290
submitted 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) by GlacialTurtle@lemmy.ml to c/usa@lemmy.ml

It's literally 2016 but worse somehow.

One source close to the Harris campaign tells Rolling Stone they reached out to several staffers in and around the campaign to voice concerns about the candidate embracing Dick and Liz Cheney.

“People don’t want to be in a coalition with the devil,” says the source, speaking about Dick Cheney. They say a Harris staffer responded that it was not the staff’s role to challenge the campaign’s decisions.

A Democratic strategist says they warned key Harris surrogates and top-level officials at the Democratic National Committee that campaigning with Liz Cheney — and making the campaign’s closing argument about how many Republicans were supporting Harris — was highly unlikely to motivate any new swing voters, and risked dissuading already-despondent, infrequent Democratic voters who had supported Biden in 2020. The strategist says they also attempted to have big donors and battleground state party chairs convey the same argument to the Harris campaign.

Another Democratic operative close to Harrisworld says they sent memos and data to Harris campaign staffers underscoring how, among other things, Republican voters, believe it or not, vote Republican — and that the data over the past year screamed that Democrats instead needed to reassure and energize the liberal base and Dem-leaning working class in battleground states. “We were told, basically, to get lost, no thank you,” says the operative.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] ceenote@lemmy.world 117 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

I recall reading early on that DNC campaign advisers were recommending against continuing with the "weird" rhetoric, and the article mentioned some specific people who had worked on the 2016 campaign. It floored me that those people still had jobs. I guess they got their way eventually. I now have no expectation that they won't be doing the same shit in 2028.

DNC Leadership would rather lose with a neoliberal candidate than win with a progressive one.

[-] refurbishedrefurbisher@lemmy.sdf.org 50 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

DNC Leadership would rather lose with a neoliberal candidate than win with a progressive one.

That's because they're paid by big money donors to prevent any movement to the left while big money donors pay the GOP to move further right. This shifts the center (Overton Window) further and further right over time, causing the Democrats to ultimately move towards the right over time.

Obama said that if he was a politician in the 1980s, he would be considered a Republican, and he wasn't wrong.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml 30 points 2 months ago

It was all Hillary people. Why the DNC keeps hiring hillary and her people? Well Hillary owns the DNC. It's a private corporation that has private share-holders and their product is ballot access for the Democratic party.

If you want to run as a democrat for almost any office in the entire country you have to go through the DNC.

[-] NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml 25 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

"DNC Leadership would rather lose with a neoliberal candidate than win with a progressive one."

I think I had this exact revelation during or right after the 2020 primaries and it has deeply impacted my approach to voting ever since.

[-] refurbishedrefurbisher@lemmy.sdf.org 15 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

I had that same revelation back in 2016

[-] PanArab@lemmy.ml 12 points 2 months ago
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] UsernameHere@lemmy.world 10 points 2 months ago

The same progressives that didn’t show up to vote?

[-] YtA4QCam2A9j7EfTgHrH@infosec.pub 64 points 2 months ago

They didn’t vote because Harris ran as a republican. Run as a progressive if you want those votes.

load more comments (41 replies)
[-] grue@lemmy.world 18 points 2 months ago

Yes. The lesson here is you can't win without progressives, and if you try they will punish you.

You seem to be trying to imply that progressives aren't important, but the reality is exactly the fucking opposite.

load more comments (17 replies)
[-] Mobilityfuture@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago

It’s not about”progressives” it’s about the average Joe voter who (in some ways rightly) couldn’t see a difference enough to make voting (an unnecessarily difficult chore) worthwhile.

The second problem, is that there is no collective class consciousness. At best there is maybe a collective unconscious feeling. Progressives often ascribe a much greater awareness than is warranted to the proletariat. Ironically after likely doing no organizing other than debating each other in closed left wing YouTube and Reddit threads.

[-] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 48 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Let’s see, so we’re blaming Biden for stepping aside too late, his advisors for not encouraging him to step aside, the DNC for not holding a second primary, and Harris for trying to get voters by reaching across the aisle.

Let’s for once try Occam’s Razor.

Can we just accept that more than half the ~~nation is~~ voters are racist, sexist, and bigoted, or at a minimum comfortable supporting racism, sexism, and bigotry? Because that’s the simplest explanation.

[-] Cethin@lemmy.zip 23 points 2 months ago

It certainly played a part, but no; half the nation isn't racist/sexist. A little over half the country voted. Of that, some portion of the people wanted Trump for non-sexist/racist reasons. They still might not be good reasons, just not that always. It's way less than half of the nation who voted for Trump, and significantly fewer who did it for racist/sexist reasons.

We have to deal with that issue in the US, and many others, but boiling it down to just that is wrong. It also pushes a narrative that we must not run people of color or women in the future, which I believe to be wrong.

We need to inspire people. That's where this campaign failed. It was almost entirely based on fear. This works much better for Republicans than Democrats. The Democrats thought they could win playing the Republican's game. They should have played their own.

load more comments (8 replies)
[-] DharkStare@lemmy.world 23 points 2 months ago

I think the real answer is all of the above. Biden waited too long to drop out, which didn't give enough time to properly hold a primary. This resulted in Harris being nominated with no way to gauge how popular she would be. She then ran a terrible campaign spending too much time courting moderate Republicans. This resulted in progressives being disillusioned and not voting. Her stance on Israel and Gaza turned away Arab voters who also didn't vote. All of this combined together to pave the way for a second Trump presidency.

[-] someguy3@lemmy.world 10 points 2 months ago

No primary also means they can't test what ideas are popular.

[-] goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org 12 points 2 months ago

Why would they want to do that when they don't give a shit if it's popular

load more comments (7 replies)
[-] orclev@lemmy.world 20 points 2 months ago

It wasn't more than half the country, in total 65% of the country voted for any candidate. Trump got about 55% of that, or a bit over 36% of the country. That's still way higher than it should be, but well below half. There's a bunch of possible explanations for why the remaining 35% of the country didn't vote, and only some of those explanations would be tacit support of Trump.

[-] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 9 points 2 months ago

Good point. More than half of voters would have been accurate.

That reduces the sting of disappointment in my fellow man a tiny bit.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] davel@lemmy.ml 17 points 2 months ago

You’re so consistently wrong that I’m starting to think you might be Will Stancil’s alt account.

[-] MashedHobbits@lemy.lol 17 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

So you’ve got 4 issues all resolving to personal issues from the Democratic Party, a very simple explanation that they lost due to their own inner problems, and you occams razor to “it’s just *ism”?

Why is self reflection so hard for Dems.

[-] YtA4QCam2A9j7EfTgHrH@infosec.pub 12 points 2 months ago

Insert Principle Skinner meme about how it is the voters who are wrong

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world 16 points 2 months ago

Because that’s the simplest explanation

No, it's even simpler than that. The majority don't pay attention to anything past headlines. There are numerous reasons for this, time, effort, working 3 jobs to make ends meet, etc. And that's something the Republicans excel at, they have spent the past 60 years developing an entire network of media to spread their propaganda masking it as factual "news".

Because people aren't looking past the headlines... if you break that down and simplify why that is , you get to the base of the average person having a hard time in the current economy. One party telling them that it is hard and they'll change things, and the other party telling them it's not actually that bad. If you're having a hard time and one group keeps insisting that you're really not, you're probably going to pick the other side if those are the only options. It's not rocket science, fuck, it's not even political science, it's just ignoring the issue and trying to convince someone being beaten to death by the system that they're not actually getting beaten.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Objection@lemmy.ml 16 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Tammy Baldwin, Elissa Slotkin, and Jacky Rosen are all women who won senate races in states Kamala lost (WI, MI, NV). There's also Ruben Gallego, a Hispanic man who's winning in Arizona. So your "simplest explanation" is that these sexist, racist bigots were fine with voting for women (one of them a queer woman at that) and minorities for senate but not for president (for some reason) as opposed to the idea that Kamala Harris was just an unpopular candidate. That's not the simplest explanation, it's just the laziest.

[-] Pantsofmagic@lemmy.world 14 points 2 months ago

Are we completely ignoring the right wing echo chamber on social media and cable news? I've encountered no shortage of people who have been completely sucked into that world and buy into the bullshit. Not all of them are innately evil, but their candidate of choice certainly is

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago

Democrats certainly like the "America is racist" narrative because it gives them justification for chasing the racist vote next time.

load more comments (7 replies)
[-] davel@lemmy.ml 32 points 2 months ago

It only makes sense if you assume the Harris campaign was trying to lose, like in The Producers.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Objection@lemmy.ml 31 points 2 months ago

You know you're cooked when Bill Kristol is going around like, "Hey, shouldn't you be running a more progressive campaign to turn out more voters?"

[-] yogthos@lemmy.ml 17 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

The idea that democrats would abandon their base and try to flip republicans was idiotic beyond belief. The exit polls show that practically no republicans were swayed by this, as anybody with a functioning brain could've told the democrats. What they ended up doing was to alienate and demoralize the people who might've showed up to vote for them while having no impact on the republican vote.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Jumpingspiderman@lemmy.world 16 points 2 months ago

I'm really curious as to whose colossally dumb idea it was to campaign with Liz fucking Cheney?

[-] Sauerkraut@discuss.tchncs.de 9 points 2 months ago

The capital class. Kamala was up 10% with Tim Walz and their progressive platform, but then lobbyists and donors demanded that she adopt a more moderate platform. No one knows for sure what they said to her, but she immediately did a 180 and ran as a moderate Republican.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 08 Nov 2024
290 points (100.0% liked)

United States | News & Politics

7377 readers
577 users here now

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS