this post was submitted on 03 Aug 2025
403 points (97.9% liked)

politics

25119 readers
3517 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] BigBenis@lemmy.world 11 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

When a populace is so disillusioned with one party that they choose to hand total control over to the other party, would you not conclude that the first party failed to appeal to the populace? Is it not the responsibility of the party to convince the populace to vote for them?

Many people on the left seem to think the Democrats are entitled to votes because of how terrible Republican politics are. This has even been the foundation of the Democrats' campaign against Trump over the last decade, "vote for Dems because Trump is bad". A strategy with a success rate of 1-in-3, which would have been 0-in-3 if there hadn't been a once-in-a-century global pandemic to help bring gravity to the Dems' messaging at the perfect time, and even then they barely eeked out a win.

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 3 points 4 days ago (3 children)

But the choice wasn't between left and far left. It was between centrist and far right. People voted for far right.

The majority want right wing policies. It's horrible but that is reality.

People who said, "I was going to vote for Harris but she wasn't left enough." were never genuine. Because it wasn't Harris vs Sanders. It was Harris vs Trump.

"Many people on the left seem to think the Democrats are entitled to votes because of how terrible Republican politics are. "

When the alternative was Trump they are entitled to your vote! It seems like you wanted Trump to "punish" Democrats for not being left enough. But that didn't work because the majority wanted Trump.

Harris could have promised to kiss Bezos's feet and anyone remotely antifa should have still voted for her.

[–] piefood@feddit.online 4 points 4 days ago (1 children)

The majority want right wing policies. It's horrible but that is reality.

I'm not sure that's true at all. Many people want leftist policy, but that wasn't on the ballot. When it is on the ballot, it seems to get plenty of votes.

People who said, "I was going to vote for Harris but she wasn't left enough." were never genuine. Because it wasn't Harris vs Sanders. It was Harris vs Trump.

I don't see how that follows. If we had a leftist on the ballot, then leftists would have voted for them. But we had two right candidates. Why would leftists vote for a right-wing candidate? Especially a right-wing candidate that dismissed their concerns, and told them to sit down and shut up. It seems pretty obvious to me why the Dems lost votes between Biden and Harris.

When the alternative was Trump they are entitled to your vote!

No, they aren't. They have to earn them, like every other politician. Voting blue no matter who is why Trump was able to gain control in the first place. No politicians were speaking to the needs of the people, until Trump did. Trump is obviously a bullshitter, but at least he pretends to fight for the voters, which is more than we can say about the Democrats.

It seems like you wanted Trump to "punish" Democrats for not being left enough.

Or, it could be, that they didn't want to vote for a horrible person that wanted to keep the war-machine going and screwing over the working class.

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 0 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Many people want leftist policy

Many isn't most. Of course I'm also factoring the electoral system which isn't a pure nationwide majority. The majority of states voted for right wing policies. The entire midwest wouldn't have all voted for Trump.

Voting blue no matter who is why Trump was able to gain control in the first place.

If that were true then Trump could not have won. Right wing states wanted Trump.

Or, it could be, that they didn’t want to vote for a horrible person that wanted to keep the war-machine going and screwing over the working class.

But Trump promised to continue the Palestinian genocide, increase the military, and cut taxes for the rich. She promised to stop the Palestinian genocide and give them self determination. Trump tweeted a picture of him on with Gaza turned into an Israeli beach resort.

But we had two right candidates.

If you can't see a difference between Harris and Trump then you are in effect a Trump supporter. To say that means you believe that Harris would have been exactly the same president as Trump.

[–] piefood@feddit.online 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

The majority of states voted for right wing policies.

A lot of the states that voted for Trump also voted for left-wing policies, like raising the minimum wage. But they didn't have any lefty politicians to vote for.

If that were true then Trump could not have won. Right wing states wanted Trump.

Yes it is. Voting blue no matter who has allowed the Democrats to become fat and lazy. Thus, they aren't fighting for anything, and people don't believe in them.

But Trump promised to continue the Palestinian genocide, increase the military, and cut taxes for the rich. She promised to stop the Palestinian genocide and give them self determination. Trump tweeted a picture of him on with Gaza turned into an Israeli beach resort.

Of course he did. I never said otherwise. But she did not promise to stop the genocide. In fact, she said that she would continue to support Israel, just like her predecessor.

If you can't see a difference between Harris and Trump then you are in effect a Trump supporter. To say that means you believe that Harris would have been exactly the same president as Trump.

Who said that there was no difference between Harris and Trump? I certainly didn't. I also never said that they would have been exactly the same. It's always amazing to me how Liberals will tell me what I believe, and yell at me for saying things that I never said.

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Voting blue no matter who has allowed the Democrats to become fat and lazy.

It doesn't matter because the alternative was Trump. It wasn't a normal election like Obama vs Romney.

But she did not promise to stop the genocide. In fact, she said that she would continue to support Israel, just like her predecessor.

Supporting Israel and stopping Israel genocide aren't opposing positions. One candidate promising to stop genocide but not cut military aid is not the same as Trump promising to exterminate all Palestinians.

Who said that there was no difference between Harris and Trump? I certainly didn't.

You said this: "But we had two right candidates. Why would leftists vote for a right-wing candidate?"

You can't have it both ways. Either there's a difference or there isn't.

[–] piefood@feddit.online 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

It doesn't matter because the alternative was Trump.

It does matter. Because they "opposition" to Trump is opposition in name only. They spent the past few decades building up the systems that Trump is using.

Supporting Israel and stopping Israel genocide aren't opposing positions. One candidate promising to stop genocide but not cut military aid is not the same as Trump promising to exterminate all Palestinians.

But she never said that she was going to stop genocide. She wouldn't even say the word Genocide, in relation to Palestinians. She gave every indication that she would continue arming the genocidal state, so why shouldn't we think that she was going to continue her predecessor's support for genocide? It's a pretty easy message to send out: "I do not support genocide, nor the bombing of children. I will absolutely cut off funding for that." But she chose not to, which made her position very clear.

You can't have it both ways. Either there's a difference or there isn't.

Two right-wing candidates != Both candidates are the same. I can have it both ways, since they are both right-wing, but also they have differences.

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

. Because they “opposition” to Trump is opposition in name only.

LGBT rights. Minority rights. The environment. Banning DEI not only in the government but threatening private corporations to comply. Militarized ICE. Ending due process for alleged illegal immigrants.

https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2021-05-16/joe-bidens-governing-as-a-progressive-thats-a-surprise-only-if-you-werent-paying-attention https://thedemocraticstrategist.org/2025/01/teixeira-how-bidens-left-turn-doomed-dem-hopes/ https://permanentcampaign.substack.com/p/a-former-biden-advisors-analysis

I can have it both ways, since they are both right-wing, but also they have differences.

The differences separate right wing policies from left wing policies. You cannot have it both ways. Just because Harris didn't want to abolish private property and execute the American Oligarchy doesn't mean she wasn't far farther left than Trump.

It is a lie to claim that Harris would have implemented the same right wing policies as Trump.

[–] piefood@feddit.online 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

LGBT rights. Minority rights.

The Dems did a bit a years ago, but are already backing down on that.

The environment.

You mean the same Democrats that bragged about how much oil they were drilling, while imprisoning climate activists?

Banning DEI not only in the government but threatening private corporations to comply. Militarized ICE.

Oh, like how Democrats fight to get more "people of color" into jobs like ICE, or policing, or C-Suites, instead of addressing the actual underlying societal issues? The same Dems that said they would enact severe border-controls, and spent tons of money on a shitty border-wall, all while increasing funding to ICE?

Ending due process for alleged illegal immigrants.

Oh, you mean the thing that Democrats had been doing since Obama?

The differences separate right wing policies from left wing policies.

Correct. And the Dems pushing for a lot of those policies, while moving further to the right is why I call them a right-wing party.

Just because Harris didn't want to abolish private property and execute the American Oligarchy doesn't mean she wasn't far farther left than Trump.

Correct. Which is why I never said as much. Your time would be much better spent on things I did say, rather than made up arguments that I never claimed.

It is a lie to claim that Harris would have implemented the same right wing policies as Trump.

Well, except for the policies that she explicitly said she was going to follow Trump on. There would have been differences, sure, but she was pretty clear that she was going to push for more right-wing policies.

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

The Dems did a bit a years ago, but are already backing down on that.

Already backing down? Republicans control the entire government. This isn't the EU where minority parties continue to have power.

You mean the same Democrats that bragged about how much oil they were drilling

Your mask is slipping. You are Repeating Right wing talking points.

Actual data: https://www.energyindepth.org/why-bidens-oil-drilling-permits-surge-is-not-what-it-seems/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_policy_of_the_Joe_Biden_administration

while moving further to the right is why I call them a right-wing party.

Gays used to not be able to marry. DEI used to not exist. Enviromental cleanup wasn't an issue. Democrats have not been moving farther right.

[–] piefood@feddit.online 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

If you are going to keep arguing about points that I never made, or yelling at me about things that I never said, I'm not going to continue this conversation. Come back when you have actual rebuttals to things that I actually said, instead of made-up arguments.

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I quoted your claim that Democrats are backing down when they have no power.

I quoted your claim Biden was drilling more when actual data shows he was better than every other president.

I quoted your claim that Democrats are moving farther right when in every policy they have moved farther left over the past 50 years.

I quoted you and responded. You have no response and you are lying that I didn't quote you.

[–] piefood@feddit.online 1 points 3 days ago (2 children)

I quoted your claim that Democrats are backing down when they have no power.

But you are wrong, because tacos are indeed tasty.

I quoted your claim Biden was drilling more when actual data shows he was better than every other president.

That's not true, it's french, not english.

I quoted your claim that Democrats are moving farther right when in every policy they have moved farther left over the past 50 years.

But it's up, not down, so you are wrong.

This was my last attempt to help you get it, but I'm doubtful it will help. Just because you quoted me doesn't mean that you responded to the things I said.

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

You've lost and are now trying to deflect.

[–] LengAwaits@lemmy.world 0 points 3 days ago

Wow, folded like a cheap card table the minute they got you on the ropes. Nice.

[–] BigBenis@lemmy.world 3 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

The majority aren't paying enough attention to distinguish left from right policies. They couldn't define fascism, let alone recognize the Right's propensity towards it. They voted for change, for a relief from the status quo that is cannibalizing the middle class. Trump promised them the moon while the Democrats told us the status quo is working, "We have the best economy in the world", and the Harris administration is effectively going to be a continuation of Biden's agenda.

You can blame the majority for being so woefully uneducated or you can accept that they are and recognize that the Dems need to offer something other than good intentions in the form of gutted legislation that pleases their donors and goes widely unnoticed by the general public.

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 0 points 4 days ago

That applied in 2016 but not 2020. They didn't vote for change because Trump had already been President. They wanted more Trump.

[–] WoodScientist@sh.itjust.works -1 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

Harris could have promised to kiss Bezos’s feet and anyone remotely antifa should have still voted for her.

You're beyond saving. You are why Kamala lost the election. Please emigrate to Russia so you can vote for the lesser of two evils there and not pollute our electorate further.

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 2 points 4 days ago

Being anti Trump is pro Russian? Wtf?