-21
submitted 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) by FatTony@lemmy.world to c/nostupidquestions@lemmy.world

I read a Reddit (through RDX mind you) post the other day that included the Who we serve page from the democrats' website. The user noted that men were not on that list and pointed it out as on of the reasons Kamala Harris had lost. Meaning the Democratic Party should pander to the white young men demographic as well. A link to the post (through RDX)

I keep seeing this sentiment over and over again on social media. And I can't help but make the analogy to the "All lives matter." as opposed to "Black Lives matter." Am I wrong to think this? I am not from the United States. Please don't bite my head off as this is no stupid questions.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 9 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

who are the people that helped Obama win with his campaign of hope and change.

They became the establishment that helped Hillary lose to Trump.

Obama had a winning message and he failed to follow through on a lot of it. It was about hope and more importantly CHANGE.

The change never came, and the candidates that came after never promised hope OR change. People stopped believing Democrats were offering either hope or change. Because they weren't, they were offering "don't rock the boat, it might upset the rich."

I mean, even Obama offered up RomneyCare instead of something more progressive. People got wise to that over time. It made them feel defeated.

Trump offered change, it's that simple. Most in this country are sadly too uneducated to really realize what his type of change means.

Democrats were too busy worrying about whether they could actually implement policy, so they tried to only make promises they could keep, and with Republicans obstructing everything they did, they stopped making real, useful promises to the electorate.

People loved Sanders whether he could make his agenda happen or not, case in point. Nobody likes a policy wonk telling them "no, wait longer."

[-] spankmonkey@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

Obama had a winning message and he failed to follow through on a lot of it. It was about hope and more importantly CHANGE.

Dems failed spectacularly by not getting rid of the filibuster when their supermajority had a couple dissenters. If they had actually followed through instead of letting Republicans obstruct when they had two houses and the oval office they could have shown that change and kept the momentum going. Well, if they actually sold their success, which they are also terrible at.

Instead they held onto their safety blanket that the Republicans neutered to stack the courts, and will absolutely throw out if they get the House too so they can pass all the terrible laws they want.

Dems screwed themselves.

[-] Dark_Arc@social.packetloss.gg 2 points 1 month ago

Obama in his book says similar things about the filibuster. It's his major regret, not ending it when he had the chance so that he could've done more.

this post was submitted on 08 Nov 2024
-21 points (35.2% liked)

No Stupid Questions

36055 readers
837 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS