this post was submitted on 11 Nov 2024

-26 points (22.9% liked)

politics

19236 readers

3431 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

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

-26

Opinion | The Elites Had It Coming (www.nytimes.com)

submitted 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) by [email protected] to c/politics

21 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Archive: [ https://archive.is/N9Bp5 ]

Liberals had nine years to decipher Mr. Trump’s appeal — and they failed. The Democrats are a party of college graduates, as the whole world understands by now, of Ph.D.s and genius-grant winners and the best consultants money can buy. Mr. Trump is a con man straight out of Mark Twain; he will say anything, promise anything, do nothing. But his movement baffled the party of education and innovation. Their most brilliant minds couldn’t figure him out.

all 23 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] PorradaVFR 21 points 1 month ago

So fucking rich that it's the NYT suggesting they effectively reported the facts and own no culpability.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 month ago

The elites won't pay for this...not as much as the guys who voted for him.

[–] gAlienLifeform 10 points 1 month ago

They still have it coming. Unless they're personally on Trump's hit list they're going to be too wealthy and insulated to feel any real consequences from a Trump administration. The people who are going to suffer the most are minorities and poor people.

[–] just_another_person 7 points 1 month ago

Dumb take

[–] Sanctus 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)

We're just gonna talk about Vance's hometown like any of that is true?

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 month ago

"the elites had it coming", but they won't be the one's catching the worst of this next administration. I suspect there are college graduates on both sides of the aisle. FU NYT, you helped to create this coming debacle.

[–] CharlesDarwin 5 points 1 month ago

Uh, how are the elites going to have anything coming but more tax breaks and more special privileges? If things get bad enough for liberal elites, they can just move, and keep their money. Elites are not going to suffer; it is the poor and middle class, no matter how they voted.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

"settler colonialism"... My problem with this bit of academic jargon was not that it was wrong... but rather that it offered a glimpse of our poisoned class relations

This pale, racist bro has no clue who the actual victims of settler colonialism are. Zero mention of any genocide at any time or place. He just wants to protect the feelings of his fellow pale people with delusional myths.

The dems/"elites" lost because they unilaterally imposed a completely uninspiring, genocidal cop on us.

[+] [email protected] -7 points 1 month ago (4 children)

I think the problem is that many Democrats are stuck in an information bubble, and instead of listening to the other side, they demonize them and cancel them. It is hard to figure out what the other side is thinking if you don't actually listen to what they are thinking.

[–] dhork 10 points 1 month ago (2 children)

You're gonna get downvoted, but you're partially right. Everyone self-selects their media, and avoids things that challenge their assumptions. Liberals are not exempt from this.

And if we are having nuanced policy discussions, it's possible to listen to the other side and respond. But when our political discourse is "They're eating the cats", and you know that's not true, what other way is there to respond?

[–] gAlienLifeform 8 points 1 month ago

A talking head who gets paid a six figure salary to go on TV and spout inane bullshit about immigrants eating pets shouldn't be replied to. Cletus in the comment section who has a two year degree and makes an hourly wage to do skilled manual labor and honestly thinks the government will let any migrants who want to do so walk into the country whenever they want and give them a welfare check for their trouble does need to be spoken with.

That's all a lot easier said than done, but I think that's the general outline of the problem here.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

To be fair, Republicans live in their own information bubble too. But the difference is that the Republican leadership knows how to talk to the middle, and the Democrats don't seem to know how to do that.

[–] CharlesDarwin 6 points 1 month ago (2 children)

We see them. We live among them. We have to work with them. A lot of us have to hear them on the daily.

We know that a lot of what they are "thinking" is due to letting the right wing propaganda machine take a big dump in their skulls every day, and nearly everything they are "thinking" (really, feeling) is based on entirely false premises.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago

I think I know who you are talking about. The loud and proud ones. But what the loudest people are saying is no necessarily what most people are thinking. So you can't assume everyone thinks like them.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Even if their thinking is based on false premises, as you claim, they have legitimate grievances. The Democrats will never get their votes if they don't address the grievances with a realistic alternative plan.

[–] CharlesDarwin 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

What if their grievances are "there is an open border" and "kids are going to school and coming back after having a sex change"?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Most people's grievances right now are the economy and inflation. And they want change. They want the elites to have less control over their lives.

Sure, the right has some crazy ideas. So does the left. But the middle decides elections because they are the swing voters, and the middle's main grievances are the economy and that they feel helpless in a world where the wealthy control everything.

[–] CharlesDarwin 2 points 1 month ago (3 children)

What are some of these crazy ideas of the left's?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

Not sure. Most of the ideas are well-intended. Sometimes the implementation could use some work though, but I don't see anything too crazy.

Some people on the right freak out over gender, but people should have a right to be who they are, and not have to fit into some gender stereotype.

But there are examples that go too far. For example, taxpayer funded sex changes for prisoners was a bit much. Sure, they should have the right to do that, but why should taxpayers pay for it?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

I think the craziest thing on the left is their soft on crime attitude. It simply is counterproductive. It does not accomplish what they think it accomplishes. It is good to be compassionate with people, but instead of letting people get away with crime, what would be more compassionate is to rehabilitate them so they they can support themselves without resorting to crime.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

I just thought of some good examples of crazy. (I don't call them crazy, but other people do.)

Stance 1: Anti-Immigration (don't let foreigners in).
Stance 2: Open Borders (let anyone in with no checks, including criminals)
Stance 3: Immigration Reform (allow immigration and make the process easier, but weed out the criminals)
Stance 4: Status Quo (allow immigration, but it is difficult and time consuming)

Many people think that stances 1 and 2 are "crazy." I just think that they are counterproductive and ineffective. And the anti-foreigner thing is racist.