this post was submitted on 08 Dec 2024
330 points (93.0% liked)

politics

19248 readers
2401 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

From the Article:

For weeks following Joe Biden’s disastrous performance, his campaign publicly maintained the illusion that he was still well-positioned to defeat Donald Trump. Privately, they knew otherwise. As Pod Save America co-host Jon Favreau revealed days after the election:

After the debate, the Biden people told us that the polls were fine, and Biden was still the strongest candidate. They were privately telling reporters, at the time, that Kamala Harris couldn’t win. […] Then we find out, when the Biden campaign becomes the Harris campaign, that the Biden campaign’s own internal polling, at the time when they were telling us he was the strongest candidate, showed that Donald Trump was going to win 400 electoral votes.

The implications of this are staggering, and it should be treated as a massive scandal.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] HeisenbergsName@lemmy.world 22 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

The campaign was complete garbage, though. In a Rolling Stone article, it details on how many advisors and Democratic party operatives were begging her campaign to not bring in Liz Cheney because any gains would essentially be eclipsed by other Democratic voters that otherwise stayed home.

A Democratic strategist says they warned key Harris surrogates and top-level officials at the Democratic National Committee that campaigning with Liz Cheney [...] was highly unlikely to motivate any new swing voters, and risked dissuading already-despondent, infrequent Democratic voters who had supported Biden in 2020

I also understand that your main points are on how political commentators and news anchors on TV chose not to encourage Harris to tackle issues on the economy, but an Atlantic article essentially tells us that Harris torpedoed her anti-big business rhetoric when she brought in her brother-in-law into the campaign itself.

While Harris was stuck defending the Biden economy, and hobbled by lingering anger over inflation, attacking Big Business allowed her to go on the offense. Then, quite suddenly, this strain of populism disappeared. One Biden aide told me that Harris steered away from such hard-edged messaging at the urging of her brother-in-law, Tony West, Uber’s chief legal officer

Honestly, how big of a role does media have in swaying her campaign into talking about important issues (such as the economy, like you pointed out) if she willingly chose to ignore the easiest slam dunks her campaign had?

[–] SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 weeks ago

The democrats that stayed home are most certainly in the group I called ignorant Americans. People couldn't see the difference between Harris and Trump, "ignorant" is being generous.

If people understood how the economy worked at all, then it would have been a strength and she wouldn't have been on the defensive about it. And do you think the majority of Americans who voted for Trump would have changed their mind if she was running on an "anti-business" platform? Trump who was proposing tariffs would solve inflation?

We literally had a candidate for President telling people to watch her opponents rallies. Why was that? Because the media only wanted to show pundits arguing over something because ratings. Everyone seeing him as the bat-shit lunatic he is doesn't give them anything to debate. So they had to sane wash what he was saying to give the pundits something to talk about. Harris has to have an economic plan. Trump, well his plan is batshit so don't talk about it. Why isn't Harris doing more interviews? Trump... well he's not doing interviews because he's too batshit, nothing to discuss there.

But sure believe the media when they blame the democrats for not doing the media's job. If I were more conspiracy minded I might say they didn't want to explain anything so the dems would have to explain things via ad spots the media made money from. But never attribute to malice what can be explained by incompetence.

The media is failing to explain anything because they've been too distracted by Trump for a fucking decade. But as long as they can blame their failures on the democrats (which does have an impact on the dems getting elected ya know) they aren't going to change.

This ain't new either. I had to learn about how vaccines from a youtuber that plays Mario Maker. Despite the covid vaccine being one of the biggest stories of the decade, they didn't bother to cover anything about it's development and testing. It was just Trump Trump Trump Vaccine Trump Trump Trump... Why don't people trust the vaccine? Why oh why don't people know that the vaccine is safe?

Same fucking thing this year. Trump Trump Trump TRUMP ELECTED! Trump Trump... why don't people understand that inflation has been handled and tariffs will only bring it back?

[–] Snapz@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I have a hard time believing that anyone was engaged enough to actually understand who Cheney was (to the point that they have an opinion of her) AND they were so upset by the gesture of welcoming her on on the Jan 6th Committee as a bridge that they completely refused their civic duty to vote? Something doesn't square there...

That said, Cheney is human garbage who was still spewing that ridiculous "dems want to abort babies after they are already born" bullshit, as of very recently.

[–] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Yep, Snapz > Harris' aids and reputable sources. You're clearly smarter than the helpers and all papers that document it well.

What kind of Trump supporter "How did he lose 2020? Rigged!" thinking is this? Running a bad campaign of copying Romney/Trump points that Trump supporters won't like, and the people Trump's policies hurt don't think you care about them in any way beyond tokenism, loses you that election.

[–] Krauerking@lemy.lol 3 points 2 weeks ago

No no. They think they are right and it's easy to just say other people are stupid and have their punishment rightfully coming to them and everyone else that get it also should be punished for their existence as well because they all deserve it.

It makes them feel very good inside so why shouldn't it be the truth?

Don't you know? Being awfule to other people and expecting you are owed whatever you want and blaming others for not being immediately fall in line with your ideas is all the rage these days. Why bother with effort and compromise when we all want our piece of the cult.