• TimLovesTech (AuDHD)(he/him)@badatbeing.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 month 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
      8
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 month 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.

      • Cataphract@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        1 month 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
          8
          ·
          1 month 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.

      • Saleh@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 month 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.

    • CumWeedPoop@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month 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.

      • TimLovesTech (AuDHD)(he/him)@badatbeing.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        By “vote for themselves” I meant people voting based on the outcome for them personally. My being a white male allows me a large amount of privilege in this country, and so I choose to use my vote to help others (knowing it doesn’t put us anywhere close to being treated equal overall). So my vote for Harris was to help women, people of color, immigrants, the kids (who are going to have education decimated now and white washed so much more than it already has been), and for trans kids/adults, for everyone in the LGBTQ+ orbit, and on and on. What would benefit me didn’t even play into it, because I’d be fine comparatively (minus the anxiety/depression that Trump causes).

      • hark@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 month 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
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month 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
          4
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          1 month 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
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 month 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
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month 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.

      • Kate@lemmings.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 month ago

        Under the democrats today, this is literally happening and has for the past year now.