From the Article:

For weeks following Joe Biden’s disastrous performance, his campaign publicly maintained the illusion that he was still well-positioned to defeat Donald Trump. Privately, they knew otherwise. As Pod Save America co-host Jon Favreau revealed days after the election:

After the debate, the Biden people told us that the polls were fine, and Biden was still the strongest candidate. They were privately telling reporters, at the time, that Kamala Harris couldn’t win. […] Then we find out, when the Biden campaign becomes the Harris campaign, that the Biden campaign’s own internal polling, at the time when they were telling us he was the strongest candidate, showed that Donald Trump was going to win 400 electoral votes.

The implications of this are staggering, and it should be treated as a massive scandal.

-2 points
*

All VP Harris had to do was choose a running mate that wasn’t Kaine-esque.

They needed a hard left firebrand to support Harris, and they chose a dude from an ABC Dad sitcom. He is a great governor. But that is not a world leader running mate.

permalink
report
reply
4 points

Do polls show voting swings based on VP activity? I find it hard to believe most Americans could even name our VPs, let alone give enough fucks about what they’re saying to be persuaded by them.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
*

I’ll admit they probably have lots of practical knowledge about campaigning. That’s not the issue. The issue is they have no imagination and they don’t now how to evaluate risk and reward. They were using a 40 year old play book against a populist candidate that America has yet to face, or at least anyone who’s still alive.

permalink
report
reply
16 points

It definitely seems like the real problem wasn’t that Harris didn’t make a good or compelling case that her opponent was unfit, it’s that they didn’t spend any time building up their own case for what they would do differently and instead tried to court the vanishingly small number of undecided moderates and, for some reason, Republicans who will still hate them no matter what they say.

There was plenty of time to run a good campaign after Biden got replaced, they just chose not to for some reason. Can’t agree more that these guys should not be involved in politics anymore if they tried to prop up Biden for an entire month after the debate and bury their heads in the sand when he was polling in the toilet the entire time.

permalink
report
reply
5 points

they didn’t spend any time building up their own case for what they would do differently

She came straight out on TV and said she wouldn’t do anything differently. That was her case. “You know Biden? The President 60% of the country hates? Great guy! Did nothing wrong.”

There was plenty of time to run a good campaign after Biden got replaced, they just chose not to for some reason.

She was the VP for four years and if you pull up her highlight reel it all sucked. Going south of the border and telling war refugees “Do Not Come” like some kind of reverse Statue of Liberty. Calling student protesters opposed to the Gaza Genocide anti-Semitic while she hides from Netanyahu during his psychotic Congressional address. Letting Manchin and Sinema walk all over her in the Senate.

What kind of campaign was she going to build on top of that legacy?

Dems told their dud QB to hand the ball off to a lame running back and watched her crash face first into a Joe Rogan’s Audience full of dorks crying about a dead squirrel. I don’t think it is possible for these people to run a campaign better than “We’re not Trump”, which is what they ultimately choose to do.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*

Why would Harris do anything different? The Biden policies were working. He literally prevented us from a goddamn recession, and because a handful of companies (nearly all of which donated considerable sums to Trump) jacked up prices for consumers, people act like it was Bidens fault. If you think the miracle Biden pulled off is bad, you’re not gonna like whats in store for us under Trump

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

The Biden policies were working. He literally prevented us from a goddamn recession, and because a handful of companies (nearly all of which donated considerable sums to Trump) jacked up prices for consumers, people act like it was Bidens fault.

Presidents have emergency powers to cap prices, prosecute private interests for exploitative behavior, and even nationalize industries in the face of a domestic crisis. Biden sat back and allowed greedflation to sap the goodwill that his Inflation Reduction Act was intended to engender. And then Harris - who very early on floated the idea of capping prices and taxing gougers - ran away from the idea in the face of corporate media pressure.

Sitting back and taking it as the conservatives fuck you is a policy failure. Same with Israel (where Netanyahu actively campaigned for Republicans while Democrats ran around apologizing to them) and with Musk and Thiel (Biden kept rubber stamping contracts to Starlink and Palantir even as Silicon Valley dumped billions in media resources into Trump’s lap).

These are policy failures. Giving your political enemies tens of billions of dollars to fuck you with is a policy failure. Biden failed. Harris failed. The Democratic Party failed. That’s why they lost.

If you think the miracle Biden pulled off is bad

Handing out cheap loans and subsidies to private industry isn’t miraculous. We’ve been doing it since the FDR Administration (arguably since the Lincoln administration) to keep the engines of industry pumping. Fucking Dipshit Donny figured out how to pull the “Cheap Money” lever all the way back in 2019 when COVID was threatening a collapse.

But when all the money flows into the pockets of the rich, while food and rent and gas costs inflate, you’re going to have a bad time even if NOT doing keynesian economics would have made things worse.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Harris was asked multiple times what she would do differently than Biden and she had no answer.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Harris was asked multiple times what she would do differently than Biden and she had no answer.

No, she came out saying that she’d do the same. Specifically, she wouldn’t change the approach on Israel / Gaza.

I was worried about the election results due to alienation of young people when protesters were getting brutalized last spring. They did this to themselves and we’re all going to suffer because of it. Dems fucked us.

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

Are the implications really that staggering? Are you unable to believe the DNC would lie? They do it all the time, this is hardly news. It just confirms what we already knew at the time, which is that Biden had no chance and all polling supported that conclusion.

permalink
report
reply
7 points

Yep, the DNC is a private organization and can mostly operate however they want. The real problem is the duopoly between the 2 parties that prevents any real progress. As long as each party control roughly half of the government they will keep fighting to maintain the status quo.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Yep, the DNC is a private organization and can mostly operate however they want.

Democracy!

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

I’d argue it’s worse, and that they’re a controlled opposition party. The Republicans fight to drag America backward, and then Dems call that the new status quo they must defend.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

It seems that way, but there’s no way to prove it. And I’d argue it doesn’t matter because the solution would be the same either way: break up the R and D duopoly.

permalink
report
parent
reply
23 points
*

I’ve kept voting for the left most party with a chance, for my own conscience and for harm reduction, not for hope, for 20 years.

There’s been no hope because our left most party has met their opposition so far up their ass, they only look left to a full blown fascist, and both parties openly take the same corporate bribe money to keep this exploitative economy and it’s inhuman priorities exactly as it is while they war over how to, or if to, address some of the social issue symptoms it causes or exacurbates, so long as it doesn’t meaningfully effect quarterly earnings results.

I could at this point be easily be convinced to vote third party for an explicitly anti-corporatist party even if it didn’t have a chance.

The public, surprisingly bipartisan reaction (voters, not reps, obviously) to what happened a few days ago in New York has given me more hope for positive change in our cesspool of greed enablement than I have felt in my entire life. At some level, it seems many of our people do understand, despite all the corpo propaganda, that their enemy causing most of our ills aren’t to their left or right, but economically above, encouraging us to fight about the symptoms of their dictates to THEIR captured government.

I would rather a left-wing populist steal the corpo DNC’s base right out from under them as Trump did in 2016 to the RNC so it could have one of the only two banners that matter helping, but I sadly also think the DNC would rather do everything possible to lose than be dragged along like that and lose the corporate bribe gravy train that left-wing populism, unlike right-wing populism, would need to fight against.

permalink
report
reply
2 points
*

Yeah, absolutely. Dems would rather lose than change. It just gives them more “pick us or you’ll be sorry” ammunition.

Edit: You don’t have to look any further than the bs soft-washing of the news media:

https://www.popehat.com/p/some-other-america-one-i-do-not-know

permalink
report
parent
reply
-20 points

Blah, blah, blah… and more blah.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

You’re part of the problem.

permalink
report
parent
reply
24 points
*

Blah, blah, blah… and more blah.

Maybe you prefer more visual replies.

permalink
report
parent
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to “Mom! He’s bugging me!” and “I’m not touching you!” Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That’s all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 9.9K

    Monthly active users

  • 12K

    Posts

  • 213K

    Comments