Summary
Key leaders of the “Abandon Harris” movement, which encouraged voters to oppose Kamala Harris due to U.S. support for Israel during the Gaza war, are now expressing unease about Trump’s incoming administration.
Many in the movement, including prominent Muslim leaders, voted for Trump hoping he would bring peace to the Middle East.
However, concerns are growing over his Cabinet picks, such as Mike Huckabee and Tulsi Gabbard, which some see as troubling for Muslim communities.
I voted for Harris. I voted for Biden. I voted for Clinton.
I still wouldn’t warn a single one of them if they were about to get hit by a bus.
Its harm reduction. They don’t solve anything. They just keep us treading water sinking slowly whereas Republicans start taking a hammer to the hull to open up new holes.
I voted for Harris. I voted for Biden. I voted for Clinton.
I still wouldn’t warn a single one of them if they were about to get hit by a bus.
American Democracy in a nutshell. You get two choices, they’re both awful for different reasons. One of them wants to see you executed for your religious beliefs/sexual preferences/nation of origin. The other is continent to sell bunker buster bombs to some raving psychotic mass murderers overseas. Nobody is going to do shit about climate change, though, so we’re all on the clock in the long run.
Its harm reduction.
It increasingly feels like the closest thing to harm reduction the US achieved was the time Trump fucked up his COVID response and a bunch of his senior leadership choked to death on their own lung fluid.
American Democracy in a nutshell. You get two choices, they’re both awful…
The democratic process doesn’t start on election day.
Yeah, it starts when someone has a billion dollars and wants to influence government.
10 million Democrats x $100/each - $1 billion
People are more powerful than they think.
I’m not giving another dime to the Democratic Party so it’s more like 9,999,999 Democrats.
I wouldn’t even be in the party if we didn’t have closed primaries in my state.
fair enough.
1 million American leftists x $100 to Bernie Sanders or AOC in the primaries = $100 million
and
1 million American leftists x $100 to Green party = $100 million
I already donated a hundred bucks to Bernie.
It didn’t work.
Yes give them more money, they’re doing such great things with the money that’s already given to them.
Liberal democracy starts with the donors in a smoke-filled room and ends with one side complaining that the election was rigged.
It started well into the election cycle after Biden refused to honor his one term pledge.
No time for a primary now! Oops didn’t mean to! /$
First Past The Post voting has got to go, or else the USA is toast. A shame the democratic party believes themselves to be more important then the country itself.
There was roughly 20 different elected positions on my ballot.
The real problem with American politics is everyone is so focused on the POTUS that they ignore the politicians who have an actual measurable effect on their quality of life.
I challenge anyone to look up your local town hall and see when the next city council meeting is. Go to it and see what they talk about and vote on. Notice the other people who go.
Many cities have public meetings for police oversite too. They’re even less attended than city council meetings
Another massive problem is the voting system which could barely be designed better for forcing a two party system on you. There is no room for someone getting 30% of the vote and of course they should then have about that much influence.
I challenge anyone to look up your local town hall and see when the next city council meeting is. Go to it and see what they talk about and vote on. Notice the other people who go.
I’ve been to a few city council meetings. When you’re there as part of an organization lobbying for a particular policy, you can at least see the terms of the debate and understand who to lobby, what the blockades are, and why a seemingly good-idea isn’t getting through. But if you’re just sitting in on meetings, its like tuning into CSPAN at a random point in the day. You’ve got no historical context. You don’t know who you’re listening to or why they’re talking. And there’s a ton of maneuvering going on behind the scenes that you can’t glimpse because you’re not really a part of it.
Add to the problem, a lot of people aren’t really wedded to their communities. I live in a neighborhood in which people move in and out every five years or so, chasing a better job or looking for better schools or trying to find more garage space for their giant cars or cashing out on a sudden jump in their home price. Trying to get them engaged in a fight over the ten-year-plan for mass transit is basically impossible because most of them won’t be here in ten years.
I don’t say this to discourage anyone from going. But this isn’t something you can just bootstrap your way into. You really need a community of more knowledgeable and engaged people to introduce you to what is going on and why. Otherwise, you’re just listening to a couple of people argue over the preferred way to renovate municipal drainage on the opposite side of town for an hour.
I gotta keep moving because my rent keeps going up. Let’s hope I find that cheaper basement
There’s only one man who’s done any meaningful harm reduction in your country and your judicial system is charging him with terrorism.
It increasingly feels like the closest thing to harm reduction the US achieved was the time Trump fucked up his COVID response and a bunch of his senior leadership choked to death on their own lung fluid.
Herman Cain approves this message.
bunch of his senior leadership choked to death on their own lung fluid.
I generally agree with your point, but the MIC is a bad example; both parties are equally happy selling bombs to murderers.
Those are all neoliberals, nothing good would come of them being president, and the voting results speak for themselves. Neoliberalism wont work in this country anymore, if you want to beat republicans, elect progressives.
Same.
But there’s not enough willing to hold their noses for us to reliably win elections.
So it doesn’t make sense to blame anyone besides the people at the DNC actively stopping the type of candidates those people would love to vote for and instead cramming someone the majority of the party dislikes down our throats and hoping enough hold their noses.
Like, not even from a perspective of which policy is better, just on the basis of what wins elections…
Why isn’t the DNC backing the candidates who are most popular with Dem voters?
Why do they keep picking the ones that will get the most donations, then trying to use that money to build up to less than the support the popular candidate already had?
And why the fuck is anyone blaming anyone besides them?
And why the fuck is anyone blaming anyone besides them?
Because if the democrats can deflect blame (again) they don’t have to deliver the change obama promised all those years ago.
harm reduction has a specific meaning…voting is not harm reduction.
It quite literally is a reduction of harm. If two options are presented one is extremely harmful and one is slightly harmful, then voting for the slightly harmful one is a reduction of harm. Harm. reduction.
I don’t know what you are talking about with “harm reduction has a specific meaning…voting is not harm reduction.” because the words literally mean a reduction in the amount of harm, whether active or potential.
Even if you can provide an alternate definition, that is more of an example of the versatility of the language allowing multiple definitions, than any commentary on the current subject.
no harm was reduced by voting for kamala
Removed by mod
I’ve got some interesting information for you about how voting works
I could donate a million dollars to the homeless tomorrow if I do well at roulette tonight. if I play roulette, is that harm reduction?
Some people literally think the term only belongs at the methadone clinic.
That’s the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard. Thanks for telling me what they won’t. And I shouldn’t be surprised people are that stupid, but somehow new lows always abound.
Harm reduction is bad?
Obviously, it’s not ideal, but one has to act according to the real life conditions… And in 2024, our only two options were “harm reduction,” and literal fascism with literal concentration camps.
Fuck you if you didn’t choose harm reduction.
Neoliberalism and harm reduction wont work anymore. What the fuck do you think America has been doing the past three decades? If you want to beat republicans, you need to elect progressives, otherwise fascism will keep on rising.
If you’re only voting for harm reduction year after year and doing nothing to try and organize grassroots opposition to the lesser evil, yes constantly voting harm reduction is bad. It’s how you allow lesser evils to grow into the larger evils of the current DNC, who care more about fundraising than winning.
If you’re only voting for harm reduction year after year and doing nothing to try and organize grassroots opposition to the lesser evil, yes constantly voting harm reduction is bad.
The thing is that this is everyone in America. The left has practically no grassroots organization and expects online complaints about the DNC to magically accomplish something, and the right has astroturfed horse shit that that is on board with whatever the corporatist GOP wants to do.
The left has practically no grassroots organization
The left literally took over the Nevada Dem committee a few years ago.
What have you done?
Oh, that’s right, I forgot it was my personal responsibility to organize the left. /s
Not everyone can be or wants to be a full-time activist.
That been my realization. I voted for harm reduction for what 12 year now like a lot of us and have little to show for it if not less. Yes the other side is a factor but they also seem more successful in their braindead idiot agenda too.
You clearly just weren’t voting hard enough.
Yes the other side is a factor but they also seem more successful in their braindead idiot agenda too.
The inability to acknowledge the appeal of the opposition and the persistent reliance on “my enemies are only strong because they are dumber than me” have lead to some really depressing political decisions by the Democrats. The Biden/Harris campaign in 2024 really seemed to boil down to saying “If you don’t vote for us, democracy is going away” and “Even Republicans from the Bush-Era like us, so you have to vote for us too”.
And then they lost in a popular landslide, suggesting that (a) democracy is alive and well and (b) neither Republicans nor Democrats seem to like you.
What if its not Republican voters who are stupid for supporting Trump? What if its Democrats who are stupid for supporting candidates lamer and more disappointing than Trump?
I mean I consider myself a progressive so yeah that’s pretty well on mark.
To the lame point, I think a large part of not most Americans think knowledge is lame regardless so arguing things seriously is just dismissed as well.
Le sigh.
I think a large part of not most Americans think knowledge is lame
People spend a lot of their younger years building an understanding of the world, then become cemented in a particular worldview as they get old.
Trying to introduce new ideas to an old crowd is much more difficult than appealing to an audience of young people without any preexisting priors.
voting is not harm reduction.
It is when both parties get the same orders from the same bribers on economic policy and merely war on how to or if to address some of the social issue symptoms, the ones that don’t effect their briber’s quarterly results.
Example: they war over forced births, but abortion is often an ECONOMIC decision, and the markets have demanded 2 breadwinners the last few decades to make moar from themselves, which is antisocial and antifuture. You won’t hear either party calling for a single income for most to all being able to support a family. That’s a matter of economic policy. That’s a choice. There would objectively, naturally be fewer abortions without coersion if economic desperation wasn’t defended here by both parties, no threat of state violence required.
No, our choice is on the social issue of forced births? No forced births? Your choice lol… Then get back to work, battery.
none of this makes voting harm reduction.
Got it, no one is receiving literal methadone so it it can’t be. /s
Language evolves.
no one was saved from the horrors of the capitalist system by your vote
Is that the only harm that exists? Maybe you should tell that to trans folks…
Agreed, but no one would be threatening to annex Canada or abolish income derived repayment for student loans either.
Even one being slightly less harmful is harm reduction. Both are taking us on a train ride to hell, and one going 65 is still harm reduction when the only other choice is a train ride to hell at 75.
Harm reduction means there’s no good option. You can argue accelerating towards collapse with Trump will make things better faster than limping along until capitalist climate change forces it in 20 years or so, but you never know what you’ll get on the other side, could be an iron fisted military dictatorship with Don Jr. As the permanent figurehead.
Sometimes, providing clean needles so the heroin user doesn’t ALSO get HIV is better than not. Something that works as a metaphor, and also a social policy position our two capitalist owned parties do disagree on in practice. That’s something the owners allow us to have an opinion on, as thats a poorie problem that doesn’t meaningfully effect their profit expectations. No skin off their nose.
There are tons of ways to reduce abortion and, typically, those are supported by Democratic politicians and opposed by Republicans. The concern is not to reduce abortion, there’s actually very little concern about the actual number of abortions that happen by its opponents. The concern is that the opponents want an opportunity for themselves to take a “strong moral stance” against abortion. They prefer a world of more abortions which are illegal to a world of fewer abortions which are legal.
Agreed, but once again, the elephant in the room is not being able to afford to have children. Neoliberals stand in the way with Republicans on human citizens being able to afford a family with one child.
It’s an important social issue, what I’m saying is almost all social issues are heavily informed by and often exacerbated by economic policy that ALEC had more say in than the American people.
I think “one income families” would be a winner if you could convince people it was even possible. I think it’d be a hard sell in the modern culture.
I think the United States, culturally, is on track to have about as much hope in positive change as your average Russian.
That’s what happens when you have a supposed generational leader calling for an age of positive progressive change culminating in… a heritage foundation conceived plan to further enshrine private insurers and the profit motive, the core blight, into our broken healthcare system. Then have his party never stop bragging about doing so. The DNC still acts like we should be thanking them for using their super majority to do… That.
Yeah, at this point, this government is too captured to hope for anything but pain rationally, at least on the timescale of human lifespans.
Unfortunately many don’t take the next step, look at nations that do serve their people like the Nordic model, and revolt for a government that serves them in similar fashion.
Because you do have to be a completely blind, willfully ignorant sucker to still believe our vote can do more than let us tread water.
If your friend is an alcoholic getting wasted on a bottle of vodka every night, switching them to beer because it has less alcohol is not harm reduction. Rescuing a young woman from Jack The Ripper and giving her to Jeffrey Epstein “for her safety” is not harm reduction. A professional fighter concerned about CTE switching to football is not harm reduction. The lesser of two evils is very much still evil.
Those are all literally harm reduction buddy. If those are the only options available you’d take them because they all mean a better chance of better results in the future. Of course, in these situations you would definitely have better options, but you’re deliberately framing it like there are no others. So are you comfortable saying you’d leave your friend alone with the bottle of vodka, let the woman get disemboweled, and not recommend the sport with helmets?
Fuck you if you didn’t choose harm reduction.
With caveats.
A lot of people who chose to just not vote were given a choice between two people who want to genocide their family… Harm reduction wasn’t offered to them.
two people who want to genocide their family
Want vs will. There’s a small difference in that binary choice that you don’t need to both-sides it.
Correct, but likely not how you like it…
Harris WAS engaged in genocide of their families. Trump wanted to.
So, yes, both-sidesing it is very applicable in this case.
Fuck you if you didn’t choose harm reduction.
…thirty years of choosing harm reduction brought us to this point…
…i held my nose and voted against fascism, but if you want to blame someone, blame the f*cking fascists and blame the thirty years of harm reduction which enabled them: pluralities win, that’s how american democracy works…
Clinton Clinton Bush 2 Bush 2 Obama Obama Fuckface Biden Fuckface
Its as even as you can get over 9 terms (4:5)
Let’s not forget how much absolute harm Bush and Fuckface caused, and I’m not even counting Fuckface’s homicidal COVID response.
The US would have universal healthcare and a sane supreme Court if it wasn’t for Republicans.
I blame both.
This is such a dumb take. You can’t say “thirty years of harm reduction brought us here” with the implication that if Republicans won every election in the time frame things would somehow be better, unless you’re actually just a right wing voter.
I’ll say it for the thousandth time: voting in national elections in no way affects your ability to do other activism. If your argument is along the lines of “voting for the worst option will unite the resistance and we’ll make real change”, well, I hope you realize that that “real change” is bloody revolution with an uncertain result.
For years I’ve seen leftists complaining about ‘harm reduction’ and ‘lesser evil’ and how the dems are ignoring their vote. But all we ever do is bicker with ourselves. We don’t have a united front. We don’t have any reliable voting bloc.
They literally don’t care about us because there is nothing to care about. If Dems court one leftist group they risk alienating another because of our unnecessary purity tests and virtue signaling. It’s so much easier and more reliable to get votes if you tack to the center so that’s what they do.
Meanwhile we don’t do any meaningful activism or organizing. We don’t vote practically and only get excited about voting when we have an exciting candidate. Leftists seem to expect their vote to have power but it doesn’t have any. And it’s entirely our own fault because you have to actually do the work to get the power.
do the work
What work is this? Writing your representatives? Voting in primaries? Voting every year there’s an election no matter how local? Knocking on doors and phone banking? Donating to campaigns?
And if that’s not the work, please tell me what the work actually is because I’ve done all those things and have no power to show for it.
Mad respect to you for the effort you put into it - all those things matter. Problem is we don’t do it as a community. Most leftists think their vote is the be-all end-all if they even vote at all, so of course not enough of us are doing what you’re doing.
Beyond that, getting involved locally and/or running for office would be powerful too. Grassroots movements have been shown to work and we don’t have anything remotely like it.
Well said.
Harm reduction and neoliberalism just wont work, end of discussion. Its fucking 2024, if you want to beat republicans you need to elect progressives
To be fair to them, we’re just delaying collapse. It is a choice.
I agree with them that there’s no saving this constitutional structure. In one sense it’s cowardly, because there’s no escape from this capitalist slaughterhouse hellscape without collapse. Collapse is necessary. Trump will certainly usher that in faster.
But Im too much of a softy to let the blood that always has to spill be on my hands.
This country was irreparable since Reagan, a zombie nation oligarch piggie bank. My vote was a cowardly one for a few more years of quiet orderly slaughter, NOT peace.
But we lost, so the slaughter will be loud and bigger than it’s ever been, so maybe it’s time for revolution if we want our kids to have anything left.
Because in 4 years the DNC WILL anoint someone to meet Trump’s economy in the middle, and even I may not be able to stomach voting for that.
Democrats going the full Florida route and just nominating Mitt Romney for President in 2028.
At which point, I will roll my eyes, tear up my ballot, and go home. 24 years of voting for least worst, and phone banking for a primary candidate I actually liked in two campaigns to no avail will have been enough for me if the 2028 candidate isn’t an economic leftist, because I already feel like a sucker and capitalism enabler.
The oligarchs were never not going to shoot the hostages for a tidy profit.
It doesn’t have to be a total waste, you can still chip your vote towards a third party to help them get that 5% that gets them ballot access and federal campaign funding.
Kamala was in a weird place as well.
Normally it’s easy for people to hold their noses for an incumbent. But if Kamala won. Shed run again in 2028.
Which would mean from 2012 to 2032, there wouldn’t have been a fair Dem primary.
20 fucking years…
Party leaders don’t understand that when you take primaries away, it hurts general turnout. Because regardless of who wins, the primary is the time for the eventual candidate to get their finger on the pulse and see what voters want.
Which is reliably that the Dem candidate moves left.
Without a primary they move right and turnout goes down.
We have literally decades of data that shows this, but it’s not what the donors want and the present DNC wants donations more than votes.
Hopefully Winkler gets chair in a few months and that changes.
Some More News did a good summary of how the Democrats win when they have a primary - and move to the left - but lose when they don’t.
The DNC would rather have Trump as POTUS than Sanders or AOC.
With Trump, the bribe money keeps flowing to both party machines, They are both paid to keep this sociopath owned economy safe from the people.
The DNC would rather have Trump as POTUS than Sanders or AOC.
Always have…
Which is the problem, and we have zero control over what the DNC does, literally the only leverage is not voting for them, which obviously is a huge risk with potentially disastrous results.
Which is why now is the time to pressure the DNC and make noise.
If Ben Winkler wins DNC chair because Kamala lost, it might actually be a net positive.
If Kamala had won, we’d be stuck with Jamie Harrison again. A guy with little political experience whose only notable accomplishment was being “the only other option” to Lindsey Graham and raising an insane amount of money on that fact alone then losing the election.
I don’t know why people are surprised with the 2024 result of they had any clue who was running the DNC…
Raising money and losing elections is all Jaimie knows. And that’s what the DNC did under his leadership
Which is why now is the time to pressure the DNC and make noise.
How would one pressure the DNC or make a noise they’re able to hear? And will it involve putting clamps on sensitive body parts and 150dB train horns?
AOC voted to protect the rail corporations from a union strike.
Realistically they weren’t gonna hold a fair primary anyway. If they held one we would’ve gotten candidate Shapiro, who would have been stomped into dust by Trump.
In large part because Jaimie Harrison was the DNC chair.
There’s an upcoming vote for chair, and there’s some standouts and one crazy with no chance.
But from what I know about them (not everything) we’re almost guaranteed a good chair with a very good chance of getting an amazing one.
I’m no fan of the DNC, but there’s a real chance to turn everything around and it’s barely a month away
Here’s hoping, though remember the people who voted for Harrison are still the ones voting. I remember we did get Howard Dean after his campaign, so hopefully there’s a similar thing that happens.
Jaimie got it because Biden appointed him…
He was the only option for DNC members to vote for, it’s a rubber stamp process when a Dem wins the presidential.
The only time they really vote is when a Dem president doesn’t win, or the chair resigns early (I think).
I think there’s some truth in thinking that continuing to elect milquetoast corporatist neoliberal candidates just builds up more extremism and discontent as people continue to suffer under option A of 2 - so when eventually a neocon breaks through they tend to be bonkers. It’s why I’m so fucking disappointed in Starmier as he’s clearly going to do fuck all and likely hand the next election to the torries.
That said, that’s a pretty fucking abstract view and there’s always a chance we get lucky. I voted for Harris but I was really hoping we’d get Senator Harris who actually gave a shit and, even if I knew for certain she’d be underwhelming I’d still fucking vote for her because Trump was worse on every issue and would directly cause a lot of additional human suffering. Women would be forced into unwanted pregnancies, trans people would be suppressed or worse - deaths would come from increased incidents of suicide and self-medication, and, lastly, (and I know a fuck ton of pushback on this point here) more Palestinians would die as Trump accelerated genocide.
So yea, I really regret that we are constantly dealt such bad hands but harm reduction is always a good thing to pursue in the absence of better actions.
Seriously though, when Biden dropped out fuck absolutely everyone who defended the DNC anointing Harris instead of running a snap primary.
Many in the movement, including prominent Muslim leaders, voted for Trump hoping he would bring peace to the Middle East.
Dipshits
I voted for the Westboro Baptist church because I’m a transwoman dating a cisman and I imagine that putting them in a position of power over me can only go well. /s
How could they have been that stupid as not to expect this??!
No shit.
Way to go assholes. You fucked around and now we all get to find out.
We’re going to be seeing a lot more of these posts as the next year progresses. Unless we can miraculously have another higher ramp mangione clone perform his magic
I mean, if we can convince the school shooters to stop killing school children and aim later in a quite literal sense…
Many in the movement, including prominent Muslim leaders, voted for Trump hoping he would bring peace to the Middle East.
😂🫵
🤡
Well, when you completely crush a region, what comes after could be called peace, I guess.
Y’know, you’ve got a point…
We fucking told you so.
Well, after four years of Trump we aren’t going to have to concern ourselves with Palestine, because it’s going to be “more Israel”. Thanks to these dumbasses. The leopards will be obese crime feasting.
deleted by creator
I have zero sympathy for those who only regret their vote for Trump now that his policies - which were always obvious - come back to haunt them personally.
HE SAID HE WAS GONNA
So did Harris.
Trump’s word and actions rarely line up, he isn’t right in the head enough to know what he’s doing, but if he thinks it helps Trump he will.
And yet he spent a whole lot of effort blocking totally not Muslims from immigrating. Why would you not take him seriously when he said Israel should finish the job?
Oh no I absolutely believe Mr. “Muslims need to wear special IDs” says the truth when he threatens to kill Arabs.
AND I DIDN’T THINK HE’D ACTUALLY
I’m not disagreeing that leopards face an obesity epidemic but it’s also very interesting that to r image you posted has a “紅星新聞” (Chinese) or “Red Star News” watermark.
It’s all the faces they’ve been eating, they’re having a banger year of it apparently
Trump has only ever wanted to glass the place.
The utterly bizarre thing to me is I don’t really think he’s tried to hide any of this. Like he’s pretty much doing what he said he was going to do, he’s done it before, why did anyone think he was going to do anything different?
But but but you see b b b Biden bad because [mental gymnastics intensifies].
Before the election he did try and deny any connection to or intent around project 2025 - of course the mainstream media never called him on that bullshit.
“Abandon Harris” movement, you mean half of Lemmy? Where are you clowns now?
Moscow. Same place they’ve always been. Just a lot less work to do now.
Yes. Putin must have had a stiffy ever since November.
It was a lot of .ml which are CCP(China), not Moscow.
I see them everywhere still. Since she did lose, sounds like they were right about Kamala being a bad candidate.
Why are you guys still putting your head in the sand and determined to blame people on Lemmy, which is an extremely niche community, for the election results instead of helping boost the voices calling for the Democrats to give you guys better candidates.
You had 4 years to make a change, but you guys would rather just blame people that wants actual improvements and still doing so after you lost the election despite getting the candidate that you supported. It’s really funny to watch.
I don’t agree with you, which means you’re a bad poster.
The downvotes I’m getting means a lot of people think this unironically.
It’s not a matter of downvotes. It is your own logic.
You didn’t convince me. Therefore, you ARE a bad poster - as a matter of fact, not opinion. Just like how, through Kamala’s failure to convince people that she was the better choice, that she was a bad candidate.
Do you see where you generate a problem by placing blame on the “convincer”?
A presidential candidate’s job is to convince people to vote for them. Neither a Lemmy commentor or a politician’s job is to make people vote for them. Therefore, me not convincing people doesn’t make me a bad commenter, nor Kamala a bad politician. She is a bad presidential candidate for the current political climate, though. On the other hand, she’s not as bad as Biden, that’s for sure.
Anyone aside from stephen01king can reply to this comment with their anecdotes as to when they’ve posted thoroughly documented arguments on forums with absolutely NO intention of convincing people of anything; because it “isn’t their job”.
Otto Wels was a bad candidate because the German electorate liked fascism more than a socialist. This isn’t an attempt to persuade, I am merely screaming into the void.
A commenter is supposed to further discussions, not to convince others of his position. Your logic means an echo chamber is the ultimate goal of commenting on Lemmy, which I disagree.
Like every single person who has ever claimed that downvotes proved their point, you are making an insupportable claim. There are at least two things I can point to in your comment that could provoke someone to downvote it, even if they agree with your other points.
You had 4 years to make a change, but you guys would rather just blame people that wants actual improvements and still doing so after you lost the election despite getting the candidate that you supported.
I think many commenters here would argue that at least some of the people who campaigned against Harris in the run-up to the election were not acting in good faith; certainly the comment you replied to implies this. It would therefore be inaccurate, in their view, to say that they’re blaming “people that wants actual improvements”.
It’s really funny to watch.
This kinda makes you sound like an asshole.
For the record, I agree that she was a bad candidate, and that the Democrats would have won the election if they offered real change, instead of rallying round the status quo as they so often have in my lifetime.
Yes, some of the people arguing against Kamala was doing it in bad faith. Did I also see people on lemmy.world broadly brushing all criticisms against Kamala as being done in bad faith? Yes, yes I did.
Did I see any effort on lemmy.world’s part to find out whether the people criticising Harris is doing so in good faith or not? I see very minimal effort, and many of them are only asking in bad faith with no apparent intention to accept any kind of explanation as for why people are not a Russian asset just because they don’t fall in line with the Democrats.
For example, the reply to the main comment did claim, while jokingly, that the half of Lemmy that was against Kamala resides in Moscow, its that kind of attitude that is pretty pervasive in the discourse on the run up to the election.
Bernie lost. Does your logic apply there too or only when it’s convenient for your argument?
He was a bad candidate to win the primary in a DNC that is focused more on pleasing the elites than the average voters, yes. But you forget one distinction, we can throw out the people in the DNC that created the situation in which Bernie becomes a bad candidate, but we can’t throw out American voters.
One reason the DNC is still ignoring what the average voter wants is because plenty of people prefer to attack those that wants to bring change rather than pressure the Democrats to change. Case in point, the people here on Lemmy.
Removed by mod
Very clever and original comment. If only my country is not affected by the US, EU, Russia, and China’s fuck ups, I would have just let you guys destroyed yourselves and just laugh, but that would be stupid of me. Seeing you all trying so hard to give Trump a fighting chance instead of banding together to fight fascism is both funny and worrying.
I agree that Kamala was a “bad candidate” in that she wasn’t very electable, despite being an intelligent, eloquent, respectable leader.
It seems like the main concepts that sank her are simply that she’s not a white male, and sadly Trump seems to have this unshakable perception that he’s good with money despite all evidence to the contrary.
That said, I think there’s a lot of self reflection to be done amongst those on the left who sabotaged their own candidate. They were protesting about Palestine outside Harris’ rallies for goodness sake. I don’t think this specific demographic is responsible for losing the election, but they are idiots that need to consider their approach to societal change.
Edit: I replied to the wrong person, whoops. Now this would be a reason to qualify me as a bad commenter.
voted for Trump hoping he would bring peace to the Middle East
what
I guess you could argue that total eradication of anyone that Israel hates will bring peace so they were sorta right
Like bringing balance to the force by murdering all the Jedi. Technically correct
