209
Amish voters did not win Pennsylvania for Donald Trump
(www.inquirer.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 30 Nov 2024
209 points (95.6% liked)
politics
19248 readers
2159 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
The grossest thing about the racist recriminations over Harris' loss is that the racial group that makes up 70% of the electorate and the vast majority of Trump voters is somehow blameless, clean, and without blemish.
It seems like every minority is only as good as their latest contribution to the movement, while white liberals are always welcome to flow in and out every election cycle like a goddamn tide.
Conservatives have mocked us for decades with terms like bleeding heart and woke because they see us betraying those values at the fist sign of trouble. And they're right.
That's not what those terms mean or why they are used as insults.
And, generally speaking, a few ethnic/gender groups changed their voting strategies this election, while others didn't. The articles calling out different demographics are pointing out reality. Those shifts affected the results of the election.
That's why they are being pointed out, instead of pointing out that one group did exactly what was expected of them and what they did last time, and the time before, and the time before...
So I'd challenge you that it's not recriminations or gross, it's simply pointing out what changed and how it led to us being in our current spot. You can't fix things/change course without understanding where you are.
Yes, it's true that analyzing who voted for who is a legitimate thing to do. At the same time, we must keep in mind that Democrats were looking for people to blame several months before the election and they're certainly still looking for people to blame now. If you're writing an article and you just ignore this broader context, you deserve to be ridiculed online.
I think what we've seen since 2016 is that the DNC has little interest in representing the interests of the average working American. They just don't want to push policies that Bernie Sanders would push, and they're desperate to argue that they can be successful without doing so. In other words, the DNC is pro-corporate America, which is anti-working America, and they won't change unless they're forced out.
I don't think "blame" is the right word here. They're/we're looking for reasons for how things ended up the way they did.
IMO it's unhelpful at best and harmful at worst to look at the data and the people analyzing it and approach it as a blame thing - or even to assume it's a finger pointing game. The facts are that the voting strategies of certain groups of people changed this election. The important thing moving forward is to understand who changed and why they changed, because then those things can be addressed.
And yeah, DNC leadership is either dumb or actively malicious because they keep pushing failed ideas under a false banner.