this post was submitted on 06 Feb 2025
688 points (88.9% liked)

Political Memes

6015 readers
3784 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I have problems with people who abstained. The hard thing is, how do you change voter behavior?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ThatWeirdGuy1001 30 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (24 children)

Okay I'm getting sick of the whole "the dems failed us" bullshit.

WE failed. WE let this happen. WE had the choice between an obvious dictator or continued democracy.

You can shift the blame all you want but at the end of the day it was an obvious choice. You can come up with any other excuse you want. If you didn't vote for Harris you are to blame. Period. End of fucking story.

Edit: The dems should've been able to run a wet paper bag against Trump and win. The fuck is wrong with people to not see that?

[–] FooBarrington 21 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (12 children)

While I can understand your perspective, it's one of those unfortunate cases where ideology clashes with reality.

Yes, Trump never planned on following through on actually helping people. He lied, and people bought it. And yet it's no ones fault Harris's that she decided to tell people "things won't change if you vote for me".

A nation of voters isn't made up of individuals who you can convince, it's a crowd of people following certain dynamics, just like any other large grouping of things. You can either accept that and work with this fact to steer the crowd, or you can ignore this fact and lose because you're trying to go against the flow. And in the end, the only people who had any meaningful control was Harris' campaign.

Imagine you're a shepherd, and your flock is running towards the edge of a cliff. Sure, you can plant your feet and say "they shouldn't run off the cliff", but the only end result will be losing all your sheep.

[–] Katana314 4 points 1 day ago (11 children)

I respect your argument, but I still refute it.

There was a saying someone shared recently: Give them the third best option. Because the second best comes too late and the best never comes at all. Essentially, do not let perfect be the enemy of the good.

I agree that Kamala should have developed more of a campaign around frustrated white young men, and working class America. That was a mistake, but I also think it was an easy mistake to make when scrambling to take over from Biden’s campaign.

If we go 4 years from now, 8 years, 30 years, I think every candidate we see will be imperfect and will make mistakes. The only time we’ll ever see a perfect candidate is when they lie about their accomplishments and overstate themselves. Americans need to be able to spot those flaws themselves, and that will not change in any election cycle. I should not get into the White House by promising every working American a trillion dollars.

[–] FooBarrington 22 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I'm not asking for a perfect candidate, not sure where you got that from.

My whole point is that Harris' positions got her some number of voters. We now know that this number was too small, and we also now know that they knew this fact.

Harris could have changed her positions to get more voters, but she didn't. How is this not completely her fault?

Again, I'm not asking her to be some perfect politician. I'm asking her to look at the polling results (which we know she had) and to adapt her campaign based on those, which she didn't do.

[–] Katana314 -5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I have never respected this circular logic. You could use this argument to make any position a "bad one" as long as biases, foolishness or gullibility on the part of the listener override any convincing points. At some point, it is possible for recipients of a message to be bad listeners, and for voters to be irresponsible in their naivety towards a candidate.

[–] FooBarrington 19 points 1 day ago

Okay, but we're not talking about any random position, we're talking about "nothing will change with me" being a terrible position if you want to get elected by people who aren't doing so well.

At some point, the senders of the messages have to accept blame. Otherwise things will never get better, as the least shitty option will get ever shittier.

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (19 replies)