487

Summary

Donald Trump’s decisive victory in the 2024 election leaves no room for ambiguity or an “asterisk” in his legitimacy, as he won both the popular vote and the Electoral College.

This outcome represents a clear mandate from American voters, who knowingly chose Trump’s policies and approach.

The anticipated results include pardons for January 6 participants, attacks on the press, and an administration filled with controversial figures.

By voting for Trump, Americans prioritized divisive rhetoric over democratic values, accepting the resulting turmoil.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Well no worries there mate, as a progressive person myself, racist progressives like yourself have now ensured that the Democratic party will never run another candidate like that ever again! Congrats! You did it!! Project 2025 was made possible by viewers like you!

[-] theparadox@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago

Yes, we all woke up to our future being a fucking fascist horror show. We're all grieving. Chill the fuck out with the "racist" shit, you just dividing the left more.

Yes, I'm sure some people are just misogynistic and racist and stayed home because of that. However, other people feel like it doesn't fucking matter. We understand that it does matter, but I'll be damned if I don't feel that way too sometimes. It's so goddamn frustrating when the Democrats tack right over and over again, hamstringing progressives along the way, and then turn around and say "Vote for us because we're the lesser evil. We've wedged you between a rock and a hard place so suck it up and do your patriotic duty like good little peasants."

Kamala's campaign veered right and abso-fucking-lutely alienated progressive voters. By the end I was legitimately worried she might actually end up being to the right of Biden economically.

Do I forgive lefties for sitting this one out? No. That doesn't mean they won't do it again and that, for the first time in what feels like decades, the Democrats need to actually learn the right lesson from losing an election.

[-] inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

At 15 million non-voters at this point, again, it's not progressives that lost this election and there's millions of Democrats here that went, "you know what, this guy's a criminal, rapist, racist but I'm going to just not vote today to make my point clear".

Democrats and progressives have divided themselves enough as it is without my help and both groups have enough people that are okay with racism taking power again, they've made it loud and clear they're okay with it.

As a minority that's had decades of living with this bullshit, nope, I'm done. Electing Trump once was bad but maybe just a fluke. Electing Trump a second time knowing full well what he is and what he stands for, nope America is a racist country and Democrats and Progressives are fine with it.

[-] theparadox@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago

Votes aren't all counted so no, 15 million didn't sit out. I'm not saying it wasn't millions, but it's not 15 million.

You're fine being part of the problem then? Shit looks bad so you're not going to even try and be civil? You sound like those disaffected voters.

What if the folks that voted in 2020 and didn't vote in 2024 are the type of folks who just normally don't vote and weren't inspired this year? What if the same kind of "there's no way Trump can win" thinking had them taking the situation for granted? Again, not saying they should have fucking voted but maybe it's more complicated than a few million people didn't vote this year so apparently the entirety of the non-republicans are racists. Group punishment is in order?

[-] iwndwyt@sh.itjust.works 0 points 3 weeks ago

the Democrats need to actually learn the right lesson from losing an election.

In related news:

Click here for the truth

*Note: the article is satire

[-] TheFriar@lemm.ee 1 points 3 weeks ago

Translation: “I’m not listening or even willing to pretend to engage in nuance! Which means YOURE RACIST!”

[-] inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

You let a convicted felon, found legally to be a rapist, racist win because you didn't vote due No True Scotsman, then yeah, you're a progressive that condones racism and are a racist in my book. You don't have to agree but then again, I honestly don't give a crap what you think at this point.

[-] TheFriar@lemm.ee -2 points 3 weeks ago

No, you’re still not getting it. And I wasn’t the original person you were arguing with. I voted for Harris, but there is so much nuance involved in the decision that writing it all off as racism is beyond stupid and helps no one but you—the same way the “I won’t vote for Harris because it’s a vote for ____” people were only doing it for themselves. Basically, it’s a glass house and stones situation. You’re both guilty of the same thing.

[-] inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world -1 points 3 weeks ago

I know you're not the original person but you are extending the OP's argument so I'm just taking it from there.

No I do get it, I simply don't care about that particular nuance when your choice is "Man I won't vote because of X so I'll just let Mr. convicted criminal, rapist, overt racist win".

You enable racists, then you're a racist in my book and with 15 million voters, who again statistically are going to be a lot of bog standard Democrats here, who sat out and condoned racists at every level, yeah, that shows me that I was right in 2016 that this country is a racist country and I'm just going to have be okay with that.

[-] TheFriar@lemm.ee 2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Say you get two choices.

One is to poison a town’s water supply without telling them.

The other is poison that towns water supply, not tell them, and then pick off survivors as they flee from the town.

Can you stomach voting for poisoning a town’s water supply if you’re firmly against poisoning people, just because anyone fleeing the town would be able to leave if they managed to survive? That’s the choice we were being asked to make. I get that it’s definitely worse to shoot the survivors, but in the end…either way your vote was to poison people. Some people have strong feelings about it. So strong they couldn’t stomach being the ones to sign on to it.

We all know it’s worse adding the slaughter of the fleeing survivors…but signing your name to the poisoning is unthinkable for a lot of people. It kinda should be unthinkable for all of us.

And you’re just saying “well, all you people are racist!”

See how silly that is?

Nuance, man.

this post was submitted on 06 Nov 2024
487 points (97.3% liked)

politics

19148 readers
2132 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