this post was submitted on 16 Nov 2024
145 points (91.4% 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
 

Summary

Kamala Harris’s presidential campaign failed to connect with low-income workers due to a perceived lack of listening, according to AFL-CIO, the largest federation of labor unions in the US.

While union members largely supported Harris, many low-income voters backed Trump, swayed by his messaging on economic insecurity.

Despite Biden’s pro-labor policies, including infrastructure investments, the AFL-CIO now faces challenges under a likely Trump presidency.

AFL-CIO emphasized labor unions’ resilience and commitment to fighting rollbacks while advancing organizing efforts.

With public approval for unions at a near 60-year high, the labor movement plans both defensive and offensive strategies to protect workers.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Yondoza@sh.itjust.works 14 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

The campaign connected just fine with the college educated working class. It didn't connect with the highschool or less education working class. IMO it seems the big party divide today is higher education.

Working class should refer to people whose income is primarily derived from selling their labor vs the value of their assets.

We need to start using the term working class correctly.

[–] jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 26 minutes ago

certainly didn't connect with me and my social circle and we're all college educated working class. maybe you're confusing people who voted for her as people who thought she was worth voting for?

[–] droporain@lemmynsfw.com 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Harris was a real candidate as much as the Tyson Paul fight was legit. Just another scam for the rich to grift.

[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca -1 points 37 minutes ago

Assertion unsupported by any facts.

[–] Nougat@fedia.io 25 points 7 hours ago (14 children)

You know what you call someone who votes for fascism? A fascist.

How do you appeal to fascists without being more fascist than the alternative?

America is comprised of stupider, shittier people than was thought.

[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca -1 points 36 minutes ago

Perfect is the enemy of better.

This has been explained so many times.

load more comments (13 replies)
[–] Natanael@slrpnk.net 76 points 9 hours ago (9 children)

"we have a concrete plan for helping you" - crickets

"my plans will hurt you but I'm pretending otherwise" - "what a brilliant businessman!"

[–] verdantbanana@lemmy.world 21 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago) (2 children)

her plan involved helping people get a home loan with no plans to raise the minimum wage

what did Harris say she was going to bring to table that would attract any voters other than high middle and above class?

[–] jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.com 25 points 6 hours ago

That home loan was fucking worthless to boot. You know what would save Americans money? Directly building homes and selling them at cost.

[–] Natanael@slrpnk.net 5 points 6 hours ago

Support for unions, getting inflation down, etc

[–] BMTea@lemmy.world 6 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (3 children)

"We have a concrete plan to help you! For example, higher federal minimum wage!"

"Okay, take my vote!

Four years later

"You've been in office for four years. Where is the minimum wage hike?"

"Turns out we can't actually do it unless we have a supermajority of government. And then it's still questionable if we will. Vote for us some more in your state and presidency. Hope that others in other states do too. Also stop bitching, we are moral and the other people are fascists, do not fail us, you must defend women and minorities by keeping us in power etc etc."

"I had more money under Trump, fuck off."

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] RagingNerdoholic@lemmy.ca 15 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

Did she, though? All I remember is something about a "new small business" subsidy fund, which is... good, I suppose, but didn't address any of the probkems the average American is facing.

Okay, there was also the suggestion of Medicare for all, which would put a dent in things, but I only heard it casually mentioned once and it sounded like something she was "open to discussing," not a core part of her platform.

Aside from that, there was nothing directly addressing the core daily problems the majority of people are experiencing, like overpriced living expenses and underpaid wages.

[–] jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (1 children)

The small business loan was a joke if you look at the details. First off most people dont want to start a business its a lot of hard fucking work with a lot of risk. It also had a bunch of means tests involved. Which would make it a disaster to implement and a disaster to get.

[–] RagingNerdoholic@lemmy.ca 5 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

Exactly. That's the "not addressing the actual problems" part. It's a sounds-good, feels-good, low impact, high visibility token effort. Throw out a little morsel for the general public that doesn't really help, but critically, doesn't impact profits for the wealthy class.

[–] EleventhHour@lemmy.world 9 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago) (1 children)

I hate to say it, but you have a point. While Kamala had lofty plans to do right by a lot of special interests, she ignored several important ones. What really killed her chances was that, for all of her promises, she had no plan to execute them with what would turn out to be a very hostile Congress.

That, mixed with the delayed effects of both Trump’s and Biden’s influence, the dogshit-brained blamed Biden for Trump’s bullshit while crediting Trump with Obama’s achievements after Bush. And it’s gonna happen again when all of Biden’s work to improve the economy takes affect during the second of Trump term and everything Trump does wreck the economy so the next president after him will take the blame for it.

Because most voters in this country, don’t understand that economic policy rarely takes affect in fewer than 2 to 4 years, but the dog shit inside their skull makes them blame whomever is president at the moment, regardless of their actual capability.

[–] SaltySalamander@fedia.io 6 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Because the media they consume have told them it's the fault of the current president, and they're too simple to do any thinking for themselves.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 10 points 8 hours ago

Similar thing happened with Hillary and the green energy jobs training.

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

That's not the message working people heard. They heard, "we are the establishment whose theories have been fucking you over for fifty years, but in our infinite wisdom and benevolence we have decided to make some changes that WE have determined will make your lives better, and so you must vote for us. After all, we are your intellectual superiors."

[–] Narwhalrus@lemmy.world 11 points 7 hours ago (3 children)

Yes. Incredibly theoretical, difficult to understand, highly abstract plans like "raising the national minimum wage".

[–] jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

Wrong plans, they're referring to the joke '50k small business loan with a bajillion strings attached', 'a maybe tax hike for the wealthy, but no transfer to middle/lower income', 'here are two tax credits half of which only impact parents and together dont break even on inflation', 'absolute refusal to commit to keeping khan', in short dems to working Americans: fuck you, and here's some genocide on top. Vote for us because we think we're the only option.

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 3 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

Yes. Incredibly theoretical, difficult to understand, highly abstract plans like “raising the national minimum wage”.

Gee. Can't imagine why they didn't have any fucking credibility on that one.

Thumbs down, curtsy

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Natanael@slrpnk.net 4 points 6 hours ago (3 children)

Because they heard that from Republicans who lied to them

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] newthrowaway20@lemmy.world 47 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) (4 children)

Trump told people they were struggling and only he could fix it.

Kamala told people the economy was rebounding and they were gonna create more opportunities for the middle class.

People didn't give a shit about what opportunities they were given. They also didn't give a shit about a rebounding economy because none of them were feeling things getting better. Media kept saying real wages beat inflation finally. Only after 3 years of insane inflation where wages in no way kept up.

So sure, the economy is better than it was, and better than the rest of the world. But the shock happened and nothing was done to actually help the people that were suffering. Instead they were told by Democrats that 'it could have been worse! And it will be worse under Trump' basically admitting they weren't really interested in helping.

So Trump, despite him not actually caring or really planning to do anything about it, stayed on message with something that resonated to voters. While Kamala assumed people wanted to start businesses? People can't afford food but sure, let's talk about how they have some opportunity to open a mom and pop shop across from Walmart.

[–] Makeitstop@lemmy.world 4 points 4 hours ago

I wouldn’t say Trump stayed on message, but he included it enough in the insane rambling.

The problem is that Harris was from the incumbent party and administration at a time of deep dissatisfaction with the economy. That's an extremely difficult position to be in, and it's made all the worse for her because as VP she gets all the blame by association but can't really do much personally to adjust policy. She's handcuffed to the status quo at a time when the vast majority want change.

Biden and Harris both chose to try to defend the status quo and spin things as more positive. This waa a mistake. I don't know if they would have won by acknowledging the problems and portraying this as them leading through a time of crisis, and how they have plans to get us through, but it probably would have had a much better chance.

It also didn't help that most of the things they did to address the economic woes were either indirect or only narrowly targeted (or canceled out by courts). News that a factory will eventually open and add jobs in one area doesn't alleviate the concerns of the vast majority of voters, nor does processing student loan forgiveness for a few thousand people at a time under very specific programs. These things are good, but they don't make most people feel better the way a more broadly applicable benefit would.

[–] TransplantedSconie@lemm.ee 43 points 9 hours ago (5 children)

She literally said, "I will go after price gouging," which is 100% the reason prices are so high, but instead, the media focused you on starting a business. The whole price gouging thing was absent from every news article. The only time you heard it was when she spoke live. Absolutely wild.

[–] ryathal@sh.itjust.works 13 points 8 hours ago (2 children)

This message fell flat. She's the vice president, the message should have been I'm working with the AG now to investigate price to gouging, and will continue that when elected. Also the end result is just the government getting a small settlement check, that means fuck all to people.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 44 minutes ago* (last edited 44 minutes ago)

Do... You know what the Vice President does? And she should have done all of this while she was campaigning?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Diva@lemmy.ml 14 points 8 hours ago

One of the frustrations was that they would be talking about how the economy was doing great... if you were a homeowner. The inflation was also in things like rent which they have no intent on really addressing, but disproportionately gets omitted from broader stats regarding inflation despite people getting $500+ rent increases shortly after the end of the COVID eviction protections.

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

She literally said, “I will go after price gouging,” which is 100% the reason prices are so high

Right. She also said she wouldn't do anything different from Biden. Whose public-facing opposition to price gouging consisted of "knock it off, guys"

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] TransplantedSconie@lemm.ee 35 points 9 hours ago

This loss brought to you by Corporate Media. We sanewash the insane bullshit and manipulate you into anything.

https://youtu.be/DnPmg0R1M04

[–] pyrflie@lemm.ee 12 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Preventing the Railworker's Union strike pretty much solidified the Democratic position as a Union enemy regardless of anything that happened afterward.

[–] AWistfulNihilist@lemmy.world 5 points 3 hours ago

He closed that strike down in like December of 2022, the East Palestine train derailment happened on February 2023, exactly what the rail workers were warning about.

East Palestine was arguably in Biden's hands. Maybe the regular people forgot, but a lot of union workers didn't.

[–] TacticsConsort@yiffit.net 12 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

I wonder how much this whole situation resonates with what happened in Argentina, when they elected Milei.

Milei to them was an obvious lunatic who would probably be terrible but had a small chance to be different, versus their traditional party who would very obviously just continue the country's predictable economic decline.

Then again, I can't really see any way Trump could be good for you if you're poor. Not ever by the most charitable interpretations.

[–] AmidFuror@fedia.io 17 points 8 hours ago

I think the difference is we already had Trump as President. Thinking he might be good now is admitting you have no idea how he was the first time.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›