this post was submitted on 07 Nov 2024
223 points (96.7% liked)

politics

19097 readers
4468 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
 

Kamala Harris’s resounding defeat affirmed the worst of what many Black women believed about their country, even as some looked to the future with a wary determination.

Black women could see the mountaintop.

Across the country, they led an outpouring of Democratic elation when the vice president took over the top of the presidential ticket. But underneath their hope and determination was a persistent worry: Was America ready, they asked, to elect a Black woman?

The painful answer arrived this week.

It affirmed the worst of what many Black women believed about their country: that it would rather choose a man who was convicted of 34 felonies, has spewed lies and falsehoods, disparaged women and people of color, and pledged to use the powers of the federal government to punish his political opponents than send a woman of color to the White House.

MBFC
Archive

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Deceptichum@quokk.au 9 points 13 hours ago (3 children)

She lost because she was a status quo right winger and didn’t represent a large portion of her base or address their ever growing concerns.

[–] Blackbeard@lemmy.world 12 points 12 hours ago (3 children)

Yeah Trump won 46% of Latinos and 20% of the black vote, and the "everyone's racist" trope is starting to lose its luster. We absolutely cannot win if we keep using race and gender as a prerequisite for exaltation and insist that they take deferential precedence over all else. To be sure, there's a shitload of racists/sexists in Trump's party, but the fact that their coalition is sucking in minorities should tell us identity politics is only part of the equation. He's cultivating working class solidarity in a really powerful way, and it's starting to appeal more and more to folks who've watched the Democrats pay only lip service to racial grievances, and then proceed to never make meaningful sacrifices to ameliorate the underlying problems of economic inequality and then work constructively to promote financial security. All racists are Trump supporters, but not all Trump supporters are racists.

[–] breakfastmtn@lemmy.ca 13 points 12 hours ago

Sure, but racism and sexism aren't just white people problems. For example, I'm assuming the repeated efforts to reach out to black men in the last month were reactions to what internal polling was telling them. There are lots of people who'd vote for any man over any woman.

Everyone also seems to be looking for the one and only reason Harris lost. There isn't one reason. I'm sure racism and misogyny are reasons, even if they're not the only ones.

[–] JamesStallion@sh.itjust.works 1 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

No one wants to hear this, but it's pretty much only educated white and black folks that believe in the social program that has been floated by the democrats the last few elections. The country is a lot more diverse than that and South Asian, East Asian and Latino folks are largely what this site would call bigots.

[–] Blackbeard@lemmy.world 2 points 7 hours ago

100%

There's a reason we got hammered for "virtue signaling" for so long. It's a shell game that doesn't require any real sacrifice on the part of educated whites, and minorities are starting to realize that.

[–] Blademaster00@lemmy.world 3 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (2 children)

He's cultivating working class solidarity in a really powerful way, and it's starting to appeal more and more to folks who've watched the Democrats pay only lip service to racial grievances, and then proceed to never make meaningful sacrifices to ameliorate the underlying problems of economic inequality and then work constructively to promote financial security.

By doing what exactly? I've seen plenty of arguments like this about Dems not doing enough to seperate themselves from the status quo, and thus are losing ground to Republicans on things like the economy and fighting for the working class. I don't disagree with that, but what arguments like that fail to convince me of is what exactly is Trump offering these Latino and Black voters that's better?

[–] Bustedknuckles@lemmy.world 4 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

"Change" and he's further back in their memories. People are genuinely struggling - both in where they are and where they're headed; he promises he can change that direction. He won't, but people are desperate and Kamala ran as a status quo candidate

It's more than just one thing, of course. Probably some racism and sexism too

[–] Fosheze@lemmy.world 3 points 11 hours ago

Exactly. Most people don't have any idea what will fix our issues they just know that something needs to change and Trump was the only one offering that. When people told Kamala they were struggling she just responded by saying that the economy is actually doing great. Trump promised actual changes (yes they're all for the worse but the average idiot doesn't know that) where as Kamala repeatedly just blew people off.

[–] Blackbeard@lemmy.world 3 points 11 hours ago

I think it's less about offering specific policies that will help and more about looking them in the eye and saying "I hear you, it's fucked up. We'll change everything." It's a bit like when my wife has a bad day at work, and when I get home she starts venting. Sometimes I try to cut in and come up with a solution to her problems, but it usually makes things worse. One day she stopped me dead in my tracks, took a deep breath, and said, "Please don't try to fix it. Sometimes I just need to vent and I want you to tell me you hear me and that you love me. That's all." She didn't want me to offer a solution at all, she just wanted me to actively listen and comfort her.

I think that's what Trump is doing. He's engaging them on a human level and validating them as individuals with problems. He's going to do absolutely fuck all to fix them, but it's a really powerful level of connection that's obviously working.

[–] grue@lemmy.world 6 points 12 hours ago

Yeah, articles like this are nothing more than an attempt to scapegoat and spin the issue into Democratic "business as usual" so that the DNC doesn't have to self-reflect on how they've spent decades selling out their base for rich corporate donors.

[–] octopus_ink@lemmy.ml 5 points 13 hours ago

Although yes I agree with you, I also think the points the article raises are definitely a factor.