346
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 11 points 4 hours ago

There is a world in which it's not her fault or anyone else's fault. You can run a flawless campaign and lose for reasons beyond your control, or any other single stakeholder's control.

[-] Tinidril@midwest.social 3 points 2 hours ago

Do you think Harris is running a flawless campaign?

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago
[-] jhymesba@lemmy.world 4 points 3 hours ago

Yeah, Picard Principle at play here. You can commit no mistakes and still lose. I can argue that there are a few things that Harris could do better. Americans are stupid and cruel as a whole...you tact too hard to the Left, you piss off the moderate voters and they stay home, vote Third Party, or worse, vote Trump, and if you tact too hard to the Right, you piss off liberal voters, and while they are less likely to vote Trump, you still lose their votes.

Man, we shouldn't even be having this conversation at all. Trump is a convicted felon. He should be in jail right now, getting ready for the next trials.

[-] Tinidril@midwest.social 4 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

I'm amazed that anyone is still buying the "moderate voters" bullshit. Just try to picture an actual human being who's politics have left them scratching their heads between Harris and Trump. "If only Harris would do a little more for corporations. Oh well, I guess I'll stick with the racist orange insurrectionist."

It's not about moderate voters. If anything it's about the median voter, but that's a very different animal. The median voter in this country is wacky as fuck with political opinions that are all over the place. The one thing they almost all have in common is that they hate establishment politicians from both parties. Harris is trying to get their votes by being even more establishment, and it's going to be a disaster.

The one hope we have is the end of RvW. If that's woken up enough women voters, then we still can win. Republicans may have screwed themselves so badly that even establishment Democrats can beat them. Let's hope.

[-] archomrade@midwest.social -3 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)

How are we defining 'flawless', exactly?

All else aside - yea, I actually kinda agree with this, though I get the distinct impression not in the way you mean it.

edit - what happens if it's the undecided vote that causes harris to lose, not Stein?

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 3 points 3 hours ago

Then she should have messaged better on Israel. On that particular item I also feel like Netanyahu is on a timeline. I'm not sure he cares about the election though. More like he's trying to get us pulled into a conflict with Iran before January because Biden can't stand up to him. If he thinks Biden is just locked by the election then he'll try to do it this month. Harris' messaging doesn't really take that into account in my opinion.

[-] archomrade@midwest.social 4 points 2 hours ago

Then she should have messaged better on Israel

I'd much rather her do more than message better, but i'd take clear messaging over whatever the fuck we've been getting.

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 2 points 2 hours ago

She's trying to stay neutral. It's not working.

[-] archomrade@midwest.social 4 points 2 hours ago

There's no such thing as neutral - either we're supporting Israel through their genocide or we're not.

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

Putting on my objective hat for a minute, pro Israel voters think the same way. There's not really a neutral block of voters on this issue.

[-] Tinidril@midwest.social -1 points 1 hour ago

There is no candidate who can win this race that won't keep writing blank checks for Israel. If anything, Netanyahu wants Trump to win. He is enraged by even the minimal pushback he gets from the Biden administration.

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

There's a chance Harris is more like Obama and reigns in everything but iron dome reloads, while actually holding them responsible for settler violence. If your standard is completely disengage from Israel then yeah we aren't there yet politically. Although shooting at the UN might just fucking do it.

[-] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago

She...still loses? I don't understand your question

[-] archomrade@midwest.social 0 points 2 hours ago

I'm asking who you'll decide to blame, since that seems to be the focus.

If you're unconcerned with blame then maybe there's no disagreement here.

[-] Cryophilia@lemmy.world -2 points 1 hour ago

Undecided voters are imo always a contemptible lot, but no more this election than any other.

[-] archomrade@midwest.social 3 points 1 hour ago

Undecided voters are imo always a contemptible lot

Maybe read this a few times yourself and see if you can spot the problem on your own.

[-] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 0 points 1 hour ago

If someone is stupid enough that they need to be flattered into no longer doing stupid things, that makes them all the more contemptible in my eyes.

[-] archomrade@midwest.social 2 points 1 hour ago

Jesus christ, is that what politics are to you? Flattery or contempt?

[-] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 0 points 1 hour ago

Anyone who's still undecided at this point likely needs one or both.

[-] archomrade@midwest.social 1 points 57 minutes ago

Lmao good luck then

this post was submitted on 10 Oct 2024
346 points (87.8% liked)

politics

19016 readers
3647 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.
  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