this post was submitted on 06 Nov 2024
346 points (98.6% liked)

politics

19097 readers
4150 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
 

Summary

Despite Trump’s criminal record, serial lying, and racist demagoguery, he won the 2024 US presidential election, reflecting America’s deep-seated anxieties and cultural divisions.

Trump’s celebrity persona, economic populism, and culture warrior appeals resonated with his base, while Kamala Harris faced challenges in defining herself and overcoming gender and racial biases.

The election underscores the decay of American democracy, raising concerns about the future of the nation.

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 49 points 2 days ago

It happened because people are dumb. They think he’s bringing 2016-2020 prices with him. He’s not. There was dumb in the Harris campaign approach too, but that would add too much for one post. I voted for her, but even so.

And remember what’s on the slash list: social security and Medicare. How many of you 45+ people have a retirement? Anything you start now won’t be enough without the benefit of social security. Which you should get because you’ve been buying into it your entire work life.

And remember Elon? The guy said well have to learn to tighten our belts for a while. Endure some hardship. Like we haven’t been doing that already. I wonder if unions will be federally legal after he’s done.

Preexisting conditions anyone? You’re well and truly fucked.

Small business? Well. That’s not happening.

Wanna buy a house? Yea that’s still not happening either.

Rent going down? Again. No.

The list goes on.

My partner last night before he went to bed in a Benadryl induced sleep: I’m going to be spending more time in the woods if he wins. No you’re not. You’re going to be working 60hrs a week to keep up and so am I.

Which will probably be the point of the Elon Musk / Trump economy.

[–] [email protected] 28 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Voter: Why does the economy suck so bad?

MAGA: Because brown people.

Harris: You're crazy, the economy is doing better than ever!

Simple as.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 days ago

My sincere condolences for the near future of Americans, and especially for my and their close friends and family.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Are the bots and trolls here, or do they just stop when the objective is reached?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 days ago

Once again, "economic anxiety" combined with the American electorate is just planing living up to George Carlin's rants.

[–] [email protected] 31 points 2 days ago (2 children)

It is simple. The economy and the media.

Call it selfish, but most people are more concerned with their own well being and that of their families than anything external. They don't see Gaza, climate change, or abortion in the grocery store, they see prices that are massively higher than they were during Trump. You can try to explain how economics works, how tarrifs are a bad idea, how inflation is actually down, but to many that's just noise and why should they trust these economists over anyone else. Their lived experience is that, excluding covid, life was more affordable under Trump.

Take a look at the most popular cable channels and you see Fox news. Look at podcasts and there is Joe Rogan. Social media is arguably better, but X and Facebook are still big and skew right, plus the others are ripe for disinformation campaigns and bots. A large number of Americans regularly consume a diet of right wing propaganda.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 days ago

I wonder what people think of Musk's investment in Twitter now? He lost a ton of money, but it's pocket change to him, and now he will get a prime government job which he will use to his advantage to get more government contracts.

He literally bought his way into power, without needing to run for office himself.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

Trump didn't get any more votes than last time.

He won because the Democrats lost.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 days ago

You try to tell them that and they go nuts on you.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 37 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Even worse, it appears that Republicans have also managed to win majorities in the Senate and House. While thin, those majorities are enough that we can expect some of the Republican priorities to start getting passed. My major question for the first six months of 2025 will be, does the filibuster survive? I know many folks on the left wanted to kill it, when Republican Senators were using it to obstruct anything more progressive than not kicking puppies. Now that the shoe is on the other foot, will the left suddenly fall back in love with the filibuster? I suspect so. I also suspect that the MAGA wing of the GOP is going to be keen to kill the filibuster the first time it gets in the way of their project. And I wonder where the less dickish members of the GOP will come down on the issue.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

I don't think that Republicans need to kill the filibuster further. It's already dead for judicial nominations, which they have used to full effect. Also, the map is much more favorable to Democrats in the next two Senate election cycles. The next election, in particular, there are 13 Democratic seats vs. 20 Republican seats up (really 21, counting a special election for Vance's seat, and more vacancies may be coming). That, combined with the standard midterm bounce for the opposition party, makes it very likely that Republicans lose their gains in the Senate next election.

OTOH, if Republicans do keep the Senate in 2026, that is a bad omen for Democrats in general. We may see the Senate kill the filibuster then, out of the belief that it will help Vance win the Presidency in 2028.

(And looking forward, the Presidential election in 2028 will be even more important than this one, because of the 2030 census. The Census is supposed to enumerate all people in the country, regardless of legal status. Trump tried, and failed, to add a citizenship question to the census last time. If Republicans are in charge of the Census, I fully expect them to attempt to apportion Congress based on citizenship status (in spite of the Constitution), which will directly affect states like NY and CA, where Texas and Florida have been bussing all their migrants to. We don't have a permanent minority government in fhe US right now, but if they pull off that Census trick we might as of 2032.)

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

I don’t think that Republicans need to kill the filibuster further. It’s already dead for judicial nominations, which they have used to full effect.

I'm not sure I agree that this removes the incentive to kill the filibuster. A lot of what the GOP wants to do will require passing legislation. Sure, they can kill a lot of existing legislation via the courts and I also expect "budget reconciliation process" to re-enter the political lexicon in full force again. But, there is going to be stuff they want to do, which will be blocked in Congress, via the filibuster. And I think that will raise the specter of killing the filibuster in some wings of the GOP.

Also, the map is much more favorable to Democrats in the next two Senate election cycles.

Ya, and this is why I mentioned there being wings of the GOP who understood just how useful the filibuster is.

[–] [email protected] 40 points 2 days ago (1 children)

They will kill the filibuster because they don't foresee Dems ever holding power again for some reason. I wonder what that reason could be...

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 days ago (3 children)

I'm not completely sold on that idea. While I'm sure there are wings of the GOP who will buy into the idea of never losing power again, I also suspect that there will be members of the Senate who are old enough to know from experience that things never quite go to plan. Yes, we could be in for an end to Democracy, that possible. But, if we're there, the filibuster doesn't mean a thing. If our institutions are strong enough to hold up for the next four years, then the filibuster will be as contentious as it always is, when the majority has only a slim hold on power.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The resistance will be eliminated.

He's already said this.

He absolutely will order the arrest or killing of his enemies.

I have little doubt, and I'm fuckkng.glad, the end is actually near.

I am sick of this game.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Oh friend, it aint over till the last drop is bled.

My money is on civil war.

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

All part of the plan.

There will be blood.

Rivers.

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

I like your optimism. I don't share it yet, but I like it.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 33 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The decision to seek re-election by President Biden’s inflated sense of self-importance cost us.

It would have been prudent for him to adhere to his previous commitment and serve a single term, allowing the Democratic Party to conduct its primaries without undue interference. The Harris campaign’s very late entry into the race was premature and potentially detrimental to the party’s chances of success.

[–] [email protected] 26 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

The Harris campaign turned out great initially.

They fucked it up immediately by saying they weren't going to be any different from Biden on Gaza and that was one of the wedge topics that had been created about Biden.

Rather than compromise with the electorate to get people out to vote, they tried to use Trump to bully voters out of the house saying he'd be worse.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 2 days ago (1 children)

They fucked it up immediately by saying they weren't going to be any different from Gaza on Biden and that was one of the wedge topics that had been created about Biden.

I don't think Gaza specifically was decisive here. It could've been with a thinner majority, but Harris lost before Michigan finished counting and Trump is collecting swing states like MTG cards. The way I see it, this isn't the result of one unpopular policy, but rather a wider campaign failure that destroyed Democrat voter enthusiasm.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Yeah. I think it was the biggest issue and was easily solvable, but the campaign was a fuck up through and through.

Across Biden and Harris they kept trying to steal a sliver of the conservative vote instead of just taking from the huge infrequent voter slice. They didn't do anything to try to get that slice to vote for them, they just threatened them with Trump if they didn't get out to vote.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›