“Stupid uninformed people didn’t vote.”
Oh really?
That and people who couldn’t take time off from their three jobs.
Once again, they are only looking at the people who DID vote… Those people always vote, and clearly the proportion of blue “always voters” is dwindling compared to red “always voters”. Yes ignorant voters lean red, but it doesn’t matter. Stop pretending like there’s a huge swath of “swing” voters. There’s not. Trump got basically the same votes this time. This election came down to the 10 million Biden voters who stayed home for Kamala. That’s it. All the rest of this is nonsense bullshit propaganda to obscure the truth. Why didn’t they come out for Kamala??
- Because she’s a woman
- The DNC failed to remind people what happened under Trump (Which is how Trump got away with “Are you better off than you were 4 years ago?”
To add to that, in 2020 we had almost universal mail voting that had been rolled back in most swing states by 2024. In addition, there were a lot of scary stories floating around about Trump supporters at the polls. Lastly, voter suppression efforts do suppress votes (e.g. removing people from voter rolls, closing polling places in blue districts, making voting worse).
- Less vocal on support for trans rights than Biden in his campaign and first days of presidency despite literal millions being poured into anti trans ads.
- Yes, the whole genocide thing, like talking about it or not, Michigan for example certainly lost a huge blue voting block just by the more predominantly Arab districts alone. Michigan, red. And nobody was thinking trump was the better option there, they just did not feel the need to participate
- They only mentioned how grave a threat a fascist who has openly talked about subverting democracy, and then were more than cordial when it came to a loss. The DNC didnt fail to mention, its that its not worth shit because trump is still a free man and our laws should have upheld those principles. You can remind people how presumeably bad it was, but it doesnt mean anything if youre not offering a clear better alternative while our system of laws is literally failing us.
God forbid Biden were to have run again, it would’ve still been a landslide, and he aint a woman. Maybe old as shit, but there is still a lot more common issues people grew to not like so much about Biden, then Kamala said she wouldnt be any different from.
I dump this comment because I personally believe reductive narrative will hurt our ability to effectively work together, and probably the biggest part the dems failed.
the whole genocide thing
No informed voter thought Trump would be better for Palestine than Kamala. Remember, people say one thing publicly when their private reasons are actually less popular.
The conservative Muslims who claimed they loved Palestine voted for Republicans because they are conservative. They are using the Palestinian people as political pawns, just like Hamas. They share conservative values with Republicans based on cultural issues. They differ on the justification for it, but they are all supporters of hierarchy. Same with conservative Latinos.
It’s not popular to say “I like hierarchy and I want to be on top”. Many supporters of hierarchy claim they love “individual rights” when they really want privileges for themselves. That’s the reason why some people love the “Bill of Rights” but hate equality.
“They are using the Palestinian people as political pawns, just like Hamas.”
Sir, with all due respect I don’t think you understand what you are talking about regarding Hamas.
Also no informed voter would actually believe Kamala to be better than Trump is maybe what you meant to say?
The Biden-Harris administration has already rubber stamped the annihilation of the Palestinian people. Every red line was blown through and no significant consequences except them bypassing congress to send more weapons to Israel every few weeks. The worst administration for the Palestinian people all-time is Genocide Joe and Holocaust Harris.
Why does anyone on Earth think she would change from that position when time and time again she preached her allegiance to Israel and no change in policy from Biden?
Do people listen to the shit she says?
And for all the bluemaga soldiers coming to tell me she said talked about a ceasefire - she was also once a proponent of medicare for all and an opponent of fracking. How did those lies work out?
No informed voter thought Trump would be better for Palestine than Kamala
That doesn’t change the dems abetting a regime currently committing a genocide. Don’t forget over half the nation doesn’t vote. It was never about changing already fixed or the elusive swing voters minds, it was about getting people out. Its a little harder to when the voter is aware of a moral conflict regarding their vote, regardless of your percieved political intentions of theirs. Are you doubting a significant amount of voters abstained? Because theres gotta be some reason trump had basically the same turnout while dems lost significantly.
It’s not popular to say “I like hierarchy and I want to be on top”. Many supporters of hierarchy claim they love “individual rights” when they really want privileges for themselves. That’s the reason why some people love the “Bill of Rights” but hate equality.
I don’t understand your point, is this in relation to conservative arabs?
Because theres gotta be some reason trump had basically the same turnout while dems lost significantly.
I made this point elsewhere but it was also far easier to vote in 2020 (in swing states especially).
That is true as well. My state still had mail in so personally I found it no more easier or difficult. Pardon for being shouldacouldawoulda, but in that case vote accessiblilty should’ve been a top priority for the dems after all of the 2020 bs.
In my humble opinion it was no larger a part than any other potential matter. I mean we’re still counting and it has inched closer… nowhere to hope, but I genuinely believe if everyone turned out to vote, we wouldnt have to worry this stuff so much
Pardon for being shouldacouldawoulda, but in that case vote accessiblilty should’ve been a top priority for the dems after all of the 2020 bs.
I think this really should be their goal, and they should trade things to get there. Like, who cares about needing an ID to vote, if you can use voter ID as leverage to get free national ID cards for everyone? (I’m not saying you can, but try?) Exchange president’s day as a holiday for election day…make voting access an actual priority.
My point is, most people don’t actually care about Palestine enough to sway their votes. Same with most genocides. People don’t like them but think other issues are more important. People care about issues that affect them directly. If they’re not voting, it means they don’t think a decision will affect them (rightly or wrongly).
Conservative Muslims (not Arabs, they’re different) mention Palestine as a distraction. They were always going to vote Republican because they are conservative and have conservative values.
[Demographic] is always going to ____ because they are ___ and have ___ values.
So, fill in the blanks with the most abhorent shit you can garner, I’ve got to listen to some nice vitriol myself. You see why generalization, is very much a slippery slope?
If you ever care to be a voice of reason and possibly convince people to vote in their own best interest despite being inundated with propaganda against so, then you will learn something from this.
It’s not reductive to acknowledge that we have a sexism problem.
When mostly white and hispanic men voted for Biden but not Harris then it’s hard to pretend like that has to do with the economy or some other shit.
Biden and Harris have the exact same policies, white and hispanic men voted for Biden but stayed home for Harris, logically you have to accept it was about being a woman.
The gender gap in voting narrowed slightly this year, so I feel like this isn’t supported by the available evidence. If you could chalk this up to just misogyny you would expect that gap to have widened rather than narrowed
https://apnews.com/article/trump-harris-gender-gap-votecast-05672b6426cb5965c446ae2871d97eaf
I believe I conceded that some voters may have had sexism play a part, but being cynical and avoiding crtitique wont get the party anywhere. Its really easy to just say shit, but coming up with solutions is harder. So if its just sexism, I’d like to hear your 5 step plan to mend this qualm.
Biden and Harris have the exact same policies
Maybe that was part of the issue, when voters want change, how is that supposed to help?
Let’s be real if they had progressive policies they wouldn’t be the Democratic party anymore
But if people actually gave a shit about policy then they would have voted for Bernie in 2016, and we all know how electable he was
You can’t pretend that people suddenly care about policy because they never fucking have
This was sexism plain and simple
A bunch of man children got a small pp and stayed home when they realized that a woman may outrank them
Okay and again, how does this solve anything? People dont have to care about policy to know they don’t want more of the same. I get why you’re frustrated, but you can’t think you know this reason when I don’t even fully, but at the very least try not to be reductionist? Because it actively sabotages any progress to constantly infight on demographic blame.
I just noticed each of my notifications have been yours in order, I dont know if you want to prove your reasoning or are just here to argue, but I suggest you actually read about half of what Ive said if you genuinely care why reason lost this election.
Everybody who was voting age was old enough to remember the trauma of 2016-2020 without reminders. Yes the dems should leverage everything anyway, but even the non-politically-aware have it in working recent memory. We can take that out of the list of causes.
They should remember without reminders, but do they? The number of people who only seem to remember cheap gas is appalling.
The missing 10 million Biden voters is a silly talking point, leads to entitled questions, and reaching infantile and politically impotent conclusions. Are you so dense that you don’t know how electoral college works?
Lmao you win the most pretentious comment in the thread award
I’m honored. There was stiff competition.
Because she’s a genocidal
copprosecutor. Who could be less inspiring?The convicted felon who is friends with Putin, Epstein, and Diddy
That’s pretty uninspiring IMO
And the other guy is a genocidal sexual predator felon. Who could more inspiring?
Says a guy who wholehearted supports genocidal Islamist terrorists. October 7th massacre? Now that’s inspiring!
The ones that get their information from places like Fox, Threads, Facebook, Nextdoor, X, etc.
How can you not include X?
You’re right. I just don’t use it and deleted my account, so it wasn’t in my head. Added.
lost the ones more easily duped by soundbites of lies.
“I love the poorly educated!” -Trump, 2/2016
It’s too bad she didn’t offer any soundbites of truth. Her entire campaign was built around being inoffensive to everyone which meant saying nothing that might evoke meaning. Lies thrive in that environment.
She did, you just weren’t listening.
I’m easily the most politically engaged person I know. If I wasn’t listening (though I was) then that’s a really bad sign. We need candidates that drive engagement.
Kamala had a lot going in terms of technocratic improvements that actually would provide some value for voters, but there was nothing transformative, and there was no interesting narrative.
The most interesting thing she did was campaign with Liz Cheney, so that’s what got the attention. She wanted to convince right leaning voters that she understood them, but instead communicated that she is just another neoliberal warmonger. It doesn’t matter that she might have threaded the needle perfectly in her rhetoric because she stepped into a narrative that said otherwise.
You taking heat for your previous statement is so typical of those giving any criticism of the DNC. You basically went outside and said it’s kinda chilly and someone came up and said, upset, “no! It’s cold.”
I have spoken to two kinds of voters.
First off, was my dad. He never ever voted in his life. This was his first year of voting and he went Harris. Simply because he knew enough of what she was about and liked her character.
Meanwhile, the other party was my formerly adoptive mother. She voted Trump because “I just don’t like the other party”. That was her only reason. And that was just simply dishonest and uneducated.
So, it is possible that someone is capable of just even doing the tiniest research can give you an idea of who to vote for.
Wait, what do you mean by formerly adoptive mother?
Mom, I’m disowning you. It’s not me, it’s you. Now pack your shit and think about what you’ve done.
The artist known as my formerly adoptive mother
deleted by creator
No, SHE didn’t.
Corporate News Fucked Up Again.
For some reason all the headlines about this seem to be about what the DNC or the Harris campaign should have done.
Democrats ran another perfect losing campaign. Some people might say that losing makes a campaign definitionally imperfect, but that’s only sane people.
Removed by mod
She lost to a carnival barker. Other than that, the campaign was perfect! Great news for the Democrats because they have the perfect formulae. (/s in case you missed it.)
It’s that kind of incisive political analyses that make all the “lolDemz” leftist commentary worthwhile. Thank you for your service. /s
Why the fuck would anyone respond to the comments you made here with any real analysis? If that’s what you wanted than you’re as tone deaf as Harris.
Fair enough! So ordered.
This is what happens when you sell all of the major news outlets to billionaires - they publish pro billionaire propaganda
I’m doing my part by getting more news than I probably should from Lemmy.
I don’t think it’s fair to just dump all the blame on corporate media. The news media landscape hasn’t meaningfully changed since Trump was first elected, but despite having 8 years to formulate a sound media strategy the DNC is still campaigning like it’s 2015.
Like, sure, the Democrats are running with a handicap in the current media landscape, but that isn’t new, and it’s the responsibility of the DNC to figure out how to overcome that disadvantage — a task that the current leadership has proven itself woefully incompetent at.
The news media landscape hasn’t meaningfully changed since Trump was first elected
I think that’s the heart of the issue. Yes, DNC should have figured out away around all corporate media outlets but that’s an enormous, unbelievable ask.
Yes, the DNC should be mobile, and memeable, and . . . fuck, I dunno - on 3.14chan or whatever, but at the end of the day they still have to rely on the fucking Today Show and NBC Nightly News and the motherfucking New York Times to carry their message without shitting on it - which they absolutely will. never. do.
The right has poured hundreds of billions into this since the mid-90s. The left has no fucking clue. Despite having all the academics and content creators telling them what to do. It’s time to put a fist in the face of corporate news. Sweet talking has gotten us a fascist dictator.
I mean… bernies doing it. Dude is like 80 and is absolutely idolised by the younger generation and regular middle and lower class people because he seems to actually practice what he preaches and is genuinely interested in what’s good for people. Most politicians to me just give the impression of seeking politics to enrich themselves and clasping onto power to avoid losing that even when their senile and completely incapable of fulfilling their role.
Bernie’s got an app?
Yeah but like, it’s a bit crazy that the right has: Fox News, OAN, NewsMax (or whatever it’s called), Joe Rogan Experience (gateway drug/sanewashing), Benny Shaps network, X, Truth Social, Prager U, Tim’s Pool, right wing radio, and lots of other smaller shops and they all seem to claim corporate media is the worst and they’re all here to tell you the truth.
They could start by shedding any hope of capturing those voters. I can tell you with 100% certainty, based on trump being a convicted felon, there is no attack that will flip them. You have to reach outside current demos and bring your message to them. If they can’t learn this obvious fact thats been lingering for 8 years (shoot someone on mainstreet) they are useless as a political power.
Next is the message. Obviously it has to be about change. Where Harris again failed by clinging to bidens record. The DNC needed to drop current dogmas and level. They would have started by talking like a normal fucking human who doesnt have a scripted line and strategy for everything. Then they would lay out the facts. This is what ‘government can do’ and this is what ‘government can’t do’. This is what YOU the voters need to do to get governement to do what YOU want. Then address what they want! FINANCIAL INDEPENDENCE. THEN LAY THEM WITH THE FUCKING PEOPLES ELBOW. “THE PEOPLE HAVE TO BLOW UP THE POLLS TO GET THE FREEDOM OF FINCIAL INDEPENDENCE, IF THERE ISNT COMPLETE HEDGEMONY IN ALL BRANCHES OF GOVERNEMNT THERE WILL NEVER BE MEANINGUFL CHANGE.”
Promise fincaial independence, promise people will never get it if they don’t show. Then we either got as far as the line, “I own gun” or the people show up. Either way, you ran an honest, noble campaign.
Yes. Add to that that they have no ethics, and will say and do anything.
People on the left tend to actually adhere to their moral and ethical framework, which immediately puts us at a massive disadvantage against the dirty cheaters.
Don’t forget Sinclair Broadcasting. They’re the local branch of the right wing propaganda machine.
Fuck Reagan and his deregularion.
What’s crazier is when WB bought CNN and literally said Faux News was the plan for what they wanted to do, and loads of journalists resigned from CNN over the changes…
People still think any media organization owned by billionaires has a chance to be “on the left”.
If a billionaire (or group of billionaires) own a media company, it’s only to manipulate people into blaming anyone except billionaires for the current state of affairs.
Like, it’s great you’re realizing it now…
But the merger was two years ago…
None of this was done in the shadows, they came right out and said it. Publicly and repeatedly.
What you want to happen is happening. The Dems are getting their own versions of that shit.
The problem is they’re getting it for the same reason: to trick us into voting against our own interests.
What you want to happen is happening. The Dems are getting their own versions of that shit.
The news could literally just use the same standards for both political parties and treat significant news with the stress it deserves regardless of parties and they would already look like left-wing lunatics.
For some reason all the headlines about this seem to be about what the DNC or the Harris campaign should have done.
Wait…
You’re surprised people are blaming the candidate that lost and her campaign team that was paid millions of dollars and spent over a billion and still couldn’t beat trump?
Why?
What is the logic where the people whose literal job was to win the election, aren’t at fault for losing the election?
And I’m scared to even ask, but:
Since you think they’re blameless, does that mean you really want us to do the same shit in four years again and hope this time screaming at people will be effective?
Cuz buddy, it’s never been effective at anything besides letting some shitty republican into the Oval
Fucking up implies they didn’t get exactly what they wanted.
deleted by creator
There’s no way in hell either Kamala or Biden’s egos left any room for them to want to lose. They tried to win and to please their patrons at the same time and found out the hard way that it’s not always possible.
Sure they wanted to win but losing doesnt change Kamala’s or bidens lives at all. They dont have to bear the burden of the trump nonsense like average people might.
Yeah, autocrats are well known for going easy on their former political opponents.
Wanna bet on whether or not Harris outlives the Trump administration?
I expect she will be fine, but she has enough reason to worry.
This is the real answer
Fair. “Fucked Us Up Again”?
Poor soul thinks said corporate media somehow exists completely outside of the scope of the DNC as if the DNC itself isn’t just a convention for corporate donors to show up and throw in their demands in exchange for campaign funds and lobbying money.
I mean I’m sure the headline NYT article about Clinton having a 91% chance of winning was totally some next level corporate funded psyop and not a one of the many thousands of advertisements paid for by the DNC. /s
No, it’s totally the corporate media that’s after her and has absolutely nothing to do with the candidate that dropped the entire uncommitted movement worth of constituents for $100 mil in corporate AIPAC money. /s
Harris was running the campaign and funding the advertisements. Not the DNC.
In presidential elections, it supervises the national convention and, both independently and in coordination with the presidential candidate, raises funds, commissions polls, and coordinates campaign strategy.
Again there is just no possible way the DNC is financially related to the very candidate it is promoting. Obviously, the Wikipedia editors are wrong /s
Again there is just no possible way the DNC is financially related to the very candidate it is promoting.
Actually the Harris campaign gave money to the DNC (or some other fund) to help fund other candidates, not the other way around. That didn’t give the DNC the slightest bit of leverage over Harris. If anything it was the opposite. The suggestion that someone at the DNC ran the Harris campaign instead of Harris is ludicrous.
Is the DNC in the room with us?
WTF is with people on this site and the DNC?
Mostly the anger at having to pick a slightly less lethal poison election after election
The DNC went full mask off this year by not holding primaries. By campaining with the cheneys and pushing 10 year old GOP policies/talking points.
All they will learn from this is losing elections still lets you amass a “warchest” of one billion dollars
Harris is not the DNC. The DNC is not a person. The DNC did not “campaign with they Cheneys”. The DNC did not “push 10 year old GOP politicies.” Nor did Harris, to my knowledge.
The only job of the DNC was to hold primaries. And they did that. Biden dropped out after the primaries were over.
All they will learn from this is losing elections still lets you amass a “warchest” of one billion dollars
The DNC’s only main job is to hold primaries. It’s not up to them to “learn” anything. They always go with the choice of the voters. The only people who can learn anything from this is the voters. The DNC is not a person. It is an fluid organization controlled by the primary voters.
The last president – Obama – that the DNC really wasn’t at all involved with was still somehow not very progressive.
The DNC has equal “involvement” in every election, which is to hold primary elections so voters can choose a nominee. The nominees chosen by the voters all run their own campaigns.
lol. Slightly.
I’ll remember this thread when abortions are banned nationwide.
Corporate news is not the guardrails of democracy. Ultimately, the people are responsible.
Will we be nominating better voters next election, or should we try to nominate a better candidate?
Who’s “we”? Democrats? Leftists? I voted against Biden in both primaries (because this outcome from a shitlib was inevitable) but there were not a lot of good alternatives in 2024.
I keep hearing Jon Stewart thrown out there, but I’d be shocked if he could be convinced to run. He is definitely the template for what we need.
There will never be another fair and free presidential election in this country if Trump and his clownshow are allowed to take power.
Trump and his clown show will be taking power. I’m not giving up.
Ok, what does that actually mean when you apply the sound bite to reality? What are your specific expectations for “the people” as individuals?
Can’t forget when I overheard someone say, “when was Biden is not running for president” as Trumps was announced he was president elect…
Democracy dies in ignorance
“Politically engaged” in completely disgusting politics is not a positive thing.
The hegemonic narrative (eg. nbc) will never prevent this viewpoint.
In other words she is a black woman…
They saw a woman was running for President and decided they didn’t care. It’s as simple as that. Sexism gave the election to Trump
Nah, had Tulsi stayed with Democrats, and ran against Trump I would have voted for Tulsi. Instead, Tulsi joined Trump, and I voted for Trump. If Tulsi runs again, I’ll vote for Tulsi.
Just watch this (again), there’s Joe, Kamala, and Tulsi. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4fjA0K2EeE
They shouldn’t have run a woman. This election was too important.
I literally lol I’d. I hope that was satire. 😂
That depends. Did Trump win because of sexism? If so, then it’s not satire. On the other hand…
We can point fingers at demographics, and certainly that may have been a part, but its reductive to say just sexism. If we accept any single reason, there will be no reason to improve our platforms.
You’ve got Democratic leaning media blaming the dems for being too woke… and more than half the country just didn’t vote. We need a platform that argues in favor of worker and individual rights alike while not capitulating on either, because as soon as you do capitulate to the right, you lose support, plain and simple.
When the only voters who sat out were white and hispanic men then what would be the logical reason?
Why didn’t women sit out this election at the same rates? Why not any other groups besides white and hispanic men?
What other conclusions can you even draw for these specific groups that have masculinity issues than not voting for a woman?
Let me go ask my whole voting block brb
Make sure you phrase it so you don’t accidentally emasculate the white and hispanic men
Latinos shift to Trump won him the election. Harris had the white and black support she needed
We cant split hairs on demographic turnout if overall turnout is way down from 2020, I mean we can make Latinos a scapegoat, but again we’re completely subverting critique that could actually help win an election.
Im not trying to scapegoat. I’m just pointing out the facts.
The fact is those margins in the Hispanic community would barely make a dent on overall turnout? Hence, scapegoating.
If every white and hispanic man who voted for biden also voted for harris then she would have won
Acknowledging reality is not scapegoating
7,000,000 less votes than Biden has is beyond any single percent margin in minority populations. Even if… what are you going to do? Harp on said demographics foe making the wrong choice for 4 years? Self righteousness ain’t gonna solve the lost vote. Ask why things happen once in a while.
53% of white women voted for Trump. Your “America won’t vote for a woman” argument doesn’t hold water.
Americans won’t vote for specific women, sure. Namely Hillary Clinton, and Kamala Harris. The fact that they are women is not why they lost so cataclysmically; they ran platforms that were deeply unengaging to Democrat and Independent voters. Worse, they tried to appeal to Republicans, which only underscored how out-of-touch and unprepared they were to hold the office. Moreover, neither of those specific women, nor the DNC that backed them seems to have learned anything from their continual failures, which, again, only deepens the divide among Democrats’ necessary coalitions.
Their failures are a function of being bad at post-Obama politics, and bad at running for the highest office in the land. It’s not because they are women.
To be fair, inflation is better, but it’s also valid to question how it’s being calculated and if it really reflects how much money people can have at the end of the month.
What does this have to do with the subject of discussion?
Sounds like they are trying to shift blame, again. We knew exactly who she was and knew she can’t be trusted with our support.
Shifting blame by… checks notes… analyzing the demographics of voters.
How are they analyzing the demographics of non voters at exit polls when non voters wouldn’t be exiting the polls to be questioned?
Which non voters are you talking about? The article is about politically engaged voters and voters who don’t follow politics, both of which are voters.
yes. thats there point… the voters are not why harris lost.
We also knew exactly who Trump is. We have a very long history.
I particularly love stuff about him before he was in politics, like the Motley Fool podcast on how he duped public investors for his private company through pumping up real estate values. They went to his office, saw this weird array of gaudy decoration and oddly attractive employees, sat down with him, and saw through his lie. Then made the only short in their firm’s entire history… and it paid off.
There’s no excuse of bias. You can’t blame any politicians. It’s just him. And while not perfect by any means, you have to squint hard to see Kamala in the same light.
Right.
But one thing we should also know is that running a bad candidate who is better than the only other option isn’t enough to decisively beat even the worst possible Republican.
Voters should have all voted for Kamala even though they didn’t want her to be president due to her policies. That would have mitigated the damage.
They didn’t do it in 2016 either, and Biden only squeaked thru because Trump was actively in office and Bernie stayed till the end to pull Biden left. If either of those didn’t happen, the strategy would be 0 out of 3.
It’s clearly not an effective strategy compared to running a candidate who already agrees with Dem voters
So rather than stomp our feet and being mad at the people we need in 2028, maybe spend the next four years bringing them back into the fold and running a candidate that people actually want to win the election?
Like, we’ve tried stomping our feet for 8 years now since Hillary, do you think any of that has helped?
Because to me, it looks like all it accomplishes is increasing donations from people who want Dems to lose, and turning dlteliable Dem voters into non-votets.
Stop worrying about if you’re right.
Start worrying about what can win 2028, and if that will actually translate to fixing shit
Why is the default argument from liberals always ‘but Trump?’ Harris would have been a shit candidate not worthy of being elected regardless of who her opponent was.
Harris was going to raise taxes on billionaires and corporations. Why the fuck would you NOT vote for that?
Because she wouldn’t have been shit. Your argument is invalid.
That doesn’t matter. She was the only other option we had
She was forced as the only choice on voters and liberals find that acceptable
Fucking child. Grow up.
It doesn’t matter. She was the choice we had.
knew she can’t be trusted with our support
Ah so you ARE a Trump supporter. Got it.
It’s an ML that doesn’t understand how elections work…or they are the CCP ops…one of the two.
Life must be so easy being binary and thinking, critique of one does not imply support of the other. Your party ran a piece of shit right-wing blue fascist who openly welcomed war criminals and you guys thought it was okay. We did not
party ran a piece of shit right-wing blue fascist
LMAO Just more projection from a MAGA Trump supporter
classic blue maga behavior - any structural critique must be met with tribal-style ad hom: “yeah well you probably just support kang instead of kodos.”
blue maga
So cringe
Critique was due in any other election year without an actual literal fascist on the Republican ticket.
bLuEMaGA screechers=Projections from Trump supporters
This attitude perpetuates the Democratic ticket running terrible candidates who can’t inspire either voters or potential voters. You can settle for a poop sandwich on rye rather than a poop sandwich on John Deerst but some would prefer something actually nourishing.
Like I said, binary thinking
Hate to break it to you, but the US elections ARE binary for as long as FPTP is the voting system nationwide. You want real change? advocate for things like RCV. I wouldn’t even vote for the DNC IF RCV was nationwide and third-parties actually stood a chance, I’m just being realistic.
As things stand now, you’re just demanding a fantasy. A pursuit that will now have blood on its hands because now instead of a “not really a fascist, just not as left as id like” president we have a full throat legit fascist.
Now you have every decision that Trump makes on your conscious.
My conscience is clear, I voted for no evil.
My conscience is clear, I voted for no evil.
Neither did I vote for Donald Trainwreck. I voted D for democracy.
Oh, fuck off with that. The fault ultimately lies with a party that thrust a candidate on us that primary voters flatly rejected in the 2020 primary, then ran a Republican lite campaign strategy when voters have been demanding change for decades.
The party did not “thrust a candidate on you”. The elected delegates chosen by the voters chose a nominee. As for Harris, she was chosen by the delegates because she was the VP. And she was the VP because she came in 2nd place behind Biden in the 2020 primary. The 2020 voters “demanded” Biden first, and “demanded” Harris 2nd. Unfortunately Bernie was not first or 2nd.
Elected delegates from a primary that most voters were never even aware of? Even Democrats who were aware knew full well that it was a pointless exercise. Can you even name another candidate than Biden?
You better go check your facts on the 2020 primary. She was only competitive for about one day after the debate where she went after Biden’s racism. She dropped out after reports that her staff imploded because of internal conflicts. This was almost two months before voting started! Oh, and Bernie actually did come in second.
Harris was chosen as VP because she was the establishment choice for President from the start. The establishment through a myriad of backroom deals (mostly brokered by Obama) got every establishment candidate to drop out the day before super Tuesday and endorse Biden who had been in last place of all the candidates still in the race. Biden payed for the help by putting Harris on the ticket. Bernie split the progressive votes with Warren (who quit campaigning but inexplicably refused to drop out) so Biden won.
Does any of that sound like democracy to you?
Elected delegates from a primary that most voters were never even aware of?
How can anybody not know there is a primary held every 4 years?
This was almost two months before voting started! Oh, and Bernie actually did come in second.
Wow I checked and you are right. Bernie did come in 2nd in delegates! Harris was apparently 2nd in the polls but she did drop out before any of the primaries.
Still, the fact that Harris was the Vice President made her the obvious choice of the 2024 delegates after Biden dropped out.
Bernie split the progressive votes with Warren (who quit campaigning but inexplicably refused to drop out) so Biden won.
Warren not dropping out ticked me off too. But it wasn’t necessarily the reason Biden won. I think he got more than Sanders and Warren combined.
Does any of that sound like democracy to you?
After Biden dropped out, having the elected delegates chose the nominee sounded like the most democratic option and the only option in line with the DNC charter. You had a better option?
The 2024 US presidential election was a binary choice, because that’s how it works with first past the goalposts elections.
If you voted 3rd party, you voted for Trump.
Why do you guys pretend to understand the electoral college in one breath and in the other assume every critic of the Democratic party lives in NC, GA, PA, MI, etc.?
My vote would have literally been more wasted voting for Kamala in a deep red state. At least a third party vote could get your party to notice something.
The vast majority of Americans do not live in swing states.
“Corporate wants you to find the difference between these two pictures”
Donald Trump
Third party candidates
“They’re literally the same thing!!”
Third-party candidates?
Oh, you mean the ones who have never won a presidential election in the entire modern history of the US and has become nothing but pawns for the 2 established parties to harm the other e.g. Jill Stein, Russian asset?
Those third-party candidates?
“A non-vote or vote for a third-party is a vote for Trump”
So congrats MAGAt, your guy won!
So, we should elect Donald Fucking Trump instead? Is that your conclusion?
Who said anything about electing Trump? The only people that say, but Trump are the liberals that think you’ve only got two options. There’s a lot of us that did not vote for top of the ticket and voted downline, top of the ticket was garbage, regardless of which fascist you decided to support
I can go ahead and call 2028 for you now.
It’s gonna be the Dem or Rep nominee.
It is binary. If you believe another outcome is likely, let’s bet money.
It’s binary because voters keep it that way
It literally doesnt though. Its because of how our votes are tallied, First Past the Post. If a third party ever reached viability, theyd just split the same half of voters with whichever large party theyre closer to
Sure. Agreed.
That doesn’t change the fact.
I made no claim about the mechanics of it. Only the outcome.
Kalama lost bc voters for who voting is a real burden didn’t show up to vote. They are poor and likely people of color. Fuck off with blaming people.
Hey I’ll likely be fine. Better off than the people you identified in your comment.
I’m a cis white male who makes ~$250k/yr.
The ones who sat at home are likely going to be much worse off.
At least it’s gonna be very hard to make the brain dead “both sides” argument over the next 4 years.
I’m a cis white male who makes ~$250k/yr.
opinion discarded
It’s just too much to expect lots of you to simply evaluate an idea on its merits.
See you in 2028 when the Dem or Rep wins again.
We have a voting system that mathematically devolves into a two party system. If you think voting third party will change anything the way the system is set up right now, you’re naive.
You’re an idiot if you think that not voting for Harris means you didn’t implicitly vote for Trump.
There were two viable candidates in this election, because that’s how the US election system works. A 3rd party will never win until the entire system changes. Full stop.
You know what makes for a viable candidate, people voting for them. Liberals claim to support a 3rd party but not until they are viable. They essentially want other people to do the work for them so they can hop on someone else’s bandwagon and claim this is what they always wanted
Is it really how that works? No way! Ive literally never heard anyone say that! Definitely not over and over in this thread or anything!
Thanks internet stranger for solving the third party problem! Not all hero’s wear capes!
There’s a lot of us that did not vote for top of the ticket and voted downline
No, the republicans won all three branches so that’s a lie.
I hope the democrats move hard right next election to target people who actually vote and don’t just sit it out.
If they do, they will lose… Again
I hope the democrats move hard right next election to target people who actually vote and don’t just sit it out.
Pretty much why y’all lost 2016 and 2024 but go off
Dems moved hard right this election and it cost them
How is reporting what PEOPLE filled out in exit polls, shifting blame? These are just facts.
You have to understand, the people who constantly attacked Harris before the election now have to figure out some way to make her just as bad as Trump, to excuse their own behavior. Is it disgusting? Yes. Is it reprehensible? Yes. Is it absolutely predictable as a means of trying to escape responsibility for the rancid shit hurricane that will be Trump Part 2? Yes.
Yeah I’ve been seeing the exact same thing, and I think it will be interesting to see them gradually unravel in the coming months.
You can see that all of the astroturfing, bot accounts vanished after Election Day, and all of the useful idiots are left to try to fight the cognitive dissonance they’re feeling after seeing the immediate insanity of Trump since winning.
Unfortunately, if they actually are progressives, they will likely have a much harder time ignoring the cognitive dissonance than conservatives (who seem to excel at that ability). They’re in for some real psychic pain when they witness Trump’s actions in Palestine.
Plenty of people voted for kamala and are huge critics of how the campaign was handled. Both can happen.
“Plenty” was not enough. The pre-election criticism looks like it worked exactly as intended.
And how are they polling these non-voters at exit polls if they did not vote? Odd dog. The story is blame shifting bullshit, what Democrats love doing whenever they can’t manage to run a decent candidate or election
…
How are you using exit polls to find out about why non-voters didn’t vote?
Did everyone say they were politically engaged as they were leaving a polling location?
Or are you using logic to determine everyone that just voted was politically engaged, and those who didn’t are politically disengaged?
Cuz like, yeah, obviously that’s true…
But what matters is why they’re politically disengaged and how we can get the to engage again.
A very very easy way, would be to make sure the next candidate agrees with Dem voters more than Republican voters.
“following politics” is not the same as “voter engagement”.
Someone that never pays attention but votes R every two years like clockwork for example.
They’d be “do not follow closely” on that, but if they 60 years old and voted R every election since they’re were 18…
How exactly are they “politically disengaged”?
They’re still voting, just not paying attention.
Like, there are loads of over things we’re going to have to clear up for you to understand, but getting that difference is step 1.
If you understand this mistake, we can probably move forward and cover other stuff. But if you don’t get this comment, nothing past it is going to be productive.
A lot of this is coming from the horrible headline that co flates the two, and is outright false.
So far trump has the most votes, he literally won with the politically engaged, because those are the people who voted.
The consultants running the campaign measure success in dollars raised. That means they only messaged those politically engaged.
It’s worse than that.
The current DNC determines who gets leadership positions by who brought the most in
Bring in 10 million from lifelong Dem voters who show up rain or shine and volunteer?
Sorry, someone just got 250 million from a fossil fuel corporation to get Dems to be pro-fracking, so now they’re leading the party.
What’s crazy is so many people defending the DNC on this and insisting we have to keep doing anything the rich ask, even though their money will never get back all the votes being pro-fracking get us.
It’s not just that either, Sam with border wall, funding genocide, and lots of other shit.
Both parties cater to the wealthy, because both parties care more about money than votes.
Made this point on another article and the response I got was that they need to keep fellating rich donors because if they stop those rich donors will run attack ads against them and cost them the election. I don’t know if that’s true or not but if so they might as well give up now because those rich donors aren’t winning them elections either.
The rich 100% would.
But it doesn’t matter, because the narrative of that happening would translate to more votes than literally any advertising all the money in the world could buy.
Seriously, absolutely nothing could ever help a Dem become president more than all the wealthiest people in the country losing their shit over just the possiblity that a Dem becomes president.
An alien invasion wouldn’t unite American voters as much as that would.
The reason Dems keep losing, is we’ve lost the “anti-establishment vote”.
The party turning their back on them would be all people would talk about, it would fill the news cycle the entire campaign.
And even though media would present it as a terrible idea…
That’s how they presented trump to, look at how that worked out.
By “I’m not sure if that’s true” I meant the attack ads costing them the election, not that they would get attacked which I’m pretty sure they would. For what it’s worth I do agree that an actually progressive Dem running on a anti-capitalist platform would do quite well. I’m not sure it would be well enough to win, but I don’t think it would be a guaranteed loss either. The biggest counter example I can think of would be Bernie Sanders, but that has the extra complication that the DNC did everything they could to try to bury him. A progressive candidate with the backing of the DNC I suspect would do well enough to offset any possible damage done by attack ads.
