764
‘I was not voting before, now I am’: gen Z voters on what they think of Kamala Harris
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 24 Jul 2024
764 points (97.5% liked)
politics
19223 readers
2786 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
On the other hand, if more people had turned out in 2016 we wouldn't be here.
Politics shouldn't be a popularity contest.
You could also say, if the Democrats had nominated a more likeable candidate in 2016, we wouldn't be here.
Clinton got less votes than Obama in 2012 and 2008, even though the population had grown during that time.
And it wasn't the Bernie bros who stayed home. Polling revealed that the Bernie bros showed up.
Blaming the voters is like having your bakery go bankrupt and trying to blame people for not buying your shitty cake.
First, bake a better cake.
"Where are all those advertisers I told to fuck off last year?"
What part of "I like soldiers who didn't get captured" and "grab them by the pussy" confused voters?
Count Dracula should have beaten Trump.
I totally blame the voters.
The voters are literally the ones who picked Biden though.
I know, but we were having a conversation about 2016 and the voters didn't pick Clinton then.
At least, not enough of them in certain swing states.
It also shouldn’t be a duopoly game but here we are.
The shorter election cycle is appreciated. This should be a thing. Say, on July 5th of an election year, then it begins.
Keep the primary results a secret until a couple of weeks before the convention. It'd also help the states with late primaries to not feel irrelevant.
"If wishes were horses then beggars would ride."
We're celebrating the apparent increase in voters that aren't even following the duopoly policies enough to recognize literal fascism vs imperfect but generally good faith politicians.
If they're not informed enough to see the face eating leopard party for what it is, adding more parties to the mix won't improve anything.
I agree that ranked choice voting is desirable. But it won't help with these kinds of voters.
I don’t get that. I still have relatives trying to tell me trickle down economics works, that it is the way. Really? You think successful trickle down economics is why we all feel squeezed right now? You think that’s why Amazon workers go through hell while Bezos flies around in a penis rocket?
Reality isn’t tracking as reality. I’m not sure how one gets to that point where a confident person in a suit announces that x is the truth and so you just start repeating x is the truth and actually believing it.
In a democracy. Politics is absolutely a popularity contest. The population votes. If you want better outcomes, do more for the population. When you don’t give the population what they want, you get totalitarianism which is the course we are on.
If more people had thought they were being listened to, perhaps they would have.
If you want politicians to listen to you, try voting in the primaries.
People need to educate themselves. Look at how Jerry Falwell and his 'Moral Majority' took over the GOP. They had one simple trck; if the local Republican clubhouse got 20 people at the regular meeting Falwell's folks would show up with fifty. They got the little jobs, like county clerk and sheriff, and then the bigger state positions and finally were in a position to control who got the white House.
Please don't gloat that the primaries have had a preordained winner for every presidential race since 2012. Particularly not when the most recent preordained winner had to step down, to the acclaim of the vast bulk of the party.
and BotH Sides aRe ThE SAme, right?
If you're going to tell people not to vote, try coming up with an actual alternative action.
I did not say that people should not vote, or that both sides are the same. You lost the argument and you're strawmanning. The shitty preordained candidate you wanted stepped down. We have a better candidate now.
You said that the primaries were fixed.
If I misunderstood you, it's because you weren't clear.
You made false accusations about me and are now trying to act like it's my fault.
How is it not your fault?
It's your job to write clearly. If someone makes an honest mistake, it's the fault of the speaker.
Also, you claimed the primaries were rigged without giving any actual proof; by your own logic you're the one making false accusations.
What you did was neither honest nor a mistake.