politics
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
view the rest of the comments
Kamala's biggest weakness was trying herself with Joe Biden. She should have taken a more radical approach and sweeping changes.
I would argue the biggest factor is the lack of a primary. Kamela didn't get to prove her 2024 chops, along with not having nearly enough time to organize a campaign. Biden and his handlers really screwed the pooch.
What it really comes down to, though, is corporate donors. Never forget that most of the high democratic leadership are a feckless and dependent lot. Kamela, like the rest, listened to the demons.
I mean, not having a real platform beyond business as usual, ignoring the cost of living crisis, and expressing a commitment to continued genocide were particularly large factors.
Harris raised 50% more than Trump. It’s hard to pin this one solely on big money influence.
Her messaging changed midway through her campaign, to one that was friendlier to a center-right disposition. She lost a good deal of her mojo because of that, since she became Biden v2.0. While obviously better than Trump, she was rejected for being more of the same. Many politicians across the globe felt a backlash in 2024 for not trying to rock the boat.
I agree. Her speech on the Monday after she got picked was great. She came out of the gate swinging. She laid out a solid initial vision with a realistic warning that it was going to be a hard fight.
Then she didn't.
Somewhere along the line she got cold feet and decided that not rocking the boat would be a safe option. She thought that pushing too hard would galvanize her opponents. Instead she tried to play nice with them and alienated large chunks of her base.
That just tells me she was paid to take a dive.
Maybe. I think it's more likely that she truly believed that her milquetoast approach was actually the safer option. I'm not even sure Harris was exceptionally cowardly.
Many other people would likely have folded and taken that "safe" option.
The problem is that we needed someone who went well beyond just "not cowardice". We needed an actual hero. We needed a candidate who was willing to boldly face down big money interests, even when it seemed unwise and hopeless. Harris definitely wasn't that hero.
This is why the neoliberal tendency to announce that any given neolib is the second coming of FDR always falls so flat. FDR welcomed the hatred of those that consider the Government of the United States as a mere appendage to their own affairs.
Neoliberals regard such people with awe and reverence.