this post was submitted on 15 Nov 2024
225 points (87.4% liked)

politics

19120 readers
2216 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
(page 2) 26 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] AnarchoSnowPlow@midwest.social 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

This is absolutely untrue.

Dems should have just used more charts that show how actually you're not paying more for groceries and making less money adjusted for inflation.

They also should have just had Kamala drop out and replaced her with Liz Cheney, that would have gotten the moderate vote.

They also should have shamed the people who don't like funding wholesale slaughter around the world more, these are jobs we're talking about here!

[–] Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (5 children)

They also should have just had Kamala drop out and replaced her with Liz Cheney, that would have gotten the moderate vote.

Let's take a look the other Republican politicians that endorsed Harris:

  • Anthony Scarramucci
  • Adam Kinzinger
  • Arnold Schwarzenegger
  • Geoff Duncan
  • Alberto Gonzalez
  • William Webster
  • Jeff Flake
  • Fred Upton
  • Liz Cheney

These are all former politicians who either sent out media or actively campaigned to support Harris. But Liz Cheney was the bridge too far. Gee, I wonder what's different about Liz Cheney compared to literally everybody else on that list.

Liz Cheney was never the fucking problem. If Liz Cheney endorsing Harris was supposedly the breaking point for you, you were never going to vote Harris to begin with.

They also should have shamed the people who don’t like funding wholesale slaughter around the world more, these are jobs we’re talking about here!

Ok, now answer this:

How does allowing Trump to return to power make any of this any better in any way?

How does allowing Trump to return to power not make all of this exponentially worse?

How does allowing Trump to return to power benefit you in any way?

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] whithom@discuss.online 0 points 1 week ago (5 children)

My heart belongs to Bernie.

The left really should actually organize and form a secret party of political actors who run as republicans to disrupt the vote.

[–] NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip -1 points 1 week ago

They would last MAYBE one term before they were instantly primaried and removed from power.

The reason manchin and sinema are so destructive is that they were from INCREDIBLY purple states. Going up against them would just split the vote and guarantee the republican candidate one. fetterman is more of a special case and time will tell on him.

The other? To get elected as a magat you need to be a pretty hateful son of a bitch. And people are already turning on AOC for removing her pronouns from her social media bio.

Because... just look at the Bernie Bros. Democrats are INCREDIBLY good at purity testing each other. So someone who pretended they wanted to enslave women and then voted for progressive legislature? They would be forever tainted and vilified... and kind of rightfully so.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] ryathal@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

An even older candidate would have absolutely lost in 24. He may have won in 16, but more likely he loses but gets a bigger share of the popular vote than Hilary did.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world -2 points 1 week ago (7 children)

So let me get this right.

The Democrat party was upset we were putting up a president that was "too old" and showing signs of cognitive decline, especially since he was going up against another old man with even more cognitive decline.

So the Democrat party gets the old man to drop out at the last minute and since there's no time for a Democrat primary, they put up a black woman as the nominee.

But because the black woman wasn't the absolutely perfect candidate, wasn't articulate enough on her policies, and didn't hand the left everything they wanted on a silver platter, they opted to stay home in protest and let the old white man with even more dementia return to power in order to "send a message" to Democrats not to put up old white guys.

And now they're saying that the solution to the old white guy that they didn't want to vote for was to put up an even older white guy who managed to get even less votes than her in his own home state.

Please, make it make sense.

And if you're one of the 10+ million Biden voters who opted to sit home, you still fucking voted for this. "If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice." And you made that choice fully informed, knowing it was a de-facto vote for Trump.

If your solution to the problem of "old white guy" is "even older white guy", then just admit it. You didn't vote for Harris because she's a black woman and are just using the narrative as a convenient excuse so you don't have to admit (to yourself, to friends) that you're a closeted racist. Because nobody with three active fucking brain cells believes that the solution to anything is to sit back and allow Trump to return to power.

"I don't like Harris's economic policies, so I voted for a guy who's economic policy is "They're eating the dogs!"

"I don't like Harris's policy on Gaza, so I voted for a guy who promised to speed up the genocide even faster."

"I don't like Harris flip-flopping on policies, so I voted for the guy who says he has "concepts of a plan".

"I don't like Harris's record as a prosecutor, so I'm going to vote for a guy who wants to have me deported because of my race."

"I don't like Harris being endorsed by a Republican woman (the men are just fine, though), so I'm just going to allow all of them to return to power."

And all I keep seeing from the people defending this line of bullshit is that "They couldn't vote for Harris because.....", or "Harris went too far to the right.....", or "Well, Liz cheney showed up that one time.....". Yet asking the questions of "So how the hell does allowing Trump to return to power help in any way? Better yet, how does allowing Trump to return to power not make the situation actively worse? What is Trump going to do to help me?" is met by silence, insults, and downvotes. Because they know what the answer is. It doesn't. It makes everything worse. But they just don't want to admit (again, either to themselves and/or to others) that they would rather allow an old white wanna-be dictator to return to power before they'd vote for a black woman. Everything else is just excuses.

[–] NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 week ago

Well said. Every time someone says that Kamala "was not likeable" I just assume "I don't want no women in office"

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com -2 points 1 week ago

or any more true.

[–] Montagge@lemmy.zip -2 points 1 week ago

Bernie ain't winning shit beyond his seat right now

[–] echo@lemmings.world -2 points 1 week ago

Yet, he literally, didn't win....

[–] echo@lemmings.world -5 points 1 week ago

Yet, he literally, didn't win....

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›