• Etterra@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 hours ago

    I’ve been saying that since the DNC muscled him out in 2015. Stupid establishment Republicrats.

  • Eiri@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 day ago

    Everyone loves Bernie.

    But dang it the man is 83. He should be enjoying the last years of his life in retirement. It makes me sad to think he still needs to be working in politics.

    He’s as old as Trump, who is already too old for this shit, will be at the end of his term.

    Maybe there should be a hard limit at 65 or something for politicians. Both to keep out people in whom dementia is clearly starting to appear and to let old people frickin’ rest.

  • lennybird@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 day ago

    Bernie may have, but also fuck The Intercept and we dodged a bullet not letting Tulsi Gabbard anywhere near the White House (I mean, until now anyway).

  • Blackmist@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 day ago

    Is pretty clear that people are unhappy and want change.

    There’s no meaningful change to be had. The political parties and their funders have got very wealthy the way things are, and they’d like to keep it that way thank you very much.

    The whole process in almost every country in undemocratic as shit. We need to be able to vote and have referendums on individual policies. Few people are 100% behind any candidate. What if you want abortions but hate immigrants? What if you’re transgender but still think corporations should be able to stomp all over us?

    • derpgon@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      22 hours ago

      You want X, you get X, Y, and Z. This is why it’s always “lesser evil” and not “greater good”. Your vote is diluted by sewage.

  • Floon@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    The Dems have been putting workers first under Biden the whole time. Putting workers first more than any administration in decades. You guys just believe a bunch of bad press.

      • CasualPenguin@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        Are you kidding? Is that really an event you think proves your point? Please tell me you will read further on in that event than whoever sold you a partial story and fooled you into thinking that.

      • Floon@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        You mean the railroad workers? Did you stick around to listen to the end of the story? Where scant weeks afterward, his administration negotiated a contract for the workers that gave them more paid sick days than they were asking for.

    • Cethin@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      They can do better. The biggest issue was messaging though. They talked about how much better the economy is now, which is true if you’re talking about stock value but the average American wasn’t necessarily doing better, and often doing worse. They kept telling the working class they should be happy instead of focusing on how they recognize the issues and focusing on addressing them.

      • Floon@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        Harris did… exactly that. That was a huge part of her messaging.

        The GOP controls the storylines that the media runs along: “Kamala just isn’t being specific about her policies” when she was robustly specific, and while Trump said absolutely zero specifics about anything and no one said a word about it.

        • Cethin@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 days ago

          No, she entertained the concept while also saying the economy is doing super well, which it isn’t if your definition focused on the working class doing well. I agree she had some good policies, but that doesn’t matter if you can’t get the message out.

          Trump said he would fix issues for the working class (with magic or something I guess, because the few policies he was willing to state certainly wouldn’t).

          It doesn’t matter how much you would have helped people if they don’t believe it.

          • Floon@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 day ago

            They did help people, and did it about as much as the government could. Almost 16m jobs created, 6m more than pre-pandemic.

            The issue was inflation, but that was global, and the US did better than most of the rest of the industrialized world in that regard. It is a complicated truth vs simple lies: you figure out how to get Americans to listen to the one and not the other.

            • Cethin@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              13 hours ago

              I agree, but it isn’t my job to figure out how to get people to listen. That’s politics. There are trusted people by the working class on the democratic (more left, but they caucus with the democrats) side. Harris was not this, nor was Biden. They are both establishment politicians. That’s not what the people want right now and the Democrats new this but they thought they could win anyway.

  • TimLovesTech (AuDHD)(he/him)@badatbeing.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    It seemed that it was a rejection of whatever political group was in power across the globe for the most part this year. This is largely in part because the world as a whole is still healing/recovering from the damage of COVID, and in the US the Dems were left to clean up an economic disaster left by Trump. And we have a large number of people who felt the effects of inflation and for reasons I can’t wrap my head around felt the Dems needed to be voted out. Then we had all the people who wanted to teach the Dems a lesson because of Gaza by making sure Trump was elected to help Israel level the area and make sure there was no future for Palestinians (which is another contradiction I can’t wrap my head around).

    So really I think the Dems could have had a unicorn candidate (Bernie) and they still would have lost this election, because enough people only vote for themselves.

    • Naz@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      Fucking THANK YOU, for elucidating this so cleanly into a two paragraphs.

      The wandering shell shock on Lemmy for a week was miserable to witness.

      • Saleh@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        I agree. If we now acknowledge that genocide was a relevant factor in making the Dems loose, this is bad for AIPAC. We need to quickly reestablish different narratives to protect AIPAC interests by claiming it was everything but the genocide. It took AIPAC a few days to develop the new narratives but now we need to embrace them.

      • Cataphract@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        Do you guys really believe the populist position is to “vote the Democrats out” and that Gaza was really the reason for voter apathy that effects half the population? Couldn’t be messaging or effective policies being lacking, definitely blame anyone against a continually funded arsenal in the hands of aggressive governments.

        • Tinidril@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 day ago

          Your right. The anti-establishment mood in this country and abroad has been building for decades. Americans have never voted based on foreign policy unless that foreign policy is directly impacting them.

    • CumWeedPoop@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      So really I think the Dems could have had a unicorn candidate (Bernie) and they still would have lost this election, because enough people only vote for themselves.

      I always vote “for myself” which meant voting for Harris. Her policies are more in line with my best interests than all that maga bullshit.

      • hark@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        Do you think the outcome would be different under democrats? Please tell me how the party that has given billions in support of israel’s genocide for over a year was so totally going to stop it at any moment if they just simply got voted in again.

        • clutchtwopointzero@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          I don’t think that the final, final outcome would be different. You are completely right on this. But under Trump it will be supercharged and any restraint that existed to this point will be gone.

        • joenforcer@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 days ago

          If you’re still asking this question, you are either a disingenuous troll or you are beyond help. You obviously haven’t spent even five minutes trying to understand why the U.S. is still funding Israel and the general positions of the two candidates and instead feel that time is better spent riffing on the same Lemmy buzzword.

          • Saleh@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 days ago

            The Biden/Harris administration just declared, that their “red-line” for more weapons to Israel, the continued starvation of Gaza with an ultimatum to today, was indeed not a red-line.

            Look at the actions, not at the words. There is absolutely no indication by the actions of Biden and Harris, that they would ends Israels US funded genocide. Especially now as the whole “we need to toe the line, because of the Israel-Lobby” bullshit falls apart. The election is over. If the Dems had any serious interest in preventing Israel from annihilating Palestine, now would be the time to do so. They don’t. Because they always were and still are in support of Israels genocide.

          • clutchtwopointzero@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            2 days ago

            …yuuuup. the US position under the two main parties is about the same on the Palestine issue. The only difference is the speed and intensity that actions will take.

  • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    I love Bernie, but he would not have won. He’s not healthy enough to have run a national campaign like that, not after his heart event in 2019.

  • Melatonin@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    As impossible and abstract as it seems to realign the Democratic base by shared class interests, it’s still much a more concrete plan than “reduce bigotry in strangers”

    Amen. Amen. Tried and failed, twice. Populism is the only way forward. Democrats must become the party of the poor again.

    Strange thing to have to say.

    • CancerMancer@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 day ago

      Voters are saying “I am going to be homeless and can’t even afford bread”. The Democrat response to this is “stop being racist, the economy is fine”.

      I’m really not sure what anyone expected besides failure from this.

      It sucks because some of the agencies were doing good work, especially the mounting attacks on landlords and monopolists/oligopolists, which are necessary but will almost certainly end now. Honestly it felt like they wanted to lose, having learned nothing from 2016.

  • blazera@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    Anyone can win, just as soon as you guys stop fighting tooth and nail to keep anyone but the most moderate democrat from being allowed to compete.

  • BananaTrifleViolin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    A lot of democrats could have won this election. Ultimately the big mistakes were allowing Biden to run unchallenged, then sticking with Biden until it was too late. Harris then had an impossible task to win.

    If the democrats had an actual democratic process, and put their best possible candidate forward they may have won. Instead this election was very much a repeat of 2016 - the wrong candidate, being favoured through to the election by the DNC. In 2016 the DNC closed ranks around Clinton because of fear of Bernie and also because of a crazy notion that it was “her turn”. Biden didn’t run when he should have. This time Biden ran when he shouldn’t have, and other strong candidates in the party didn’t get a chance.

    But it was more than the candidate - the election focus was totally wrong. 1/3 of the electorate did not vote - and this election is not a story of Trump breaking through. Trump got 74m votes in 2020 and about 74m now. The Dems got 81m votes in 2020 and 71m votes now - Trump is basically static; but the Dems lots 10m votes because they ran a bad campaign. Those missing 10m voters are in the 1/3 who are not included in polls; because Trump has not broken much above his 74m ceiling. The Dems floor fell out under them instead.

    The polls always showed 50:50 but that was just “likely voters”. Really 1/3 support dems, 1/3 support reps and 1/3 weren’t going to vote. That vast pool of people are not all never voters; the missing 10m are in there. THAT is where the Dems should have been going for votes. Forget the republicans; they should have been reaching out to the disinterested and disenfranchised. A positive message that actually addresses their concerns.

    The “moderate” Republican votes were never in play nor worth courting, and the abortion and democracy focuses were not the priorities of voters. The dems needed to listen to the actual voters - and the message of what the voters cared about is clear: the economy. The Dems needed to have a clearer message on the economy - “it’s doing great” does not tally with voters experiences who are living with high cost of living after inflation. Prices haven’t fallen back, they’ve just stopped rising as fast. The message to voters should have been “we’ve done some stuff but there is more to do” and offer clear policies are wage growth, housing/rent costs etc. Give the disinterested in particular something to vote for.

    So yes, maybe Bernie would have won. But lets not forget he chose to endorse Biden, not run in the democratic party primary. So it’s actually his fault too.

    Only Dean Philips, Marianne Williamson and Jason Palmer actually stood up and challenged Biden in the primaries, and they were criticised for doing so as if they were the reason Trump would win.

  • inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    Honestly I think he would have simply because with the evidence we’ve seen, Americans are really that stupid and racist they as long as you promise them you’d magically fix all of their problems without any plan behind it.

    Americans are rightfully concerned about the economy and I, even as a upper middle class person, was concerned about inflation but I’m pretty plugged into what’s going on in the world because I have the luxury of having a job where I’m posting on Lemmy in the middle of the day.

    Bernie would have offered loud, in your face I’m going to fuck corporations and get you a living wage, wither he could actually do that given America, it wouldn’t have mattered because that what Americans wanted to hear, even if you never wanted to do that in the first place.

    God I hate that Greenday is correct.