this post was submitted on 19 Nov 2024
429 points (94.6% liked)

politics

19118 readers
2747 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] HawlSera@lemm.ee -5 points 1 day ago (4 children)

They saw a woman was running for President and decided they didn't care. It's as simple as that. Sexism gave the election to Trump

[–] 7toed@midwest.social 11 points 1 day ago (3 children)

We can point fingers at demographics, and certainly that may have been a part, but its reductive to say just sexism. If we accept any single reason, there will be no reason to improve our platforms.

You've got Democratic leaning media blaming the dems for being too woke.. and more than half the country just didn't vote. We need a platform that argues in favor of worker and individual rights alike while not capitulating on either, because as soon as you do capitulate to the right, you lose support, plain and simple.

[–] UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml 1 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

These people are throwing as much shit at the wall desperately to find anything to blame other then the Democratic Party. Perhaps it is a coping mechanism because the democrats would rather cling to First-past-the-post voting with rigor mortis clenched hands then to have to actually compete for your vote.

A trump presidency over breaking the two party system.

Party over country.

[–] 7toed@midwest.social 1 points 18 hours ago

I understand to the kneejerk reactions to critique of the dems, but ffs this should be easy to win and who else do you critique then? Actually bring some change to the table and people will perk up to it. They've just let the repubs define them instead of doing anything to even make a name for themselves. At this rate I don't think we'll ever get ranked choice, unfortunately. Won't stop me from trying.

[–] SquatDingloid@lemmy.world -4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

When the only voters who sat out were white and hispanic men then what would be the logical reason?

Why didn't women sit out this election at the same rates? Why not any other groups besides white and hispanic men?

What other conclusions can you even draw for these specific groups that have masculinity issues than not voting for a woman?

[–] 7toed@midwest.social 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Let me go ask my whole voting block brb

[–] SquatDingloid@lemmy.world -1 points 1 day ago

Make sure you phrase it so you don't accidentally emasculate the white and hispanic men

[–] BadmanDan@lemmy.world -1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Latinos shift to Trump won him the election. Harris had the white and black support she needed

[–] 7toed@midwest.social 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

We cant split hairs on demographic turnout if overall turnout is way down from 2020, I mean we can make Latinos a scapegoat, but again we're completely subverting critique that could actually help win an election.

[–] BadmanDan@lemmy.world -2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Im not trying to scapegoat. I’m just pointing out the facts.

[–] 7toed@midwest.social 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The fact is those margins in the Hispanic community would barely make a dent on overall turnout? Hence, scapegoating.

[–] SquatDingloid@lemmy.world -3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

If every white and hispanic man who voted for biden also voted for harris then she would have won

Acknowledging reality is not scapegoating

[–] 7toed@midwest.social 1 points 1 day ago

7,000,000 less votes than Biden has is beyond any single percent margin in minority populations. Even if.. what are you going to do? Harp on said demographics foe making the wrong choice for 4 years? Self righteousness ain't gonna solve the lost vote. Ask why things happen once in a while.

[–] TempermentalAnomaly@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

They shouldn't have run a woman. This election was too important.

[–] Maeve@midwest.social 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I literally lol I'd. I hope that was satire. 😂

That depends. Did Trump win because of sexism? If so, then it's not satire. On the other hand...

[–] bradd@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

Nah, had Tulsi stayed with Democrats, and ran against Trump I would have voted for Tulsi. Instead, Tulsi joined Trump, and I voted for Trump. If Tulsi runs again, I'll vote for Tulsi.

Just watch this (again), there's Joe, Kamala, and Tulsi. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4fjA0K2EeE

[–] Flocklesscrow@lemm.ee 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

53% of white women voted for Trump. Your "America won't vote for a woman" argument doesn't hold water.

Americans won't vote for specific women, sure. Namely Hillary Clinton, and Kamala Harris. The fact that they are women is not why they lost so cataclysmically; they ran platforms that were deeply unengaging to Democrat and Independent voters. Worse, they tried to appeal to Republicans, which only underscored how out-of-touch and unprepared they were to hold the office. Moreover, neither of those specific women, nor the DNC that backed them seems to have learned anything from their continual failures, which, again, only deepens the divide among Democrats' necessary coalitions.

Their failures are a function of being bad at post-Obama politics, and bad at running for the highest office in the land. It's not because they are women.