this post was submitted on 08 Dec 2024
329 points (93.2% liked)

politics

19223 readers
2801 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] 96 points 1 week ago (2 children)

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

[–] [email protected] 45 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (9 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.

Edit: Not talking about the Democratic establishment. Speaking specifically about Biden refusing to step down until it was too late.

[–] phdepressed 51 points 1 week 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] 14 points 1 week ago

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

[–] [email protected] 33 points 1 week 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] 17 points 1 week ago (1 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.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 week ago (1 children)

anyone who hadn’t already been clued into his cognitive decline was suddenly confronted with that reality

I remember when I said Biden was making more speeches like Trump, I was downvoted on Reddit for wanting someone younger than retirement age for president, even if I was going to vote for Biden.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I don't think these people could get any more liberal.

But they could certainly choose a leftist candidate in theory at least.

[–] [email protected] 63 points 1 week 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] 28 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Walz then disappeared for a month. The campaign sent him into the background while Harris made appearances with Liz Cheney.

They threw progressives a bone, and then forgot about it.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 23 points 1 week 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)
[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 week ago (5 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] 15 points 1 week ago (8 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.

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 week ago (2 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.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 week ago (1 children)

No, they're clearly capable of it when they want. That's the frustrating part. This republican lite theme is an active choice national democrats keep making.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 58 points 1 week 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] 37 points 1 week ago

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

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 week ago

It's all they want to do

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 week ago

Fascism Lite and Fascism Max, into Blue Fascism and Red Fascism!

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Nancy Pelosi 2028, let's gooooo!!!

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Nancy Pelosi 2028, let’s gooooo!!!

ah man, that hurts. I can only get so aroused before something pops.

/s or is it..

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 week ago

It's her turn! USA will understand that.

[–] [email protected] 28 points 1 week ago (1 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)

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Not sure what you mean about pollsters. They said it would be a tight race, and it was. Trump did not have a landslide by any means.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Agreed. Trump won by 140k in PA, 80k in MI, 30k in WI. That's less than 0.16% of the total vote. (source)

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Yeah people really seem to have a hard time understanding this. Like they think 51% is some huge plurality.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 23 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (4 children)

I've kept voting for the left most party with a chance, for my own conscience and for harm reduction, not for hope, for 20 years.

There's been no hope because our left most party has met their opposition so far up their ass, they only look left to a full blown fascist, and both parties openly take the same corporate bribe money to keep this exploitative economy and it's inhuman priorities exactly as it is while they war over how to, or if to, address some of the social issue symptoms it causes or exacurbates, so long as it doesn't meaningfully effect quarterly earnings results.

I could at this point be easily be convinced to vote third party for an explicitly anti-corporatist party even if it didn't have a chance.

The public, surprisingly bipartisan reaction (voters, not reps, obviously) to what happened a few days ago in New York has given me more hope for positive change in our cesspool of greed enablement than I have felt in my entire life. At some level, it seems many of our people do understand, despite all the corpo propaganda, that their enemy causing most of our ills aren't to their left or right, but economically above, encouraging us to fight about the symptoms of their dictates to THEIR captured government.

I would rather a left-wing populist steal the corpo DNC's base right out from under them as Trump did in 2016 to the RNC so it could have one of the only two banners that matter helping, but I sadly also think the DNC would rather do everything possible to lose than be dragged along like that and lose the corporate bribe gravy train that left-wing populism, unlike right-wing populism, would need to fight against.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Are the implications really that staggering? Are you unable to believe the DNC would lie? They do it all the time, this is hardly news. It just confirms what we already knew at the time, which is that Biden had no chance and all polling supported that conclusion.

[–] Ajen 7 points 1 week ago (5 children)

Yep, the DNC is a private organization and can mostly operate however they want. The real problem is the duopoly between the 2 parties that prevents any real progress. As long as each party control roughly half of the government they will keep fighting to maintain the status quo.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] GhiLA 17 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (15 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.

--

PARDONS HIS DRUG ADDICT SON, WHILE YOU CAN'T AFFORD GROCERIES 🤣

^ remember that

load more comments (15 replies)
[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 week 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.

[–] ghen 9 points 1 week 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)
load more comments
view more: next ›