• UsernameHere@lemmy.worldBanned from community
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    39
    ·
    1 year ago

    The right won. They had more votes because many who voted democrat in 2020 voted red. How does going further left change that outcome?

    If voters wanted politicians that are further left then wouldn’t they have voted for the politician that is furthest left?

    I think most people just voted republican because they experienced inflation under Biden and dont understand why.

    • Dkarma@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      This is factually false. Trump received no more vote really than he did the last 2 times. Dem voters simply stayed home.

    • melitele@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s not soorts teams. Going further left means reaching rural people and poor people. A lot of the working class just isn’t aware of what left and right mean. If the left let’s republican dictate who is taking those ppl’s side this is how it’s auways gonna end. Posh elitism has failed yet again

      • UsernameHere@lemmy.worldBanned from community
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        There was an election between an independent union leader and a career politician in Nebraska and the career politician won by a landslide. How do you explain that?

        • dontgooglefinderscult@lemmings.worldBanned
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          1 year ago

          The career politician ran a better campaign and lied more believably.

          Also not all union leaders are left wing, paradoxically. There are legitimate reasons that Americans distrust unions.

        • niucllos@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          One example does not a rule make, and in the US electoral system money (and the party affiliations that bring it) speaks loudest of all. Maybe going further left wouldn’t work, but going further right certainly hasn’t. When Harris first emerged as the candidate she had such a swell of support, as she moved further right she lost it.

          • UsernameHere@lemmy.worldBanned from community
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Voters are saying it is because of inflation. Not because she didn’t go further left.

            • niucllos@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              8
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              Sure, but if she had spent her few months promising to tax the shit out of Elon Musk and other billionaires I bet people would have been more excited and actually showed up to vote than when she promised to keep the course and also appoint a Republican

              • UsernameHere@lemmy.worldBanned from community
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                Harris literally campaigned with a promise to tax the billionaires more.

                Billionaires countered her campaign by doing things like literally buying votes.

                Now people on lemmy are pretending she never promised to tax billionaires more.

                • niucllos@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Sorry, I meant she should have been Bernie-style grandstanding about it and hammering it home and making it a core part of her campaign more than it not being in her plans at all. I feel like she started with that kind of message and was doing well and ended with the Cheneys like me and ill put a Republican in my cabinet and lost

        • koper@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          That doesn’t mean what you think it does. The fact that Harris received fewer votes from independents is because they stayed home (as evidenced by the lower turnout), not because they moved to Trump en masse.

          Your conclusion also makes very little sense when you consider that Harris already conceded so much to Republicans compared to 2020, i.e. on migration, campaigning with Cheney and even proposing to appoint Republicans in the cabinet.

        • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          That quote isn’t saying what you’re saying.

          Trump kept pretty much all of his republocan support from 2020. That quote is saying 94% of Republicans voted for him, the same overall share of republican votes in 2020.

          • UsernameHere@lemmy.worldBanned from community
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            “Reduced the Democratic edge among independents”

            When tallying votes this looks like less democrat votes that previously.

      • UsernameHere@lemmy.worldBanned from community
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        He hasnt been able to win outside of Vermont. Even when he lost the primaries he it was because he didn’t have enough votes.

        • Dkarma@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Well he did until the DNC scuttled his momentum with spoilers like Clinton and biden

            • njm1314@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              It’s also interesting that the argument here is that the only way Bernie would have had a chance as if there were enough candidates to dilute the vote. But in a straight up head to head contest he couldn’t win. Which is what happened. When the choice came down between Bernie Sanders and Joe Biden the latter got more votes. That’s not a pro Bernie argument. Yet we see it all the time.