4 ms·

That this gets downvoted shows that people have still not learned a single thing. You're spot on, it's tragic that so very few people understand this, based on

by maeil 1y ago

That this gets downvoted shows that people have still not learned a single thing. You're spot on, it's tragic that so very few people understand this, based on how incredibly little I see it voiced online. In fact, you're the first I've seen voice it in ages. E.g. if Harris (another, at best, incredibly mediocre candidate) would've won, the post-Harris Rep presidency would've been even worse than the current one. Until there's a competent non-Rep president, every single subsequent Rep government will be worse, until there will be no more fairish elections - and likely we're already there. Someone like AOC - not policywise, people don't vote on policy, it doesn't matter. Attitude-wise. It's abundantly clear the DNC hasn't learned (or more likely, doesn't want to learn), so the next president will be another Hillary/Biden/Harris candidate who will either lose or make the next Rep win even more decisive.

AlecSchueler 1y ago
I think maybe it gets downvoted because it comes across as victim blaming and has echoes of abusive reasoning. The left must change what they want because otherwise the right will throw a hissy fit and start opening concentration camps? Maybe I'm misunderstanding. It could be helpful to point to actual policy failings of Harris rather than handwaving about mediocrity.
- tim333 1y ago
  When Harris actually completed to be presidential candidate she came in fifth. She was on stage a couple of times saying 200 million Americans died of covid - you have to be fairly thick to not realize that isn't so - she'd misread 200,000. They had to keep her away from interviews to stop similar stupid leaking out.
  - AlecSchueler 1y ago
    Misreading a number seems incredibly insignificant to the number of outright idiotic things Mr Trump says on a daily basis. Why the disparity in expectation/response?
    - tbrownaw 1y ago
      > Misreading a number Simple misreading is not the issue. The misread number was almost two thirds of the entire population. That's the sort of thing I'd expect someone to catch as they're saying it because of how absurd it is.
      - AlecSchueler 1y ago
        So misreading it and not immediately catching it is the issue? It seems incredibly human. And you really feel this is worse than the dumb things Mr Trump is on record as saying?
        ethbr1 1y ago
        One shouldn't measure excellence solely by ones distance relative to catastrophe. Being better than shit doesn't mean good.
      - thrance 1y ago
        Trump believes people are born with a set number of heartbeats [1], hence why he doesn't exercise. To save them for later. Is that something you'd expect POTUS to catch because of "how absurd it is" or not? [1] https://edition.cnn.com/2017/05/15/politics/donald-trump-exercise https://edition.cnn.com/2017/05/15/politics/donald-trump-exe...
      - Anamon 1y ago
        Meanwhile, the Trump administration claimed to have saved 258 American lives with their drug busts. In contrast to Harris, who I'm sure realised her mistake and would've corrected it if asked about it, the Trump admin actually believes their number and doubled down on it. Harris misspoke. Trump believes the majority of the American population would have died in 2025 had he not been in office.
  - const_cast 1y ago
    I don't recall this ever happening and, if it did, it was not a big enough deal for anyone to care about it. Certainly not a single person I know who didn't vote for Harris said this was the reasoning. The reality is she was much more intelligent, better spoken, and higher qualified than Trump. That's not the reason she lost, and anyone proclaiming otherwise is stupid. Yes, stupid.
    - bmn__ 1y ago
      > [Harris] was […] better spoken […] than Trump Pardon me, are we opining about same Harris that was widely ridiculed for her word salads?
      - esafak 1y ago
        Yes? Consider the following, typical Trump speech: > But I think when you talk about the kind of numbers that I’m talking about, that—because, look, child care is child care. It’s, couldn’t—you know, there’s something … You have to have it. In this country, you have to have it. I can't identify the train of thought here.
      - thrance 1y ago
        As if Trump's word salads weren't 100 times worse?? I have no idea how someone can be this blind to the shit they say. Yes, Harris is better spoken than Trump, this is an absolute fact.
      - const_cast 1y ago
        The "word salads" were completely made up. It was always a hallucination. The reasoning is that she's a black woman, so obviously she's stupid, and then we work backwards to word salad. That's how that happened. In reality, she's very well spoken. 99.99% of all the stuff Kamala says is very easy to understand. We can cherry-pick clips that represent 0.00001% of her speaking career all day. The fact is she's an educated woman who knows how to publicly speak, and she knows it well. Any other narrative is an alternative reality, sorry.
  - computerthings 1y ago
    [dead]
- thrance 1y ago
  I understand why one might take my comment that way, but I'm advocating for the exact opposite: democrats should start acting as a real left-wing party, with aggressive messaging on oligarchy, healtcare, the depravity of the right, you name it. The democrats, as they exist now, are almost "controlled opposition". There's much to wager that if they succeeded Trump II, they wouldn't undo 10% of the damage he's done. I fully believe Harris could have done a correct job at maintaining the status quo, but that's not what the people want or need. The democrats should stop showing weakness and trying to build bridges with fascists, and instead speak 24/7 about how vile and stupid this entire circus is. Then they should start advocating for big changes that will hype Americans: free healthcare, extra taxes on billionaires, etc.
  - AlecSchueler 1y ago
    That seems like a much more reasonable position, thanks for taking the time to clarify. All I can say is what a unspeakably massive pity it is that there hasn't sooner been a reform to the electoral system that would have allowed for a less reactive governance.
    - thrance 1y ago
      Indeed. I don't know how much comfort it could bring you, but know that almost the totality of western democracies are slowly succumbing to right-wing populism, not just the US. While flawed, I believe the current electoral system is only a minor part of a much deeper issue, that being the prevalence of money in our democratic processes.
  - ethbr1 1y ago
    Part of the problem is that Democrats aren't counting voters correctly. There are fewer identity voters than there are economic voters. They'd win more elections if they trended centrist on identity and progressive on the economy. As has been quipped after they lost the last election, "poor" is its own identity.
    - thrance 1y ago
- maeil 1y ago
  > I think maybe it gets downvoted because it comes across as victim blaming and has echoes of abusive reasoning. Ah yes, rather downvote because it smells of victim blaming than actually coming to terms with the reality which has played a huge role in a superpower to spiral into facism. Seriously? Now's not the time for that. > The left must change what they want >It could be helpful to point to actual policy failings of Harris You still don't get it at all, I literally stated it verbatim. It's not about policies, it's about candidates, attitude, messaging, narrative. > The left must change what they want because otherwise the right will throw a hissy fit and start opening concentration camps? As explained, this is not the case, there isn't a need to change the "wants" - that's the least of the concerns. But let's disregard that and imagine a world where yes, that is the case. Are we going to say "nuh-uh, we rather have concentration camps than change what we want"? If that would be the reality (which it isn't) then that's how things are. Start facing the reality we live in.

by maeil 1y ago

AlecSchueler 1y ago

I think maybe it gets downvoted because it comes across as victim blaming and has echoes of abusive reasoning. The left must change what they want because otherwise the right will throw a hissy fit and start opening concentration camps? Maybe I'm misunderstanding. It could be helpful to point to actual policy failings of Harris rather than handwaving about mediocrity.

tim333 1y ago
When Harris actually completed to be presidential candidate she came in fifth. She was on stage a couple of times saying 200 million Americans died of covid - you have to be fairly thick to not realize that isn't so - she'd misread 200,000. They had to keep her away from interviews to stop similar stupid leaking out.
- AlecSchueler 1y ago
  Misreading a number seems incredibly insignificant to the number of outright idiotic things Mr Trump says on a daily basis. Why the disparity in expectation/response?
  - tbrownaw 1y ago
    > Misreading a number Simple misreading is not the issue. The misread number was almost two thirds of the entire population. That's the sort of thing I'd expect someone to catch as they're saying it because of how absurd it is.
    - AlecSchueler 1y ago
      So misreading it and not immediately catching it is the issue? It seems incredibly human. And you really feel this is worse than the dumb things Mr Trump is on record as saying?
      - ethbr1 1y ago
        One shouldn't measure excellence solely by ones distance relative to catastrophe. Being better than shit doesn't mean good.
    - thrance 1y ago
      Trump believes people are born with a set number of heartbeats [1], hence why he doesn't exercise. To save them for later. Is that something you'd expect POTUS to catch because of "how absurd it is" or not? [1] https://edition.cnn.com/2017/05/15/politics/donald-trump-exercise https://edition.cnn.com/2017/05/15/politics/donald-trump-exe...
    - Anamon 1y ago
      Meanwhile, the Trump administration claimed to have saved 258 American lives with their drug busts. In contrast to Harris, who I'm sure realised her mistake and would've corrected it if asked about it, the Trump admin actually believes their number and doubled down on it. Harris misspoke. Trump believes the majority of the American population would have died in 2025 had he not been in office.
- const_cast 1y ago
  I don't recall this ever happening and, if it did, it was not a big enough deal for anyone to care about it. Certainly not a single person I know who didn't vote for Harris said this was the reasoning. The reality is she was much more intelligent, better spoken, and higher qualified than Trump. That's not the reason she lost, and anyone proclaiming otherwise is stupid. Yes, stupid.
  - bmn__ 1y ago
    > [Harris] was […] better spoken […] than Trump Pardon me, are we opining about same Harris that was widely ridiculed for her word salads?
    - esafak 1y ago
      Yes? Consider the following, typical Trump speech: > But I think when you talk about the kind of numbers that I’m talking about, that—because, look, child care is child care. It’s, couldn’t—you know, there’s something … You have to have it. In this country, you have to have it. I can't identify the train of thought here.
    - thrance 1y ago
      As if Trump's word salads weren't 100 times worse?? I have no idea how someone can be this blind to the shit they say. Yes, Harris is better spoken than Trump, this is an absolute fact.
    - const_cast 1y ago
      The "word salads" were completely made up. It was always a hallucination. The reasoning is that she's a black woman, so obviously she's stupid, and then we work backwards to word salad. That's how that happened. In reality, she's very well spoken. 99.99% of all the stuff Kamala says is very easy to understand. We can cherry-pick clips that represent 0.00001% of her speaking career all day. The fact is she's an educated woman who knows how to publicly speak, and she knows it well. Any other narrative is an alternative reality, sorry.
- computerthings 1y ago
  [dead]
thrance 1y ago
I understand why one might take my comment that way, but I'm advocating for the exact opposite: democrats should start acting as a real left-wing party, with aggressive messaging on oligarchy, healtcare, the depravity of the right, you name it. The democrats, as they exist now, are almost "controlled opposition". There's much to wager that if they succeeded Trump II, they wouldn't undo 10% of the damage he's done. I fully believe Harris could have done a correct job at maintaining the status quo, but that's not what the people want or need. The democrats should stop showing weakness and trying to build bridges with fascists, and instead speak 24/7 about how vile and stupid this entire circus is. Then they should start advocating for big changes that will hype Americans: free healthcare, extra taxes on billionaires, etc.
- AlecSchueler 1y ago
  That seems like a much more reasonable position, thanks for taking the time to clarify. All I can say is what a unspeakably massive pity it is that there hasn't sooner been a reform to the electoral system that would have allowed for a less reactive governance.
  - thrance 1y ago
    Indeed. I don't know how much comfort it could bring you, but know that almost the totality of western democracies are slowly succumbing to right-wing populism, not just the US. While flawed, I believe the current electoral system is only a minor part of a much deeper issue, that being the prevalence of money in our democratic processes.
- ethbr1 1y ago
  Part of the problem is that Democrats aren't counting voters correctly. There are fewer identity voters than there are economic voters. They'd win more elections if they trended centrist on identity and progressive on the economy. As has been quipped after they lost the last election, "poor" is its own identity.
  - thrance 1y ago
maeil 1y ago
> I think maybe it gets downvoted because it comes across as victim blaming and has echoes of abusive reasoning. Ah yes, rather downvote because it smells of victim blaming than actually coming to terms with the reality which has played a huge role in a superpower to spiral into facism. Seriously? Now's not the time for that. > The left must change what they want >It could be helpful to point to actual policy failings of Harris You still don't get it at all, I literally stated it verbatim. It's not about policies, it's about candidates, attitude, messaging, narrative. > The left must change what they want because otherwise the right will throw a hissy fit and start opening concentration camps? As explained, this is not the case, there isn't a need to change the "wants" - that's the least of the concerns. But let's disregard that and imagine a world where yes, that is the case. Are we going to say "nuh-uh, we rather have concentration camps than change what we want"? If that would be the reality (which it isn't) then that's how things are. Start facing the reality we live in.