175
Democrats Chose Backing a Genocide Over Defeating Trump
(therealnews.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 06 Nov 2024
175 points (77.8% liked)
United States | News & Politics
7378 readers
757 users here now
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
100%. It wasn't just the genocide though. They alienated the progressives. Kamala was scared to actually talk outside of mostly scripted messaging and interviews. They didn't provide and explain strong progressive policies. To me, Kamala was pretty indistinguishable from Joe Biden and other corporate Democrats. Her picking Tim Walz was a great move and she was way up in the polls. Had she leaned into him more, broke from Joe Biden (even thrown him under the bus a bit), and turned to other progressives for advice rather than the DNC corporate consultants, she would have won.
The Dems will always alienate their leftward sections, they serve monopolist capitalists just like the republicans do. It's time for liberals to be radicalized and read theory, join orgs, and join leftists.
If anyone wants a good intro list on Marxist theory, I can provide one.
But Joe Biden beat Trump. Seems like she could have won by being more like Joe Biden.
Male. And white.
Biden beat Trump during COVID and when Trump was the incumbent. Being, "not the other guy" works a lot better when you aren't currently the president when the bad things are happening.
Given high inflation that was never balanced by wages or deflation and an ongoing sponsored genocide, "more of the same" and a near complete lack of major policy positions means hewing close to the unpopular incumbent.
Also she literally never won a primary. She lost to Yang lmao. This was donors shoving a pro-gemocide empty suit candidate down peoples' throats. "Winning" is a secondary goal to choosing the candidates.