Hey guys, I gotta lock this. There’s too much devolving into personal attacks and a shit ton of troll baiting. Weekends and major events are ripe for that, we had both this weekend. Please don’t fall for it.
Yes it’s truly macho to lose elections. Big muscle energy. This person is stoked to lose the next one. As long as they’re “correct”… jfc.
Hillary Clinton too.
And Elizabeth Warren.
I wasn’t old enough to be politically involved when Al Gore ran, but I heard he had good policies. How many people can tell you what policies Kamala ran on?
I don’t think Kamala could even tell you what policies Kamala ran on.
Straight up cash to help buy your first house. I wasn’t thrilled about it.
Only for immigrant first generation home buyers with no other members of your family owning a house and after you had lived in government backed apartment housing for more than 2 years.
Same way her business loan suggestions were only for specific communities with super strict requirements.
Set it up “help” so restrictive to only “the people who actually need it” so that you don’t have to give out any at all and just sounds good on paper. They don’t want to actually help people, Democrat leaders just needed to keep status quo.
This has been tagged as misinformation. I suspect it is, but if it isn’t, please source it. I’ll remove it until I get the valid source.
If you’re reading this and want to know what it says so you can help source it or not, read the modlog for this community.
https://onlinevisas.com/us-immigration/kamala-harriss-25000-for-immigrant/
It was literally designed around first generational home buyers. Just cause people don’t like that doesn’t mean it’s misinformation.
Down payment assistance was only for first generation and she had proposed adding a tax credit for first time home buyers. That would include average people.The proposal includes $25,000 in downpayment assistance for 400,000 first-generation homebuyers, defined as those whose parents do not own a home. To qualify, these families must have a history of paying rent on time for at least two years. Additionally, the plan offers a $10,000 tax credit for first-time homebuyers. Here is another article
I don’t have the proposed plan specifically as it also changed a couple times and was more just a proposal without much meat other than primarily being what I said it was.
First generation isn’t immigrants, they’re US citizens because they were born here.
How do you become a first generation to a country without immigrating to it even if it is by your parents? The country was not founded at the time of their birth, the generation before them was an immigrant.
I’m sorry but that’s pointless pedantry to resist having to put my comment back of legitimate criticism against the idea that the Harris campaign was providing cash for buying homes to the average American.
provide working families who have paid their rent on time for two years and are buying their first home up to $25,000 in down-payment assistance, with more generous support for first-generation homeowners – or homebuyers whose parents don’t own a home.
Nothing at all about “immigrants”. Where did you hear that bullshit?
Mostly pro immigrant news sources that were happy about the benefit this would give directly to those communities and the fact that it targets people that have no other family members with a house in the US which those of us with older parents who were born in the US likely have.
The $10,000 credit for only first time homebuyers was a later addition and was not even set as it was more an additional thought tacked on and does nothing for actually giving money for the down payment but only credits you after you bought it.
Not helpful.
She had a website, she promised to tax the rich on it. There were even some rightwing nutjobs producing cartoons about it claiming an unrealized gains tax would ruin the economy.
An unrealized gains tax would never make it out of committee, much less actually passing either house of Congress. She took absolutely zero risk w/ that one because everyone knows it’s not feasible.
If we vote for the Tax The Rich candidates then the Rich will get taxed.
Instead the anti-tax rich candidate won.
When has that ever actually happened? Like anything else, there will be exceptions upon exceptions because the rich have the money and influence to successfully lobby Congress.
And the rich already pay the most in taxes, and the richest get loopholes:
The top 1% of earners pay 45.8% of income taxes.
If you think the top 1% are going to pay even more in taxes without a massive concession, I’ve got a bridge to sell you.
Harris couldn’t pass that even if she actually, truly cared, and I fervently believe she’s just pandering to the left for votes. I don’t think she actually believes in most of the policies that made headlines, I think she just wanted to be Biden 2.0. She said as much in interviews, and it’s why she lost: she couldn’t convince her base that she’s actually different.
If you wanted actual, meaningful change from the left, Bernie Sanders was your best bet. I don’t even think he was that good of a candidate, but he actually seemed to believe in what he promised.
The tax laws that the GOP wrote in 2016/2017 expire this session and now they’re back in power to write the new ones.
Republicans have been the party cutting taxes for 50 years.
In 2023 they proposed tax raises across the board in order to have a chance of passing the senate with their 50 seat majority (with caucus) against the 49 Republicans, while they simultaneously expanded benefits like medicaid expansion so as to redistribute wealth to those who need it to survive.
GOP is the enemy. Remove the GOP, first and foremost.
GOP is the enemy
No, the enemy is the two-party system. The GOP is merely a symptom of that larger problem. The GOP proposing terrible bills doesn’t imply that Dem bills are “good,” they’re both generally quite terrible since most representatives don’t really need to worry about their seat since their district is likely uncontested, so they’re more beholden to special interests than their constituents.
Fix the electoral system and maybe I’ll entertain a discussion about the GOP being “evil.”
She was pro fracking. Got to line those pockets afterall.
Let’s list out all the good and bad policies Harris and Trump ran on then see which is the lesser of 2 evils.
And then throw them all away and burn it down with the greater evil just for funsies, apparently.
Yeah, but eggs are cheap again, so…
Oh wait.
And Trump? What’s his policy about the environment? Please, do enlighten us!
As always, any criticism for harris is interpreted in bad faith as support for trump.
No argument, no talking points, no facts, no sources, just a biased opinion and a salty comment.
That’s not criticism. That’s badmouthing.
I’m tired of these people pointing at one candidate’s speck of dust, while ignoring the other candidate’s plank to justify not voting against a fascist dictator.
She was pro fracking.
Maybe she was. Maybe she wasn’t far left enough. And so, because of that one specific detail, that as enough to tip the balance and swing the vote for the guy who is not only very pro fracking, but also for destroying the entire ecosystem and environment scorched-earth style.
I’m so f… tired of the double standard.
I’m tired of these people pointing at one candidate’s speck of dust, while ignoring the other candidate’s plank to justify not voting against a fascist dictator.
You assume that about anyone with any criticism whatsoever of harris.
I voted for harris; you just can’t abide anything other than unconditional worship of her.
Maybe she was. Maybe she wasn’t far left enough. And so, because of that one specific detail, that as enough to tip the balance and swing the vote for the guy who is not only very pro fracking, but also for destroying the entire ecosystem and environment scorched-earth style.
And you’re doubling down on the bad faith assumption that criticism of harris is support for trump.
I wasn’t criticizing your comment. I never implied that you had voted for the other guy.
And I have no worship for her. She’s a politician. I only had hope, for the country and for the world, that the other guy wouldn’t take power.
She was pro fracking. Got to line those pockets afterall.
A lot was implied in that comment the person wrote. Implying that she is corrupt.
That isn’t criticism. That is badmouthing.
And that is what I have a problem with. The double standard, and the gratuitous smearing. That’s what revolts me. That’s what upsets me.
That’s the awesome part about democracy: you get one of two shitty choices.
*American “democracy”.
Other countries don’t have this problem, most picked other voting forms than “first past the post”, which over time destroyed our ability to have more than two actual serious political parties. So both those parties get overtaken by ethically dubious people, overtly for the entire republican party, and subtly with the establishment democrats, and it all collapses.
Yes but we don’t live in other countries. We live in the stupid one.
Other countries don’t have this problem
Have you seen the recent elections in Germany, Poland or France? Literally the entire western world is at risk of fascism. The problem isn’t “first past the post”, the problem is capitalism.
As much as I hate having to use the word, this genuinely is whataboutism. You’re being provided with a legitimate criticism of one candidate and instead of actually addressing it you just point to a different candidate.
Yes, it is. And I don’t give a f.
I’m just tired of these people pointing at one candidate’s speck of dust, while ignoring the other candidate’s plank to justify not voting against a fascist dictator.
She was pro fracking
Maybe she was. Maybe she wasn’t far left enough. And so, because of that one specific detail, that as enough to tip the balance and swing the vote for the guy who is not only very pro fracking, but also for destroying the entire ecosystem and environment scorched-earth style?
Oh, she showed she was just a little bit more right than center, she wasn’t left enough, so I’ll vote for the far-right fascist instead.
Every time I read some comment like what the person above wrote, I get to remember that these voters are “just simple farmers. These are people of the land. The common clay of the new West. You know…”
It’s not a double standard, you’re just butthurt about having your preferred candidate being held to any standard at all. “Maybe she was” is bullshit, it’s extremely easy to verify that she was, you either don’t care enough to find out or you know perfectly well already and are deliberately lying. She was a shit candidate fielded specifically for her loyalty to corporate dems and their billionaire backers, the only people who are still pretending otherwise are incurable morons or paid propaganda posters. I don’t know or particularly care which you are, either way you’re a spineless sack of shit. You should be ashamed and silent, in that order.
Criticizing a candidate doesn’t mean you voted for the other major candidate. It just means that the challenger to the other major candidate sucks. The DNC needs to run better candidates to actually convince people to show up and vote for them.
No argument, no talking points, no facts, no sources, just a biased opinion in a salty comment.
A lot was implied in that comment. Implying that she is corrupt. That wasn’t criticism. That was badmouthing.
And that specific style of badmouthing usually insinuates justifying a non-vote, which in this case, meant a vote for the the other guy.
She wasn’t absolutely perfect, and she wasn’t the absolute exact perfect fit for everyone. And yes, her campaign could have been run better. Nobody’s perfect. No one can please everyone. But hey, at least she didn’t wear a tan suit!
Because it’s an either-or choice. We were always going to get either Harris or Trump. Criticism of one candidate must be viewed in the context of the only other alternative. So calling out Harris on fracking is only meaningful if her position was substantially different than Trump’s. And if their positions are really no different, but only one candidate got called out for it, then the criticism is irrelevant and that makes me question the motives of the accuser.
The Rapture. Trump’s plan is to utilize the environment to Rapture the entire species, all at once.
That explains the Zionism, at least.
Eh what the funk did I just read!!?!?
You just read highly classified top secret plans regarding mass emigration to the Kingdom of God.
You mean deportation?
The heritage foundations actual plan. Why we are funding the war in Israel. Isreal needs the one state solution so white evangelicals can have their rapture.
They’re in dire need of psychotherapy.
Whataboutism
Shitpostingism
Average liberal
Harris ran on a continuation of existing beneficial politics with a trend of effectiveness and some tuning after she took over the post.
In short, her positions was gestures at 4 years of positive tending numbers . Oh: and not fucking up the treason trial for Trump.
But the sparkle junkies need everything to pop-pop-pop, so incremental improvement wasnt as good as destruction of America.
Trump: ok so stocks went down 50% because of me, but look since then it’s up 80% !!!
Maga crowd: Yess, wooow!!!
There are absolutely lots of people that don’t understand that down 50% and up 80% means you just lost 10%.
For anyone who’s like me (where math and I are not friends), if you start with $1 and drop 50%, that’s 50¢
Go up 80% from 50¢ and you’re at 90¢
Your original $1 is now worth 90¢.
Yeah, my stocks are almost back to where they were at the beginning of the year, and it’s almost 100% due to Trump messing w/ tariffs. I’m not rich or anything, but seeing my retirement savings fluctuate at Trump’s whims doesn’t feel great.
I seem to remember something about a genocide, too.
Good thing Trump ended that huh
What does that mean?
It sure would have helped if either biden or harris credibly stood for anything else.
Harris stood for many good things. She should’ve also opposed the genocide yes, but the other choice was worse on it, making you a moron for not voting for her as a form of harm reduction.
I voted for harris.
You don’t give a shit. You just want silence from the critics of your genocide.
Well, get over it. Incremental change is over forever, your way failed. It’s time to do things our way now, because liberal democracy is dead.
Your way of sitting on the couch and doing nothing sure has worked wonders.
Yep, that checks out
“You’re from place I don’t like” isn’t a particularly strong counter-argument
It’s the basis of their entire political philosophy.
Wealth inequality continued to grow under Biden, and the average jet worth of black families decreased.
This neoliberal obsession with “incremental improvement” is a fucking plague. It’s so easy to blame voters for not recognizing marginal changes, but it’s delusional to think today’s American voters are any different from voters in any other era or part of the world. Not recognizing that is political malpractice on the part of Democrats.
This pattern that we are living through is the same pattern behind every fascist movement since Mussolini. It starts with a failure of leadership from out of touch liberal elitists.
Democrats stand for absolutely nothing. They check the polls to figure out what people think they want to hear, but they never follow through because they have no conviction. Someone who is passionate about starving children doesn’t slow down to brag when starvation falls by 10%. Democrats do, and that registers with voters - consciously or unconsciously. Democrats can point to charts and figures all day long but,without genuine passion, they will always fail to break through.
Voters want conviction. Republicans have it, and Democrats don’t. Shaving half a point off inflation won’t change that.
So I’ve been going on and on about how “democrats bad” is a huge narrative being pushed hard on Lemmy. Always with the caveat that criticism is warranted, when it’s specific and targeted.
This is specific and targeted. This is how you properly criticize Dems. But that wouldn’t jive with the people seeding that other narrative. They don’t want to be helpful. They’re not interested in how to get other people to vote. Their objective is the opposite.
Maybe the Dems should switch their incremental improvement to the fact that they need billionaires to buy them votes before their dollars turn into rubles. Yeah, the number is bigger. Look how much good that does the Russians.
They should be supporting both Elon-style directly, and indirectly through accepting tax policy to allow us to do big things. Find smart policies to support medical school so that we can push for more doctors/nurses the way we did for Software Devs from 1995-2015. Create actual medicare for all to finally get rid of the odd tie between your employer and your healthcare. Support real freight so we can have fewer semis destroying our roads and creating traffic. Support mass transit so we need fewer roads and can have more walkable spaces with more available housing. (Mass transit enables realistic high density housing.) Change Trump’s stupid ass tariffs to be a response to climate change, now that we’ve developed better tech to see where the CO2 is coming from.
Raise the federal minimum wage. Reduce the work week to 36 hours, with real teeth in overtime requirements and salary exemptions. Recreate the Civilian Conservation Corps to make sure everyone who’s willing to put in real work can find a job, even if AI doesn’t like their resume.
Healthcare, traffic, and work are the biggest things everyone in the country has to deal with. Address the things that actually affect people’s lives. This is how your dollars stay dollars instead of turning into rubles. The billionaires might have less of them, but they’re worth more. When people are less desperate, everyone’s lives are better.
Biden’s administration was a dam holding back fascism. It was never going to make the river disappear but it definitely slowed things down and if we continued that path we eventually would have real permanent solutions.
People blame Democrats but we haven’t had 50 of them in the senate without caucus in over a decade.
People blame Democrats but we haven’t had 50 of them in the senate without caucus in over a decade.
Don’t blame the broader caucus when people who ran as democrats vote with republicans.
Biden’s administration was a dam holding back fascism
Holding back fascism within the US*. Biden happily was releasing fascism in Israel.
Anyway, how did that “fascism holding” work out? You mean it did exactly nothing but postpone the thing for 4 years while having presidential powers?
Biden promoted peace which favored Israel, which is a trash stance imo, but it’s a world of difference from Trump admin’s Pete Hegseth promoting literal bare definition genocide, unapologetically.
Biden promoted peace
No. Funding and giving political support to a genocidal state while crushing down on demonstrations against genocide isn’t promoting peace. It’s a very close thing to what the Trump administration is doing, marginally less bad but not “promoting peace” in the slightest.
We did continue down that path, and it brought us back to another Trump presidency - not permanent solutions. Fascism was the only place that path was ever going to lead.
We have been hearing constantly about slow and steady progress for 60 years of the hollowing out of the middle class. It’s not fucking working. Not materially in people’s lives, and not politically.
It was Clinton who signed NAFTA. It was Clinton who said “The era of big government is over” as he dismantled federal safety net programs and broke unions. It was Obama who put the impact of the mortgage crisis on the backs of homeowners and bailed out Wall Street. (Then collected millions in speaking fees from Wall Street firms within weeks of leaving office). It was Obama who sidelined real healthcare reform and put in a right wing healthcare system that guaranteed cost increases of 10-15% every damn year.
Biden was a modest improvement, but nothing will forgive his slavish devotion to a genocidal Israel.
Democrats threw the trans community under the bus. They threw immigrants under the bus. Time after time they surrender to Republican framing then wonder why Republicans keep winning.
Know how Hillary got the DNC to put a finger on the scale for her campaign? She bailed them out of near bankruptcy. Why were they bankrupt? Obama funneled money that used to go to the party into his own campaign coffers. That’s how he won a second term while losing Congress. Overall, the Democrats lost over a thousand state and federal seats in the 8 years of his presidency.
This isn’t all about the big bad Republicans. It’s not all about stupid voters. Republicans are no better or worse than they ever were, and voters are no dumber. Democratic leadership has a lot to answer for as well. Quit trying to shield them from the change that desperately needs to happen.
Trumps votes barely changed from 2020 to 2024. Whay changed is 8 million less people voted for Kamala tban Biden.
We did not follow the path, we abandoned the DNC and that is why we have fascism.
The Democrats lost ground with every demographic but college educated women. 2020 was an unusually high turnout election. 2024 was a regression to the mean, yet Trump’s vote total went up.
Blaming the voters is just electoral masturbation. It doesn’t lead anywhere. Do you have a plan to get better voters in 2028? Blaming voters is for politicians that don’t care about winning. In other words, it’s for establishment Democrats.
We did not follow the path, we abandoned the DNC and that is why we have fascism.
The DNC abandoned us and expected unconditional votes.
Your opinions are bad, and you should feel bad.
Yeah, the Democrats have actually been doing everything right and have just had a string of bad luck. Bad dice roles on their voter generator. There is no reason for them to reevaluate or change anything. /s
Really large sweeping economic changes tends to have significant unexpected problems created from them. It would be bad if we lifted everyone up and then destroyed our ability to maintain that new status in the process.
“Changing shit means you have to adapt.”
So you’re saying it’s better to have the devil we know in the form of all the expected problems? What kind of regressive nonsense is this?
No, Im saying sweeping economic changes come with unforeseen consequences which is why many/most economists dont push for massive sweeping change.
Most economies are neoliberal/neoclassical, they’re literally a poverty cult based on empirically proven wrong axioms such as “printing money creates inflation”, “rising the minimum wage creates unemployment”, or “public expenditure in healthcare, pensions and education is bad for the economy”. You should do the opposite of what most economists preach.
Yeah, consequences like FDR getting elected President four times in a row. That was the last time the Democrats had a popular President.
I’m not sure if you noticed, but America’s ability to do much of anything is being dismantled before our eyes. The Democrats played it safe, so voters looked elsewhere.
60 years of unbelievable productivity gains and new technologies, and life has only gotten harder. I think we could do better than that. Bullshit excuses are easy to accept when it hasn’t hit you yet.
This isn’t “bullshit excuses” as you are focusing on the potential political gains and I am talking about the economic problems that could come about from sweeping economic changes.
When the New Deal passed the USA was a larger portion of the world economy and it was growing.
It’s absolutely bullshit. Most of what progressives want is stuff we had 50 years ago. The boldest new proposal is Medicare for All. Somehow every single other developed economy in the world can achieve universal healthcare, but the richest country in the world can’t manage it? BULLSHIT! While you wrong your hands people are dying and lives are being ruined every single day. It’s profane, and it’s pathetic. Yes, we can do a hell of a lot better.
Incremental improvement (genocide)
I mean, yeah
I voted for Gore, but a bunch of my moron friends voted for Nader in that election. And Nader an ego was so big he could never admit fault for fucking up the next 2 decades of our country.
Now it looks like we fucked for the rest of this century.
Thankfully the Left learned from this mistake and added ranked voting
Oh wait that was New Zealand. But yea, everything since 9/11 is Nader’s fault
Gore’s election was the first I could vote in.
I voted for Kucinich in the primary and then traded my vote for Gore in a swing state for a vote for Nader in MA.
Then my “Al Gore won the votes” bumper sticker was torn off my car while I was at work at Cracker Barrel.
Will you please tell me more about trading your vote? Are there communities online where you can meet people willing to do that? How did you do it during the bush/gore election? Online? I live in MA, I’d trade a vote w a swing stater, assuming we have elections again.
Yep, it was done over the internet. The idea was to get Nader to 3% without electing Bush.
Neither happened because people are terrible and we can’t have nice things.
5%. You need 5% for the federal grant.
It works like this: they say they will wote your choice if you vote theirs. Then both of you end up voting an orange ape.
So you think increasing military spending in exchange for having no healthcare, and supporting a genocide is correct?
Gotta love the freaks over here complaining about a prosecutor with a doctorate in law while a felon rapist traitor descends fascism upon our nation and sends the military to assault Americans.
Pull your head out of your ass.
Fuck off back to whatever Putin-compromised chanboard birthed you
Any criticism of liberals means I’m alt-right?
Is your name Israel, by chance?
I think it’s more correct than sending the FUCKING MARINES TO SHOOT AT PEACEFUL PROTESTERS IN YOUR OWN FUCKING COUNTRY. Something something Tiennemen Square…
And you were fine with sending marines to shoot people in other countries, stop whining that it happens to you.
When did I say I was fine with it? Also we are still doing that too. GTFO with your all bad choices are equally bad bullshit. That’s not how the world works.
When did I say I was fine with it?
When did I say “bad choices are equally bad”, you hypocrite?
But I’ll comfortable interpreting you complaining about using marines domestically rather than just on foreigners to mean you think one is worse than the other.
The feddieverse is still a small place, so PSA @[email protected] is really just here to troll some both sides stuff. If you try to have some dialog where you ask what their alternative is they will just never answer. They are just here to troll and grand stand about how much they care, but not enough to do something material for the cause.
I’m so glad that the one that did win ended the genocide, got us universal healthcare, and decreased military spending… oh wait…
Wow, it’s almost as if there wasn’t a proper candidate?
Harris was the correct option.
Clearly not, she lost
Do you have eyes and ears? Are you currently alive and breathing with minimal brain functionality?
Harris was CLEARLY the correct option.
Harris was the better option. That’s not the same as a good one.
only option.
You must be wearing horse blinders. Remember to keep to the track. Turn left. And left. And again. One more time. It’s the final stretch now…
Congrats, you placed fifth. Your odds are now 44-1.
Left? Like Dale Earnhardt and Hillary Clinton, she failed to turn left, then smashed into a fucking wall.
Not my favorite candidate. By any means. Better than what we have with Trump? Absolutely undisputed. It’s not even a conversation. Wild that someone would even try to contend it.
There was a correct candidate and an incorrect candidate. America chose incorrectly.
If she had run a competent campaign she would have won, I’d say that the DNC chose incorrectly but that’s not true either, they chose a candidate that aligned with the interests of their billionaire backers because they knew they’d get paid whether she won or not
If she had run a competent campaign she would have won
Lol. The fact that you think Kamala didn’t run a competent campaign, while her opponent was a felon rapist who has confirmed lied more than any other president in U.S. history, sent a mob to our capitol to assault police, illegally attempted to overturn an election, and makes time every single day to divide Americans tells me all I need to know about your intellectual capacity.
Anyone that points a finger at the non-felon rapist traitor habitual liar and says they should have run a better campaign is fucked in the head and needs to get their priorities straight.
Voting? You must love genocide…
/s
Expressing any criticism at all means I didn’t vote.
You are truly a genius of equal of intellect as Musk. Are you why the Dems want him as an ally and to take his money/sperm (frozen, turkey baster)?
Welcome to the reality of the broken US voting system bud
And instead of doing anything to fix it, I’m jerking off to what would have happened if another terrible candidate would have won.
I’m just in the spectator seats, we have preferential voting in Australia (not a perfect implementation, but probably one of the best in the world.)
Despite this, still under capitalism. So. Not rosy.
Just that, not voting tactically - while fighting like hell to get a third party candidate in, or get enough members of the less shit party to push through voting reform - is stupid.
It’s stupid.
A shit candidate that’s less shit, is still less shit.
This is the spoiler effect, and being high and mighty about not having voted is your copium. There may well have been enough people like you to have avoided a Trump presidency.
And if you think there’s no difference? Then you’re getting high on your own righteous supply.
Anyway, I’ll be over here enjoying my slightly left of centre government, and actually have a viable pathway to getting further left parties elected here. 🎩🦘
You’re insufferable because you think you’re better than everyone else who actually understands how the voting system works.
not voting tactically
In most of the US, who you vote for literally doesn’t matter, because your state will go to the candidate from whatever party has won your state for the last couple decades. Unless you live in the 8 or so states that could actually, realistically flip in a given election cycle, there’s literally no point in voting for the lesser of two evils.
Going into any given election, I can say with high certainty that my state will go to the dominant party with a 15% split with very high confidence, and that all votes outside of the top two will be under 5%. The only way for this to not happen is for the minority party to run a very strong candidate, the majority party to run a very unpopular candidate, and for a large third party to steal a ton of votes from the majority party… And even then, you’ll probably trim the gap to 5% or so and the majority party candidate will still win by inertia.
If you understand that, you can be free to actually vote your conscience and pick one of the third party candidates. If third party candidates collectively get enough votes to actually spoil an election in your area, maybe you have a chance to get voting reform discussed on the media, and if the majority candidate doesn’t get 51% because of it, maybe it features in the debates.
So until the gap between the top two candidates narrows to where all third party voters collectively voting for the second candidate could actually flip the state, I’ll keep voting for a third party candidate.
I love how any criticism of your chosen deity makes you think I didn’t vote, or believe that there’s no difference between the two.
Incredible.
Whataboutism
deleted by creator
Kamala also supports sending cops against protesters, especially if they oppose Zionism:
Ahem, for those in the back and those with their heads in the sand: SHE STILL WOULD HAVE BEEN BETTER THAN TRUMP!
BETTER THAN TRUMP!
Talk about understatement…
“better than trump” evidently doesnt get people to the voting booths. Who knew? (everyone)
Where did she say that?
we must not tolerate it (anti-zionism) in our nation
The context for this was a pro-palestine protest in washington dc, with kamala supporting the police action to break it up.
They were all fighting for AIPAC Election support. Not that it’s a good excuse, but it’s leagues different than protesting the Gestapo in your own city ripping things apart simply because your state leans toward the opposition.
If only the dems had had 4 years to do something…
Reformists try not to capitulate to fascists challenge REDUX(…again)
Any attempt by the Democrats to forestall this would have allowed Trump to paint them as anti-American traitors. So the Democrats did nothing and Trump painted them as anti-American traitors.
And he’s painting them as anti-American traitors to this day as he makes Nazi poses around the WH.
Hey now! He was convicted of all 34 indictments he was charged with!
And sure, those charges were delayed for years. And they were a fraction of the 91 indictments he could have been tried for. And they had to be brought in a municipal court, by a local DA, because nobody above Alvin Brag was willing to bring a case to trial.
And then the court never bothered to issue a sentence, because it would have been rude to punish a newly elected President.
But they did something!
Um ackchyually it’s the Marines and National Guard.
I mean is anyone surprised? The media’s capitulation and normalization of a felon rapist traitor and his enablers is why we are where we are. Because drama makes them more money and this nation lacks the rules necessary to prevent the media from lying to Americans.
I mean is anyone surprised?
I am genuinely surprised that we made it four years under his first term without getting this far in, but we’re speed running to military dictatorship inside six months.
If you actually read the article it is absolutely swimming in reactionary revanchism. There’s everything from the author defending Trump’s association with the Charlottesville rioters to whining about MSNBC sound-bites to referring to immigration during the Biden Presidency as a “Border Invasion”.
This isn’t even the boilerplate Politico “Lying when their lips are moving” false-equivalency. This is Derek Hunter, a talk radio frothing fascist and senior columnist for Townhall.com, doing exactly what his corporate handlers pay him to do.
All we need is more rules and theyll stop breaking the rules!
We need to reach out harder to the republicans, and we need more AIPAC money. Whoever gets the most election funding tends to win! (except for last time of course)
So lets reach out to AIPAC and ask how we can close on more campaign funding, and ask the Cheney family to send someone stronger than Liz next time, to stand next to Harris. Is Dick Cheney busy? Maybe he can shoot a dem in the face and have the dem apologize for it. I bet Dick Cheney would say yes to this.
/s
Everyone knows leftists are lazy idiots that’ll make up any reason to rationalize not voting. You’re rationalizing so hard now you’ve gone down some antisemitic rabbit hole.
Removed by mod
Tim Walz, her running mate, sent the national guard in to attack BLM protesters. This is a problem with both parties.
I can’t with you people.
‘Stop repeating unflattering facts about Democrats! 😭’
If you only oppose authoritarianism under Republicans, you don’t oppose fascism. You just prefer a flavor of it.
Or maybe you should tell the entire story about how he realized he fucked up, formally apologized, and made good with the organization.
Seems like the opposite of a red flag to me. When is the last time we had a competent leader who was willing to admit it when they’re wrong?
LoL. ‘It’s just a little ol’ military crackdown! Nobody’s perfect! He said he was sorry!!’
You’re welcome to forgive him, but it’s still disqualifying. You don’t give someone a second chance to repeat their mistakes, when that mistake was an authoritarian military crackdown on the people they were charged with protecting.
Nobody can ever change their mind about anything, but also Republicans are the worst because they never change their minds about anything!
People can change. That doesn’t mean they’re entitled to a position of power after they have earned a reputation for abusing power.
Ah the classic alienate the other side of the population to further the divide. It’s almost like these political escapades are by design to divide the nation.
You can’t win with people who know the facts?
Yes, you are correct
I understand that the hill published this, but it was an opinion article. I get that some people value that, but they are almost never opinions of people that should have an opinion on the matter. Either way, I don’t consider opinion articles to be something that you can nail an organization to the cross over. Just sharing a perspective is all.
Also Marines are Navy, so…technicality?
🤣 Trump really is playing 5D chess. You can’t nail him down. He’s like a bar of soap, that is also a pedophile.
There have to be consequences for platforming fascists. This whole “civility and decorum” crap has got to stop, we are in a fascist coup and cannot afford to tolerate any enemy activity.
Our media has been completely complicit in the fascist coup because our news has been entirely captured by corporations hell-bent on profit maximization.
It’s called the court of public opinion. It doesn’t work if we don’t participate. And no one participates.
This whole “civility and decorum” crap has got to stop
…cool… You should tell that to someone that called for you to act with civility and decorum because I sure as shit did not.
enemy activity
🙄
Calm down combat carl. I fully believe the actual fascist coup to begin any day now, but falling face first into a rake is not exactly a fucking panzer attack. You’re trying to defend a clearly false and misleading post by misdirecting with semantics and sensationalism. I’m amazed you didn’t try jangling your keys.
People are already being shot in the streets, and the military has been deployed domestically in blatant violation of the constitution. People are being kidnapped by masked unbadged thugs and disappearing without any court appearance. What more will it take for you to recognize the coup?
Firstly, I never said that the coup didn’t exist. Is every response from you going to be a straw man of what you wish I would have said?
And secondly, was it a coup when it happened in Portland? Because I’m not seeing a distinction here. You can pretend all you want that this situation is different because of the obvious illegality, and this admin IS different, but the situations are identical in every fucking way.
I was in the military. It was 20 years ago but I’m reasonably confident that not much has changed since the “don’t ask” days. We trained on how to conduct operations IN populated areas. If you told me that we got our training from Steven Seagal, I would laugh my ass off. Would you like to venture a guess on who hires a shit stain conman like Steven Seagal? Yup, it’s those cops that you would argue are legal to deploy and “trained” for serving the public. Sadly, they are not. I trust a misplaced marine every day and all day over an unregulated highschool dropout. I agree it is wrong, but until they use actual bullets on domestic streets, I’m not really any more worried than I already am at the guys who WEREN’T trained for the military grade equipment they were issued.
Fyi, I was skeptical of your application of the word “enemy”, not implying denial. If you are using the word to describe cops then, of course, but it’s been this way since the very origin of cops so what makes now so special? But if you are using that to describe people, then I have no doubt that conservatives appreciate your assistance legitimizing their endeavors.
And if you think there is something to win on the streets of the US pushing back against the organized boots then you’ve already lost.
It’s worth nothing that “The Hill” has always been liberal garbage.
You should. Arguably, you should nail the to the cross for opinion pieces more, because opinion pieces exist to launder articles that the paper can’t reasonably justify publishing… but still really wants to publish.
They can be used for that but they are absolutely not solely for the purpose of misinfo laundering. That’s a proposterous and indefensible claim. Fucking ridiculous.
Look, you can dislike it all you want. I do. I dislike them. And I refuse to read opinion pieces, from anyone. That’s what you do when you’re intelligent. You check what you’re reading before you read it. Do you not check your beverages to ensure they aren’t floor cleaner? When your beverage tastes unpalatable do you not remember to check then? At what point does drinking a gallon of bleach become your own fault?
I hate ads. I stopped watching TV entirely because of how much I despise ads. I wasn’t good at manually filtering them out so the responsible things to do was to stop watching TV until I had a solution. So over the years, I found solutions. After a while I was able to use a smart phone completely free of ads. I filtered my data and was able to use a lot of sites again. Now I get all my media from Usenet. Every now and then I walk past a TV at work and it’s playing ads and I find it hilarious. I literally forget about ads. And hearing the simple fucks cry about YouTube and chrome is yet another joke for me.
I can’t imagine being so opposed to something only to invest absolutely nothing into remediation and then blaming everyone else for my failure to act. Because that is what you remind me of when I read your response. You don’t get to have your bleach and drink it too. At what point does reading an opinion article become your fault?
Misinfo? I’m talking about opinion pieces. “Israel has a right to defend itself” isn’t strictly misinfo, but it is, arguably, an opinion. And you’re correct. They’re not only used for opinion laundering - they also appear to be a sort of make-work program.
And I don’t know what conversation your tangent on what you’re reminded of comes from, but it’s not the one we’re having.
because opinion pieces exist to launder articles that the paper can’t reasonably justify publishing… but still really wants to publish.
Your words. Not mine. And this is what the tangent is about. You said we should nail them to the cross for publishing opinion pieces - something which I also abhor but happily accept the responsibility of avoiding. I’m not going to blame a capitalist organization for doing what a capitalist organization is always going to do. I’d be blisteringly stupid if I did that.
Once again, I’m not sure what conversation you think you’re having, but it’s not this one.
After seeing your rationale, I have no doubt you feel that way.
You should. Arguably, you should nail the to the cross for opinion pieces more, because opinion pieces exist to launder articles that the paper can’t reasonably justify publishing… but still really wants to publish.
Literally your words bro. It’s right there.
Should organizations platform anything and everything? Should there be no standards?
That’s entirely up to them. I sure wish they wouldn’t, but capitalism is what it is. And if the mass of metaphorical Beakers hangs their hat on each and every controversial word regardless of bias, then they’re going to do that. If platforming chucklefucks keeps the lights on… So there it is.
There should be standards. Agreed. I have literally no say in that and my opinion means literally nothing on this. However, that doesn’t mean calling meaningless shit like this out doesn’t hurt the rest of us. I’m as sympathetic as the next person. It sucks. But if we are going to cry wolf and alligator tears every single time an already trash organization does a thing you - without a shadow of a doubt - expect them to do, then you are doing their work for them. Stop hitting yourself.
Take it on the chin, ignore them, and move on. I work in one of the most remote places on the planet with about 1000 conservatives, and these aren’t the GOP “gays are cool now” conservatives, these are the “gays are pedophiles and we should exterminate them all” conservatives. These are InfoWarriors and flat earthers. Deep state theory is assumedly foundational and antiestablishmentarianism is the MO. I pointed out, a single time, that even Alex Jones said Trump was “mobbed up with the russians” and I have been known as “the liberal” since then. These proverbial tweakers are drawn to plausible deniability like a catalytic converter. Sure, they are the lowest common denominator when it comes to human prototypes, but they are also the low tide and they know it. If they can sanitize bigotry then the cool GOPers will be able to use them to justify it. So we (the opposition to authoritarianism) need to sterilize easily defensible shit like this.
Look at the replies I’ve received… All I did was point out the plot hole in the assertion implied by OP exposed by the reality that one could say that “the hill” did not say it themselves and furthermore that the hill has a giant warning at the top of the article that literally states they DO NOT hang their hat on opinion pieces (and btw, fuck the hill but they do). All I’m pointing out is to not say the hill explicitly called Harris a liar, because based on the facts, they didn’t. Several replies still allude to the culpability of the hill… Which is best case scenario semantic when totally generalized, but more likely consolatory and akin to someone splitting hairs over “travelling” in street basketball.
“The right” could say that “the left” would polish brass on the titanic. And we could know that they’d said it too. But here we are, God forbid we pass a single piece of brass without giving it a mirror shine and then gasp Pikachu faces when the right says “see?”.
How did we lose the election? Shit like this. We need to be better than this. This is teaching a pig to sing.
Sensationalism is their game. Leave to play it amongst themselves.
Hey now, they blacklisted Katie Halper for talking about Palestine.
Never say The Hill doesn’t have standards.
I understand that the hill published this, but it was an opinion article.
Authored by a far-right talk radio host who fully endorses mass deportation and execution of liberal dissidents, sure.
This is where I challenge you to find a single opinion article published by the hill from a reputable person about a worthy opinion. And when you say “that doesn’t exist” I’m going to respond “no shit sherlock, that’s what an opinion piece is, a disreputable person seeking your unearned attention.” Good thing we gave it to them…
An agreeable position if those opinion pieces were written in good faith by a respectable journalist who knows what they’re talking about. Honest opinions are never wrong.
But in today’s news it’s just a way to publish straight-up misinformation and propaganda, they can just abuse their position to just say whatever and people internalise it because, well, it’s the news.
Journalists and news outlets used to depend upon a reputation of integrity and factuality built over the years. Now anyone can open up their “news” website, or be a politically motivated party with lots of resources, claim completely made-up stuff, and when those articles reveal themselves to be complete bullshit, nothing happens.
Also, the world seems to really have lost the conception of what is a fact vs what is an opinion, a deduction, a belief, and so on. Guess the nature of Internet communication doesn’t help with that.
But in the end, it doesn’t even matter.
I had to fall to lose it all
Kamala DID lie. They didn’t send the Army. They sent the Marines.
Stupid smart Kamala.
I’m not sure the intention of this sort of note.
Yes, Harris may’ve made those predictions. People heard em. They still preferred Trump, compared to Harris. It’s not like people, outside of the potentially fringe / outlier cases highlighted in some left-leaning media sources, are all that surprised. People didn’t vote for Trump because he was promising to treat immigrants with respect and dignity.
I wouldn’t be at all surprised if many of the red-voters are looking at LA, and thinking things like “Look at how bad that immigration invasion got, they’re literally destroying the city and disrupting government. Even the governor of the State is part of the problem at this point, making noise about defending the public disorder. Tut tut. Send in more marines”.
“this is what we voted for go team ICE” is the jist of what ive been seeing.
Hillary was right. Harris was right. Misogyny ignored them.
Lets not pretend the presidential election is all about gender and nothing else. Thats just petulant.
That’s not what they said.
Were there other problems in Clinton and Harris than the gender, then? (Except them “lying” that Trump would use the army against US civilians, of course)
Yes.
Were there other problems in Clinton and Harris than the gender, then?
If it was misogyny alone was the cause, then why did harris lose across every single demographic of women? She lost across every single voting demographic except a 1 point gain in college educated white men.
We have polling data, you could read it. Dems are failing to analyze why we lost, just like they failed to figure out how we could win. So we’re on track to lose again, and comments like the one you made are why.
Uh… If the misogyny was enough to remove enough votes from them to allow the worse candidate to win, then obviously it was a decisive factor. Being a decisive factor does not equal being the only factor.
If the misogyny was enough to remove enough votes from them to allow the worse candidate to win, then obviously it was a decisive factor.
Sure, but how do we put actual numbers behind that “if”?
No, it wasn’t the decisive factor. The misogynists wouldn’t have voted for Harris either way. The decisive factor was Harris failing to inspire her own base while pandering to the elusive “undecided voter” by propping up Liz Cheney, among other things. Don’t get it twisted, Harris lost because she and her team were too incompetent to read the room.
What is this the decisive factor you’re talking about? You can have several.
women can be misogynistic too
Clinton is a fuckin capitalist and Harris is a fucking neoliberal. Neither of them actually care about anything more than upholding the status quo. They are not working class or even for the working class.
This all being said, status quo is far better than fascism, but we can do better.
Basically, just like someone being a woman wouldn’t make them a bad president, it would also not make them a good one. Having good policies makes you a good president.
Good luck finding a presidential candidate with good policies in USA.
You asked what the other problems with them were, not whether there was a good presidential candidate, i was answering your question
No unclarity regarding that, don’t worry :)
Oki dokes! :)
The status quo is a slow slide into fascism. And we are at the end of that slide. At some point, and that point was 2016, enough people would rather vote for the fascist than the woman that, at best, would continue the slow decline.
Agreed.
I could understand Hilary not getting elected, but Harris? She’s as blank slate as any presidential candidate could get ( and maybe that was the problem). But the demographics which shifted the most politically, was the Hispanic and black male (whom tend to be less educated) voters towards the right. That could either be populism or misogyny, and considering they were leaning left when elected Biden the previous term, I’m leaning towards the latter reason.
Kamela lost because she’s a woman
She’s a former cop and prosecutor that wasn’t selected through a primary process (not that Dems ever allow anyone not selected by party elites.)
She’s basically a Republican with zero progressive policies, which isn’t going to appeal to an increasingly radicalized base.
There were a lot of problems with her that had nothing to do with her being a her.
Democrats keep chasing votes to the right, abandoning the actual left and the working class.
Remember how Dukakis got tanked by a goofy helmet? Yea, Harris sank when she couldn’t propose any change from Biden.
tanked
nice pun cuz iirc he was riding in one while wearing that helmet
She was also a candidate we didn’t vote for, Biden being shoved down our throats again then him dropping out are what gave Trump the election. The focus on her gender and nothing else is to keep you from remembering that the DNC fucked us again and a large number of voters protest voting because “She’ll genocide the Palestinians” like TRUMP wouldn’t.
“The DNC” does not have the power to force Biden to step aside when he doesn’t want to.
They aren’t a military or a government. They are a club, and Biden was far and away the senior member.
The fact that when it comes to politics I see Americans nowadays keep repeating over and over and over again “this can’t be done”, “they don’t have the power”, “that will never happen”, is to me astonishing. When I was growing up, America was where things HAPPENED. What happened to you guys? Where did this learned helplessness come from?
So your party structures are broken and unable to produce good outcomes? Change them. Reform them. Update them. What the fuck is wrong with you people? You made democracy into a fossil that you no longer fit in and you’re despairing. It’s supposed to be a living breathing thing that evolves all the time. WTF.
I have to agree, it is very weird that people treat their society like an thing set in stone.
40% of the country wants it to be worse in every way imaginable. They want more religion in the halls of power, more impressive law enforcement and mass incarceration, more dictatorial centralization of power, less education more environmental destruction more wealth concentration in fewer elites hands, less protections for workers, and their families, more poverty sickness and death.
They aren’t the same people either, sixty-70% want one or some of the things on that list.
If we declared a constitutional convention, I don’t think there would be any agreement whatsoever about what changes to make, and if there were, agreement, I expect they would be disasterous.
Knowing my paisanos, it was plain old ignorance. I mean, we did elect a woman president this year. 😅
If the Dems wanted to stop losing they could have selected Sanders. It’s not about gender, it’s about trust, and nobody trusted Clinton or Harris (nor should they, frankly). Meanwhile Sanders has spoken for the working class the whole time he has been around.
I posted a post-deep-dive take on what gave Trump the presidency here, but I will say that misogyny did did no small amount of heavy lifting.
What we need to figure out before the GOP finds its next cult leader is how to neutralize the massive far-right propaganda machine that is churning out false information and disinforming the public.
We’ve decided before that ethically we can’t trust human beings to make sound decisions in some conditions. In the case of gambling, we’ve just invented loopholes (and lootboxes) to circumvent regulation. So I don’t know how we’re going to deprogram massive viewerships of media that promotes hate, including misogyny.
If we fail then the
ice zombie armyclimate crisis (and running out of water for agriculture) is going to drive us to extinction.hmmmmm… stats say otherwise. A lot of males did not vote for her because she was female. That said, US is clearly not ready for female president.
There are also a lot of liberal women who didn’t vote for her because she’s a woman. They didn’t vote for Trump, they just didn’t vote at all.
hmmmmm… stats say otherwise.
Can you show us the stats you’re talking about?
Remind me when you get a response.
it won’t happen.
All? No, not all. But it is very evident that most Americans seem to hate women. The right hates on women, the left hates on women, the men and the women hate on women. If you doubt me, look how news articles disparage male senators compared to female ones.
Americans didn’t vote for Hillary or Harris because apparently they wanted a whiny bitch to be president instead.
I have NO idea why the democrats chose Harris as the nominee. The country wouldn’t vote for a white woman last time. You REALLY think they’re going to vote for a woman of colour? REALLY? And then a bunch of them didn’t. As predicted.
Maybe the gender or color didn’t really matter to people who had a chance of voting Democrat anyway
Biden made hay about selecting a Black Woman as vise President. That is declaring her heir apparent.
There were a lot of issues with it being anyone else. Since she was already the VP and already “on the ticket”, switching to anyone other than her would have brought with it a whole lot of complications and probably would have tied up all the money the Biden campaign had raised. The whole process of deciding on anyone other than her posed huge risks, especially given the time constraints. Harris was effectively the default option so they took the path that appeared to be easiest and guaranteed that the campaign kept its funding.
The country did vote for a white woman the previous time: Hillary Clinton won the popular vote.
You can save so many words by just saying “the hill lied”.
She looks pretty hot in that photo
