Many Democrats continue to believe that the racism of average Americans — many of whom voted for Barack Obama twice — explains why Donald Trump won. This moralism suits party elites who would rather demonize the public than address growing inequality.

  • Verdant Banana@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    57
    arrow-down
    26
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    A black woman was not the issue

    Both parties and their presidental candidates are just puppets like the rest of their parties and do not have the public interests at heart

    Kamala held a celebrity filled gala and invited Republicans while the citizens were outside the gathering protesting about inequality, wars, healthcare, wages/employee rights and were not allowed in

    • tburkhol@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      15
      ·
      2 days ago

      In an election where the margin of victory is 1%, it only takes 1-in-50 racists to throw the election.

      Sure, Kamala wasn’t hugely popular with internet Democrats. Sure, running as a centrist annoyed all the people looking for change. The whole Israel thing. Voters overlooked all of that with Biden in 2020, when he wasn’t hugely popular with internet Democrats & came with a 50 year legacy of supporting some atrocious policies.

      • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 days ago

        The only reason Biden won in 2020 was covid regulations increased turnout with vote by mail.

        Without that extra turnout in 2024, Harris lost.

        If Biden had had a normal election in 2020, he would have lost as well.

        If we had 100% vote by mail everywhere, we would not see another Republican President in our lifetimes.

        • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          2 days ago

          If we had 100% vote by mail everywhere, we would not see another Republican President in our lifetimes.

          I’m sure voting by mail played a role. Not sure that’s all of it, but, boy, the qons were mad as hell about it and I bet they do everything possible to ruin it for parts of the country where we’ve already had it for years and years (like here in Colorado).

        • UsernameHere@lemy.lol
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          2 days ago

          If Trump didn’t have the help of foreign nations, the billionaire class, voter suppression, the GOP, etc. Harris would’ve won in 2024, and Biden would’ve won in 2020 without Covid.

            • UsernameHere@lemy.lol
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              2 days ago

              Trump has been trying to become president since 2000 and he has been talking about it since the 80s. It wasn’t until Russia got involved with their propaganda machine that he was able to start his cult.

              Without Russian support he wouldn’t be anybody.

              • AWistfulNihilist@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                2 days ago

                But he had Russian backing, he was on the apprentice, all those things are true. So if they weren’t true he wouldn’t be who he is. It’s a bit like saying JK Rowling wouldn’t be famous without Harry Potter. Like… duh.

                • UsernameHere@lemy.lol
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  So if Trump wasn’t the candidate that trump is, he wouldn’t have won? I mean he was Trump tho.

                  This statement indicates you think Trump won because of who he is.

                  My statement points out it is not because of who he is but instead because Russia chose to interfere in elections.

                  In other words, if Trump dies today, Russia would find another person to fill his place and would use the same propaganda tactics to help get them into a position of power.

                  This is because Trump is a puppet. Your comment was evidence you don’t understand that that is why he won.

    • UsernameHere@lemy.lol
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      arrow-down
      27
      ·
      2 days ago

      Good thing they protested Kamala’s event. Now that Trump is in office we don’t have to worry about inequality, wars, healthcare, wages/employee rights OR voting.

      Both sides amiright?

      • NoSpotOfGround@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 days ago

        That’s not how it works. Using that logic voting for Himmler would be the right thing to do because at least they’re one step less awful than Hitler. Fucking demand that Himmler change his ways or a better candidate is allowed to run.

        A lot of countries have political theater instead of actual politics, but the US is really deep into it.

        • UsernameHere@lemy.lol
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          2 days ago

          That is exactly how it works. Criticizing the better option of the two will reduce turnout for that candidate. That’s the whole purpose of political campaigns.

          That’s how Trump got elected. We had a better option but people complained so much that the worse option won.

          Your attempt to claim both sides are as similar as Hitler and Himmler is an obvious bad faith argument of “both sides are the same”.

          • Otter@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            I find this unproductive. People SHOULD ask their elected representatives (and candidates) to improve. I want people to point it out when my preferred candidate does something wrong, because then they’re more likely to address it before the election.

            That is exactly how it works. Criticizing the better option of the two will reduce turnout for that candidate. That’s the whole purpose of political campaigns.

            I’m not saying this doesn’t happen, but I don’t think a significant number of people changed their mind about voting for her because of the protests.

            • Option 1: Politically engaged people don’t point out a problem -> The candidate doesn’t address the problem -> The average voter doesn’t vote for the candidate because of the problem

            • Option 2: Politically engaged people DO point out a problem -> The candidate addresses the problem -> The average voter is more likely to vote for the candidate

            • UsernameHere@lemy.lol
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              7
              ·
              2 days ago

              Maybe if it wasn’t Trump and fascism on the line.

              But in this context you’re referring to the prevention of fascism as “unproductive”.

              • Otter@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                8
                ·
                edit-2
                2 days ago

                But in this context you’re referring to the prevention of fascism as “unproductive”.

                I’m saying that if the candidate listened to the protests and addressed the issues that were brought up, they may have gotten more votes. Arguably, having MORE protests may have helped them win if it could convince the leadership to make changes.

                Outcry from supporters is what convinced Biden to step down, which I think helped the Democrats come closer. Protest is important if it can help a party make the right adjustments in their campaign.

                Telling people to stay silent is unproductive.

                • UsernameHere@lemy.lol
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  7
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  Not all voters agreed with those protests. Arguably, the candidate would’ve lost by more if they listened to the protests and addressed the issues that were brought up.

                  What we can’t argue about is the fact that the protests hurt voter turnout and now Trump is the president.

                  • Otter@lemmy.ca
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    8
                    ·
                    2 days ago

                    Not all voters agreed with those protests. Arguably, the candidate would’ve lost by more if they listened to the protests and addressed the issues that were brought up.

                    Even if this was true, silencing any criticism isn’t the solution. In most parts of the world anyway

    • rigatti@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      2 days ago

      Yes, but racism (even subconsciously) was likely a contributing factor to her loss as well, which is what the other person was saying.