News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
It's my fan theory that she was only supporting Israel to get campaign donations and would have done what every politician does and abandoned her campaign promises. Iirc while VP she supported investigating Israel in order to nullify the law that says we have to supply Israel with arms.
If you look at her past voting history, it aligns super close to Sanders.
Raising half a billion more than Trump didn't do her a lot of good. Maybe next time a candidate should try running on what the people want instead of the donors.
If the election was decided on the basis of "which candidate is going to give us what we want," Trump would have gotten about 15% of the vote. Look around at what's happening now, and it hasn't even got really ramped up yet. We've got years and years more of this stuff. And it's going to get worse (not just politically but in terms of economic suffering, the final death of American science and education, stuff we haven't even really had on the radar yet).
I don't disagree that some of her campaign strategy was bad, keeping Biden in that long was bad, all that stuff, but also... if the people are choosing diving into the empty swimming pool instead of the full one, then sure you could say you could spruce up the full one to make it more enticing and make sure the water's not too cold, but that's not the core of the issue.
It's definitely the core of the issue. Trump ran on cost of living issues and deporting immigrants (which is essentially a cost of living argument as well to a lot of people, even if empirically it's a policy that has an opposite effect).
Kamala ran on essentially upholding existing institutions, 'democracy' and hanging out with the people that got the US into the Iraq war.
A lot of people picked the lying conman over the person that didn't even promise to do the bare minimum. If the government doesn't work for the people (and granted, a lot of it is due to Republicans cynically sabotaging things at every level), people will vote to change it one way or another.
You're not grasping what I'm saying. I'm more or less agreeing with you that her campaigning was bad. My point is that, also, for things to even get to that point where this election was close whatever she did (even with people crying out for some kind of change to the point that anyone who wasn't a politician looked like a step up to them), a lot of groundwork got laid that had absolutely nothing to do with her.
Some of it was the Democrats betraying the working class for the last 32 years, some of it was media. Some of it was her campaigning, too, sure. It's not an either or thing.
Of course, this is definitely not just Kamala, this is a Democratic leadership issue, has been since Carter. Biden would've faced the same issues.
I mean it’s a long shot, but it would have been easier to convince her than it would to convince Trump.
Which was exactly the point of holding her accountable.
There was zero other avenue than try to pressure her with losing voters. She took the AIPAC money and sold out America to Trump instead.
I don't follow the logic here, how did that avenue improve anything?
It was a hail mary, it sadly didn't improve anything because money is more important to her.
It seems like it would have been way more effective to vote her in and then apply pressure for reelection.
What kind of backwards ass logic is that?
"Harris might do what I want, but to punish her for not doing it aggressively enough I'm going to make sure the guy who won't ever do what I want gets elected."
That doesn't sound like a hail Mary, that sounds like the tantrum of a petulant toddler who didn't get enough sprinkles on their ice cream so they decided to a pile dog shit instead.
They were talking about during the campaigning. i.e. threatening to not vote for her unless she changed her stance before the election.
Trying "to pressure her with losing voters" doesn't really work after the fact.
It doesn't work during a campaign either, it just tells her that you aren't going to vote for her so she can write you off as a constituency and focus on other groups.
Person A might change their mind if you pressure them.
Person B won't change their mind ever.
Who do you try to get to change their mind on the topic?
Supporting person B doesn't pressure person A, it just tells person B that you support them.
Good thing no one said to support person B.