this post was submitted on 06 Nov 2024
595 points (98.5% liked)

politics

19090 readers
4174 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
[–] [email protected] 77 points 2 days ago (9 children)

Even the far left is stupid in America. They're supposed to be the educated ones. But instead of doing their civic duty, they stayed home. And you can blame it on Democrats all you like, but it's your duty to go vote, no matter who you vote for. The turnout this election was pathetic.

I don't understand how these people are going to complain now for the next 4 years, when they didn't even want to take part.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 days ago

She got 14 millions less votes than Biden.I doubt there are even 10 million far leftists in the USA.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

But instead of doing their civic duty, they stayed home

Do you have anything to back this up, or is this typical Democrat blaming people they never tried to appeal to?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 days ago (3 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago

You mean the abysmal (checks notes) second highest turn out since 1932? The turnout whose numbers are still as of right now being counted? That turnout?

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Guess liberals should have tried to get people excited to vote.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You shouldve been aninated enough to vote against trump. He is just that bad, abstaining is abhorrent.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

2020 is not the fucking baseline, this was above average, great even. 2020 was the highest turnout since Reconstruction you can't rely on that to stick

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Honestly it should be. If people could find ways to vote during a pandemic, they should be able to do it without one. That we've regressed is a serious issue

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 hours ago

Am I right in my understanding that the 'super high' turnout of 2020 was still less than 50% of eligible voters? That really looks like maybe a minimum turnout threshold should exist :(

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 days ago

Right on the money.

[–] [email protected] 29 points 2 days ago

It is absolutely fucking infuriating how many people disagree with your assessment here but you are absolutely 100% right as fuck.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 days ago

Gaza is to Harris what Drone Strikes were to Hillary in 2016.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I expected him to win, but i did not expect such a sad turnout.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Ok this line of thinking is pissing me off.

As of this right now the turn out is 140,144,378 and counting (it will be weeks before the final number).

If we look at the last 90 or so years we can see that this "sad turnout" is the second highest only behind 2020s 158,481,688.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

90 years ago the entire US population was less than that 140 million, let alone eligible voters. Percentage of eligible voters would make a better argument than absolute numbers when you're comparing over time.

That said, 140m versus 158m is a huge drop. An astonishing drop. The final total could still amount to a >10% reduction in turnout, despite a slight increase in the number of eligible voters. I don't understand how that could be viewed as not sad, regardless of who you vote for.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

Ok, a few things. This is also using the percent of eligible voters and shows about the expected turn out if not higher then normal. And more importantly 140 million is not the final number in fact some places have stated "National turnout has been estimated at 64.5 percent this year, with around 158 million ballots counted out of the 245 million eligible voters."

I am sorry that this is not the easy target of blame people clearly want it to be.