this post was submitted on 06 Nov 2024
76 points (85.2% liked)

politics

19144 readers
5938 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
 

Unlike 2016, when his victory over Hillary Clinton came as a shock to many Americans, Trump was no surprise in 2024. The Democratic Party had the benefit of four years to ensure that this would not happen again. Yet as in 2016, Democrats appear to have failed to win over the electorate in a race against a uniquely unpopular candidate — this time one with multiple impeachments, indictments, and criminal convictions.

The short-lived Biden campaign and subsequent Harris campaign opted to try to beat Republicans at their own game, by tacking rightward on issues such as immigration, criminal justice, and climate. After President Joe Biden dropped out, the Democratic Party rejected calls to stop providing arms to Israel’s war on Gaza. Instead, Harris touted the endorsements of conservatives such as Liz Cheney. The strategy was a ploy to woo moderates and conservatives wary of a second Trump term, but it may have alienated key voting blocs.

top 30 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 63 points 9 hours ago (4 children)

Honestly, I think they blew it back over the 4 years they barely did anything to lock him up. It took them the better part of 3 years to just get the freaking classified documents back. And they still don’t have them all back.

They sat around all that time because they were afraid of being political. Well guess what. Now that fascist fuck is the next POTUS and it’s bloody political.

[–] AfricanExpansionist@lemmy.ml 33 points 9 hours ago

Exactly. "Biggest ever threat to democracy", so big they sat on their hands for four years

[–] Omegamanthethird@lemmy.world 2 points 2 hours ago

In 2016 when Trump supporters were declaring the economy fixed on DAY ONE. Or when Trump supporters were blaming inflation on the inflation reduction act, which was named after the ALREADY soaring inflation.

They've been gaslighting Americans for the last 8 years. We overestimated Americans, just like Hillary did in 2016, and assumed they would see the obvious faults in logic.

[–] UsernameHere@lemmy.world 2 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

They tried to impeach him and more. They were blocked by Congress. It was pretty clear that they didn’t have enough votes to do anything.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 8 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

What does congress have to do with a fucking criminal trial on violating the National Espionage Act?

[–] UsernameHere@lemmy.world 2 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

What do democrats have to do with it? I was under the impression that you were talking about Congress not taking action to hold Trump accountable.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 15 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Yes, because the DoJ are “congress”.

Biden is the head of the executive branch, and Marrick Garland's boss.

It took Garland two and a half years just to appoint Smith as special counsel. They sat around with their thumbs up their asses hoping trump would fade to obscurity because they were afraid of being “political”

[–] Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works 1 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

Locking up Trump wouldn't have kept the Republicans from winning. They'd have just found another candidate willing to say the same things.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 17 points 9 hours ago

I don't know. it would have been hard for them to change the figurehead of the cult. it also would have sent a clear "Don't do that" signal vis a vis insurrection and treason. Especially because Trump absolutely would have split the vote from jail.

fact is Trump has barely seen any consequences at all for his actions, and now he never will, and that's on democrat's and Biden's DOJ in particular. (And yes. Biden could have lit a fire under Garland if he wanted. Not doing your job is grounds for firing, even if Biden can't dictate day to day or specific courses of actions.)

[–] EleventhHour@lemmy.world 4 points 8 hours ago

One doesn’t guarantee the other. Trump had something special that nobody else seems to have. I doubt they could get that lightning in the bottle again.

[–] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 14 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Donald Trump winning is not an indictment of the Democratic Party, or Harris for that matter. It's an indictment of the American people.

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 9 points 8 hours ago (1 children)
[–] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 6 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

The way modern democracies die is they democratically elect authoritarian leaders who erode and dismantle that democracy. Parties don't matter. It's the people who do it to themselves. Sad but true.

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 0 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

I mean yeah but that didn't need to be now. Harris basically threw the race and that's part of why this disaster came to be. Even assuming American democracy was nearing the end of its lifetime, it should've had a few more decades in it. The popular will to defeat Trump was there.

[–] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 2 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (2 children)

Harris didn't do anything any good pol wouldn't do. The popular will was not there, as the results displayed.

[–] Makeitstop@lemmy.world 2 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Harris tried to run on protecting abortion rights, and saving democracy from Trump and Project 2025. Under other circumstances, that probably would have worked.

Unfortunately, she was the nominee for the incumbent party at a time when the vast majority of voters were unhappy with the economy. That's a hard position to be in, and requires a compelling answer. She had a few token items for the agenda, but nothing that would address the larger issue of people feeling squeezed by inflation. Saying things are better now or going to be better soon doesn't appease the voters who don't feel better.

The horrible truth is, a large portion of the electorate would vote for the literal devil if he was running against an incumbent during a bad economy.

[–] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 2 points 6 hours ago

I've seen this put a different way. That she didn't separate herself adequately fromas Biden, in this case the economy. But, that's the problem for a politician as the minute any c she separates on one issue, others will be asked about. Then the story is about perceived failures, rightly or wrongly. Most young voters have never been through an inflation cycle. They don't realize that that they are pretty natural, and also this one was controlled well. You just ride them out. But, I doubt you could point to this issue as a sole cause.

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 2 points 2 hours ago

Harris didn't do anything any good pol wouldn't do

Huh? Look at her campaign's treatment of the Uncommitted movement, among others, and say that again. Harris was openly antagonizing her voters, relying completely on not being Trump ala Hillary Clinton and courting right wing voters at the cost of her base. And if you don't believe it, well, take it up with Bernie.

[–] UsernameHere@lemmy.world 2 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

I don’t buy this. In Nebraska there was an election between an independent union leader and a career politician. The union leader lost.

The consensus seems to be that people that voted democrat in 2020 voted republican this time because they experienced inflation under Biden that think it was his fault.

[–] AmidFuror@fedia.io 6 points 7 hours ago

All the polls suggest it was driven by the economy. Inflation is quite moderate right now, but the prices stay high, so that's got to be on everyone's mind.

People around here think it's all manner of things except what voters are actually saying.

[–] ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 6 hours ago

I bet Harris hasn't given a speech because they're coming over the votes with a fine tooth comb to check for anything funky. I'm not claiming I think that happened, but the trump party has been caught doing almost every single corrupt thing they have accused the dnc of doing, and the trump party has done an awful lot of finger pointing about rigging the election.