414
(page 3) 49 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] KoboldCoterie@pawb.social 20 points 2 days ago

This is hilarious, because of Biden's "I'd have won if I was the candidate" bullshit. More like "Harris might have won if I wasn't hamstringing her", but okay, sure, Joe. Let's get you to bed, now.

[-] Absaroka@lemmy.world 13 points 2 days ago

Just another example of how the Democratic party is only slightly less fucked than the Republicans.

[-] halfempty@fedia.io 14 points 2 days ago

Her position regarding Palestine and Israel cost her the election. Many Dems could not vote for her, so they didn't vote.

[-] MountingSuspicion@reddthat.com 6 points 1 day ago

I'd really love for that to be the case (enough people caring about genocide to decide an election), but it just isn't. The data shows that people on the left still came out to vote and she lost a bunch of centrist votes or people who are seen as "low information"/unmotivated voters. Those people don't care about Palestine. They thought she was weird, or a DEI candidate, or just weren't inspired to get up and vote for her. I'm not saying she needs to go more centrist, but people like populism and she just didn't do it.

[-] orcrist@lemm.ee 3 points 1 day ago

There have been multiple reports on this issue indicating that you're wrong and the previous claim was correct. But nobody knows for sure. If she had flipped positions, perhaps some people would have been turned off and they would have called her a flip-flopper.

And obviously there were many other reasons that she lost. We don't get to blame it on just one.

[-] MountingSuspicion@reddthat.com 1 points 1 day ago

That used to be my belief until I saw reports to the contrary. I believe you can see in my comment history right after the election saying that Gaza was a big contributor, but basically all the analysis I've seen since points to that not being true, so I've changed my tune. Would love to see what you're looking at for numbers/polls.

[-] cabb@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 1 day ago

I can't remember the source, but the number 1 issue in every swing state other than Michigan (which had Palestine as its #1) among democrat nonvoters and centrists who voted republican was grocery prices. Most of those states had inflation as their number 2 issue and Palestine as the third. Palestine alone wouldn't have been enough to swing any state other than Michigan.

I think its pretty clear that the primary reason Kamala lost because she didn't present a vision for the economy. She literally just said that the economy is fine. Inflation and grocery prices? Ignore those!

Inflation maybe shouldn't have been as big of an issue since it was below 3% and on its way down but it was still a concern for a large number of voters.

[-] MountingSuspicion@reddthat.com 3 points 1 day ago

I agree for the most part, but she did have some milquetoast neolib proposals that would have helped. Mostly things already seen in one form or another in Bidens build back better plan, but honestly it didn't matter. Her rhetoric was weak and her campaign was poorly managed. I saw SOOOO many ads requesting donations (lady, I don't have money to buy eggs and you're buying ad space, the optics are bad) and not one of them said anything of substance. I say time and again that Bernie got people to donate time and money they didn't have because they believed in his message. Kamala had no message. She had some plans, sure, but did not effectively communicate them. They were too little too late regardless, but it felt like her ads were lazy cash grabs that couldn't even be bothered to give out empty promises.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] verdantbanana@lemmy.world 11 points 2 days ago

horseshit

she had multiple chances like at the DNC convention

[-] thann@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 2 days ago

"they puppeted me poorly"

[-] BertramDitore@lemm.ee 10 points 2 days ago

Harris was the candidate, not Biden. Being his VP should have been a boon to her, but instead she turned it into her own biggest obstacle. It was ultimately her decision to follow Biden’s directions on this.

It’s not like the sitting president can order a party’s candidate to take certain policy positions, even if that candidate is the sitting VP. Biden deserves a ton of the blame for our current situation, but Harris was the candidate and she decided to follow Biden’s terrible advice. He’s just the stubborn geriatric who cared more about his legacy than the peoples’ future.

[-] alkbch@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 day ago

I don’t buy that. Harris has made her choice.

[-] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago

When do I get to collect my payment for being right the entire time?

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

Your payment was the year of abuse from centrists you've already received, plus the next 4 years of blame for the loss they earned.

Same as anyone else who wasn't 100% on board with the genocide centrists preferred to keeping democracy.

[-] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

The day they admit they've been wrong the entire time. I hope you get interest on that bet because it'll be a while.

[-] Rooskie91@discuss.online 6 points 2 days ago

As usual the democratic party fails because it's trying to be both progressive AND cater to wealthy donors. Those two things just don't go together. Either abandon the upper class, or resign yourself to diametrically opposed rhetoric that will NEVER win an election for the Dems.

[-] orbituary@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 2 days ago

It's not remotely trying to be progressive. It's cosplaying as caring while raking in them donor dollars.

[-] meangreenbeans@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago

Could’ve, should’ve, would’ve

[-] Tempus_Fugit@midwest.social 5 points 2 days ago

Yikes! This is a shit argument IMO. Biden wouldn't have broken from her if she stood strong on her own stances. This is a terrible look for her. More feckless establishment Dems acting like the controlled opposition they are.

I won't be voting for people like this in the future. I know many others that think like me too. That's going to be a huge problem for the Dem establishment. They're pushing progressive folks out and replacing them with no one.

[-] dudinax@programming.dev 5 points 2 days ago

Huh? He couldn't have stopped her. This is nonsense.

[-] thann@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 2 days ago

Smells like bullshit to me

[-] MCasq_qsaCJ_234@lemmy.zip 5 points 2 days ago

So if Biden had allowed Kamala Harris to have her own narrative, would she have won the presidency?

[-] DadVolante@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 day ago

A vice president isn't going to publicly break with the sitting president

Been saying this before the election. These comments are wild.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

A vice president isn’t going to publicly break with the sitting president

The pro-genocide centrists who made this excuse were silent when she moved to his right.

[-] petrol_sniff_king 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Why not?

I mean, I know she wouldn't. But seriously, think about it, why not? People wanted her to, so why not? People don't want milquetoast policy changes that improve such and such by 2%, they want a hero, so why not? People don't want palestinians to die, so why not?

She was either: an awful candidate because she wouldn't promise anything, or, an awful candidate because she couldn't promise anything.

And yeah, I wanted her to win, but the problems that fucked the last election up still plague the party. If they don't learn, we're all going straight to Trump's gulag.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] MCasq_qsaCJ_234@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 day ago

It's because of the frustration surrounding the elections, and it will take a while for everything to calm down, although Kamala could run for president again if she doesn't opt ​​for the California governorship.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

although Kamala could run for president again if she doesn’t opt ​​for the California governorship.

I wouldn't put it past leadership to consider this a good idea and forego primaries again.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Sibshops@lemm.ee 3 points 2 days ago

I doubt this. Harris had some controversial policy issues such as taxing uncapitalized gains which were breaks with the Biden administration.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›
this post was submitted on 17 Mar 2025
414 points (100.0% liked)

politics

21970 readers
3969 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS