this post was submitted on 11 Nov 2024
294 points (97.1% liked)

politics

19090 readers
4031 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
 

Summary

Following Kamala Harris’s unexpected defeat, Democratic leaders are scrutinizing their party’s failures, particularly with working-class voters.

Figures like Bernie Sanders, Chris Murphy, and Ro Khanna argue the party lacks a strong economic message, especially for those frustrated with stagnant mobility and neoliberal policies.

Sanders emphasized Democrats’ disconnect from working-class concerns, while Murphy criticized the party’s unwillingness to challenge wealthy interests.

DNC Chair Jaime Harrison announced he won’t seek re-election, leaving the party’s leadership in flux as Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries prepare to assume top roles amid a Republican resurgence.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Allero@lemmy.today 11 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

The question is: how are they gonna get back on track?

One thing to remember is that Democrats, just like Republicans, are sponsored by the rich, and have their hands tied against taking drastic measures that would actually improve lives of common people against the interest of businesses. This is primarily why key economic points they rallied with never came to fruition.

[–] Maiq@lemy.lol 5 points 22 hours ago

They even go as far as to have poisoned pill dems that are there to tank any change and take the blame. Joe Libreman, Olympia Snowe were likely not the first. Just the first time I saw that trick. I was dumbfounded when everyone let Manchin and Sinema rob that football like Lucy, again!

I remember when Biden was caught hot mic'ed saying "Nothing would fundamentally change" to a room full of rich donors during his first run. He already knew that he wasn't gonna do a fucking thing to help anyone but his donors.

Surprise pekachu all those who forgotten the first three card montie "find the single payer" trick during the Obama years.

The system is working exactly as designed. Repetitively even.

[–] geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml 16 points 1 day ago
[–] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

At what point do we learn that voting for progress is an illusion, a fable, taught and told to us to prevent us from organizing socially to effect real change?

[–] x0x7@lemmy.world 0 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Yeah. Voting is retarded. Yet if anyone on the right tells you that republican democracy is a failed concept that creates a false sense of control and corruption you call them un-democratic and a nazi. But if you come to that conclusion yourself its ok.

[–] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world 0 points 11 hours ago
[–] francisfordpoopola@lemmy.world 1 points 22 hours ago
[–] jaggedrobotpubes@lemmy.world 91 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Democrats are basically a conservative party, a depressing wet blanket to the people's spirits, and Republicans are illegitimate, unhinged extremists.

Democrats are objectively superior in every way and they still suck ass.

Sure would be nice if there was a party that actually represented Americans instead of company profits.

[–] lagomorphlecture@lemm.ee 27 points 2 days ago (8 children)

They have got to stop talking down to voters, gaslighting voters, and they need to give people something to vote FOR instead of against. I find Kamala to be a good speaker and easy to understand but people saying she's using word salad...at first I didn't get what that was all about, especially when Trump makes absolutely no sense whatsoever but I think I might get it now. She's talking to well educated people but a huge swath of this country is not well educated, uses social media extensively, and maybe it actually does sound like word salad to them when democrats start using words that normal people never use and probably don't understand. If you never went to college and only graduated high school because standards have been reduced, maybe she kind of sounds like an alien sometimes. They need an economic message that speaks to people who have been getting crushed more and more since the 80s and they need to say it in terms we can all understand. And when voters tell them "this is how I feel" for the love of God they need to stop saying "no you don't".

[–] Preflight_Tomato@lemm.ee 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Register_(sociolinguistics)#Register_as_formality_scale

I'm not sure about the specifics, but the core I can agree with, that is: 'people speaking the same language, but with vastly different backgrounds, will have difficulty communicating effectively.'

[–] lagomorphlecture@lemm.ee 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yes perfect, thank you for this. I literally majored in Linguistics but didn't even think of this because school was so long ago. The ability to code switch where someone could use the professional language while governing but colloquialisms and everyday language while giving public statements would be nice, to be better understood. We all understand basic informal American English but not everyone has a great education.

[–] Preflight_Tomato@lemm.ee 1 points 1 day ago

Nice, glad to help! And cool that you did Linguistics in school!

[–] dream_weasel@sh.itjust.works 1 points 23 hours ago

How can you NOT appear to talk down to someone who is Trump vocabulary / concept or less about issues that are actually complex and nuanced? Trump can talk out of both sides of his mouth to different groups with radically conflicting messages tuned to the audience. If anyone did that while trying to cater to the left, you would be immediately strung up for being duplicitous while at the same time being excoriated for being vague and nonspecific with your plans. No "concepts of a plan" are going to fly for someone running outside the Republican party.

Trump is basically bowling with the gutter guards up and it's because the Republican electorate is angry and not exactly... uh... discerning when it comes to complex or academic issues.

[–] knobbysideup@sh.itjust.works 17 points 2 days ago (1 children)

TIL speaking plain English is word salad.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ToastedPlanet@lemmy.blahaj.zone 63 points 2 days ago (2 children)

They didn't show the entire tweet chain. Murphy starts off saying we should abandon neoliberalism which is good. But then finished by uncritically supporting men's rights, abandoning social issues, and abandoning action on climate change.

He's calling for Democrats to move to the right. The big tent he's pitching is fascism. A true populist movement that champions socialism and progressive causes can bring people together while also championing these issues.

[–] x0x7@lemmy.world -1 points 14 hours ago

Do you think men shouldn't have rights?

[–] BobQuixote@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] ToastedPlanet@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Murphy starts off saying we should abandon neoliberalism which is good.

The left has never fully grappled with the wreckage of fifty years of neoliberalism, which has left legions of Americans adrift as local places are hollowed out, rapacious profit seeking cannibalizes the common good, and unchecked new technology separates and isolates us.

But then finished by uncritically supporting men’s rights, abandoning social issues, and abandoning action on climate change.

But here's the thing - then you need to let people into the tent who aren't 100% on board with us on every social and cultural issue, or issues like guns or climate.

Listen to poor and rural people, men in crisis. Don't decide for them.

It fits the description to a T. We don't have time for 50% or 0% action on climate change. The window to avert key tipping points that will have catastrophic consequences for the Earth's climate is now.

As a trans person, I am not interested in 50% or 0% of my rights. I would like my right to exist, 100% of the time.

We should push back on some of the more fringe men's rights groups. No one is entitled to a state mandated girlfriend. But it is probably worth understanding how patriarchy harms men because inequality harms us all.

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 3 points 23 hours ago

Exactly. Trans rights, radical climate solutions, but also yeah we need to work with young men to help them feel less isolated and vulnerable to the far right. We need to be talking with rural people as people not just over them

[–] Deconceptualist@lemm.ee 81 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (3 children)

The Dems kept making big proclamations about how the economy has rebounded under the Biden administration. But no one except the wealthy has benefited from that. It felt genuinely insulting every single time. Average folks in the US keep seeing bills, grocery prices, subscription services, and especially housing costs rise steadily. People are so worried about paying for these core things.

But the party never listened to Bernie and just kept saying "look, we fixed it" when they clearly didn't, and I believe that drove away voters.

[–] seaQueue@lemmy.world 49 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (14 children)

The Dems kept making big proclamations about how the economy has rebounded under the Biden administration. But no one except the wealthy has benefited from that.

And that's just a microcosm of Dem policy for the last ~35y. We get it, Democrats are better at government, we all fucking know it. What everyone has been waiting for is a Democrat who'll come along and say "the top 15% of the country has taken 90% of the wealth over the last 35y, it's time for everyone to share in the prosperity."

People are sick of neoliberal business as usual, this is why Hillary lost, this is why Kamala lost. This is why every single Dem candidate from here on out is going to be viewed with skepticism and voters will continue to stay home. People would rather hand the country to a narcissistic kleptocrat and hope for the best than accept four more years of neoliberal business as usual while they try to eke out a meagre existence with ever increasing costs of rent, food, healthcare, energy, insurance and corporate profits.

load more comments (14 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] oakey66@lemmy.world 29 points 2 days ago (1 children)

There's a cognitive dissonance on Lemmy. I keep seeing people post the electorate is stupid for electing trump or staying home while also seeing posts like this acknowledging that the democratic party isn't listening to the constituency. I realize it's likely very different audiences but this is very much a bubble among liberals which unfortunately make up a large part of the party voting base. They were fine with everything continuing to suck a tiny bit more because the alternative was Trump. I think people are just squeezed and exhausted. They're tired of being given the narrative that this is the election that will end all elections while things continue to get worse around the margins. And I think the people that would vote for systemic change don't see Democrats capable of delivering on anything substantive.

Note: This is not an endorsement of Trump or not voting at all as a result. But people really need to reckon with how broken shit is before blaming voters. Democrats have no incentives to fix anything.

[–] homura1650@lemmy.world 28 points 2 days ago (4 children)

Both can be true. A large swath of the electorate is stupid for electing Trump, but the Democratic party failed to reach them. This is a lesson that Republicans have known for decades but Democrats still don't get. Voter's are not rational; being better than your opponent does not win elections. People can be annoyed at the voters for making this reality, and at the Democrats for still not getting it.

In fairness to the Dems though, the incumbent party lost ground in almost every Democracy, and Harris underperformed less in swing states where both parties campaigned.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 46 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (3 children)

I hope Schumer steps back. He’s part of the old guard that got us here, and I don’t think he should be involved in party leadership anymore. Less sure about Jeffries - but frankly, despite his obvious skills, I’m deeply sketched by his refusal to play hardball with Johnson specifically, when he threw him a lifeline to get some stuff done instead of stepping back and letting his party and the situation they and Johnson created eat themselves alive. I think that alone indicates an excellent argument for Jeffries NOT being in leadership. This is not an era for compromise and half measures that perpetuate the status quo, which he inarguably has done.

TL;DR: at this point, it’s my firm opinion that NOBODY who was involved in party leadership up to this point should be let within a country mile of leadership going forward - up to and including “fuck you, the DNC is dead, we’re making a new party”.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] nifty@lemmy.world 19 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

The Dems need to implement the Nordic Model of economic and social policies in the U.S., it’s not that hard outside of removing oversized lobbying influence on U.S. politics

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordic_model

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›