this post was submitted on 08 Nov 2024
284 points (94.7% liked)

politics

19097 readers
4343 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

Many Democrats, especially women, expressed disillusionment and frustration online, viewing the result as a reflection of deep-seated misogyny in the U.S.

Harris supporters highlighted anger that a “felony convicted, twice-impeached” Trump prevailed over a female candidate.

Comparisons to Hillary Clinton’s 2016 loss resurfaced, with many attributing Trump’s win to targeted appeals to young men, including appearances with influencers like Joe Rogan.

The election outcome has intensified concerns over growing right-wing radicalization among young men.

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 16 points 11 hours ago (10 children)

It's really beyond time for this sort of disinformation to fuck off.

Harris lost because she's a neoliberal, full stop. Scapegoating it as sexism means you learned fucking nothing and will only keep losing.

[–] [email protected] 35 points 11 hours ago (5 children)

If you think sexism wasn't a significant part of this, I don't know what to tell you. Of course it was. Biden wasn't better than her in any way and he won against Trump. Despite the fact that practically no one was excited to vote for him. It's baffling you're even questioning this.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago) (1 children)

Whether sexism was an important part of it or not isn't the point.

The point is that if we allow that statement to pass unchallenged, it will take over the narrative, none of the necessary reforms will happen, and the world will continue to get worse.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Right we can only talk about one thing. Fair.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

We can talk about the one thing that's important, or we can talk about mostly-irrelevant bullshit that not only fails to solve the problem, but actively works against solving it by serving as a distraction. I mean, if you just fucking love failure and losing for some reason, I guess you could do the latter, but why?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 16 points 11 hours ago (2 children)

Any sane adult should have beat Trump. He won because 72 million Americans want fascism.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 11 hours ago

Once all the smart, wealthy, moral, and ethical people flee the US that can flee the US do flee the US I'll finally be able to get a job!

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
[–] [email protected] 12 points 11 hours ago (4 children)

Misogyny is an easy excuse that doesn't question the effectiveness of any of the politicians or consultants involved in the race. People forget that Biden only barely won what should have been an easy race. Now the difference between losing and barely winning is a big deal, but they all ran pretty similar campaigns trying to get the "good Republicans" while neglecting their base. Maybe Biden's shriveled dick was the difference to get him to barely squeak past Trump while a woman wouldn't, but none of these races should have been close. There's a much bigger problem at play than "just don't run women because too sexist".

[–] [email protected] -1 points 10 hours ago (2 children)

Not defending bidens record here but are you really dissing an 81 yo dick? You think anyone has a girthy hog at 81?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

Arnold Palmer maybe.

Also, is this post serious? Because I'm assuming someone taking offense about colorful language about an old man's penis can't possibly be so, but it's being played very straight that this is a real thing worthy of conversation.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] -1 points 11 hours ago (3 children)

He won by more than she lost by. It's not an excuse, it's just a part of the equation that cannot be ignored.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 10 hours ago (3 children)

In a win as close as his, that's not saying anything particularly significant. Biden's win was what, 80,000 votes or so?

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 11 hours ago

I'm with you. Some of the simplicity of this is what's going to keep these cycles going.

[–] [email protected] 65 points 13 hours ago (5 children)

Honestly, I feel we have a huge disinformation problem. A war really where billionaires, Russia, Iran,and China are on one side and we're on the other. They treat it like a war while we treat it like a small infestation. So many Republicans I speak with bring up reason why they support trump that are reasonable: Better economy, Protecting children, protecting rights, protecting jobs, reducing crime.in a vacuum, cool candidate. Except that many of the strategies he utilize to accomplish those goals seems illegal or unhelpful. Even worse, who cares if he could and would accomplish those goals, He tried to overthrow the government. Yet all the Republicans I know view that as untrue. Mainly in the form of, "I don't hear about it much, so it's either fake news,or not really a coup"

Why? Because they get their news from faux news and social media that have focused on keeping those negative aspects of him buried. And both of those things have huge reach.they are the eyes and ears of these voters, how can they not believe their eyes and ears that tell them that Trump is great?

Until that problem is dealt with, we can't have an informed population that votes. Instead we will have a large group of uninformed voters. It's not their fault, they're just some of the first casualties in this disinformation war.

[–] [email protected] 45 points 12 hours ago (4 children)

I saved a comment from u/allmhuran posted to r/news on 2016-06-24:

"Australia has had five prime ministers in five years, the poor yanks look as though they'll have to choose between two options both of which have more disapproval than approval, and the UK leaves the EU. It seems like a ridiculous amount of instability. One might even call it absurd.

But it's not surprising.

You can't feed a society exaggeration, hyperbole and propaganda for over a decade, and then claim surprise when people don't seem to be making rational decisions on the basis of well established truth.

There's a cost associated with not telling the truth. There's a cost associated with polarized, adversarial public discourse. There's a cost associated with media more concerned with profits than the public interest.

It is, apparently, time to pay the piper."

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

And what's the suggestion here? I'm not getting it.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 10 hours ago

They aren't suggesting anything. They're saying we're poisoned and it's gone critical.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 12 hours ago

There’s a cost associated with media more concerned with profits than the public interest.

Media: good thing we're not the ones paying the price! Continue current heading, profits ho!

[–] [email protected] 7 points 12 hours ago

Very well stated. We need to operate within this reality instead of the fantasy land created by those who will be fine either way.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 12 hours ago

Unless that the large portion of americas population that thinks the ultra rich are awesome suddenly stops thinking that way then it’s gonna be a difficult battle.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 12 hours ago

The worst part is all of those claims can be easily debunked, but not a one of them will ever believe it.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 99 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago) (9 children)

I don't think that way, personally.

I think that America is just dumb af. Every stance Republican Voters claim to care about: Trump performs worse on. But they were told he was their guy by Facebook, TikTok, YouTube, Twitter, etc. Money won the race.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

You know Canada used to make fun of America as a daily pastime. We stopped doing that and now look where we are.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 hours ago

I just assumed that started as a reactionary movement responding to South Park.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 11 hours ago (2 children)

Don’t underestimate misogyny / bro culture in the US. Combine that with machismo in some subcultures and the weird religious beliefs that women should be subservient and at home making babies and we’ll never see a female president at this rate.

[–] [email protected] -4 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Don't overestimate it, either. Even places where that "machismo" is in the dominant culture have managed to elect women as presidents.

You know what the real difference is? Their woman presidents aren't useless fucking neoliberals.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

I'm not really underestimating it, it's clearly there and a very huge problem, but if Harris was the candidate offering to cut taxes for the rich and Trump was the candidate threatening to change half of all US Cars to electric in 10 years, then the outcome would be opposite to what it was.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

If that was true then Obama would have lost and Nikki Haley would have been the Republican nominee.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 10 hours ago

Our socioeconomic situation almost 20 years ago isn't the same as it is now. The Rich are much richer now than then, the middle class existed in much greater numbers, Russia and China weren't (as much) actively campaigning on the whole US Population's social media, and fossil fuel companies weren't at risk of being phased out.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›