this post was submitted on 28 Nov 2024
555 points (93.8% liked)

politics

19223 readers
2658 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
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] foggy@lemmy.world 148 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

My message to the dnc

Fuck you we elected Bernie and you ran Hillary and then we elected Bernie and you gave us Biden. Fuck you.

[–] FireRetardant@lemmy.world 110 points 3 weeks ago

They knew Bernie might actually improve the lives of Americans and our rich overlords shudder at the thought of that.

[–] timbuck2themoon@sh.itjust.works 14 points 3 weeks ago (6 children)

Who elected Bernie in 2020? Biden wiped the floor with him. Maybe more people should've voted for Bernie in the primary then.

[–] pjwestin@lemmy.world 101 points 3 weeks ago (95 children)

I mean, the commenter is overstating what happened in 2016 and 2020, but Biden did not, "wipe the floor," with him. Obama and the DNC convinced every centrist to drop out, consolidating the moderate vote around Biden, while Warren stayed in, splitting the progressive vote, and Bloomberg used his personal wealth to run anti-Bernie ads. Then Biden had to ask Bernie to help him craft a platform just so he could be electable. It's less that, "Biden wiped the floor with him," and more that, "the entire Democratic party lined up to block Bernie so Biden could limp over the finish line."

load more comments (95 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] BigBenis@lemmy.world 97 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (3 children)

Democrats: "Understood. We must try harder to win over the center-right."

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 22 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

Honestly, we should have seen it coming with all the "nostalgia" for the Good Old Days of GWB.

This was literally what the Harris campaign walked away saying.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 20 points 2 weeks ago

"center right":

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] jordanlund@lemmy.world 82 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

"Nothing will fundamentally change" + "there is not a thing that comes to mind."

Two killer statements.

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 30 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

To be fair Biden's "nothing will fundamentally change" is a lot better with context. "There's not a thing that comes to mind" is fucking inexcusable though.

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 33 points 3 weeks ago

To be fair Biden’s “nothing will fundamentally change” is a lot better with context.

To be fair, it became clear over the course of 4 years that it was correct at face value.

[–] themaninblack@lemmy.world 82 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (4 children)

One of the biggest unforced failures of the Biden administration is the reported complaint of Joe Biden that people weren’t acknowledging the economic turnaround.

Biden did a lot of good for the economy! Massive stimulus via the infrastructure bill, a sensible approach to recovery from Covid, acknowledging that recovery from an inflationary period would be necessarily painful, etc. He was a steady hand at a time when America needed one.

But what sends me into apoplexy, what really grinds my gears, is that this motherfucker was so out of touch to believe that this was a messaging problem. He felt that Americans had not yet heard of his accomplishments in turning around the tide of economic misfortune, how badly the republicans would have bungled it, and how the next four years would have been a period of huge growth based on the previous four.

All of these points were absolutely true.

But there is no housing supply. The economic pressures are so hard on young people that their biological impulses are changing.

Young empiricists have taken a look at the climate and have correctly deduced that their future is full of pain in the absence of truly radical action.

And Kamala’s strategy for relieving pressure on the housing market was a $25,000 credit for first time home buyers? In an environment where housing prices have doubled and tripled in fifteen years?

I am one of the very few members of the public that attended Feinstein’s funeral at San Francisco City Hall. And the only one there that day wearing sneakers. I attended her lying in state, paid my respects to a committed civil servant, and in the book, cautioned Pelosi against a similar, “ignominious” end. Then I hear that Pelosi has filed to run again in 2026. As an 86 year old.

At some point the Democratic leadership looks less out of touch and more actively malicious considering the serious and existential crises of the young and near-young in the United States.

The country is in decline because of its extreme individualism, its lack of compassion, and its ruthless “politics is the art of the possible” approach by leaders who could not possibly inspire with bold leadership.

The party is chasing local maxima.

[–] GoofSchmoofer@lemmy.world 16 points 2 weeks ago (6 children)

Harris' solution to the housing problem really annoyed me. There are so many other more effective ways to go about making housing more affordable but she just ignored them. This, in my uneducated opinion, would have also motivated more voters.

In a more general sense, the mainstream Democrats have always had a difficult time with messaging which is nothing new but really showed itself in this past election.

Democrats think that if you just spend time educating the voting population on all the good their policies will do then the voter will make a rational decision in the voting booth. And in the exit polling that is exactly who voted for Harris, highly educated people that like that kind of lecture type of politicking. But most people don't vote like that - they don't want a professor in the oval office they want a cheerleader.

[–] Flocklesscrow@lemm.ee 23 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children)

Disagree on only one point: the time for a cheerleader has passed.

The people now want a Teddy Roosevelt progressive. A person who physically kicks asses and legally enforces regulations on the Corporates who are undermining the country's well-being to pad their pockets. A leader who is tough, speaks plainly, and has grit and vision for the conservation of natural resources.

None of these qualities describe any current members of the Democratic party.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Wrench@lemmy.world 13 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Very well said. I hated Harris' "economic plan." It wasn't going to make a dent. It might get some people in rural passover states afford a home, which is great for them, but would do nothing but maybe raise costs of entry level tiny condos in any city.

But I do think they accomplished a lot in Biden's term. If you compare the US' inflation to other 1st world countries, we recovered far better. We were moving in the right direction. It would have been far worse with Republicans.

And they accomplished all that with a festering rot of DINO obstructionists in the senate, and a republican controlled House. They did an amazing job with the limitations they had.

But they didn't adequately lay the blame in the right hands. They didn't address greedy corporate Housing speculation. They tried and failed to reign in "shrinkflation". And they failed to bring some sanity to the immigrant blaming, and instead somewhat joined in on it.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] tburkhol@lemmy.world 50 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

But who will pay for our campaigns if we don't lick the boot of oligarchs?

[–] Eldritch@lemmy.world 31 points 3 weeks ago (12 children)

Before the 1980s that used to be the unions paying and funding campaigns. The reason Democrats started chasing and boot-licking oligarchs. Is because the unions stopped funding elections and campaigns at the rate they had been before the 1980s. If you can figure out why that was. There were two solid hints given. Then we could probably understand why they're seeking funding from oligarchs. And how we should probably go about changing that.

People love to complain about Democrats begging for oligarchs money without understanding why. Which helps the oligarchs. And gives them even more control over the DNC than they would have otherwise. I'm not saying we should accept the oligarch funding and ownership. But until we come to terms with why that came to be and address it appropriately. It won't end anytime soon.

load more comments (12 replies)
[–] cheese_greater@lemmy.world 22 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

A campaign for someone people wants will pay for itself. Everything will be provided and the press will be free if it wishes to remain clicked and watched

This billion dollar campaign frenzy every 4 years is an industrial complex that needs to die

[–] JokklMaster@lemmy.world 41 points 2 weeks ago
[–] SolacefromSilence@fedia.io 40 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Simpson's Skinner meme, "no, it's the voters that are wrong"

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] ShaggySnacks@lemmy.myserv.one 37 points 2 weeks ago

"The DNC hears ya. The DNC don't care."

[–] takeda@lemmy.world 33 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

This is BS. People saying Kamala was too liberal, or too centrist, she was riding too much on Biden achievements or not enough etc etc.

The real reason for this is that majority of people no longer get their news from MSM, they get their news from social media which are hevily slanted for trump. Not only GOP understands how influential those are, but they are helped with foreign entities who are free to use these media as well.

This also isn't just happening to US but also to Europe.

The fucking solution is to get your family off of Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, TikTok etc. it is a cancer and essentially hacks their brain.

You might think that social media is great, because everyone can have a voice. This might be true for sites like Lemmy, but in other places what you post is irrelevant, because their algorithm controls what others see. It is very clever, because they can hide behind freedom of speech to not restrict the sites, while essentially still having full control of what it is shown and zero consequences.

With AI they don't even need people anymore they can generate content themselves and say it is a real user.

Why do you think companies involved in social media are also heavily invested with generative AI?

[–] Yawweee877h444@lemmy.world 16 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (7 children)

The fucking solution is to get your family off of Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, TikTok etc. it is a cancer and essentially hacks their brain.

What you're implying here is that people aren't smart enough to navigate social media intelligently, without being duped by propaganda and group think, yet you are.

Protecting dumb people by hiding them from social media, is a bad fix for a symptom of other major problems. Fixing symptoms like this is never a good solution.

What we need is education massively overhauled, to the point it would be unrecognizable to what we have today. People should have the critical thinking skills and educational background to laugh there ass off and shrug off ~~right wing~~ propaganda, and never let it take hold.

This is a much bigger problem, and we're losing significantly, but it's what should be discussed instead of just hiding social media from people.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Montagge@lemmy.zip 29 points 2 weeks ago (6 children)

Wait, so apparently Americans don't want neoliberal economic policies so they didn't vote for Kamala, but instead voted for Trump and his neoliberal economic policies?

This shit is stupid and old already. It reeks of people using unhealthy coping mechanism to deal with the idea that the average American shifted even further right.

[–] ShinkanTrain@lemmy.ml 59 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

The average american doesn't know what neoliberal economic policies are, but the average american can feel the impact of neoliberalism on a daily basis. Convincing people you have a solution to what everyone knows is wrong (even if your solution is even more neoliberalism and blaming minorities, the old reliable) is what get people in booths.

Conversely, saying things are fine the way they are is the easiest way to lose an election.

[–] jordanlund@lemmy.world 35 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

What killed Biden and Harris was the outright denial of what people were feeling.

"The economy is hurting us!"

"What are you talking about, Jack? We have the best economy ever! Look... inflation is only 3% (on top of 3%, on top of 9%), we're doing GREAT! Not a joke! I'm serious!"

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Wes4Humanity@lemm.ee 26 points 2 weeks ago (13 children)

1/3 of voting age Americans voted for Trump (that 3rd wants fascism)... 1/3 for Kamala, and 1/3 stayed home... A lot of the 1/3 that stayed home did so because they don't want neolib policy, and probably a lot of the 1/3 that voted for her also don't want neolib policy. There's very little to support the idea that anyone "shifted right"... They shifted home when they weren't given an option to vote against genocide and other neolib bullshit

load more comments (13 replies)
[–] ShittyBeatlesFCPres@lemmy.world 23 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Trump’s economic policies aren’t neoliberal so much as mercantilist. He wants tariffs and trade wars. (There’s obviously also a dash of fascist policies where he wants companies to serve him.)

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 12 points 2 weeks ago

Fascism was the rebranding of mercantilism. State supported industry with a blurry line between state and private actors and owners, all ultimately supported by imperial conquest and colonialism.

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 19 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Trump verbally promised to change the system. Harris said the system is doing great, you're doing great, anyone who says they aren't doing great doesn't understand the economic genius that is Biden's economy.

The predictable happened. Democrats were warned when Biden tried to take a victory lap on the economy in 2023. They ignored that warning and didn't attempt to pass legislation they knew was required. Even if they failed they could have been seen fighting for the people. We know they knew what the required legislation is because Biden suddenly promised national rent controls right before being forced to step aside. Then Harris silently kept them in her campaign but didn't highlight them again until a week before the election. When she was desperate.

Until Democrats actually show, in their actions, that they're fighting for the working class, the beatings will continue. And no shutting down strikes and one vote on minimum wage isn't going to cut it. They need to be in the news every week on some aspect of the financial pain the working class feels, and repeats are not only okay, but necessary. A term has 208 weeks in it, that's enough to press several issues. They can also do a quarterly podcast, this entire idea of silently governing was proven inferior by FDR. Even Obama had the petition system which generated national conversations. People do not expect that a quiet government is doing something. In fact they are suspicious of it.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Asafum@feddit.nl 22 points 2 weeks ago
[–] ChairmanMeow@programming.dev 21 points 2 weeks ago (32 children)
load more comments (32 replies)
[–] Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world 21 points 3 weeks ago

Hahaha, good one. I'm sure that's exactly what's going to happen.

[–] NeilBru@lemmy.world 19 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (4 children)

The message to ~~Democrats~~ neo-libs and neo-cons, is clear: you must dump ~~neoliberal economics~~ corporatism.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] teamevil@lemmy.world 17 points 3 weeks ago

They shouldn't have existed ever. Shock Doctrine by Naomi Klein. My spelling may be off.

[–] WoodScientist@lemmy.world 15 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

It goes beyond just that. I think a Democratic presidential candidate could do well addressing elitist thinking in general. I think they could do quite well with a pledge not to appoint anyone to their cabinet or to a court that graduated from an Ivy League school. One of the reasons we keep seeing the same shitty approaches is that both parties recruit heavily from the same handful of schools. This they're recruited from the same social circles. I would suggest that candidates just flat out state that they'll be filling all their major spots with people who got their education at state schools.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Freefall@lemmy.world 14 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

The message to Democrats is clear: (insert your agenda here)

Boring

[–] LittleBorat3@lemmy.world 13 points 2 weeks ago

Based on the assumption that it was some economic issue, that lost them the votes, this article is pretty good.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›