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. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. 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
Then maybe they should have listened when they were told that this was the exact literal consequence of voting emotionally.
So they should've listened to Bill Clinton instead, who went to Dearborn and essentially said Israel can do whatever they want to their faces? There were no good options to vote for.
Fuck Bill Clinton. Who the fuck cares what he said days before the election. You should already have educated yourself enough to know exactly who you're voting for by then (and as a Muslim, that shouldn't take very long given the options). This is such a bullshit excuse.
But again, fuck Bill Clinton, that was such a shit show
My dude, nobody said there was a good option. The choice was a bad option, and a much worse option. Bill Clinton doesn't matter since he has nothing to do with the government. Harris at least paid lip-service to stopping Israel; Trump said he wants Bibi to "finish the job."
And the kicker is, one of those two choices was going to win and if you don't vote for the bad option, the much worse option wins by default.
Unfortunately, this whole election can be summed up as: everyone not named Trump voted against their best interests.
When it comes to this issue, you can't really say that Trump is that much worse. Either way Gaza and the West Bank were heading to oblivion. Rhetoric aside, there is no evidence that Harris would have ever stood up to Israel in any meaningful way.
You're in for a rude awakening.
Oh my sweet summer child... It can always be worse.
I didn't think Bill Clinton could run for a third term.
He was a campaign surrogate.
And he's also a human being with his own opinions.
Maybe they should have listened to the woman running for president instead. I'm not sure why that idea didn't occur to you.
If the campaign didn't want Bill Clinton there, he wouldn't have gone. This was their campaign strategy, along with hanging out with Cheney.
The Democrats ran an awful campaign again, and they need to stop blaming the voters for reacting negatively to this.
You asked who they should have listened to. I told you the person they should have listened to. The person actually running for office.
I have no idea why you think they should have not paid attention to what the person running for office said and just took for granted what her surrogate said agreed with what she said. That's a pretty ignorant thing to do, not take a few moments to check and see what her actual beliefs on this are and if they're being represented accurately.
So I guess we'll put you down on the "pro-ignorance" list. I guess that's why you seem to be okay with Trump winning.
https://x.com/DropSiteNews/status/1857620963522658570
It's like they were trying to lose Michigan.
Again. You asked who they should have listened to. I told you. All you are doing is telling me that you think they're all ignorant.
And people in the community were warning for months that this was the consequence of refusing to denounce genocide. But somehow you only want to blame the racial and religious out group who can't even be credibly blamed for losing the election. You guys were claiming for months they weren't important and should be ignored, and now that the election is over and the thing Democratic leaders were warning of happened, suddenly it's all their fault?
And they were told, repeatedly, that Trump would be worse. Guess what happens now?
Trump improved his margin across nearly every single demographic, so there's plenty of blame to go around. But in a comment thread about Muslim voters feeling buyer's remorse, I'm not going to talk about the white men who get fed shit from the manosphere podcast space, or the ghost of Phyllis Schlafly infecting women across this country to vote for the party that wants to take their rights away, or that when Trump was talking about Latino immigrants he was talking about them and not those other immigrants. It's called "context."
Nope, didn't say that. I said that when your choice is token lip service about maybe stopping Palestinian genocide, and making the genocide worse, that you should vote for the former, because otherwise you'll get the latter. Which is what happened. Congratulations, you told the Dems you weren't going to vote for them, and now are surprised they ignored what you wanted.
This is such a completely broken and backward way to think about politics, but even so, the entire time representatives from that community (Democrats trying to get Harris elected) were trying to get them to do anything to head this off. At no point was there a "well, we're just never going to vote for you so look elsewhere", but that didn't stop the campaign for prioritizing literal Republicans over previously Democratic constituencies with unsurprisingly bad results.
And I am a non-Muslim Harris voter, but this liberal tendency to blame minorities for the failures of existing power structures cannot be suppressed.
I personally agreed with undecided in principle and was sympathetic that Harris largely ignored them. The problem is that trying to leverage their position for actual good policy outcomes made for this nasty prisoner's dilemna situation where both parties chose the bad option.
I honestly thought that they'd eventually come around because of just how bad Trump was going to be for democracy, and moreover for the people they cared about. Sadly, they were so devoted to their game of chicken that some of their loved ones will pay for it.
I also don't think it's that callous to engage in a little bit of "I fucking told you so."
Most people I saw here were just trying to achieve the most favourable outcome, given the reality at the time.
The problem in this is that you can substitute either the Harris campaign or the Muslim voters for "they", and far too few people are applying it to the people with power. It seems inconceivable to these people that politicians actually need to address the concerns of the people they want to vote for them. They're like some sort of unknowable force without agency or responsibility. It's always the little guy's fault for not coming around to the whims of the politician.
What makes it all worse is that on one side you have a population with good reason to be acting emotionally and the other you have someone just making a calculation that they just didn't think they were worth it. Everyone shares blame for this result, but I get acting emotionally when you're being ignored by power while they send weapons to kill your families. I don't have any grace for sociopathic Democrats who would rather chase Republicans than take a moral stance for a constituency that voted for them in the past.
Lol! You're absolutely right. From my point of view, though, the democratic party is so fully captured and out of touch with actual issues that they're beyond being reasoned with, so it should almost go without saying who I'm referring to. And yes, I acknowledge how completely fucked that is.
They've created this absolutely monstrous situation where we always have to choose between letting people we care about get hurt, or a tiny glimmer of hope of something better, and even though I pushed to avoid the former, I'm fully sympathetic to both sides.
I think the masses of voters who are much less easy to influence. They're not on Lemmy debating the topic or waiting for a community leader to decide the strategy. They probably didn't even do any sort of deep game theory about playing chicken and scaring the Democrats. They just got more pissed off as the news came through, as the Democrats made excuses and acted like nothing needed to change, and as people in their community reported deaths. We can debate and shout and rationalize here all we want, we can suppress the topic for the greater good, and all that will have zero impact on electorate-level perceptions. They're not here, there are too many for us to individually convince to change their mind, and they're probably not even open to listening to a coldly rational argument about lesser evils and other topics.
Even the people organizing these campaigns didn't have the influence to change their votes. Uncommitted endorsed Harris! But the whole thing was never in their control. They can only report the temperature they're feeling in the community and suggest moves they think would help get people back into the tent. Those Democratic operatives and elected officials should have the potential to influence Harris. They have names people know, and phone numbers to people of importance. If she was so corrupt and blocked off that even they couldn't reach her then we kind of do need the reckoning that could come from such an abject failure to keep the coalition together. There's no "push her to be better after the election" in that case.