• SpiderFarmer [he/him]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    88 months ago

    Ah yes, there’s no reason people would avoid voting for a cop president after a widely publicized lynching.

  • came_apart_at_Kmart [he/him, comrade/them]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    178 months ago

    Trump only lost to Biden because voters were afraid Trump was too entrepreneurial.

    McCain lost to Obama because voters were afraid McCain was too tumor-having.

    having a coherent politics is just that easy.

  • bigbrowncommie69 [any]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    48 months ago

    Hillary lost because she was too white and too much of a servant of the patriarchal bourgeois order for anyone to want to turn out for her. Kamala may have the same problem, though liberals seem to be pushing the “Kamala super progressive” lie.

  • Frogmanfromlake [none/use name]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    108 months ago

    The reality is that nobody knew who the hell she was. Only knew a few older people who liked her during the primaries and that’s because they have all the time in the world to watch CNN 24/7 and get familiar with the candidates.

  • PKMKII [none/use name]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    218 months ago

    That would be the one upshot of Kamala winning, trolling libs with “huh turns out voters will vote for a woman guess that wasn’t the problem in prior elections.”

    • InevitableSwing [none/use name]OP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      268 months ago

      Lib denial is deeper than the Mariana Trench. If Kamala wins - within days there were be op-eds opining the 2016 tragedy. It’s a shame voters weren’t really for a female candidate then. Hillary could have and should have won. And it would have been an era of kittens, puppies, rainbows, unicorns, joy, and neoliberal wonderment.

      • Belly_Beanis [he/him]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        168 months ago

        They will flip it around as the US becoming less misogynistic since 2016. I can see it now. Nothing has actually changed (except, you know, losing abortion), but libs will act like they were the vanguard for women’s issues this whole time.

        • DragonBallZinn [he/him]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          58 months ago

          Ugh, I can see it now.

          the-democrat: “We did it! After enough concessions we finally convinced the dumb backward masses into voting for a woman president! It feels great to have educated them! Tailism? What’s that?”

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    58 months ago

    Nah it’s cause she’s center right like Biden. Still gonna vote for her over the Cheeto fascists but this is not the reason.

  • UmbraVivi [he/him, she/her]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    78 months ago

    Is this even wrong? I think if Kamala had been a white guy, she would’ve done a lot better and the Democrats might very well have rallied behind her instead of Biden. Yeah, she sucks ass, but she’s not particularly worse than any of the other Dems. The only reason she’s the candidate now is because she happened to be VP while Biden basically died during a live debate.

  • InevitableSwing [none/use name]OP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    268 months ago

    I have a leftie telling me that because Cheney endorsed KH , we should take that as evidence that she is a bad candidate and NOT AN ANTIFASCIST.

    I kept pointing out that Patton and Stalin invaded Germany and HATED each other. “Ally of convenience” is not a friend. As long as no concessions are made, the best thing you can do is let two enemies destroy each other.

    After the main danger is vanquished, we excise our “once and future” enemies the neocons.

    • InevitableSwing [none/use name]OP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      78 months ago

      It’s the third post by the OP - haha.

      For the record, my argument here is not “she should have beaten Biden in 2020” but “she was a much better candidate than the point at which she dropped indicated, and for instance is substantially better than Klobuchar."

  • thethirdgracchi [he/him, they/them]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    208 months ago

    If in the sequel their interests turn out to be uninteresting and their power turns out to be impotence, either this is the fault of dangerous sophists, who split the indivisible people into different hostile camps, or the army was too brutalized and deluded to understand that the pure goals of democracy were best for it too, or a mistake in one detail of implementation has wrecked the whole plan, or indeed an unforeseen accident has frustrated the game this time. In each case the democrat emerges as spotless from the most shameful defeat as he was innocent when he went into it, fresh in his conviction that he must inevitably be victorious, taking the view that conditions must ripen to meet his requirements, rather than that he and his party must abandon their old standpoint.

    From Marx’s 18 Brumaire: https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1852/18th-brumaire/ch03.htm

  • edge [he/him]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    478 months ago

    voters, extremely shy from Hillary’s loss, were afraid that [Kamala] was too Black

    Yes because if Hillary’s loss indicated anything it’s that a black person can’t win. This is definitely a coherent analysis.

    • casskaydee [she/her]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      258 months ago

      They were so triggered by her loss in the 2016 general they forgot all about her loss in the 2008 primary

    • WhatDoYouMeanPodcast [comrade/them]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      208 months ago

      I feel that only the democratic party gives half a fuck about “middle [America]” and the people who are waffling between the two candidates. I’m sure you could get a fuck ton of votes doing something, anything popular instead of talking about bullshit Marvel slop quotes to try and convince someone whose high fructose corn syrup coated neurons couldn’t conjure a coherent ideology any faster than infinite monkies could.

      It’s a dogshit analysis.

      • buckykat [none/use name]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        78 months ago

        Democratic party analysts, either because they’re incompetent or because they’re always looking for ways to triangulate to the right (or possibly both) imagine that anyone who is not a loyal member and consistent voter of either party exists precisely in the center of the Overton window.

      • anarchoilluminati [comrade/them]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        68 months ago

        someone whose high fructose corn syrup coated neurons couldn’t conjure a coherent ideology any faster than infinite monkies could.

        data-laughing Wow, that’s brutal.