Lemmings when given evidence that their preferred political actor could be doing better:
this post was submitted on 05 Nov 2024
-21 points (34.8% liked)
politics
19144 readers
2315 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Sticking your head in the sand and downvoting whatever you disagree with is how you make good policies and candidates, right?
If she wins today, that's good. If she loses, I have to laugh because I'll cry that it could have been prevented but choose to ignore it.
Not by her though. It's the risk of running a candidate that's part of a current administration. They can't even pretend to promise they'll make radical changes; they have to align with the current policy position.
That was her choice though. But some of those same breaks could have potentially hurt her Never Trump coalition. She made some space with Biden during her Elipse speech, but that was a bit late. That was probably her one misstep in the campaign. Regardless, the day isn't over, very few counts are in. I think she did well in her campaign all things considered.
She didnt "have to" align with Biden as much as she did. That was a clear mistake and a missed opportunity. She also didnt have to support the far right wing israeli genocide. She didnt have to spend the entire last month of her ground game trying to appeal to disaffected repiblicans, losing dem base support every single day in the process. She didnt have to do so poorly on the economy issue either.
Lets face it, she was a flawed candidate. She's a political noob who by her past performance appears hesitant to take policy positions.
I'm saying as a subordinate in the Whitehouse she cannot largely deviate from the official position to the degree and outside candidate could.
Lots of other failings, as you point out. But on the topic of Israel there is little that could have been said, even if there was the desire.
I'm not excusing her of anything, I think it was a flaw of picking her as the candidate.
I’m saying as a subordinate in the Whitehouse she cannot largely deviate from the official position
She absolutely can. VP is an elected position, whats he going to do, fire her? cut her out of decisions? Decisions already literally werent her job. And he could read a poll the same as the rest of us. He should have understood that she needed to play to win. You're confusing loyalty with her inability to grab the ring and lead.
US doesn't have a centrist or left leaning party. It is either centre right or a far right party. If a party is only counting the right wing vote it is but obvious that a far right would be much more appealing than a centre right.
That leaves the centrist and left leaning populace without a voice. People can berate them for not choosing a right wing party to avoid far right getting power. But that just glosses over the fact that there is no representation of them in either direction.
If downvotes were electoral college votes, Harris would have won based on this post.
Trump won poplar vote so that doesn't matter.
Downvotes are how you engage with criticism and reflections, right?
EDIT: Ooo, thank you for engaging with my points and reflecting all of this. Good stuff.
EDIT: [slow clap] Good job. I couldn't have timed this better myself. Thank you for proving my point in the most bittersweet way possible on the night Trump wins again. Jesus.