this post was submitted on 11 Sep 2024
1021 points (97.8% liked)

politics

19090 readers
3957 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

She set a tone at the very start when she walked right into his space to shake his hand and made him almost pull back into himself in response. She was in charge and never stopped being in charge. 

Harris also managed what neither Joe Biden nor Hillary Clinton nor any of the 2016 Republicans managed to do which is successfully bait Donald Trump and get under his skin. Within a few minutes Trump was visibly angry and not in a way that empowered him but in a way that made him lose focus, go down rabbit holes and generally go off onto damaging tangents. Spittle anger, not righteous anger, shall we say.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] chakan2@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (7 children)

So...no...I disagree strongly with this analysis.

Yes...for reasonable people...Kamala slaughtered Trump.

But that's not what his base cares about. They're the dregs of society that get off on WWF and whatever MTV is these days. He yelled more, he made sensational completely bullshit off the cuff lies, and he rolled over the moderators like a Karen going after the manager.

His base loved it. I think his message of fear, hate and bullshit was compelling (if you still read at a 6th grade level like the majority of Americans).

Yes...reasonable people know Kamala is a better candidate.

Do you really believe someone who is still undecided going into last night's debate is a reasonable person?

[–] Skua@kbin.earth 48 points 1 month ago

I don't think there's any chance of converting his base, though. Surely what she needed to do - and what it sounds like she did, I haven't finished listening to the debate yet - is persuade everyone else to vote for her? His base alone isn't enough to guarantee him a win if there's a strong showing for Harris, as happened for Biden in 2020

[–] Veedem@lemmy.world 22 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I think there are people who have conservative values which they believe are better for the country but also struggle with the thought of supporting Trump. For those people, last night’s debate probably pushed them further away from him. Some may go to Harris which is the hope.

I wish she would have invited those people directly in her closing statement. Something along the lines of “If you don’t agree with me, I’m hear to listen and understand why. Together, we can move forward instead of going back to chaos and anger and division “

[–] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 month ago

She did seem to go after them when she mentioned all the Republicans that have endorsed her.

[–] FatCrab@lemmy.one 18 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Undecided are largely not actually undecided. They mostly vote along party lines. The point, in the current political climate, is to demotivate turnout of the other side's undecided. And I think based on that, this was a deep loss for Trump. Outside the pundit sphere, he was literally a punchline and joke the entire night. Memes of the hilariously dumb shit he spewed almost instantly sprouted up and are all over the place.

[–] chakan2@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

The demotivated take is solid. I like it...thanks.

[–] Makeitstop@lemmy.world 15 points 1 month ago (1 children)

As others said, she would mainly be converting independent voters and potentially some Republican leaning voters that don't actually like Trump but are hesitant to cross party lines.

But I also think it's likely that his terrible performance and obvious weakness could be demoralizing to his more devoted followers. The people who buy into the stable genius strong man image he is so desperate to project got a chance to see just what a sad old wreck of a human being he is. Even if virtually none of them switch sides, a decline in enthusiasm likely translates into slightly fewer donations, slightly less engagement, and ultimately slightly less voter turnout.

To put it another way, did Biden's debate performance convert his base into Trump voters? No. But, it sure as hell had an effect on them.

[–] chakan2@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I can tell you, based on what the conservatives were posting last night, they were excited as hell about Trump's performance.

It's weird...so fucking weird. You people (conservatives) are reasonable in real life, how can you watch this shit show and be excited about it?

[–] Makeitstop@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I would expect the Trump supporters that are posting (particularly the ones posting as they watch) to post their support and approval for everything Trump says and does. Any that are disappointed or discouraged by what they saw are probably more likely to say nothing. People are quick to express the knee-jerk reaction they want to have, but it often takes time to process when they feel let down.

I mean, yes, absolutely, there have to be people who nodded in agreement at everything Trump said, who were excited when he brought up the immigrants eating pets, who felt that Trump was the only sane one there. But there also had to be some that were frustrated with what they were seeing, and who now have a little less energy to devote to the election. Will the latter group be large enough to have an impact? We'll have to wait and see.

[–] chakan2@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago

Good response...I hope you're right.

[–] Empricorn@feddit.nl 14 points 1 month ago (1 children)

They're the dregs of society that get off on WWF and whatever MTV is these days.

People are climaxing to the World Wildlife Fund?

FYI It was renamed WWE in 2002...

[–] chakan2@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

His supporters don't know that.

[–] Melatonin@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

They most certainly do

If there's one thing they know it's TV 'rasslin'.

[–] Atomic@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 month ago

Do you really believe someone who is still undecided going into last night’s debate is a reasonable person?

It's not just about president it's about party. Someone might not like Trump. But at the same time dislike democratic policies and democrats as a party.

So now the have to decide. Do they go against Republicans due to their candidate? Hearing Kamala debate him might convince them that yeah... ok. They're not THAT bad.. at least they (democrats) are better than him (Trump)