3 ms·

Passively? Actively. A majority of voters handed over all the keys to these guys in full knowledge of the kind of people they are and what they wanted to do.

by wrs 2y ago

deathanatos 2y ago
> A majority of voters handed over all the keys Due to the weird way our nation works, it was a minority of voters. (A plurality in this case, though our electoral system also doesn't require that.) But yeah, the keys were handed over by the populace as much as was required by how our elections occur. I keep wondering where the line is, for those on the right. It seems like wherever you would draw a line in the sand … we're past that point.
- lotsofpulp 2y ago
  Eligible voters that did not vote due to apathy/laziness/politics are complicit.
  - 998244353 2y ago
    GP's comment was about accepting this actively vs passively, not about being complicit.
- saturn8601 2y ago
  >I keep wondering where the line is, for those on the right. It seems like wherever you would draw a line in the sand … we're past that point. Been thinking about this for years. I've come to the conclusion that there might be two seperate groups. 1. People that have nothing left to lose. Their life is ruined due to their community falling on hard times and if they see the people they perceive at fault suffering then they are satisfied. 2. People who love to watch the other side suffer but have themselves not felt enough pain yet. It has to really hurt for them to stop. I think the economy crashing in 08 was a moment where many of them quieted down for a tiny bit until the pain stopped.
  - prawn 2y ago
    The people with truly nothing left to lose are probably worried more about existing than voting, but I do generally agree otherwise. I think some resentment is possibly along lines of smarts/education and the roles and trappings those normally bring? I also think there's a polarisation between people predisposed mentally for survival and others for thriving. Scott Alexander has a piece about this that I found very interesting: https://slatestarcodex.com/2013/03/04/a-thrivesurvive-theory-of-the-political-spectrum/ https://slatestarcodex.com/2013/03/04/a-thrivesurvive-theory...
palmotea 2y ago
> Passively? Actively. A majority of voters handed over all the keys to these guys in full knowledge of the kind of people they are and what they wanted to do. I wouldn't say "full knowledge," but it's not like the other guys were any good either. There was a huge spike in inflation and right before the election it became clear they were lying about their leader's obvious incapacity. All the options voters had were bad. Personally, I blame the Democrats for this. Winning against Trump should've been easy, but they managed to fuck it up in all kinds of ways. They knew the stakes (and said so, loudly), but for some unfathomable reason they thought that meant they could coast. They also don't appear to know what the fuck they should be doing now, and seem to want to keep coasting.
- miohtama 2y ago
  From all good Democrats out there, they managed to come up with a mummy as a candidate so it is kind of self dug grave
- saturn8601 2y ago
  The bad leadership is still there so they will try to continue this nonsense next cycle. Whats worse is they are beginning to groom the next generation of grifters. We saw this with the start of Gen-Z Democratic 'influencers' this cycle.
- Freedom2 2y ago
  > Personally, I blame the Democrats for this. Is there any reason in particular people should not be blaming Republican voters for "this"? The US had four full years of Trump and it was plain as day what he'd get up to from his campaign, and voters still think he was a good choice. At what point does the US stop coddling Republican voters and blaming Democrats, even if they ran a bad campaign? The idea that a voter is ignorant and stupid to realize the consequences of their actions that they need a "campaign" telling them is frankly absurd.
  - voidhorse 2y ago
    I think this is a great point, and people honestly don't say it enough. There was a clearly worse choice this cycle, even if you felt both options were not ideal. Apparently, though, most people do not have a memory capable of spanning back past four years time. That and, depressingly, many people are woefully uninformed voters. But this is a natural consequence of poor labor structure. Work the wage earner to the bone so that they have no time to actually consider their options, learn, and make informed decisions. Cut their leisure to a minimum so that every vote is a vote of vibes and gut feeling. I feel this myself when assessing local candidates. I would love to develop a complete picture of each candidate and their beliefs, but with what time?
miohtama 2y ago
Every democratic country gets the government they deserve.
rickydroll 2y ago
not a majority. as I wrote in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42963075 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42963075 [edit fixed table formatting and labels] Assuming I did my sums right, DT won by approximately 1.5%. Hardly a ringing endorsement. He got 31.59% of the voter-eligible (VE) population. I count active yes votes as for a candidate and non-voter passive no votes. Some non-voters support a candidate, but since they didn't vote, their non-votes count against each candidate. EC %EC pop vote %of ballots %of VE population Democratic Kamala Harris Tim Walz 226 42% 75,019,230 48.34% 30.66% Republican Donald J. Trump J.D. Vance 312 58% 77,303,568 49.81% 31.59% voter eligible population 244,666,890 non-voters 89,278,948 https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/statistics/elections/2024 https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/statistics/elections/2024 https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/articles/2024-11-1 https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/articles/2024-11-1...
- wrs 2y ago
  OK, 0.2% off a majority of voters. Still plenty of people actively calling for this.

Passively? Actively. A majority of voters handed over all the keys to these guys in full knowledge of the kind of people they are and what they wanted to do.

by wrs 2y ago

Passively? Actively. A majority of voters handed over all the keys to these guys in full knowledge of the kind of people they are and what they wanted to do.

deathanatos 2y ago

> A majority of voters handed over all the keys Due to the weird way our nation works, it was a minority of voters. (A plurality in this case, though our electoral system also doesn't require that.) But yeah, the keys were handed over by the populace as much as was required by how our elections occur. I keep wondering where the line is, for those on the right. It seems like wherever you would draw a line in the sand … we're past that point.

lotsofpulp 2y ago
Eligible voters that did not vote due to apathy/laziness/politics are complicit.
- 998244353 2y ago
  GP's comment was about accepting this actively vs passively, not about being complicit.
saturn8601 2y ago
>I keep wondering where the line is, for those on the right. It seems like wherever you would draw a line in the sand … we're past that point. Been thinking about this for years. I've come to the conclusion that there might be two seperate groups. 1. People that have nothing left to lose. Their life is ruined due to their community falling on hard times and if they see the people they perceive at fault suffering then they are satisfied. 2. People who love to watch the other side suffer but have themselves not felt enough pain yet. It has to really hurt for them to stop. I think the economy crashing in 08 was a moment where many of them quieted down for a tiny bit until the pain stopped.
- prawn 2y ago
  The people with truly nothing left to lose are probably worried more about existing than voting, but I do generally agree otherwise. I think some resentment is possibly along lines of smarts/education and the roles and trappings those normally bring? I also think there's a polarisation between people predisposed mentally for survival and others for thriving. Scott Alexander has a piece about this that I found very interesting: https://slatestarcodex.com/2013/03/04/a-thrivesurvive-theory-of-the-political-spectrum/ https://slatestarcodex.com/2013/03/04/a-thrivesurvive-theory...

palmotea 2y ago

> Passively? Actively. A majority of voters handed over all the keys to these guys in full knowledge of the kind of people they are and what they wanted to do. I wouldn't say "full knowledge," but it's not like the other guys were any good either. There was a huge spike in inflation and right before the election it became clear they were lying about their leader's obvious incapacity. All the options voters had were bad. Personally, I blame the Democrats for this. Winning against Trump should've been easy, but they managed to fuck it up in all kinds of ways. They knew the stakes (and said so, loudly), but for some unfathomable reason they thought that meant they could coast. They also don't appear to know what the fuck they should be doing now, and seem to want to keep coasting.

miohtama 2y ago
From all good Democrats out there, they managed to come up with a mummy as a candidate so it is kind of self dug grave
saturn8601 2y ago
The bad leadership is still there so they will try to continue this nonsense next cycle. Whats worse is they are beginning to groom the next generation of grifters. We saw this with the start of Gen-Z Democratic 'influencers' this cycle.
Freedom2 2y ago
> Personally, I blame the Democrats for this. Is there any reason in particular people should not be blaming Republican voters for "this"? The US had four full years of Trump and it was plain as day what he'd get up to from his campaign, and voters still think he was a good choice. At what point does the US stop coddling Republican voters and blaming Democrats, even if they ran a bad campaign? The idea that a voter is ignorant and stupid to realize the consequences of their actions that they need a "campaign" telling them is frankly absurd.
- voidhorse 2y ago
  I think this is a great point, and people honestly don't say it enough. There was a clearly worse choice this cycle, even if you felt both options were not ideal. Apparently, though, most people do not have a memory capable of spanning back past four years time. That and, depressingly, many people are woefully uninformed voters. But this is a natural consequence of poor labor structure. Work the wage earner to the bone so that they have no time to actually consider their options, learn, and make informed decisions. Cut their leisure to a minimum so that every vote is a vote of vibes and gut feeling. I feel this myself when assessing local candidates. I would love to develop a complete picture of each candidate and their beliefs, but with what time?

miohtama 2y ago

Every democratic country gets the government they deserve.

rickydroll 2y ago

not a majority. as I wrote in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42963075 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42963075 [edit fixed table formatting and labels] Assuming I did my sums right, DT won by approximately 1.5%. Hardly a ringing endorsement. He got 31.59% of the voter-eligible (VE) population. I count active yes votes as for a candidate and non-voter passive no votes. Some non-voters support a candidate, but since they didn't vote, their non-votes count against each candidate. EC %EC pop vote %of ballots %of VE population Democratic Kamala Harris Tim Walz 226 42% 75,019,230 48.34% 30.66% Republican Donald J. Trump J.D. Vance 312 58% 77,303,568 49.81% 31.59% voter eligible population 244,666,890 non-voters 89,278,948 https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/statistics/elections/2024 https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/statistics/elections/2024 https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/articles/2024-11-1 https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/articles/2024-11-1...

wrs 2y ago
OK, 0.2% off a majority of voters. Still plenty of people actively calling for this.