this post was submitted on 06 Nov 2024
45 points (92.5% liked)

Political Discussion and Commentary

229 readers
111 users here now

A place to discuss politics and offer political commentary. Self posts are preferred, but links to current events and news are allowed. Opinion pieces are welcome on a case by case basis, and discussion of and disagreement about issues is encouraged!

The intent is for this community to be an area for open & respectful discussion on current political issues, news & events, and that means we all have a responsibility to be open, honest, and sincere. We place as much emphasis on good content as good behavior, but the latter is more important if we want to ensure this community remains healthy and vibrant.

Content Rules:

  1. Self posts preferred.
  2. Opinion pieces and editorials are allowed on a case by case basis.
  3. No spam or self promotion.
  4. Do not post grievances about other communities or their moderators.

Commentary Rules

  1. Don’t be a jerk or do anything to prevent honest discussion.
  2. Stay on topic.
  3. Don’t criticize the person, criticize the argument.
  4. Provide credible sources whenever possible.
  5. Report bad behavior, please don’t retaliate. Reciprocal bad behavior will reflect poorly on both parties.
  6. Seek rule enforcement clarification via private message, not in comment threads.
  7. Abide by Lemmy's terms of service (attacks on other users, privacy, discrimination, etc).

Please try to up/downvote based on contribution to discussion, not on whether you agree or disagree with the commenter.

Partnered Communities:

Politics

Science

founded 3 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] LovableSidekick 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Harris tried to address our material conditions too, just different ones. At this point I think a major reason Harris failed is that she's a woman and mainstream America still isn't ready for that, amazingly.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

That's completely false. Tammy Baldwin won in WI, Elissa Slotkin won in MI. It's completely incoherent to blame the fact that she's a woman.

Harris' message did not resonate with people struggling to pay their bills. She completely attached herself to the policies of the Biden administration and the broader status quo.

[–] LovableSidekick 1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

Yes there have been women in Congress for many years. In fact if you wanted to make that point better you could have referred to Jeannette Rankin, who was elected to the House of Representatives in 1916 and again in 1940. It's not "incoherent" to point out the fact that many people are still against having a woman as President. When Hillary Clinton ran in 2016 it came up a lot. And don't take my mention of it as agreement - I voted for Harris.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

Right, but this is literally the same election we're talking about, in the same states that she needed to win, that two women got elected. If the majority of voters are willing to vote for a woman for senate, then it's pretty ridiculous to suggest that they're specifically only opposed to a woman being president. There is not a significant voter bloc that is specifically opposed to a woman being president but is fine with women in any other position.

Your speculation is not "fact." Clinton and Harris are a grand total of two data points that you're using to draw this conclusion, and they were both deeply flawed candidates. Blaming their gender is just a deflection from their actual faults and strategic blunders, of which there were many.

[–] LovableSidekick 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I'm saying Americans will elect women for CONGRESS, but many of them still don't feel good about a woman PRESIDENT. I don't really care if you believe that or not.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I understand what you're saying, what I'm saying is that it's wrong, makes little sense, and is almost completely baseless.

[–] LovableSidekick 0 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Whatever dude. Argue with these ignorant bozos at The Hill who said in July that the number of Americans who say they are ready for a woman president had dropped 8% since 2015. Obviously they just pulled that number out of their ass.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Right, and I suppose I'm supposed to interpret that number as being completely unaffected by the specific woman who was running for president.

By the way, funny you should mention that it "dropped by 9 points" without mentioning the actual numbers. Only 30% said that they weren't ready for a woman president. The vast majority of that 30% is going to vote Republican even if you run the straightest whitest malest person you can find.

Of course, as always, "The Democratic Party cannot fail, it can only be failed." Never point the finger upwards, only ever downward. Their loss cannot possibly have anything to do with their strategies, the voters are always the ones to blame. This refusal to self-criticize is exactly what caused the Democrats to repeat the same blunders that caused Trump to win in 2016. Get your head out of the sand.