1776
In the end, The Hill lied and Harris was right. (lemmy.world)
submitted 1 year ago by to c/whitepeopletwitter@sh.itjust.works
locked 344 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Link https://archive.ph/lk6HY

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 43 points 1 year ago (48 children)

Hillary was right. Harris was right. Misogyny ignored them.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 48 child comments
    •
  • [–] 30 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (35 children)

    Lets not pretend the presidential election is all about gender and nothing else. Thats just not true.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 35 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    I posted a post-deep-dive take on what gave Trump the presidency here, but I will say that misogyny did did no small amount of heavy lifting.

    What we need to figure out before the GOP finds its next cult leader is how to neutralize the massive far-right propaganda machine that is churning out false information and disinforming the public.

    We've decided before that ethically we can't trust human beings to make sound decisions in some conditions. Gambling, for example. Sometimes humans get addicted to just giving the house their money when it's coached in a probability game. But then we've just invented loopholes (and lootboxes) to circumvent regulation. So I don't know how we're going to deprogram massive viewerships of media that promotes hate, including misogyny.

    If we fail then the ice zombie army climate crisis (and running out of water for agriculture) is going to drive us to extinction.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    hmmmmm... stats say otherwise. A lot of males did not vote for her because she was female. That said, US is clearly not ready for female president.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [+] -7 points 1 year ago* (11 children)

    I could understand Hilary not getting elected, but Harris? She's as blank slate as any presidential candidate could get ( and maybe that was the problem). But the demographics which shifted the most politically, was the Hispanic and black male (whom tend to be less educated) voters towards the right. That could either be populism or misogyny, and considering they were leaning left when elected Biden the previous term, I'm leaning towards the latter reason.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
    •
  • [–] 17 points 1 year ago

    She's a former cop and prosecutor that wasn't selected through a primary process (not that Dems ever allow anyone not selected by party elites.)

    She's basically a Republican with zero progressive policies, which isn't going to appeal to an increasingly radicalized base.

    There were a lot of problems with her that had nothing to do with her being a her.

    Democrats keep chasing votes to the right, abandoning the actual left and the working class.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 18 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    She was also a candidate we didn't vote for, Biden being shoved down our throats again then him dropping out are what gave Trump the election. The focus on her gender and nothing else is to keep you from remembering that the DNC fucked us again and a large number of voters protest voting because "She'll genocide the Palestinians" like TRUMP wouldn't.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [+] -8 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    "The DNC" does not have the power to force Biden to step aside when he doesn't want to.

    They aren't a military or a government. They are a club, and Biden was far and away the senior member.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 14 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    The fact that when it comes to politics I see Americans nowadays keep repeating over and over and over again "this can't be done", "they don't have the power", "that will never happen", is to me astonishing. When I was growing up, America was where things HAPPENED. What happened to you guys? Where did this learned helplessness come from?

    So your party structures are broken and unable to produce good outcomes? Change them. Reform them. Update them. What the fuck is wrong with you people? You made democracy into a fossil that you no longer fit in and you're despairing. It's supposed to be a living breathing thing that evolves all the time. WTF.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    40% of the country wants it to be worse in every way imaginable. They want more religion in the halls of power, more impressive law enforcement and mass incarceration, more dictatorial centralization of power, less education more environmental destruction more wealth concentration in fewer elites hands, less protections for workers, and their families, more poverty sickness and death.

    They aren't the same people either, sixty-70% want one or some of the things on that list.

    If we declared a constitutional convention, I don't think there would be any agreement whatsoever about what changes to make, and if there were, agreement, I expect they would be disasterous.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [+] -7 points 1 year ago (14 children)

    Were there other problems in Clinton and Harris than the gender, then? (Except them "lying" that Trump would use the army against US civilians, of course)

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
    •
  • [–] 27 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    Clinton is a fuckin capitalist and Harris is a fucking neoliberal. Neither of them actually care about anything more than upholding the status quo. They are not working class or even for the working class.

    This all being said, status quo is far better than fascism, but we can do better.

    Basically, just like someone being a woman wouldn't make them a bad president, it would also not make them a good one. Having good policies makes you a good president.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Good luck finding a presidential candidate with good policies in USA.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    You asked what the other problems with them were, not whether there was a good presidential candidate, i was answering your question

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 17 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)

    Were there other problems in Clinton and Harris than the gender, then?

    If it was misogyny alone was the cause, then why did harris lose across every single demographic of women? She lost across every single voting demographic of general voter except a 1 point gain in college educated white men.

    We have polling data, we could dig through it-- and the results must be a statistical understanding of a number of reasons. There wont be a unifying single smoking gun across this many voters and issues. We aren't that uniform of a group of people for that. Although there will be some that are larger than others, like Gaza, consumer prices, wage stagnation, and misogyny.

    Dems are failing to honestly analyze why we lost, just like they failed to figure out how we could win. So we're on track to lose again, and comments like the one you made show we arent making much progress-- or that we even have any will to.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Uh... If the misogyny was enough to remove enough votes from them to allow the worse candidate to win, then obviously it was a decisive factor. Being a decisive factor does not equal being the only factor.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    No, it wasn't the decisive factor. The misogynists wouldn't have voted for Harris either way. The decisive factor was Harris failing to inspire her own base while pandering to the elusive "undecided voter" by propping up Liz Cheney, among other things. Don't get it twisted, Harris lost because she and her team were too incompetent to read the room.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago*

    If the misogyny was enough to remove enough votes from them to allow the worse candidate to win, then obviously it was a decisive factor.

    Sure, but how do we put actual numbers behind that "if"?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] -3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    All? No, not all. But it is very evident that most Americans seem to hate women. The right hates on women, the left hates on women, the men and the women hate on women. If you doubt me, look how news articles disparage male senators compared to female ones.

    Edit: All you four people who downvote without responding only give me more validation. The people hate the truth.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (10 children)

    I have NO idea why the democrats chose Harris as the nominee. The country wouldn't vote for a white woman last time. You REALLY think they're going to vote for a woman of colour? REALLY? And then a bunch of them didn't. As predicted.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
    •
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    The country did vote for a white woman the previous time: Hillary Clinton won the popular vote.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [+] 1 point 1 year ago (3 children)
    [removed by mod]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I'm saying that more people voted for Hillary Clinton than her male opponent, which flatly contradicts the claim that people wouldn't vote for a woman. But let me ask the question: If the GOP nominated Kristi Noem as its candidate for president in 2028, would you rest assured that she couldn't win because of misogyny?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    That is true, but I will add that most people I knew that voted for Hillary also did not like her.

    The people will vote for women, but a disturbing amount are unhappy about it. I don't even like Hilary, but people were more biased against her than Biden for what feels like manufactured reasons to me.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago

    There were a lot of issues with it being anyone else. Since she was already the VP and already "on the ticket", switching to anyone other than her would have brought with it a whole lot of complications and probably would have tied up all the money the Biden campaign had raised. The whole process of deciding on anyone other than her posed huge risks, especially given the time constraints. Harris was effectively the default option so they took the path that appeared to be easiest and guaranteed that the campaign kept its funding.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    I have NO idea why the democrats chose Harris as the nominee.

    Well, that's the thing: they didn't. She didn't win the primary, Biden did; and Biden won because there was no opposition. My ballot had two choices: "Joe Biden" and "Uncommitted". I voted Uncommitted.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent