this post was submitted on 13 Nov 2024
705 points (86.4% liked)
Political Humor
1337 readers
455 users here now
Welcome to Political Humor!
Rules:
- Be excellent to each other.
- No harassment.
- No sexism, racism or bigotry.
- All arguments should be made in good faith.
- No misinformation. Be prepared to back up your factual claims with evidence.
- All posts should relate to politics and be of a humorous nature.
- No bots, spam or self-promotion.
- If you want to run a bot, ask first.
- Site wide rules apply.
- Have fun.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
No, they didn't, but I think a lot of people didn't vote for Harris who otherwise would have
Quite possibly but I think that has as much if not more to do with Harris massively failing to be the exciting not completely pro-establishment candidate we needed.
"I'm sorry. It was between literally the man who will destroy the country and told us as much and someone just not exciting enough. Gotta do better, Dems."
This isn't helpful, I never said they were smart or correct, I said I understand how we ended up here and I sympathize with people who are suffering and angry and very ignorant and susceptible to propaganda. The DNC didn't fail at being objectively better, they failed at making people feel heard and convinced that there would be hope of real systemic change and not just roughly what we have had for the past 20-30 years.
I think you accidentally replied instead of editing your comment
Yeah, seems likely, connect has some really annoying habits around replying to your own comment...
I understand that genocide isn't an important issue for libs, but for most of humanity it's pretty important.
quickly shuts history book and tucks it in his backpack
Yeah totally. That checks out.
Most American liberals have gone full blown mask off about not caring about genocide. It’s WILD to see.
Y’all might as well be trump voters in my books buds.
I mean out of the candidates she was less evil, but vote for the evil? She didn't even promise to solve any of the long standing problems voters face and vouched to support new trending problems.
I'm not an American, but when the whole point of one(of two for some reason, and that won't change for some reason) political party is that they will fuck you in the next 4 years, and the whole point of the other(again for some reason there aren't any good people going into the government for years) is to fuck you harder but they also will fuck other chilling people who may understand now the real problems or(probably in the dreams) actually break the system(via either revolt or civil push against the first party), why would you vote for the first?