I was gonna title this “And here I sit so patiently waiting to find out what price you have to pay to get out of going through all these things twice” and then write “Stuck inside of America with the fascism blues again” here, but I’m not sure if that comes off like gloating and that’s honestly the last thing I want to do this morning.

  • wick@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    16 days ago

    So he’s saying his fake progressive base stayed home? How is that different to every other election? Appealing to moderates is going to swing the vote more than any attempt to appeal to his psychotic fans who don’t even vote in the first place.

    All these “this was important to me so it’s the reason we lost” takes should be ignored. Especially from a moron like Hasan. The guy was saying it’s possible he’ll get deported because Trump won.

    • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      16 days ago

      if they went out and voted they would have nothing to bitch about, ergo, problem solved. They’re issues voters, they club themselves over the head to make a point, to themselves. Because apparently that’s relevant for some reason.

  • _____@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    16 days ago

    is this the random andy streamer guy ? why should I give a shit about what he thinks

    • savx@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      16 days ago

      you dont need to know him and he can be anyone on the internet, it doestnt matter, what he is arguing is still very accurate.

    • pjwestin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      16 days ago

      Because he’s fucking right. Maybe the Democrats should start listening to people who are fucking right for once.

      • Eugene V. Debs' Ghost@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        16 days ago

        And win with people excited for the candidate? Never. Milquetoast saves money and being in opposition brings in even more.

        Why try to codify Roe v. Wade when you can use it for funding?

          • Eugene V. Debs' Ghost@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            15 days ago

            They get more donations to fight back than they do in office. When Clinton lost, they got more donations for Biden.

            When Roe V. Wade was overturned, they got a massive injection of cash and used it in campaign outreach, so they get money from saying they’ll protect women’s rights but don’t need to unless the money slows down.

    • Doorbook@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      16 days ago

      While trump thanks Dana White and Elon Musk and Adin Ross, democrat are refusing to listen to someone represent the new generation of political motivated democrat voters. Then wonder why they didn’t get the votes.

  • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    16 days ago

    Normalizing republican extremism is about the only thing modern neoliberalism has accomplished, and likely why the same billionaires donate to both.

    They want the return of feudual society, they just know the only way they get it is if the only other option is a shit sandwich.

  • blazera@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    16 days ago

    Democrats were too busy making sure progressive candidates were banned from participating in democracy.

    • Allonzee@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      16 days ago

      🇺🇸 MISSION ACCOMPLISHED 🇺🇸

      The reality is that neoliberals in power, and even many poor deluded neoliberal voters, would rather have Republicans in charge than people interested in addressing the intentional and by design inequity of our economy, despite all the social issues that very inequity causes and exacerbates they then falsely claim to care about, including abortion, which is often correctly an economic decision.

      https://www.cnbc.com/2021/12/15/house-speaker-nancy-pelosi-opposes-banning-stock-buys-by-congress-members.html

      I voted blue out of harm reduction as I always have, without hope, just to minimize what little cruelty I have the power to potentially minimize, but they did this to themselves, as we never get a vote on our economic system or the cruelty it propagates, because (D) and ® are on the take, and I’ve yet to meet an affluent person of either party take issue with the economic system they benefit from despite our legions of homeless and barely subsisting people without the means to bribe officials on their behalf, and their very existence is proof of this economy’s failure as a lowly tool to better equitibly distribute goods and services in service to a society that an economy is meant to be.

      Our economy, and by that I mean our oligarch class that sits above the society they have no stake in, instead orders our society around through the legislators they own solely to maximize their private profit against all other concerns, and it’s beyond perverse. We’ve just been propagandized our entire lives to consider it to be the natural state of things by self-serving for profit media and captured state government’s capitalist indoctrinating curriculum.

      • UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        16 days ago

        "The son of the worker, on entering life, finds no field which he may till, no machine which he may tend, no mine in which he may dig, without accepting to leave a great part of what he will produce to a master. He must sell his labour for a scant and uncertain wage. His father and his grandfather have toiled to drain this field, to build this mill, to perfect this machine. They gave to the work the full measure of their strength, and what more could they give? But their heir comes into the world poorer than the lowest savage. If he obtains leave to till the fields, it is on condition of surrendering a quarter of the produce to his master, and another quarter to the government and the middlemen. And this tax, levied upon him by the State, the capitalist, the lord of the manor, and the middleman, is always increasing; it rarely leaves him the power to improve his system of culture. If he turns to industry, he is allowed to work–though not always even that --only on condition that he yield a half or two-thirds of the product to him whom the land recognizes as the owner of the machine.

        We cry shame on the feudal baron who forbade the peasant to turn a clod of earth unless he surrendered to his lord a fourth of his crop. We call those the barbarous times. But if the forms have changed, the relations have remained the same, and the worker is forced, under the name of free contract, to accept feudal obligations. For, turn where he will, he can find no better conditions. Everything has become private property, and he must accept, or die of hunger."

        • Peter Kropotkin (The conquest of bread)
    • zarkanian@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      16 days ago

      The Democratic Convention had room on the stage for anti-choice Republicans, but none for Palestinian-Americans. I heard the speech that representative was going to give. There was nothing controversial in there. It didn’t mention an arms embargo. Having them present was too much for the DNC.

      • Eugene V. Debs' Ghost@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        16 days ago

        It’s a big tent party for “former” Republicans, oligarchs, corporations, but not anyone the Republicans are making hit lists of right now.

        Palestinians can’t even attend, “she’s talking right now.” Meanwhile she just has lunch with the people who made the War for Oil on Terror, and acts like this is true progress and you’re the bad guy for not warming to with Dick Chaney.

        • leftytighty@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          16 days ago

          hey man Cheney and Bush are monsters and we have to stop them by voting blue no matter who

          checks calendar sorry I mean Cheney and Bush are moderate Republicans who endorse Kamala let’s give them a hand

  • IndustryStandard@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    16 days ago

    I went to check Reddit. for a bit It is interesting to see the difference in reaction on Lemmy and Reddit. At least Lemmy is now admitting that running a Republican campaign with Lez Cheney might not have been the best idea.

    There is absolutely zero self reflection on Reddit. All blame lies on “racist imigrants”.

    And Democrats had the perfect economic plan too. Forget Kamala failing to secure the Unions. No teamsters endorsement. Forget the railroad strike shutdown. Forget massive inflation. The genocide is never even mentioned on Reddit. Kamala was 100% perfect in every single way.

    No mention of the massive increase of young white voters for Trump.

    Democrats will lose again in 2028. They vehemently refuse to learn from any of this. Instead of doing anything progressive they will say everyone is a racist and move right.

  • brucethemoose@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    16 days ago

    Swinging left wouldn’t have worked either.

    There is no high horse. There is no right path. Us Americans have the critical thinking skill of an ant. The left should have fought dirty with a full blown propaganda machine, populist lies, and blatant collusion if they wanted to win, simple as that.

    It needs a leftist Trump.

    What are Republican’s gonna do… demonize democrats even more?

    • blaue_Fledermaus@mstdn.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      16 days ago

      But the left in the USA is like half a dozen people, they don’t even have a party, how would they organize it?

      Because Democrats are just a more “moderate” right.

    • snooggums@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      16 days ago

      They don’t need to lie, they just need to get better at being direct and stip pulling punches or taking the high road to avoid offending moderates or whatever their stupid logic is.

      Instead of cozying up to Cheney, just call Trump a felon constantly, remind people about how he put migrants in cages and is now using durect nazi rhetoric against them. Those aren’t lies, and they jind of half assed brought them up, but they need to actually lean in hard and constantly.

      • brucethemoose@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        16 days ago

        They did call him a felon constantly! They plastered everything he says in every outlet, screamed his threats at the top of their lungs.

        No one cares!

        That doesn’t get you in people’s facebook, tiktok, and youtube feeds.

        Dems need a candidate who’s already famous. They need one totally unchained, unhinged, who would say awful but barely not illegal things in public, so they’re plastered on every news outlet constantly. They need someone who’s a little iffy about vaccines, who will print money and send people fat checks with their face stamped on it, who will straight up collude with the powerful in public, so calling it out does nothing.

        They need a liberal Trump.

        I’m not sure who it would be… maybe a big pop star that kinda loses their marbles? Think Taylor Swift. But the dems are not going to win a Trumpist election running someone like Bidden, Harris, Bernie, AoC or whatever.

        • turddle@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          16 days ago

          Don’t think it has to explicitly be a shitty person but the Left definitely needs to realize it’s a popularity contest. Charisma and moxie win it cuz voters want it simple.

          Look how FDR swept Hoover. Went around promising Happy Days are Here Again and he’ll whip the government into fixing the individual’s problems. Blasted his aura on the radio and newsreels which kept voters’ eyes on him. Then kept them for 3 more terms by saying fuck the red tape and making tangible things happen (which is probably what drives people to Trump despite the different results)

          People want to back the cool guy who tells em it’ll be alright. Simple as

          • brucethemoose@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            15 days ago

            Then kept them for 3 more terms by saying fuck the red tape and making tangible things happen (which is probably what drives people to Trump despite the different results)

            Please don’t kill me, but I saw this appeal when Trump first ran. In 2016, his rhetoric on withdrawing from foreign wars and similar stuff, when Hillary was the other choice, was very appealing. Of course my eyes were opened wide by his actual statements/history, and then his presidency.

            I think what’s different now is the feedback loop is broken. In the 30s, I assume people connected what FDR was doing to what was happening. Everyone lived in the same reality.

            But now people live in complete personalized realities inside their phones and apps. Perception is extremely selective, issues are complicate. And just, like, looking him up on Wikipedia and news archives like I do is completely alien now. I know children and relatives who literally don’t know how to use the internet and just live in their scrolling feeds.

            • turddle@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              15 days ago

              Nah you’re completely right. The appeal was that he’d push past the usual ineffectualness of politics and get things done.

              Bumble through the red tape too quickly for consequences to catch him while claiming everything as a win.

              The warping of reality hides what he’s actually doing/who he is and too many people are just red team vs blue now so will keep on supporting. They’ll think a win for him is a win for them and won’t look further to think otherwise (because who wants to think they’ve lost?).

              Almost wish Biden would’ve gone full Mr. Bean and just oopsied his way through using executive power. Oops, forgave student loans. Oops, taxed the rich. Oops, legal weed. Trump already showed the system is too slow to stop it and doing things that actually helped folks would be disastrous for any group trying to undo it once people felt the effects. Oh well…

              • brucethemoose@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                15 days ago

                Almost wish Biden would’ve gone full Mr. Bean and just oopsied his way through using executive power. Oops, forgave student loans. Oops, taxed the rich. Oops, legal weed. Trump already showed the system is too slow to stop it and doing things that actually helped folks would be disastrous for any group trying to undo it once people felt the effects. Oh well…

                He was trying to preserve the image of the US president as being dignified. measured and cognizant, but only now are we certain that’s not what voters want.

            • NuclearDolphin@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              16 days ago

              Dems need a candidate who’s already famous. They need one totally unchained, unhinged, who would say awful but barely not illegal things in public, so they’re plastered on every news outlet constantly.

              They need a liberal Trump.

              What chuds like about Trump is that he jokes around and appears to be passionate about what he talks about, and instead of backing down when challenged, will face it head on and double down. Someone who will spit in the face of his enemies without apologizing after. Get anyone who can riff and mock their enemies while standing firm on their positions.

              They need someone who’s a little iffy about vaccines, who will print money and send people fat checks with their face stamped on it, who will straight up collude with the powerful in public, so calling it out does nothing.

              I dont think they actually like any of this, just the way he does it inspires confidence. They care very little about the actual policy specifics.

              That’s all they really want is confidence. They aren’t confident in their place within a changing world and want someone who exudes that confidence so they can delegate their trust to someone who has it where they have none.

              I only said Hasan because he’s funny, comfortable being an asshole, confident, and isn’t a pushover.

    • alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      16 days ago

      Swinging left wouldn’t have worked either.

      It absolutely would have. Progressive policy is insanely popular and easy to campaign on by virtue of being designed to help everyone. Do you think Bernie had such high favorably ratings because they have a thing for 80 year old white dudes?

      Tell people “healthcare will be free” or “We will cap rent and build housing that won’t cost more than 3x local median income” and then people can’t afford not to vote for you.

      Biden could have cut off arms to Israel, and hundreds of thousands of students so politically activated they’re willing to risk their degrees to protest would be doing everything in their power to keep Trump out.

      Instead they sent the police to kick the shit out of those kids, at great expense to the colleges, and called them antisemitic.

      • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        16 days ago

        Tell people “healthcare will be free” or “We will cap rent and build housing that won’t cost more than 3x local median income” and then people can’t afford not to vote for you.

        1. It would have to go through congress, which wouldn’t approve it, so it would be a lie.
        2. They told people “I won’t do mass deportations or order the assassinations of my enemies” and it didn’t work. Why do you assume that this other stuff would?
        • alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          16 days ago

          It would have to go through congress, which wouldn’t approve it, so it would be a lie.

          The US president is probably the single most powerful position in the world between explicit powers and people who serve at his pleasure and can be replaced at will, and undefined powers that that extend as far as anyone is able to stop them, as we saw under Trump. If they just flagrantly broke the law and kept doing it until the SCOTUS and others actually stopped them, the dems would be far more popular than just throwing their hands up and saying "better things aren’t possible.

          There’s a lot of indirect ways they can get what they want done, whether it means appointing an AG and other department heads who will punish people who don’t go along or using the military’s vast legal protections and resources.

          They told people “I won’t do mass deportations

          1. That’s not saying how you’ll improve people’s immediate conditions, just that trump will make them worse

          2. You can’t credibly say that when Biden deported more people than Trump.

          • BlitzoTheOisSilent@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            16 days ago

            If they just flagrantly broke the law and kept doing it until the SCOTUS and others actually stopped them, the dems would be far more popular than just throwing their hands up and saying "better things aren’t possible.

            This is basically what FDR did with a lot of his social and work programs during his presidency. He’d establish an agency or authority or whatever, regardless of the legality, and by the time the court’s or whoever made the decision to close it, they’d have 5 others going simultaneously, and/or they’d make another one. And the process would start all over again.

            • alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              16 days ago

              Yup. The nice thing about policy that helps everyone is that it’s incredibly unpopular to kill. Biden could have burned student debt in the most visible way possible, and then dared the SCOTUS to create new debt. If they took the bait, you’d have 46.2 million people ready to vote for anyone who promises to expand the SCOTUS.

        • theparadox@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          16 days ago
          1. It would have to go through congress, which wouldn’t approve it, so it would be a lie.

          The policies are extremely popular and universal. Doesn’t really matter in a politicalcampaign if you struggle to achieve those ends. Trying is important and failing gives you ammunition against those who oppose extremely popular policies for next campaign.

          1. They told people “I won’t do mass deportations or order the assassinations of my enemies” and it didn’t work. Why do you assume that this other stuff would?

          The bottom line is that the average person isn’t listening for anything besides “how is the candidate going to help me because I feel like I’m drowning”. The right scapegoats something and promises to fix your problems by hurting the scapegoat (immigrants, minorities, socialists, whatever). This is a lie, but it’s just as, if not more, direct of a solution so some voters will support them.

          Harris had attention when she said things like stopping price gouging and providing in-home elder care. Those were extremely popular ideas that she didn’t focus on. Instead, she pivoted right.

      • yeahiknow3@lemmings.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        16 days ago

        I’m afraid exit polls say otherwise. Kamala’s economic policies were the most left wing we’ve seen in decades (a wealth tax?). If people cared about actual economic issues, such as inequality, they’d have elected her.

        This election was lost because Latino men voted for Trump (for starters). We needed populism, not progressivism, to appeal to the small minded American voter. Don’t you see that? Most American men are misogynistic, racist psychos. And they’re unhappy. You appeal to them with populism full stop.

        • sigmaklimgrindset@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          16 days ago

          I’m not going to say that the Latino shift isn’t huge, but this really feels like a strawman (to a certain extent). Even without the full 2024 turnout numbers, we know less people turned out to vote than 2020. I think NBC last night said Harris was projected to have 15 million less votes than Biden, and Trump voter numbers were steady, so I don’t think it all went to Trump.

          There are multiple factors that went into the outcome we have today, and only mentioning the Latino men or the pro-Palestine constituents and ignoring the failures of the DNC (starting with not having a convention) feels really weird.

          • yeahiknow3@lemmings.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            16 days ago

            The Latino men are one example. My point is that Democrats focused on policy and policy is ineffective when the electorate is a bunch of barely sentient macho dipshits angry about economic issues they can’t understand (not to mention most young men are broke and can’t get laid). You use populism. You blame the rich. You blame the wealthy elites. You channel Bernie Sanders.

            Every other sentence out of Harris’s mouth should have been about the billionaires stealing from the working class. Instead we saw a bunch of well reasoned economic policy that went completely over everyone’s head.

            • sigmaklimgrindset@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              16 days ago

              Ok, I see your point. You’re not wrong here. But I’m always surprised at how averse US politicians are to anything perceived as left wing populism, while they tolerate (or even eat up) the right wing version.

              Maybe it’s a remnant of McCarthyism.

        • yogurt@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          16 days ago

          Wealth tax to collect more money to give to Israel and the most lethal military and killing immigrants is what she ran on, she ran as a right wing populist and lost because Trump is a better right wing populist

          Small minded voters are told what to think, Harris refused to tell them to want free healthcare because that shit pisses off donors

            • yogurt@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              16 days ago

              Yes, Democrats don’t know how politics works, they ask Republicans to decide which issues are important, and then argue a slightly more moderate response to those issues is best. Sometimes they accidentally win doing that, if the economy is good and people are happy with moderation, but that’s probably not going to be true any time soon.

              • Moneo@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                16 days ago

                they ask Republicans to decide which issues are important

                I love this. They are so reactionary and seem almost incapable of counter messaging. I say almost because they managed it once with the tarrifs are sales tax response.

      • yetAnotherUser@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        16 days ago

        Why then do countries with existing left parties and proportional representation elect further and further right-wing parties in Europe?

        It’s simple: They promise easy solutions for complicated problems. Banning immigration will fix all crime and the economy, opposing LGBTQ+ rights will ensure a return of the better olden days, climate change is nothing to be worried about etc etc

        And even people depending on social support will gladly shoot themselves in their feet if it means someone else will have it worse.

        • PugJesus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          16 days ago

          Why then do countries with existing left parties and proportional representation elect further and further right-wing parties in Europe?

          Obviously they haven’t gone far left enough. /s

          Some people want easy solutions. Not unlike Trump voters.

      • surewhynotlem@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        16 days ago

        It’s easy to get students to protest. They’re young, it’s exciting.

        Voting isn’t loud or angry, so it doesn’t feel effective. It feels like actual work. And so they skip it.

        • John Richard@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          16 days ago

          I’m sorry, forgive me if I don’t take advice from the party that just lost. After Kamala picked Walz she was up by more than 5 points in many states that she was trailing in at the end of her campaign. People skip voting when you pick unpopular policies like Praise the Cheney’s, No Different than Zionist Joe, Billionaire Mark Cuban Is the Greatest, and Hollywood Loves Me.

          • snooggums@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            16 days ago

            Yup, other than picking Walz each new thing the campaign did made me less excited aboit voting for Harris. I would have rather had Walz lead the ticket, at least he would have been an unknown white guy that the right wing propaganda would have had trouble vilifying.

            • John Richard@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              16 days ago

              I don’t think the white guy thing is as important as at least he would have been someone that wasn’t directly tied to the White House that has been lying about genocide for the last year, or apartheid for the last 4 years.

                • alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  16 days ago

                  OK, but the people who are that racist and sexist are voting republican anyway. Of the dems many mistakes, running a black woman wasn’t one of them.

                • gAlienLifeform@lemmy.worldOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  16 days ago

                  I don’t think you’re wrong but I also have to add that I won’t accept that we just can’t run black women for offices for that reason

                  e; I should have read this thread further, it looks like other people are already discussing this

    • gerbler@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      15 days ago

      I think their intention was to appeal to older Republicans who remember the bush years with rose tinted glasses and don’t approve or the pivot that the GOP has done post-Obama.

      Evidently they don’t make up a significant amount of red voters when compared to the frothing fascists who would eagerly re-elect a rapist.

      Democrats keep extending the olive branch out of naïvety only to have it used to smack them across their stupid fucking faces.

      • frayedpickles@lemmy.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        15 days ago

        I mean the over-65s (turned 40 before bush was elected) leaned heavily to Harris. It was the Hitler youth that was a shocker.

    • ATDA@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      15 days ago

      I was like uhh ok? And?

      I figure that’s probably one of the better reactions because in hindsight who the fuck cares what that warpig thinks or who it endorses?

  • TheFriar@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    15 days ago

    Hey! Don’t forget that it also alienated anyone who is even moderately humanist!

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      15 days ago

      Democrats will have two years to build their reputation as Vocally (but ineffectually) opposing Donald Trump.

      But I think the bigger question is whether they actually do that. I can see a lot of Dems turning coat after this and just going along with Trump like they went along with Bush in 2001.

  • slickgoat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    16 days ago

    I don’t think that you can lay this disaster at the feet of Liz Cheney and a few other star Republicans. That is pretty lazy thinking, and suits a particular progressive viewpoint. This election is going to take years to figure out.

    Cue the instant hot takes as to how the orange man climbed the hill he was already sitting on.

    • MisterScruffy@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      16 days ago

      Dick Cheney is incredibly unpopular across the board in America. Having him endorse your campaign is asking to lose

      • zarkanian@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        16 days ago

        She should’ve rejected his endorsement the same way Jill Stein rejected the endorsement of David Duke. The fact that Harris accepted the endorsement of Dick Cheney and Richard Spencer is nuts.

      • slickgoat@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        16 days ago

        Anyone who backs away and let’s Trump take charge just because Cheney also wants Trump gone is a fucking idiot.

        • MisterScruffy@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          16 days ago

          The majority of the voters are fucking idiots. What now? Do you just admit defeat or try a different way to reach the fucking idiots?

            • MisterScruffy@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              16 days ago

              So you’re admitting defeat because you can’t imagine an actual progressive populist candidate that appeals to the things people care about (basically obama '08)

              • slickgoat@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                16 days ago

                A lot of things have changed since 08, or haven’t you been paying attention?

                Am i giving up? This war between the states has been going since 1861. With the exception of brief periods of lucidity, now and again, what has fundamentally changed?

                Anyway, I’m not trying to talk anybody out of anything. Go at it. Make it work if you have the secret. Meet me back here in 2028 for a chat, if we both survive.

  • OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    15 days ago

    Every interest group in the Democratic party after a loss: “See? It’s because [Candidate] didn’t agree with ME enough!”

    Maybe if they did your idea the loss would have been worse.

  • azertyfun@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    16 days ago

    Everyone from Sanders to Dick fucking Cheney endorsed Harris. Anyone who was paying any attention and wasn’t a literal fascist voted for her. The direction of the swing seems irrelevant.

    The swing fell short because it’s not so much about direction than strength. Macron in 2017 ran the most “hard center” presidential campaign imaginable. Difference is it worked, not because his centrist program was particularly novel but in large part because he is a very charismatic figure and managed to create a voting base of hopefuls for himself. The same can broadly be argued about Obama (whose first act as president was to essentially absolve the previous administration and Wall St of their many sins in case anyone forgot how moderate he was).

    Harris ran on a platform of… “I’m not him”. Which to any reasonable person is an obvious “yeah OK”, but unfortunately most Americans are apathetic cretins who will refuse to move their asses to a polling station if the guy on the telly doesn’t promise them a blowie at the voting booth. And the Democrat establishment is simultaneously too big to fail and incapable of producing an actually charismatic leader.

    Well, all that and the obvious election interference from Musk, Putin, and the ontological inability of traditional media not to platform literal fascists.

    • SoJB@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      16 days ago

      “How did you vote on your California ballot with several highly contentious ballot measures, Madam Vice President”

      “I will not speak on this 5 days before the election.”

      Leftists have been telling all the libs exactly what this path would lead to.

      Looks like liberals ushered in a fascist regime, again. Funny how that always happens.

      • azertyfun@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        16 days ago

        I mean, she did try other things as well and that characterization is a bit reductive. More correctly I think we can say that “she’s not him” is the only thing the Sanders->Cheney spectrum could ever agree on and nothing else she did “stuck”. Sanders wasn’t happy about the pro-israel stuff and Cheney probably wasn’t happy about the “tax the rich” stuff.

        Choosing one clear ideology and sticking to it might sound great to the progressives on here (and to people like Hasan), but I don’t have the hubris to think she or anyone within the Democratic party establishment actually had the charisma to pull that off either (maybe Michele Obama but she didn’t wanna do it so that’s the end of that plan). Especially considering Harris had like 4 months to pull a campaign together and did not have any previous popular good will to rely on.

        4 months is very short and no matter how right you play your cards a lot of voters will not know anything about you other than “she’s not Him”. Sometimes you can do everything right and still lose (not that she did everything right but I think a postmortem will need to look back way further than that at Biden and Hillary and those who supported them).

        • AwkwardLookMonkeyPuppet@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          16 days ago

          She had an entire platform, but when I was actively trying to review it, I was constantly presented with Trump’s name & face on the Democrat’s website. That’s really poorly thought out.

    • gAlienLifeform@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      16 days ago

      (whose first act as president was to essentially absolve the previous administration and Wall St of their many sins in case anyone forgot how moderate he was).

      I think this very thing led to the 2010 tea party wave election that fucked us for a decade and a similar thing has happened here, except it was the seeming inability of the Biden administration to hold Trump and his supporters accountable and not going after corporations making record profits during an inflationary crisis (“So how would you recommend they have done that?” Great question, I will let you know when I have a good answer).

      e;

      Well, all that and the obvious election interference from Musk, Putin, and the ontological inability of traditional media not to platform literal fascists.

      This absolutely played a huge roll (also, voter suppressing laws passed by GOP governments), but I don’t know how to change any of that without having a Democratic party that consistently wins elections first

      • azertyfun@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        16 days ago

        The FBI apparently learned some lessons on how to deal with Russian interference since 2016 and made some arrests this time around. Way too little too late though, and in January Trump’s cronies will take over and that’ll be that. Other countries should take notes though and start being much harsher on Russian trolls and their puppets. Unfortunately Von Der Layen recently fired the guy who was prosecuting Musk over Twitter so I’m not too confident anyone in power learned their lesson. Which is mind-boggling because russian-backed far-right parties are a meaningful electoral threat to people like Von Der Layen.