this post was submitted on 08 Nov 2024

406 points (96.1% liked)

politics

19097 readers

4344 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

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:

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.
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.
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.
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.
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

outrageousmatter@lemmy.world

aidan@lemmy.world

jordanlund@lemmy.world

HLMenckenFan@lemmy.world

little_cow@lemmy.world

406

Harris Tried to Win Over Republicans. Democratic Support Collapsed Instead. (www.rollingstone.com)

submitted 11 hours ago by Zaktor@sopuli.xyz to c/politics@lemmy.world

146 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Harris only received five percent of Republican votes — less than the six percent Joe Biden won in 2020 when he beat Trump, as well as the seven percent won by Hillary Clinton in 2016 when she lost to him. While Harris won independents and moderates, she did so by smaller margins than Biden did in 2020.

Meanwhile, Harris lost households earning under $100,000, while Democratic turnout collapsed. Votes are still being counted, but Harris is on pace to underperform Biden’s 2020 totals by millions of votes.

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] GoofSchmoofer@lemmy.world 23 points 1 hour ago

My take on this is that the DNC has never understood that to win the presidency in the last 20 years you need to be a fire brand.

I think this stared in 2008 with Obama who won I believe because he fired up the base with great speeches about hope and change. It didn't really happen, BUT the man knew how to give a speech. That got people inspired to do something and they voted.

Bernie was another fire brand - told it like it was and it appealed to a large population.

trump won using the same idea, but just the opposite of hope and change yet it worked. It tapped into a visceral and deep frustration that this country has left them behind.

The modern view of the American president to the population is less of a wonky politician and more of a cheerleader for big ideas, even if those ideas are abhorrent and exceedingly horrifying.

Harris just wasn't the person to pull this off, she was too wonky and it felt like the entire campaign was playing the old card of "we are not trump" Instead if they really wanted to win they would have found ( 2 years ago) a feisty out spoken progressive leaning firebrand that would have inspired people to vote for something better.

The only reason that (bland) Biden won was because of how badly trump fucked up the Covid response.

[–] octopus_ink@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Everyone needs to let them know how strongly this article is nailing it.

https://democrats.org/contact-us/

[–] goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 20 minutes ago

Based on them already attacking Bernie, who sucked up to them so hard this last year, I doubt they're going to listen to anyone's opinion if it doesn't also come with millions of dollars

[–] nutsack@lemmy.world 19 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (2 children)

yeah this was a really fucking stupid idea and I think any Dingus on Twitter could have told you the same. The Trump voter base does not move. everyone's been saying this. I don't understand the Democrat strategy at all

I don't know what the actual numbers are on this, but I have to imagine the number of progressive voters who want more progressive policies far exceeds the number of Republicans that will vote Democrat. if anyone has a source to this data, I am interested in it.

[–] echolalia@lemmy.ml 18 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago) (1 children)

I don’t understand the Democrat strategy at all

Someone else summed it up better than I can. The democratic party is doing exactly what it set out to do.

Nitter link.

They have no interest in furthering progressive policies so they don't. That's why the DNC chair is calling Bernie Sander's critique of the party's platform bullshit right now, instead of admitting he's right.

The system is as it does.

[–] nutsack@lemmy.world 4 points 2 hours ago

i think some of this is true, but I don't think that they would be implementing all of the same policies. maybe all the things that they actually care about are common between the two, and that's what he means.

[–] IndustryStandard@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Democrats called those Twitter users Russian trolls. They are now advocating to restrict social media so this cannot happen again.

[–] nutsack@lemmy.world 0 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

They are now advocating to restrict social media so this cannot happen again.

source?

[–] IndustryStandard@lemmy.world 4 points 24 minutes ago* (last edited 24 minutes ago)

Saw a brazen example yesterday about how social media is the fault of it all. It was an article like this one https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/11/07/10-democratic-thinkers-on-what-the-party-needs-right-now-00187993

What we’ve seen is that tens of millions have opted into a right-wing information bubble, largely online, that has grown to eclipse almost the entire traditional media infrastructure. Often, in that bubble, they’ve become the willing consumers of lies and outrage. Trump’s real misdeeds are whitewashed while audiences are encouraged to embrace cathartic rage against rotating groups of enemies — many of which seem to suspiciously mirror historically unpopular minorities. In this fractured information environment, clownish strongmen thrive, their meme-like public personas enrapturing otherwise disengaged voters — a trend we’ve seen across the globe, as social media increasingly displaces traditional media.

Democrats need to recognize that it is impossible to win votes by improving voters’ lives, when your opponent has a national rage machine it can toggle on or off at will. We will see the next iteration of this game soon enough, when the right switches to praising the precise economy they blasted for years, likely spiking economic satisfaction through the roof. This capacity — dominating media and social media, and its power to shape public opinion — has been the obsessive focus of the right for years. Democrats have almost completely ignored these questions in favor of wonky policy and kitchen-table economics. If the party continues to ignore this problem, it courts oblivion. Democrats must find a way to make headway in modern media, and wrest more control of the national information environment from Trump and his band of thugs.

My favorite line

Let’s start with where Democrats should NOT go. We should not blame Vice President Kamala Harris or her campaign.

[–] Rekorse@sh.itjust.works 22 points 4 hours ago

Kamalas campaign thought they could win without offending any megadonors, despite seeing what a bit of honesty did for them right after biden was replaced.

Ive never seen such obvious virtue signaling, I'm not sure kamala even believed her own words.

[–] HawlSera@lemm.ee 43 points 5 hours ago

Here's a fun little tip if you're ever able to try this again.

MLK Jr. never appealed to the white man, he never tried to win over whitey nor tone down his message so that he didn't alienate his opressors, and he never tried to get the Klan on his side.

Notice how we don't have segregation anymore? It's because if Dr. King did these things, he'd have been luaghed at.

[–] OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml 31 points 6 hours ago

Ding ding ding! Trump went further right and got more support. DNC should go further left. People want radical change in 2024

[–] Monstrosity@lemm.ee 21 points 6 hours ago

This. Right. Here.

Stop the triangulation it needs to die already.

[–] Asafum@feddit.nl 79 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

If we wanted to be Republicans we'd be Republicans for fucks sake...

We can't have 2 parties fighting to be the most hateful party of the billionaires. I mean I guess we can but only one gets to win.

[–] buttfarts@lemy.lol 29 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

The Democrats have been chasing the mythical moderate conservative at the expense of the progressive left forever and have learned nothing. I want a fire and brimstone progressive who is belligerent and aggressive

[–] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 8 points 3 hours ago

I'd even be happy to settle for someone in the middle of the party willing to fight for the party's supposed ideals. Remember when one of her slogans was "when we fight, we win"? Not "when we bipartisan, we win" or "when we coopt conservative issues, we win".

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 53 points 10 hours ago (3 children)

Yeah, the notion that she was going to put a Republican in her cabinet.....did anyone think that was a good idea? I mean, outside the beltway media?

[–] JustZ@lemmy.world 1 points 3 minutes ago

That was a media lie. She said that sarcastically and both her and the reporter were laughing. Media didn't report that fact, other than the original interview which aired like one time.

[–] HawlSera@lemm.ee 15 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

I know every early on she was talking about possibly having a Republican Vice President before she wised up and went with Tim Walz and ran on his progressive ideas for about... three seconds till Nancy and the DNC told her to just do what Hillary did, as that worked for her and Kamela is obviously the second female president right now. /s

[–] VinnyDaCat@lemmy.world 5 points 55 minutes ago

Seeing Walz as her VP pick was such a win and then everything started slipping away. If you listened to her speeches you'd start to notice she was slowly leaning more conservative, slowly backpedaling on a lot of Biden admin policies even. And for some reason she was absolutely obsessed with going on right wing media outlets.

I genuinely think she's rather well spoken but what a waste of potential.

load more comments (1 replies)

load more comments