this post was submitted on 06 Jul 2024
32 points (60.7% liked)

politics

19097 readers
3461 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] dhork@lemmy.world 11 points 4 months ago (4 children)

Sexist enough that a woman who no one likes won the popular vote in 2016. ....

[–] mosiacmango@lemm.ee 34 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (3 children)

Popular vote dont get you shit here.

She lost the race in swing states where "independents" choose the winner. If she had been "John Clinton," with every single bit of the politcal baggage and none of the sexist baggage, I guarantee she would have cleared that 80k vote hurdle in those 3 states.

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 12 points 4 months ago

She lost swing states because she decided she didn't need to campaign there.

[–] pyrflie@lemm.ee 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Not if her statements and Goldman Sachs relationship were as public as they are. Goldman and Chase are political kryptonite for anyone on the left.

Goldman killed Warren in 2020.

[–] elbarto777@lemmy.world -2 points 4 months ago

That's a red herring. The original comment was "America is sexist," and that's a statement based on quantities.

So yeah, the popular vote matters here.

[–] ProvableGecko@lemmy.world 9 points 4 months ago

Joe would have won that election, let alone Bernie. It would have been a different world today

[–] mightyfoolish@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago

I remember the conservatives I worked with hated H. Clinton for "wanting to take our guns away." I told her (it was a white 20 year old girl I was talking to specifically in this group) that whole idea is untrue.

Clinton didn't lose because of her horrible treatment of Africans, her philosophy that abortion should be a states' right issue, because she is a woman, etc. She lost because the "Dems want our guns" propaganda. Conservatives are a simple breed.

[–] BarbecueCowboy@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I think people underestimate how much the Clinton name helped her even when the sexism hurt her. Beyond maybe Michelle Obama now, I can't think of any other woman out there likely to perform as well as Hilary did. During the race, I heard more than one person make comments along the lines of "If she's in trouble, she can just call her husband". She definitely got a lot more points from the Clinton name than she lost for being a woman. It's a sad world sometimes, yall.

I personally think Bill Clinton's brother Roger could have won that race even with all his controversies and the fact that he has zero qualifications.

[–] pyrflie@lemm.ee 3 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

She lost due to her connections.

Her speaking engagements cost her important votes in key states.

If the left wants to win Goldman and Chase are Kryptonite.