89
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] jordanlund@lemmy.world 19 points 2 weeks ago

Pretty obvious to anyone who observed it:

  1. Biden held on too long making it impossible to run a proper primary.

  2. Harris wasn't allowed to differentiate herself from Biden.

Time of Death: October 8th, 2024:

https://youtube.com/shorts/SJRk5PV588Q

[-] Bbbbbbbbbbb@lemmy.world 12 points 2 weeks ago
  1. people dont like unwaivering support for genocidal Israel
[-] kvasir476@lemmy.world 15 points 2 weeks ago

It's gotta be either this or evidence that the base is further left than they thought and moderating to the right was a dogshit strategy. Nothing else seems like it's threatening enough to the establishment to warrant burying the report. Though if I was gonna bet, I'd be putting it on support for Israel.

[-] takeda@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 weeks ago

3rd option would be evidence of election fraud by GOP but they are afraid DOJ will go after them.

[-] kvasir476@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

LMAO if that's it, we're even more fucked than I thought.

[-] takeda@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 weeks ago

We are actually very fucked unless Americans woke up.

https://youtu.be/XaqKHHbSOEc

This is take from an American historian and she also mentions that US has this happen 2 times already and people woke up and stopped it. Let's hope this time it won't be different.

load more comments (17 replies)
[-] Maeve@kbin.earth 3 points 2 weeks ago
  1. People are beginning to wake up that good/bad cop is still slave patrol for the empire.
[-] MagicShel@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 weeks ago

You are giving people way too much credit here. Your average voter for either side isn't thinking this hard.

[-] Maeve@kbin.earth 2 points 2 weeks ago

Hence "beginning."

[-] Switorik@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 weeks ago

I don't understand this one. Both sides seem to support this?

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 weeks ago

people dont like unwaivering support for genocidal Israel

Some of us draw a harder line: as long as Israel is genocidal, no support. Sanctions instead. So where's a party that actually runs on that?

[-] zenitsu@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Anyone still describing support under Dems as "unwaivering" compared to Trump deepthroating Netanyahu and posting Gaza riviera AI slop, needs to take their pills.

Progressives got scammed by the right & foreign states into not voting for Kamala because of Gaza. Braindead clowns.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] fox2263@lemmy.world 8 points 2 weeks ago

I felt like she had so much traction in the beginning, and with Walz coming in on board and really hitting the MAGA in the stomach with their comebacks.

But then suddenly they just stopped, and MAGA was able to reposition and gain the upper hand for the remainder of the season.

So yeah, shit themselves in the foot a few months before the end. Such a shame, I think they would’ve ok.

[-] orlyowl@piefed.ca 4 points 2 weeks ago

But then suddenly they just stopped, and MAGA was able to reposition and gain the upper hand for the remainder of the season.

Don't forget cozying up to Republicans. I think they took the campaign to the right because of some crazy idea that they needed to try for getting Republican votes. They stopped punching maga in the nose out of a misguided idea that they might steal some R votes from Trump.

u7rXuj49wLITXCV.webp

[-] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 weeks ago

She was just inept. Remember her talking about how much she liked her handgun? She should have used Hapiness Is A Warm Gun as a campaign tune.

[-] Bustedknuckles@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

I distinctly remember when they told Walz to stop calling out how weird the Elon/Vance/Trump crew all were. It was working and I couldn't understand why stop. Some wormtongue consultant or PAC? It was baffling

[-] Krono@lemmy.today 3 points 2 weeks ago

Many people point to the influence that Uber exec and Kamala-brother-in-law Tony West had on the campaign.

His pro-corporate policies helped Kamala raise a billion dollars, but accepting that corporate money is a deal with the devil: it shifted her policy proposals and rhetoric significantly to the right.

[-] NekoKoneko@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Yeah, I don't know if it's just the same Democrat consultants every presidential election, but the last three elections they've always, always reverted to, "The election is three months away but you've already won, so for the love of god don't do anything inspiring to our base because that might upset Republicans and make them attack us more. In fact, just put all your energy into getting Republican votes."

[-] stickyprimer@lemmy.world 5 points 2 weeks ago

And having no primaries turned off a lot of people. It’s like he died and she was sworn into office, except he didn’t actually die and she never took office.

[-] jordanlund@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago

Yup, and it takes 6 to 8 months to organize a primary, 100 days to the election wasn't enough time.

[-] ohulancutash@feddit.uk 3 points 2 weeks ago

She also refused any broadcast interviews of substance to make her case.

[-] Hello_there@fedia.io 1 points 2 weeks ago

Harris 'wasn't allowed'? Fuck that, you're the candidate now. What would they have done, unannounced you? She doesn't have the ovaries to take a strong stand.

[-] jordanlund@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago
[-] stephen01king@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 weeks ago

All that financial backing didn't help her win. She would rather lose the election than lose a source of money.

[-] jordanlund@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago

She would have lost harder without it.

[-] stephen01king@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 weeks ago

Would she? What part of the money she received made her pivot to the right more palatable to the average voter?

[-] jordanlund@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

It was never about the average voter, it was all about appealing to the people with the money.

[-] stephen01king@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 weeks ago

But would she have lost more votes from people with money than she wouldn't have lost from the average voter had she not pivoted? Given that people with enough money to be called wealthy are the minority, I don't believe so.

[-] jordanlund@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

Again, it wasn't about voters, it was all about money.

[-] ViceroTempus@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

Then she never had a chance. And the DNC fucked up hard by putting her forward.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 weeks ago

wasn’t allowed

What would be the consequences if she went off-piste?

[-] jordanlund@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago

Abandonment by the Biden camp, who were really the only people supporting her.

[-] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 weeks ago

There were other potential donors who sat it out because she was running as Biden 2.0.

[-] jordanlund@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

Yup, but they had less money than the Biden machine.

load more comments (3 replies)
this post was submitted on 17 May 2026
89 points (98.9% liked)

politics

29962 readers
538 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 3 years ago
MODERATORS