The debate was being held in Pennsylvania which is a fracking state. She knew she couldn’t repeat the same mistake Clinton made on coal and she didn’t.
https://www.npr.org/2016/05/03/476485650/fact-check-hillary-clinton-and-coal-jobs
That one poorly thought out statement cost Clinton Pennsylvania and the election.
That was such a face slap of sound bite propaganda. From your linked article
Clinton did tell a town hall audience in Columbus, Ohio in March that “we’re going to put a lot of coal miners and coal companies out of business.” But that was part of a longer answer about the need to help blue-collar workers adjust. “We’re going to make it clear that we don’t want to forget those people,” Clinton said. “Those people labored in those mines for generations, losing their health, often losing their lives to turn on our lights and power our factories. Now we’ve got to move away from coal and all the other fossil fuels, but I don’t want to move away from the people who did the best they could to produce the energy that we relied on.”
The $30 billion plan she released last fall calls for of increased job training, small-business development, and infrastructure investment, especially in Appalachia. The plan also seeks to safeguard miners’ healthcare and pensions.
But years later all I ever hear brought up is that one closing sentence.
But years later all I ever hear brought up is that one closing sentence.
Because that closing sentence ended her political career.
You can’t ever tell voters you’re going to put them out of work. Ever.
You tell coal miners “I want you to have better, safer jobs that don’t involve risking your lives underground for business owners who don’t care about you just so your children and grandchildren can survive and thrive.”
Pretending sound bites aren’t a thing doesn’t make them not a thing. Politicians need to word things carefully. It’s kinda part of the job.
I know. But she only said it to that small group at the town hall, and only that one sound clip got blasted out without the rest of it. If it had been reported on honestly it wouldn’t have been as damaging.
While watching the debate it was funny watching Trump say she’ll end fracking like that’s a bad thing (though even with green energy, I do admit we’d still need it for plastic).
I joked “next he’ll attack her by saying she’ll drive up green energy” then he literally did. Said she’d return to windmills and dare to use desert land for solar panels, oh the humanity xD.
Harris’s policies are misguided on a number of issues, but her main commitment is to strengthening the nuts and bolts of our democracy, so we will still have mechanisms available to challenge those policies and get them to change.
Not only is Trump a thousand times worse than Harris on every bad policy she has, his primary commitment is to destroying the mechanisms of democratic participation, so that there will be no way to hold the powerful to account.
I’ve read many thoughtful articles in TNR; I’m disappointed they would publish this one.
But she did – fracking??
I feel she also may be saying certain stuff just to close off avenues of attack for Republicans. She’d rather just say something conservatives would like to hear than give a hedging response to appease the base that Trump and co would run with. For example, when asked about guns, she said “I’m a gun owner, so is Walz” — it’s just not worth losing this election over being pure on a handful of issues that might trigger moderates and swayable conservatives.
I’m pretty far left of Harris and I would be furious if she got up there and said she was going to ban fracking. We might like to hear that, but it’s a goddamn fact that swing voters she needs to win in PA do not. She can say whatever the fuck she wants about fracking as long as she wins.
Almost half the country is right wing and the electoral college gives their votes much more weight. That’s just a fact. That means you can’t win a national election without tacking toward their views in some areas, mainly the areas of concern to those in the swing states that will decide the election. You can’t win by pleasing only your own base. Until we either abolish the electoral college and move to popular vote, or liberals/left wing/whatever you want to call it, reach a majority of the population substantial enough to overcome the electoral college.
Neither of those things looks likely to happen anytime soon, so the only option is to deal with our current reality and develop a strategy to win under these circumstances, but at the same time we should also be working to create a movement to amend the constitution to decide national elections by popular vote.
edit to change “half” to “almost half”–gotta recognize there are some more in the middle.
Almost half the country is right wing
Where are you getting that stat?
Of voters, almost half are registered or leaning Republicans.
In 2020, only 22% of the country voted for trump, the most right wing 2 party candidate in the modern era.
When you ask about specific policies that are seen as left or right wing, left wing policies poll much higher than dem votes at elections.
The reason Democrat leadership keeps tacking right has less to do with Americans and more to do with money and support from key centers of power. Dems stay right because US aristocrats and large interests skew righter than Americans. The money would dry up if their policies matched what Americans want.
per 538, the last two polls of “adults” (not likely voters or registered voters) showed trump support around 40%. And Harris’ lead in those polls is basically the same as with likely voters and registered voters, around +3-4.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/national/?ex_cid=abcpromo
edit:
Also this gallup poll says 30% of people identify as Republican, and 40% as independent, with 46% of independents leaning Republican. So “almost half” as the top comment said.
https://news.gallup.com/poll/15370/Party-Affiliation.aspx
edit 2: for whoever downvoted, I would love to hear why. the person above asked for a source that says “Almost half the country is right wing”, and I provided multiple. if you have better evidence to the contrary let’s see it.
per 538, the last two polls of “adults” (not likely voters or registered voters) showed trump support around 40%
This feels to me like the best metric to judge ‘right wing’ by.
Voting for right wingers or being a Republican is not quite the same as being right wing - many people register and vote strategically. My grandparents in Alaska were left wingers who knew Democrats didn’t stand a chance. I’m sure there are plenty of right wingers registered as Dems here in the PNW. Voting can also be about identity more than ideals - I’ve known Republicans who have mostly leftish ideals as long as you don’t call them that.
But saying you personally support trump feels more unambiguously right wing to me. I’ve heard plenty of polls over the years putting trump’s support at around 30-40%, so 40% right wing sounds believable to me.
Your data does not logically lead to your conclusion, because the polls cited naturally bifurcated the responses into two (or three) camps.
It’s like if I did a poll asking: “what is your favorite color, purple or yellow?” and then said this proves that 50% of respondents’ favorite color is purple. We are discounting the opinions of orange and green lovers.
Half the country is not conservative or right wing, the highest percentage of red votes are in low population density areas, so thats maybe like 35-37%, and that’s why the electoral college is important for republican wins
It is almost half. There’s a spectrum on the right (as there is on the left of course). The hardcore maga cultists are a little over a third – like you say, 35-37%. But then there are the conservatives who aren’t extremists like them but are still very conservative, so yes, it’s almost half the population. Trump has 42-45% who are definitely going to vote for him no matter what–the rest beyond the maga contingent are the conservatives such as the one-issue anti-abortion segment and the rich who want his tax and deregulation policies; they don’t care about his character flaws or even preserving democracy for that matter.
There are also some conservatives, not many, who previously voted for him and would again, but have come to recognize that trump is so extreme and dangerous that they either won’t vote for him or will hold their nose and vote for a Dem this time, hopefully enough to tip the election in her favor.
Those conservatives are ”moderates” and also vote democrat
https://news.gallup.com/poll/328367/americans-political-ideology-held-steady-2020.aspx
Hate to break it to you but from anyone else Looking in all your politics and politicians are right-wing.
FWIW, the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact is doing better and better: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Interstate_Compact
Yeah but a majority of voters want to fix climate change. The GOP platform is “let the planet burn so we can make our quarterly target” but if you take politics out of it a lot of gop voters are on the same page with Democrats.
Both of them couldn’t give a single shit about liberals though.
ITT: People who want the party to only tack rightward being angry.
