4 ms·

The DNC barely exists and doesn't do anything. (Same for the RNC.) In a presidential year it's basically all geography and coattails from the presidential camp

The DNC barely exists and doesn't do anything. (Same for the RNC.) In a presidential year it's basically all geography and coattails from the presidential campaign. This one followed the post-inflation trend from every other country, if you need a single explanation for it.

floobertoober 2y ago
I disagree - IMO the idea of having superdelegates is terrible. Any way of picking your party's candidate that deviates from how the candidate is selected in the general is setting yourself up for failure. IMO this is part of why the party has lost steam and alignment with their base. That does fall on the DNC, I think
- johnnyanmac 2y ago
  This isn't an opinion up for debate unless you study foreign policy: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/nov/12/voters-plague-incumbents-labour-trump-election-win https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/nov/12/voters... we can talk about super delegates if we want, but this is a worlwide phenomenon and goes past advertising and faux represenation. People are frustrated and want change. Any change. They are afraid and fearful people don't make rational choices.
  - tourmalinetaco 2y ago
    The reason people want change is not because they are “irrational” or “fearful”, it is because the people in power have demonstrated their inability to lead in every capacity. In Germany the government has literally collapsed due to the former coalition’s ineptitude. Prices in America have skyrocketed in the past 4 years, and pay hasn’t even started to catch up. In England innocents are being murdered and the government instead focuses on the people upset about the murders, calling them “terrorists”. If I fail at my job I am fired, that is a logical outcome. Why do you feel that politicians should be treated differently?
    - astrange 2y ago
      > Prices in America have skyrocketed in the past 4 years, and pay hasn’t even started to catch up. No, it's about the same as 2019: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEHOINUSA672N https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEHOINUSA672N Inflation is over and done with. We even fixed income inequality; it's sharply reduced since 2019: https://www.nber.org/papers/w31010 https://www.nber.org/papers/w31010 In fact, every single economic indicator is currently better than 2019. One thing you can say that may be true is that voters are upset because they remember inflation from 2021-22 and are still reacting to it. Or that they don't like high interest rates. And housing prices are bad in blue states and that is the local governments' fault. But one thing we see from US voters is that R voters claim the economy is bad under a D president and immediately switch to claiming it's good under an R president. So I think you should consider those people are lying.
      - CptFribble 2y ago
        > R voters claim the economy is bad under a D president and immediately switch to claiming it's good under an R president. adding on to this, typically it takes 1-3 years for the effects of an administration to really bear fruit in the economy, either good or ill. So a common tactic from the R side the last several presidential cycles is to claim ownership of the economy handed to them by the outgoing D president, then when their policies cause some kind of problem, blame the incoming D president 4 years later. See also: who the R's blame the deficit on vs. which party's presidents actually increased the deficit the most over the last 20-25 years.
        tourmalinetaco 2y ago
        If it takes 2-3 years, then that means that the economic growth we experienced in ~2021 is Trump’s 2017/19 policies, and the economic downturn we’re receiving in 2024 is due to Biden’s 2021/23 policies. Also, Dems do literally the exact same things.
        47282847 2y ago
        I highly doubt any but the most crude policy changes would demonstrate within 5 years how they were to play out in the longer term. The idea of that seems almost as insane as US politics.
ihsw 2y ago
[dead]

floobertoober 2y ago

I disagree - IMO the idea of having superdelegates is terrible. Any way of picking your party's candidate that deviates from how the candidate is selected in the general is setting yourself up for failure. IMO this is part of why the party has lost steam and alignment with their base. That does fall on the DNC, I think

johnnyanmac 2y ago
This isn't an opinion up for debate unless you study foreign policy: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/nov/12/voters-plague-incumbents-labour-trump-election-win https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/nov/12/voters... we can talk about super delegates if we want, but this is a worlwide phenomenon and goes past advertising and faux represenation. People are frustrated and want change. Any change. They are afraid and fearful people don't make rational choices.
- tourmalinetaco 2y ago
  The reason people want change is not because they are “irrational” or “fearful”, it is because the people in power have demonstrated their inability to lead in every capacity. In Germany the government has literally collapsed due to the former coalition’s ineptitude. Prices in America have skyrocketed in the past 4 years, and pay hasn’t even started to catch up. In England innocents are being murdered and the government instead focuses on the people upset about the murders, calling them “terrorists”. If I fail at my job I am fired, that is a logical outcome. Why do you feel that politicians should be treated differently?
  - astrange 2y ago
    > Prices in America have skyrocketed in the past 4 years, and pay hasn’t even started to catch up. No, it's about the same as 2019: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEHOINUSA672N https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEHOINUSA672N Inflation is over and done with. We even fixed income inequality; it's sharply reduced since 2019: https://www.nber.org/papers/w31010 https://www.nber.org/papers/w31010 In fact, every single economic indicator is currently better than 2019. One thing you can say that may be true is that voters are upset because they remember inflation from 2021-22 and are still reacting to it. Or that they don't like high interest rates. And housing prices are bad in blue states and that is the local governments' fault. But one thing we see from US voters is that R voters claim the economy is bad under a D president and immediately switch to claiming it's good under an R president. So I think you should consider those people are lying.
    - CptFribble 2y ago
      > R voters claim the economy is bad under a D president and immediately switch to claiming it's good under an R president. adding on to this, typically it takes 1-3 years for the effects of an administration to really bear fruit in the economy, either good or ill. So a common tactic from the R side the last several presidential cycles is to claim ownership of the economy handed to them by the outgoing D president, then when their policies cause some kind of problem, blame the incoming D president 4 years later. See also: who the R's blame the deficit on vs. which party's presidents actually increased the deficit the most over the last 20-25 years.
      - tourmalinetaco 2y ago
        If it takes 2-3 years, then that means that the economic growth we experienced in ~2021 is Trump’s 2017/19 policies, and the economic downturn we’re receiving in 2024 is due to Biden’s 2021/23 policies. Also, Dems do literally the exact same things.
        47282847 2y ago
        I highly doubt any but the most crude policy changes would demonstrate within 5 years how they were to play out in the longer term. The idea of that seems almost as insane as US politics.

ihsw 2y ago

[dead]