this post was submitted on 08 Dec 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)

politics

19267 readers
470 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

From the Article:

For weeks following Joe Biden’s disastrous performance, his campaign publicly maintained the illusion that he was still well-positioned to defeat Donald Trump. Privately, they knew otherwise. As Pod Save America co-host Jon Favreau revealed days after the election:

After the debate, the Biden people told us that the polls were fine, and Biden was still the strongest candidate. They were privately telling reporters, at the time, that Kamala Harris couldn’t win. […] Then we find out, when the Biden campaign becomes the Harris campaign, that the Biden campaign’s own internal polling, at the time when they were telling us he was the strongest candidate, showed that Donald Trump was going to win 400 electoral votes.

The implications of this are staggering, and it should be treated as a massive scandal.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 weeks ago (4 children)

It definitely seems like the real problem wasn't that Harris didn't make a good or compelling case that her opponent was unfit, it's that they didn't spend any time building up their own case for what they would do differently and instead tried to court the vanishingly small number of undecided moderates and, for some reason, Republicans who will still hate them no matter what they say.

There was plenty of time to run a good campaign after Biden got replaced, they just chose not to for some reason. Can't agree more that these guys should not be involved in politics anymore if they tried to prop up Biden for an entire month after the debate and bury their heads in the sand when he was polling in the toilet the entire time.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Harris was asked multiple times what she would do differently than Biden and she had no answer.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Well, they couldn't tell the truth and risk a more liberal candidate.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 weeks ago (4 children)

I honestly have a hard time believing it was ideology and not the good, old fashioned inability of boomers to let go of power.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 weeks ago

Nah the article makes it clear the Democratic leadership has been captured by corporate executives who have a vested interest in not giving the working class an inch.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Biden is silent gen, the generation before boomers.

But yeah all the old politicians clinging to the levers of power because they're selfish is a part of what has led us to this point.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 weeks ago

It’s not even just old politicians, it’s every aspect of society, at least that’s my experience

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

You'd have a hard time believing a lot then, because that's what actual voters were saying. If Harris had been more left-leaning in appearance, they wouldn't have even captured the shift they did grab.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

Clearly she didn't support genocide hard enough or get the endorsement of enough Cheneys.

For your liking.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

To anyone reading Ensign's comment and downvoting, their claim is essentially an already established fact. Rolling Stone put out an article after the election saying that the Harris campaigned intentionally ignored Democratic party insiders and their advice and polling data against bringing the Cheneys on board.

A Democratic strategist says they warned key Harris surrogates and top-level officials at the Democratic National Committee that campaigning with Liz Cheney — and making the campaign’s closing argument about how many Republicans were supporting Harris — was highly unlikely to motivate any new swing voters, and risked dissuading already-despondent, infrequent Democratic voters who had supported Biden in 2020.

“We were told, basically, to get lost, no thank you,” says the operative.

Article in question

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

It’s hard to truly know what went on behind the scenes, but there was a large amount of common disdain for Biden staying in the race after “we beat Medicare” - anyone who hadn’t already been clued into his cognitive decline was suddenly confronted with that reality, and people knew he was a clear loser at that point.

For Biden the floor only fell out beneath him after Nancy Pelosi and the donor class publicly announced they wanted Joe out NOW that the DNC/Biden camp realized the gig was up.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 weeks ago (11 children)

Yet, under his leadership, Minnesota passed some of the most ambitious progressive legislation in the country, including a child tax credituniversal free school meals, and free tuition at public colleges for families earning under $80,000 per year. Walz also delivered major labor victories, including paid family and medical leave and worker protections like banning non-compete clauses and anti-union captive audience meetings.

Nooooo Democrats ignore working peoplllllle! They’re terrible for the underserved!! Everyone knows that that’s why they looooossst!!

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 weeks ago (16 children)

Turns out when economy bad stupid people vote out the incumbent.

Also white and Latino men have masculinity issues that prevent them from voting for women.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 weeks ago

Ain't that the truth. Fuck.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Even more so for a black woman.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 weeks ago

I heard she's an indian black woman

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 weeks ago (5 children)

Ah yes, Latino men prefer super macho men like the socialist feminists Claudia Sheinbaum and Dilma Rousseff.

Definitely not that Kamala was an unconvincing candidate who simply got a boost from women due to the abortion issue, relative to men.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (3 children)

It's almost as if Latin American voters are a completely different demographic than people who live and vote in South America.

Who would've thought.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (13 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 weeks ago

And the weed.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 weeks ago

But he's an evil capitalist. If you aren't fighting for violent communist revolution, you're part of the problem!! /s

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

The only progressive one is the free college one. The rest are so bare minimum that India and Brazil have them (feeding schoolkids and paid parental leave.) Minnesota isn't the USA writ large either.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Til paid parental leave doesn't pass the progressive purity test.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 weeks ago

I don't get what you mean. It's a minimum requirement. If there is a "progressive purity test", then it's the part where you write your name at the top of the paper. Huge credit for the free university though.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

How many of these were put onto Harris' platform, and then how many had a chance of getting passed in Congress?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 weeks ago (4 children)

The campaign was fine. Americans are the problem. They're too ignorant.

If we're going to blame this ignorance on anyone we might consider blaming the media. Odd how we aren't seeing a lot of articles from the media saying the media failing to give information to people about how bad Trump is. But linked above is something from the media blaming a political campaign for not doing their jobs for them.

Still not doing any introspection about waiting until after the election to explain why Trump's "economic plan" will be a disaster, huh? Didn't bother to explain anything about what causes inflation. Wouldn't want people to think it's something to do with it being a free market, and not caused by the government. Nope, it's up to the campaigns to explain economics to people in 30 second TV spots.

So the media will continue blame the Democrats for all the problems, while wondering "why couldn't the democrats win the election"? Must be the democrats fault! It's like we've always been saying, it's always their fault! We should never think about what the effect of us blaming one party for everything might be.

But mostly it was just Americans taking democracy for granted. Don't know what you got until you've lost it I guess.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

The campaign was complete garbage, though. In a Rolling Stone article, it details on how many advisors and Democratic party operatives were begging her campaign to not bring in Liz Cheney because any gains would essentially be eclipsed by other Democratic voters that otherwise stayed home.

A Democratic strategist says they warned key Harris surrogates and top-level officials at the Democratic National Committee that campaigning with Liz Cheney [...] was highly unlikely to motivate any new swing voters, and risked dissuading already-despondent, infrequent Democratic voters who had supported Biden in 2020

I also understand that your main points are on how political commentators and news anchors on TV chose not to encourage Harris to tackle issues on the economy, but an Atlantic article essentially tells us that Harris torpedoed her anti-big business rhetoric when she brought in her brother-in-law into the campaign itself.

While Harris was stuck defending the Biden economy, and hobbled by lingering anger over inflation, attacking Big Business allowed her to go on the offense. Then, quite suddenly, this strain of populism disappeared. One Biden aide told me that Harris steered away from such hard-edged messaging at the urging of her brother-in-law, Tony West, Uber’s chief legal officer

Honestly, how big of a role does media have in swaying her campaign into talking about important issues (such as the economy, like you pointed out) if she willingly chose to ignore the easiest slam dunks her campaign had?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

I have a hard time believing that anyone was engaged enough to actually understand who Cheney was (to the point that they have an opinion of her) AND they were so upset by the gesture of welcoming her on on the Jan 6th Committee as a bridge that they completely refused their civic duty to vote? Something doesn't square there...

That said, Cheney is human garbage who was still spewing that ridiculous "dems want to abort babies after they are already born" bullshit, as of very recently.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 weeks ago

The campaign was fine. Americans are the problem.

Hi, Principal Skinner.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 weeks ago (4 children)

they'll try to run the exact same plan in 2028 if we let them. Its all they know how to do.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 weeks ago

It's all they want to do

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Nancy Pelosi 2028, let's gooooo!!!

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 weeks ago

democratic candidates after Carter don't know politics... al they know is AIPAC, punch the left, twerk, be bipartisan, kill Arabs and lie

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (14 children)

The Democratic party is an enemy of the American people, as much now as the Republican party always has been.

They don't fight for you to stop fascism. They enable it, step aside and let it walk past and say "well, we did all we can do".

Well, if all they can do is die, good riddance.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 weeks ago

What do those two things have to do with each other?

load more comments (13 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 weeks ago (7 children)

I think the big media companies probably knew this too but needed to create a false horse race for ratings and clicks

I mean, either every single pollster in every major news organization was just terribly off on their prediction or there was a push from the ownership to make this election 'more interesting'. (This is my own conspiracy theory and I have no sources to back this bullshit up with)

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

All VP Harris had to do was choose a running mate that wasn't Kaine-esque.

They needed a hard left firebrand to support Harris, and they chose a dude from an ABC Dad sitcom. He is a great governor. But that is not a world leader running mate.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 weeks ago

Do polls show voting swings based on VP activity? I find it hard to believe most Americans could even name our VPs, let alone give enough fucks about what they're saying to be persuaded by them.

load more comments
view more: next ›