this post was submitted on 08 Nov 2024
806 points (96.5% liked)

politics

19118 readers
3228 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Harris only received five percent of Republican votes — less than the six percent Joe Biden won in 2020 when he beat Trump, as well as the seven percent won by Hillary Clinton in 2016 when she lost to him. While Harris won independents and moderates, she did so by smaller margins than Biden did in 2020.

Meanwhile, Harris lost households earning under $100,000, while Democratic turnout collapsed. Votes are still being counted, but Harris is on pace to underperform Biden’s 2020 totals by millions of votes.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] jagged_circle@feddit.nl 75 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children)

Yes. When you abandon the left, they don't vote for you. This is what Clinton did too

[–] db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 40 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children)

They have clearly internalized the pervasive trope that leftists will vote for them, because they have no other choice, so the only thing that matters to convince is the right. Looks like they calculated wrong.

[–] Wogi@lemmy.world 27 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Obama got people excited about healthcare reform. Biden got people excited about student debt relief. Clinton tried to get people excited about a female president and Harris centered her campaign around running against Trump.

Social programs get people excited.

[–] NewNewAccount@lemmy.world 16 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

Biden got people excited about student debt relief.

This is not why Biden got elected. Trump so badly mishandled Covid that everyone left of center demanded change.

[–] nondescripthandle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

The failure to realize Covid is the only reason Biden won cost the Democrats. In the swing states 2024 Trump beats 2020 Biden by vote count.

[–] pjwestin@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago

I don't think you can point to one specific thing that got Biden elected. Covid mismanagement was a huge part of it, but student debt relief and other progressive proposals that Bernie pushed the campaign into played a big part as well. Even with Covid, I think there's a good chance that Biden would have lost if he'd run the same kind of centrist campaign that Harris and Clinton ran.

[–] Sauerkraut@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 1 week ago

everyone left of center demanded change.

I think you mean "everyone left of FASCISM" because liberals are center-right at best. Center left is Social Democracy (Bernie Sanders and AOC)

[–] kreskin@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

agreed. Biden won because people voted against Trump. Every other time Biden ran, and there were many, he couldnt even win his home state. He was and is a joke of a politician, and his legacy is a Trump win becaus he was so unpopular.

"Never underestimate Joe Bidens ability to fuck everything up" --Barrack Obama.

[–] masinko@lemmy.world 11 points 2 weeks ago

Student debt was not a campaign platform he ran on, it was something he did during his presidency.

He did run on Green New Deal and the original proposal that later became the $2 trillion Infrastructure investment/bill/plan.

But to your point, yes he ran on platforms that people got excited. Both of those platforms were new economic opportunities for people in a time when people when much of the labor class was jobless from COVID.

[–] jagged_circle@feddit.nl 2 points 2 weeks ago
[–] Jumpingspiderman@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The funny thing is that Harris had a lot of progressive policies. She didn't tout them for some reason. Which I suspect was to get GOPers on board. Have a look here and wonder why she didn't talk more about them: https://www.politifact.com/article/2024/sep/30/kamala-harris-2024-campaign-promises-here-are-her/

[–] jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Because most of them were worth less than the bits than they were stored on. She never would have gotten them through congress. She just put them there. 🤷 You'll note the things she could have done unilaterally like end shipments to israel and commit to keeping kahn she flat out refused to do/support.