575
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 15 Nov 2024
575 points (100.0% liked)
politics
19223 readers
2579 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
The turnout of Democratic voters was lower than previous elections. There are too many variables at play to claim anything definitively, but it's safe to assume that the number of voters who abstained due to the issue was more than zero.
If a conclusion is going to be drawn about whether the whole genocide topic had a tangible effect on the outcome, it's important to consider those as well as the protest votes.
I really want to see a credible analysis showing how many of those non-votes were due to abstentions versus voter-suppression mesaures such as electoral-roll purges, overcrowded polling stations, fake challenges at the polls, etc.
For something like 30 years running, the real winner of the election was non-voters. When other countries have this level of boycott and the US doesn't like them, they get called "regimes" in need of "democraticization".
I believe there was real, grassroots protests, and the people who were there genuinely, were easily manipulated by those who were there maliciously into literally fighting for the opposite thing that they wanted.
It would be impressive if it weren't so goddamn depressing.
Online, on the other hand, agents provocateur everywhere. Plus more useful idiots who are now the ones who will either be an adult and admit they fucked up, or double and triple down on their mistake in order to preserve their ego (somewhat understandably so, as they seem to actually give a shit about Palestinian lives and now have to live with the role they played in escalating the genocide).
And to be clear, I consider myself an ardent supporter of Palestine in the genocide Israel is perpetrating. Which is exactly why I did the one small thing in my power that could have possibly done something to reduce that damage and not escalate the genocide (btw, a lot of people here are going to find out that genocide ≠ genocide ≠ genocide. In the worst way possible). And that was to vote for Harris.
If you want to find out what's coming, just pick up a history book for once. A couple weeks too late, but at least you'll learn why you fucked up.
You cannot call yourself an ardent supporter of Palestine while speaking about pro-Palestinian protesters like they are aliens or well-meaning idiots manipulated by unspecified malevolent forces. Anyone that is ardently pro-Palestinisn is at the protests, organizing actions, and speaks as a member of the community, not separate from it.
Please take some time to ask yourself whether you have the experience and knowledge required to talk on this topic.
It was pretty obvious most Americans don’t care about Gaza, and didn’t let it influence their voting.
I’ve seen polling prior to the election that asked people about their most important issues when voting.
https://news.gallup.com/poll/651719/economy-important-issue-2024-presidential-vote.aspx
The Republican voter's top issues were the economy, immigration, terrorism/nation security, crime and taxes.
Meanwhile, the Democrat top issues were US democracy, the supreme court, abortion, healthcare and education.
Basically, foreign policy was a non issue for voters. Gaza did not factor into most voter’s decisions at all. And of course it doesn’t. When you’re worried about putting food on the table, you can’t afford rent, your bodily autonomy is at stake and your country is going to shit… you’d be silly to vote based on Gaza. Because that’s directly voting against your own interests. Gaza should not have been a large talking point or even at all.
I think the reason a lot of Democrats stayed home was basically candidate fatigue. They just didn’t feel like voting for a candidate so boring and faceless. And she didn’t have nearly enough time to turn things around. Why bother voting when democratic leadership clearly isn’t taking voters and their actual issues seriously?