259

Summary

Kamala Harris’s political skills have transformed a potentially disastrous 2024 presidential election into a competitive race.

Despite initial skepticism and a challenging campaign, Harris has improved her public image and closed the gap with Trump on key issues. Since Biden stepped aside in July and endorsed her, she has shifted from an unpopular vice president to a viable candidate, even matching Trump in polls on economic issues.

Her leadership has given Democrats a chance to prevent a Trump landslide and halt the rise of American authoritarianism.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 106 points 1 month ago

The fact that it's close is a testament to the idiocy and racism of the American public.

[-] lettruthout@lemmy.world 51 points 1 month ago

That and just a dash of sexism.

[-] Damage@feddit.it 5 points 1 month ago

TBH when her candidacy first was announced I was completely convinced that Trump had already won... A woman, AND black?

[-] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 10 points 1 month ago

Voting is a two way street.

You can't put all the blame on voters and none on the campaign. One of those groups gets paid millions and millions of dollars to get a D president.

When we ran a young charismatic candidate with a progressive campaign in 08, it was easy to get voters on board and red states became blue, it even carried over to flipping state governments

[-] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 17 points 1 month ago

If we had a moderately sane Republican running, I'd agree with you.

But anyone who looks at Trump and thinks "Yep, that guy should have the nuclear football" is a fucking moron and I'm terrified that they're allowed to operate motor vehicles.

[-] givesomefucks@lemmy.world -1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

But you can still make the argument the DNC seeing trump and using that as an excuse to run candidates more conservative than Dem voters are is also a dangerous thing...

That's what I'm saying, you can blame 10s of millions of voters, or the handful of people at the DNC who get paid millions to get a Dem elected.

Both should do the right thing, and I get criticizing both. I even get criticizing the handful of wealthy unelected people running the DNC as the priority.

But I'll never understand why so many people demand only voters compromise and insist the handful of unelected wealthy, powerful, and connected people running the DNC are above reproach

[-] AA5B@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

If the Republicans were running a sane choice, then Democrats holding to their ideals would be key. Voters would have an actual choice and candidates would need to better distinguish themselves

However we have a scenario where the Republicans candidate is not a sane choice for the future of our democracy, our country, our future, and are in some sort of bizarro world where half the population is fine with that. A bizarro world where saying the quiet part out loud is “telling it like it is”, where blatant corruption and fascism is somehow not just tolerated but even celebrated. Where it’s ok to be racist, sexist, and scapegoating is the strategy of the day

While I’m happy to be voting FOR Harris, it’s critical in so many ways to vote AGAINST Trump, his excesses, his corruption, his abuse of power, his signature for sale, his lackey for Putin, his willingness to sacrifice our future for more money today, his narcissism at the expense of the citizens a President is meant to serve

[-] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago

I don't blame Democratic voters. I blame every voter. This should be a no brainer. Trump should be polling in the single digits.

Americans are fucking stupid. The ones who vote are stupid. The ones who run the parties are stupid. The ones who don't vote are stupid.

I keep trying to hitch a ride off this bug infested mudball but even the aliens know to avoid it.

[-] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

And in 08 a young charismatic candidate with a progressive platform got them to vote for him even in red states

The voters will vote if given a better option.

Bill Clinton, who won in 1992, was from the midwestern state of Arkansas. I think this trend started long before, and has to do with the center of the US shifting differently from some of the more populated areas of the US.

When we ran a young charismatic candidate with a progressive campaign in 08, it was easy to get voters on board and red states became blue, it even carried over to flipping state governments

See https://lemmy.world/comment/12409521 - but the TLDR is that 2008 isn't comparable, since a major gerrymandering effort by the GOP took place in 2010 that took Dems by surprise - and this gerrymandering made the above virtually impossible to repeat (by design, I might add).

[-] simplejack@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Or is a testament to how effective rich authoritarians have been at keeping much of the public uneducated and or fed misinformation.

this post was submitted on 05 Nov 2024
259 points (72.4% liked)

politics

19188 readers
1763 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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