Trump has repeatedly claimed credit for that 2022 verdict, which was made possible by his appointments of three conservative judges to the top court.

The Harris campaign made much of Trump’s stance on reproductive rights in a bid to woo female voters, particularly in the swing states. However, early national exit polls showed that Harris had won the support of 54 percent of women, lower than President Joe Biden did in 2020 when he had the support of 57 percent.

https://www.aljazeera.com/amp/news/2024/11/7/beyond-abortion-rights-why-did-kamala-harris-lose-womens-votes

[Quiet Em]

51. It's an issue.

And it's going to remain an issue. Women are dying. Women are losing their chances of future pregnancies. This issue is not going to go away. It's a big issue, not a minor one. It absolutely needs to be talked about.

[Jk23]

42. "Liz Cheney is not an effective Democratic vote getter."

Bite your tongue. Get Out. That is a bridge too far....

I was listening to the Economist podcast this morning, and they said if we can locate an Ice Flow despite the record temperatures we need to put whatever advisor who came up with that idea on it.

[alarimer]

6. Good, yes, but not for for the times, I guess.

Some of the problem was just timing. Biden (in hindsight) should have stepped back a year ago so we could have an actual primary. I don't necessarily think the nomination should ever just be handed to the VP. They almost never win. And not a lot of time to ramp up a campaign in this particular case.

But also, maybe we just need our own carnival barker. Stop being so fucking civilized and get down in the mud. Someone crude and rude of our own. No idea who, really. Just an idle thought. Fettermen? Jesse Ventura? Kidding, mostly.

People wanted change for change's sake, I guess. Chickens voting for Colonel Sanders.

And it is entirely possible that they just don't want what we are trying to sell them. Maybe do something different.

[Voltaire2]

9. A campaign that loses is quite obviously a failed campaign.

I don't care what the excuses are. We lost. That is on the team that ran the campaign.

[tritsofme]

11. She ran the best campaign she could under the circumstances, the problem is that she is not a good candidate.

If Biden dropped out earlier, primaries could have produced a much stronger candidate.

It seems impossible that Whitmer or Shapiro would have been swept out of the Blue Wall.

[Baron2024]

14. I Disagree

I think that she *was* a good candidate. The problem was an electorate that supports Trump and MAGA Fascism. Kamala ran a strong campaign.

[Blue_Roses]

12. She sure did!! Her campaign

was flawless and she worked her butt off! I am so proud of her and I hope she runs for office again!

[Zeitghost]

13. You're gonna need to define flawless for me

Because I can't think of any way that a flawless campaign ends is defeat in both the EC and popular vote.

[Blue_Roses]

15. For the short 100 days she had

to campaign, it was flawless. I can't speak for the STUPID people who voted for the other one. I can't speak for the misogyny and racism clearly evident in this country. And I can't speak for the interference from other countries meddling in our election.

[Zeitghost]

18. I guess

I see a glaring flaw at the end which seems to indicate the campaign was not flaw-less.

I don't doubt VP Harris' effort, heart or character in the campaign. But she lost ground to Trump and from Biden and the campaign made some major tactical errors.

[Blue_Roses]

20. Just stop.

I see what you're doing there.

[Jk23]

60. If only smart people vote for you

You're going to lose every election.

[newdayneeded]

64. Broadcast this!

we've got 2 1/2 years to learn this or it's the same results. Also, if you're a person that's gonna run for dem president, don't take pics with trangender folks. it''ll be run non stop on commercials.

[Jk23]

67. It's basically that old Adley Stevenson quote

I'm sure that the name I just have is wrong cuz I'm speaking into my phone instead of typing into my computer but the guy who ran against Eisenhower.

[Jk23]

68. It's basically that old Adley Stevenson quote

I'm sure that the name I just have is wrong cuz I'm speaking into my phone instead of typing into my computer but the guy who ran against Eisenhower.

[CTyankee]

17. What the hell did she do wrong, in your opinion? And what would YOU have done if you were her?

[Zeitghost]

19. She lost

And she failed to maintain numbers from her successor. That's kind of a flaw by definition.

The campaign failed to reach or motivate voters, didn't do well through social media and podcasts and failed to distance themselves from the Biden administration. Which is admittedly tough for the sitting VP, which is why she should never have been the nominee to begin with. The party leadership messed this up from the drop and Harris was put in a position she should have never been in.

She showed heart, hard work and character, but to suggest the campaign was without flaw is not realistic given the results on Tuesday.

[CTyankee]

21. So her campaign design was flawed. What campaign design do you think would have worked better?

[Zeitghost]

22. That's above my pay grade and a conversation to have in the coming days

We have a very simple and easy to understand metric used to define success in campaigns. Votes. That's all that matters.

VP Harris put out a hell of an effort, but she was not successful and that is a flaw when it comes to elections, by definition.

If we want to win in the future, insisting we did everything perfectly this time around and there are no possible changes we could have made isn't going to help.

[CTyankee]

24. Trump's message won. That is not Harris's fault. Eoungh people wanted more of him, for whatever reason

tho I suspect there were just enough people who thought a woman couldn't/shouldn't be POTUS or those who were addicted to hatred of women and Democrats like a drug, or lifelong repubs who don't have too many brain cells. You can't persuade these people with rational arguments, no matter who you are.

[Zeitghost]

26. They came out for Biden

So they can be persuaded.

[CTyankee]

28. How do we know they came out for Biden?

[Zeitghost]

32. Ummm

Because he got a lot more votes...

Millions of fewer people voted. If they had been motivated to come out an vote for VP Harris, we would not be having this conversation.

[CTyankee]

78. Then we are doomed to never have a Democratic woman lead our country and we will be the laughingstock of the other

democracies in the world who have been led by women.

Are you fine with this? Or are you just giving up, saying "nope. we can't do this"?

By this logic women would never have even been "allowed" to vote in the first place.

[Zeitghost]

79. How about we start

With selecting a candidate (male or female) who can win a Democratic primary and isn't intrinsically tied to an unpopular administration. Harris did very poorly in 2020, has never won outside of deep blue California and refused to distance herself from the Biden administration. That isn't the kind of person, regardless of gender, that can win a nationwide election.

[CTyankee]

80. Again, who are the "persuadables" that we didn't reach? Please be as specific as possible.

[radius777]

81. Biden narrowly won in 2020

after Trump had been impeached and then mismanaged a pandemic where bodybags were piling up in the streets.

The Dem party's biggest problem is it's now seen as too much for open borders - which even many Dem voters don't like. The R's bussing of migrants into cities across the country really 'worked' to shift voters rightward, including in blue states.

IOW, even if a primary was held, I think that person would've lost anyway, due to this issue, as well as the inflation issue. Once voters view the economy as bad that usuallly signals trouble for incumbents.

[tritsofme]

23. No design would have worked better, what we needed was full primaries and a different candidate.

[CTyankee]

25. Which candidate would have been better in your opinion?

[tritsofme]

27. I think either Whitmer or Shapiro would have been stronger.

I can’t believe either would have been swept away in the Blue Wall.

[CTyankee]

29. What about Whitmer or Shapiro would have been stronger?

[tritsofme]

35. I think they are stronger candidates. They could have won the sort of Blue Wall states that Harris lost.

They are both sitting governors from states we needed to win, and they have a record of success in their own swing state.

Harris, coming from California, never had a truly competitive general election, and she failed to garner any interest in the 2020 primaries. She was just not a good candidate.

[CTyankee]

43. Who was the candidate with the qualities you would have liked to see get the nomination?

[tritsofme]

44. I mentioned Whitmer and Shapiro in a previous post.

[Zeitghost]

33. One chosen by the people

In an open and well contested primary.

[Quiet Em]

36. Not a single person stepped up to put the work in to win any delegates

She worked for every single one of them. Nobody else even tried. And the people rallied around her. Enthusiastically. Did you even see how much money she brought in?

[Zeitghost]

37. And look how that worked out

n/t

[Quiet Em]

41. Harris is the only reason this race was even competitive.

.

[CTyankee]

45. who did you have in mind who would meet your qualifications, was running and had enough support?

[Zeitghost]

30. This is 100% true

The way Harris was selected was the primary issue in the loss. That's not entirely on her, although I think she should have stepped aside and allowed someone not as close to the current administration to be chosen at the convention. Somebody should have pulled Joe aside in early 2023 and had a tough talk with him about the future. Instead we kicked the can down the road and had an ugly public mess when it was far to late. Complete clusterfuck all the way around.

[CTyankee]

38. Then you can put this on Joe if anyone wants to make that argument ("he shudda known he wasn't up to it").

This argument just breaks my heart. I cannot find it in my soul to fault the dear man for wanting to hang in there and then having such a very public political demise.

As to her "stepping aside." This is frankly getting on my feminist nerves. Secondly, let's explore who you had in mind when you say "someone not as close to the current administration." Do you have a candidate in mind? What are their strengths that she didn't have?

[tritsofme]

47. Unfortunately I think this is the correct take, Biden made the right decision, but it was a year late.

I have much love for President Biden, but he made a historic error.

I agree we had no choice but to run Harris after Biden’s exit, but she never should have been put in that situation, Democratic primary voters should have gotten the opportunity to choose.

[Quiet Em]

39. I completely disagree.

This was discussed at the time.

Pushing Harris out after Joe stepped done would have ended all of our chances. Harris is what turned the race competitive. We were getting killed before that. The knocks on Biden's age by the Republicans and amplified by the media greatly harmed us.

[Jk23]

57. The problem is after the debate the Republicans whom everyone were ignoring....

Were proven more correct than think even they realised. It was not Republican muckraking that drove Biden out. It was Biden staring off into space and being unable to put three coherent sentences together that drove Biden out.

I don't understand this need to rewrite history on the matter.

[Quiet Em]

58. I'm not rewriting history

He started out slow but he finished strong. But the Republicans with the help of the media had created a perception that he could not overcome. President Biden does not have dementia. C'mon now.

[Jk23]

59. I watched the debate

Trump is unacceptable. But if you were hiring manager would you have hired Biden as a Walmart greeter after that performance?

I mean this isn't the negative comment on Biden. He's doing pretty good I mean most people his age are already dead.

But the idea he was ready to be president for an additional four years simply doesn't work. And telling voters to ignore what they actually saw really doesn't work.

[Quiet Em]

62. I didn't say that people should ignore what they saw.

He had a couple bad minutes. It's not like we didn't know he was an older man. His mental capacity is still perfectly fine. I have real life experience with loved ones who have dementia. Biden does not have dementia.

[Jk23]

65. I'm actually not saying that he does

I think we're just talking past each other. Being too old or informed to do the job does not necessarily mean one has dementia or is even a criticism.

There are plenty of older Americans that are sharp as a cat but are certainly not up to being president or for that matter working.

[Quiet Em]

69. Yeah, Trump is not sharp and not mentally well enough for the position of President

and yet,

[Jk23]

73. have serious doubts he'll make it the 4 years

He's not in good shape and honestly he's not all there.

[Jk23]

46. She was way to timid and had no real identity.

If she ran as a law and order candidate (Tough on crime, illegal immigrants, tax cheats (the rich in general), Russia and Isreal... not to mention a certain felon we all know.) She would have done a lot better. Instead, she danced with celebrities and sorority sisters and defend the president when it was in her best interest to separate herself.

[CTyankee]

52. Did you miss all those times she talked about being a prosecutor and the bad people she prosecuted? No? Well, I didn't

miss hearing what she said about prosecuting bad people. She walked the walk (and my son who is a prosecutor in Brooklyn was very enthusiastic about her and the job she did).

I remember one, and only one, time that she mingled with sorority sisters from college. Why was that bad, exactly? I really want to know what the rap is on ONE incident where she mentioned it.

Who were the "celebrities" she danced with? She was on Oprah once and Meryl Streep praised her but that was ONCE and what was wrong with that? Oprah is a beloved media figure and Streep is one of the most admired women in the world.

[Doodley]

53. She danced with sorority sisters during the campaign? Are you kidding?

[Arthur_Frain]

16. I can't recommend this post effectively.

This, right here.

[Quixote1818]

31. It does seem like her numbers began to drop when she said she wouldn't change anything Biden did

She ran a status-quo campaign when a good chunk of the electorate did have some pain from the inflation a couple of years ago which was still making things a bit more expensive. Not Biden's fault but she should have been similar to Trump by suggesting she was going to do some bad ass shit to break things up. If she had distanced herself from Biden and said she was going to shake things up, she probably would have won.

[CTyankee]

48. OK, let's work that one. If she HAD distanced herself from Joe, there would have been a huge reaction from other Dems.

Remember how sad we all were at that time? For her to come along and criticize his policies at that time would have cause uproar in the party and very divisive at a time when we needed all the party support thrown into the campaign.

[John2028]

49. Biden

Biden should have dropped out earlier.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

54. Kamala actually outperformed what she should have achieved based on polling on Biden and the economy

I am a numbers geek. While I do blame part of Kamala's defeat on sexism, I heard today a good explanation as to what one of the major reasons for Tuesday's election results on Deadline White House today. President Biden had an approval rating of around 40% and the wrong track numbers were very high. Historically, an incumbent president tends to get the same percentage of vote as their approval ratings. Here Kamala got 7% or so higher vote compared to Joe Biden's approval rating which is a testament to the fact that she ran a great campaign. Watch the video below and you will see that Kamala Harris did far better than what she should have based on history.

Link to tweet

.

Joe Biden did a great job on the economy and prevented a recession. However the public was still upset at the fact that food and other things cost more and they felt bad about the economy. The high percentage of people who believe that the country was on the wrong track also hurt. In effect, Kamala was facing a very high burden to overcome and was unable to overcome the feelings that the country was on the wrong track and the fact voters were upset about the economy.

[Nanjeanne]

55. I think Kamala Harris was an excellent choice as was Tim Walz. But I disagree that an

excellent campaign was run and I think it’s important to understand that wanting a different way of doing things is not unsupportive of an intelligent, humane human being. My 2 cents. It is time for a change from the beltway bubble consultant bs of chasing that illusive R/I voter that has been the strategy for Democrats to win in the last few elections. Biden went against that with an extremely progressive push and won. His Build Back Better would have been transformational. It didn’t pass because of two D Senators. But it was something to build on.

What I wish Dems would realize is:

Rs aren't going to vote for Ds in any big enough number that justifies a watering down of policies to convince them otherwise.

Swing voters are not moving R to D. Swings are non-voter to voter. And that can be done with a bold platform akin to FDRs that ignites a feeling of excitement and inclusion in the outcome.

Engage in transformative politics and stop with the transaction politics. Excite, Innovate, Big - not incremental and small thinking.

Try to build a media landscape that can compete with right wing propaganda

Don't just organize every 4 or 2 years. Build a year round organizing effort and build coalitions in rural areas recruiting local people to run locally and build a big bench.

Be FDR like - Attack corporate greed head on and understand the pain working people are experiencing. It’s Populism that works.

Call out "hate for profit" scheme of the rightwing. Don't be afraid. Don't be defensive.

It's time to leave behind the Clinton/Obama/Biden way of doing things. Embrace a new way forward. Please understand this isn't an attack on them. It's been done. It's not helping. World has changed. Our politics have to also. Honestly if I never hear we need a strong two party system or Republicans are our friends and we admire Reagan and Kissinger again, I’ll be a happy Democrat. Rs never say that.

Stop dumping on your base - young people, progressives, lefties . . . Rs play to their base. Ds run from them and continually expect they'll show up anyway. Well they aren’t. And their values are closer to ours than Dick and Liz Cheney. Stop chastising them and start listening.

Work with community activists.

Stop using the strategies that lost the last elections. Focus on new strategies (it can't be worse than what we have now). Stick to the hopeful vision we want to achieve.

Develop a platform that is forward thinking - visionary - right for people - and then just stick with it. Speak like a normal person. Engage in dialogue. Don't be a poll-tested robot.

If one more Republican pundit gets on TV and says the problem is the left or the progressives or the young or the anti war crowd or whatever I think I'll scream. I never have cared what a freaking Rethuglican has said and I certainly am not interested in their tired same old same old plan for Democrats future.

Yeah. My two cents and hopefully this won't be construed as "anti" Democrat or "anti" Biden or "anti" Harris. I have been a Democrat my entire life. I've never voted any other way. I would like to see a Democrat in the White House again. I'd like to be proud of my country. I'm tired of trying to win over some white soccer mom who is too stupid to realize that her daughter is going to suffer from her vote or some ridiculous white businessman who hates Trump but sure likes his tax cuts and the chance to pollute the country. How about we win back the people tired of never getting ahead, never seeing a change in their pocketbook, their child's ability to get an education, the chance to take a two week vacation and rent an apartment and earn a decent wage? Paid Leave. Paid Sick Days. Tuition Free College. Medicare For All. Fair tax burdens. Living Wage. Negotiated Drug Prices for Everyone. Taxes that go to making our lives better - not wars. That's the Democratic Party I'm fighting for.

[In It to Win It]

75. " Swing voters are not moving R to D"

I think that’s a good point. In hindsight, it does seem like she spent a lot of time trying to court R to D voters, which is why they used Liz Cheney. The Trump team spent more time trying to turn non-voters or infrequent voters into voters. As we saw, that clearly paid off for them.

Granted, she didn’t have the opportunity to work on this as long as the campaign did. I’m not sure how much she wasn’t able to do was attribute to the limited amount of time she had. That’s the hard part to measure for me. If she had more time, would she have targeted non-voters?

[Nanjeanne]

76. Back in 2016 Schumer said (I paraphrase) for every left blue voter we lose in PA we win 2 Republican/Independents

it didn't work then and it hasn't worked now. I think Biden won because he embraced a progressive campaign with progressive policies. His Build Back Better would have been transformative. I lost because of Sinema and Manchin. But it was a real bold piece of possible legislation. We had none of that kind of policy push this time.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

56. DEADLINE WHITEHOUSE uncovers REAL REASON Why Kamala Lost - Nicole Wallace MSNBC revealing Insights

Watch the video below. Tuesday's election loss was not due to a bad campaign but due to the fact that voters had a negative impression of the economy and the wrong track numbers were too high. I do NOT think that based on the polling discussed that the Democratic Party has to make drastic changes.

I am a numbers geek. While I do blame part of Kamala's defeat on sexism, I heard today a good explanation as to what one of the major reasons for Tuesday's election results on Deadline White House today. President Biden had an approval rating of around 40% and the wrong track numbers were very high. Historically, an incumbent president tends to get the same percentage of vote as their approval ratings. Here Kamala got 7% or so higher vote compared to Joe Biden's approval rating which is a testament to the fact that she ran a great campaign.

Link to tweet

.

Joe Biden did a great job on the economy and prevented a recession. However the public was still upset at the fact that food and other things cost more and they felt bad about the economy. The high percentage of people who believe that the country was on the wrong track also hurt. In effect, Kamala was facing a very high burden to overcome and was unable to overcome the feelings that the country was on the wrong track and the fact voters were upset about the economy.

[Rebl2]

61. Do you

think if her run for president started in let’s say January or February her chances of winning would have been better? I realize there would have been a primary if that had been the case. Do you think she would have been nominated in that case?

[Jk23]

63. It's very doubtful she would have won the nomination of that was the case

I'm basinh that on her previous run for the nomination.

[Rebl2]

66. Unfortunately

I believe you are correct.

[Quiet Em]

70. You have no basis then

She suspended her campaign before a single vote was taken. What we do know is that it was obvious that Joe Biden was going to win the nomination. Everyone knew that once we got to South Carolina voters would coalesce around Biden.

[Jk23]

72. I mean it was a fairly competitive process up until South Carolina

Harris did what one or two debates and then just left the field before the game started.

[Quiet Em]

74. It really wasn't competitive

It was clear everyone wanted a solid, well known, experienced, moderate, white guy. Only Biden fit that bill.

[mcar]

71. She ran a great campaign

On Monday, media, pundits, pretty much everyone was saying she ran a "flawless" campaign. On Wednesday, same people, different story.

She ran a great campaign. The voters didn't care. They would rather have a rapist in the WH than a woman.

[Ferrets are Cool]

77. I agree with almost everything you say. There is ONE thing I wish they had done differently.

Instead of calling him "not serious", call him dangerous and then outline in 5 yr old language how he is dangerous to our country.
I do not feel that was done often enough nor was it hammered just how dangerous Project 2025 is.
Trying to bring people together just doesn't hit home.
Making people understand how dangerous he is would have worked better to conquer the misogyny.

[CTyankee]

82. I like the way you are thinking on this. Why do you think we didn't do it?

I'm sure it was discussed but for some reason not utilized. Why not?

[Ferrets are Cool]

83. We are always too nice

[CTyankee]

84. Sadly, that is the case when we are dealing with this monstrous person.

[anglesphere]

85. It's a cult and they are under a spell

They will not pay attention to good arguments or reasoned debate until the spell is broken.

The best candidate in the world would not have convinced them. Look who they voted for. They are not listening.

The only thing that will snap the spell is when they start to feel pain themselves at the hands of their dear leader.