118

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.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 86 points 2 weeks ago

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 39 points 2 weeks ago

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

[-] Mirshe@lemmy.world 8 points 2 weeks ago

Bingo. Garland has the same amount of blame as Biden and Harris. Biden should've thrown him out and replaced him with anyone willing to actually enforce the law regardless of "conflict". Trump doesn't wanna return documents after being asked nicely? An FBI raid or two should fix that. Judge Cannon doesn't wanna prosecute and keeps stalling the case? Move the case to another judge, keep moving it until you find one who isn't going to play games.

The DNC's perennial problem is that they're so afraid of fighting dirty against a party that, since Nixon, has had little problem doing exactly that. I wanted a Democratic Party that was willing to go to the mat and meet the GOP where it was, rather than trying to take the high road, and for a few weeks it seems like we HAD THAT.

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

The sad part is…. That’s not even fighting dirty.

Garland fucked around, and now we’re all finding out.

[-] Omegamanthethird@lemmy.world 7 points 2 weeks 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 2 weeks ago

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 13 points 2 weeks ago

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

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

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 18 points 2 weeks ago

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 2 weeks ago

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 20 points 2 weeks 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 5 points 2 weeks 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.

this post was submitted on 06 Nov 2024
118 points (88.8% liked)

politics

19120 readers
2074 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