The Democratic Party is already dead. They ain't comin back from this debacle. They're better off cutting bait now, ejecting ALL their "senior political" weight, and reforming themselves into something modeled on European progressive parties.
They're absolutely not going to win anything in their current mode and strategy.
that's the thing that's so astounding: she could've just lied. It worked for Obama
I found a YouTube link in your comment. Here are links to the same video on alternative frontends that protect your privacy:
I would have voted for her if she was willing to lie about it… and I would have assumed it was a lie. But nope…
(All of my states delegates went to Harris even though I did not vote for her)
The 2nd reason, the economy, was also something they kept pretending was absolutely fine, great even.
but if you don’t talk about what is wrong how will the stupid rubes living through it possibly know something is wrong? Don’t we set the narrative?Yep rents double what it was just a couple years ago buying a house is a pipe dream, I used to buy tri-tip for $10-12 now that same tri-tip is over $30 everything is up 50% or more except for my wages and then they brag that the economy is doing so well. Republican or democrat it doesn't matter neither one will fix the real problems
On a lighter hearted note:
Do y’all remember when PC gaming was for the people? You could build a machine that blew consoles out of the water, and would be green in value after buying and playing like one game due to online sales and not paying to be able to connect the internet you already pay for (lmfao). Not to mention the wealth of low cost indies.
Now it’s purely a bourgeois activity. RGB bullshit everywhere, $300 glass cases, need to spend over $800 just for a GPU that can run blurry ass UE5 AI slop at 20fps, and then do it again next year…
God I fucking love the fall of the American Empire, if only I wasn’t in the core…
No fr wtf is that about? Why is my PS5 twice as powerful as my PC for half the cost?
This poll is very interesting because in the polls before the election, people reported the economy being the most important reason, and the genocide in Gaza ranked around the last.
this is also a reminder that Americans are not demons who love to colonize, but people held in an imperial propaganda bubble, and when that bubble wavers many of them are shocked and appalled at the world the US has created outside its borders
should also add that the american media (both social and legacy) are working overtime to make the economy the official reason why people didn't vote so that they can pretend that the genocide didn't factor in.
Indeed, imagine these results if information was spread naturally based on public interest and not heavily skewed by those with the power to conduct public opinion.
get outta here w that commie shit .... (so i can have it all to myself) lol
Let's keep perspective tho, this poll is not describing the majority of Americans but a minority (29% of active dem voters) of a minority (voting Americans)
And if it was broken down along racial lines we'd see typical divisions
No data backs up the claim Americans oppose the genocide in any real numbers outside of certain demographics
Let's keep perspective tho, this poll is not describing the majority of Americans but a minority (29% of active dem voters) of a minority (voting Americans)
please read things, it's not 29% of active Dem voters, it's 29% of people who voted Biden but NOT Harris
The difference between Biden and Harris vote count was 0.6%so you're looking at 29% of some mystery number which is at least 0.6% of the Dem population because honkies don't like putting numbers in things
I'll do you one better, I did the math, they're talking about 1,800,000 people who didn't vote Harris because of Gaza
Jingoism is so ingrained in the american mind that liberals can’t even fathom that sending weapons to a genocidal regime might disgust some people. So I guess it’s no surprise that a lot of them immediately blamed trans people for their loss.
Note that immigration is actually more of a concern to these people than fucking healthcare.
I signed up for an account here right as r/CTH was banned, but never really used it. Came back after a few years to post/comment once or twice but it never stuck. I come back now, however many years later, to discover that there is a hexbear-sicko-woke sticker.
I don't know what exactly happened here but I like it.
meanwhile at the DNC:
hmm it seems our side didn't win over enough moderate conservatives. next time we simply need a few dozen more gop politicians to endorse us and find a white man who will make campaign ads more overtly racist than trump's
Next election they'll run the newest version of Pete Buttigeg: An angry soccermom with a queer son and a thot daughter and a husband who runs the local HOA. The mom works for raytheon and she owns a large amount of those metal cups.
She's going to have a Harry Potter bumper sticker on her oversized SUV to try and seem relatable to the voters. Not because she's really into Harry Potter, but because some campaign advisor said that a "My cat is a Ravenclaw :3" sticker resonated the most with 3 rounds of test audiences sourced from a strip mall in upstate New York.
That’s just it, they haven’t learned anything so they aren’t going to change anything… it’s literally going to be the same exact people from the last debates they were willing to hold. The same Pete Buttigieg, not a newer generation lol
Democrats are going to try to scold voters for Gaza being their #1 issue because this ceasefire was worked out while Biden is still president, probably correctly pointing out that Israel intentionally prolonged this phase of the genocide to help Trump win.
For them I'm asking: if Israel was trying to make Biden/Harris lose, why were they both ride or die for Israel?
Let the liberals scold all they’d like. The numbers are as obvious as possible. People who didn’t vote because of Gaza were 3x more common than people who didn’t vote because of abortion, immigration, or healthcare. If actually want to win, you go for winning issues
Also, they could have stopped sending weapons to Israel any time without a ceasefire in place. If they wanted an end to the violence, why did they keep fueling it with billions in weapons?
The dems have lost the way. Either they reform or they'll never have a candidate to win presidency ever again.
I believe they can fumble and fail upwards into the white house again simply because as soon as Donald dies from acute Big Mac poisoning, the rest of the GOP will turn on itself trying to be the next "God Emperor". If it happens during an election year and they don't have time to get their shit together (and they won't, because every single one of those hyenas are self serving and ready to stab each other in the back), the Dems might just win by default. Of course, they will accomplish nothing during that term, but still.
In Australian English, this tactic is known as "doing a Bradbury", named for that time Steven Bradbury won an Olympic gold medal in a race where he was coming dead last by a significant margin but the front runners fell over and caused a pile up, and he was far back enough to not be involved in the shithow and cruised towards the finish line.
The dems have lost the way.
The Democrats started out as the party of openly proud slaveowners writing polemics about how Black people are totally cool about being slaves and stealing half of Mexico. This is them returning to their roots. There's only so much you can reform out of the slaveowning party, and we are seeing the limits of how much lipstick you can put on a pig and how much you can polish a turd. To entertain any delusion otherwise is like thinking the NSDAP can be reformed into a progressive party.
Yeah but their opponents are the Republicans, who are mirror image rubes and fuck ups. People also said the Democrats would never win again in 1980 after Reagan swept Carter.
Not to mention that candidates in America don't win based on popular issues. That influences things but what issues are even available and which people are at the podiums is the jurisdiction of capital. The president is whoever capital allows the president to be.
people have said that [insert party] will never win another election again forever in this country. people said that reps would never win again after obama in '08 and before hillary lost in 2016 (lmao). after the dems didn't totally shit the bed in the midterms in 2022 people were saying it. after 4 years of trump and his cabinet stumbling around breaking things and being annoying in the news every day the dems will be looking a lot better to the average voter than they do in the immediate aftermath of 4 years of brandon
Surprising no one. We must conclude that the Biden Administration intentionally decided that arming and funding a genocide was worth losing the presidency.
Trump did not win the election from voters abandoning the democratic party. It's a fun and convenient story to spin to your dearest issues, but that just isn't what happened. I don't doubt at all what the survey is saying, it just isn't talking about that many people. You'll notice nowhere in any of these graphics does it address the actual proportion of voters who fall into this category? There's a reason for that. Masses of Biden voters staying home or voting for someone besides Harris happened in California and New York, where it was convenient. It did not happen where it actually mattered, in places like Georgia and Pennsylvania.
Across the states that flipped from 2020 to 2024 Harris got 99.4% of Biden's total. She only lost ~79,000 votes across six states that cast more than 25 million votes each election. The difference between the 2020 Trump that lost and the 2024 Trump that got the flips was more than ten times larger, over ~810,000.
That this election was not decided on opinions about sending weapons and support to Israel is evidenced even here. In the graphics for this survey in both questions where it pops up, the choice "makes no difference" was by far the most popular answer. There's no advocacy here from me. No pride or misery(well okay, some misery). It's just a fact that the 'average American', regardless of preference between the two major political parties, does not give a shit about our bombs being used to kill brown people on the other side of the world. This really shouldn't be news to anybody.
Yes… it does say the actual proportion of voters? That’s literally the first thing it said. Proportion of voters falling into (X) categories who voted Biden in 2020 who did not vote for Harris in 2024. It then talks about votes that flipped from Biden to Trump across swing states
The “makes no difference” is just a part of the sample size that isn’t relevant on those discussions. Clearly the important data takeaway is that 3x more people who didn’t vote Harris would have been more likely to vote for her than turned less likely to vote for her if she promised to stop sending weapons to Israel.
Honestly, it sounds like you just didn’t read the data
Hey, first of all sorry for being a nitpicky statistics nerd. I hope this doesn't come off as debate pervertry, pedantry and the like, but i want to clarify a few things.
Their core point is that Harris didn't lose the swing states because of absent former Biden voters, but because Trump mobilized voters that didn't vote for him in 2020. Harris lost 79,000 voters there, Trump won 810,000. The Biden 2020 voters who didn't go to the polls because of Gaza wouldn't have been enough to change that result, because while Harris lost a lot of these throughout the country, she barely lost any in the battleground states. Beating Trump's mobilization of new voters there would have required successful mobilization of people who didn't vote Biden in 2020.
And these people are simply not represented in the dataset. People who usually don't vote would have been interesting, first time voters would have been interesting, people who could have voted for the first time but didn't go to the polls would have been interesting and the latter two in particular might have been won over by a convincing anti-genocide stance. Maybe enough to flip the election, the tendency shown by the results of this survey and the opinion of young people on Gaza absolutely make that a plausible assumption. That's were i disagree with the person you're replying to, we can't rule out this issue was decisive. But they're correct that this survery doesn't prove that it was, because it looks entirely at people who voted Biden and didn't vote Harris.
Sure, I know you aren’t being debate perverty because you aren’t arguing with a claim that I actually made. Nowhere did I say people sitting out in the election was the reason Harris lost. I said Gaza was the main reason people who voted Biden in 2020 did sit out the election. Those are two entirely different claims.
That being said, I think you are making the same assumption as the other person. Looking at net voter gains/losses across the two years is meaningless without the data to separate them into groups. Harris lost 79000 votes there? Ok. Who? The same exact slate of people that showed up in 2020 minus 79000? That isn’t how election turnout works
Some pedantry from me.
We can't rule out the decisiveness of this issue based on the contents of this thread. I have seen enough other polling about low engagement/infrequent voters to have convinced me throroughly that those folks who might have turned out, but did not favored Trump because they thought he would be better on the economy.
Even that, I admit, does not mean there was not some way for Harris to come out against Israel and distance herself from Biden that would have managed to motivate a subset of low engagement voters who weren't that concerned about the economy, were concerned primarily about Gaza, and large enough to be decisive, but we're getting pretty thin thin with the should/could/would haves here.
Yes… it does say the actual proportion of voters?
yes, that proportion is 0.12% of the Democrat vote. Harris got 99.4% of Biden's 2020 total, and then 20% of that 0.6% difference stayed home due to Gaza. Equals 0.12%
Harris lost the popular vote by 3.5%, which is 30x that number
If she ended all shipments to Israel and everything else was held constant, she would have lost by (3.5 - 0.12) = 3.38% insteada continent of crackers don't really give a shit about palestine, who would've thought? (except anyone with an ounce of common sense)
Yes, that proportion is .6% of the Democratic vote when compared to 2020. Good thing the exact same slate of 70 million people showed up in both 2020 and 2024 to make that math really easy for us to figure out who exactly stayed home!
That being said, not sure what Harris losing by 3.5% has to do with anything when Gaza is still the largest reason 2020 dem voters who didn’t vote in 2024 states home.
when Gaza is still the largest reason 2020 dem voters who didn’t vote in 2024 states home.
It doesn't matter, and it's already been explained at least 5x over in this thread why it doesn't matter.
At some point you have to get over your hatred of democrats and let go of this weird just world fallacy that a lot of democrat haters have. Democrats are annoying and ineffective and fascist. If they weren't, they still would've lost.
Where oh where, I beg of you to show me, have I made the claim that Palestine is why democrats lost at any point in this discussion? You are literally arguing with nobody about that.
If you're telling me that you think Harris lost 20% of Biden's voters to Trump in those 6 states, then yes, one of us definitely isn't reading. But it ain't me.
Brother, total voter turnout in 2024 has nothing to do with who voted in 2020. Very cool that the total numbers you are using to draw your conclusion are close to the same, but they have no correlation with each other unless you are making the bold assumption that the same exact set of people showed up in 2020 and 2024 lmao
So yes, given this data it is entirely possible that people staying home because of Gaza mattered, though to be clear that was never a claim that I made. I said 2020 voters’ largest reason for staying home was Gaza.
Brother, total voter turnout in 2024 has nothing to do with who voted in 2020.
Nothing? No, really. Nothing?
Sure was weird to spend so much effort looking at this particular group of people in the OP then. I think you're grasping at straws here.
I guess going from "The discussion is over." to "it is entirely possible" is progress of a sort.
Sure, it would make sense that you might think going from "The discussion is over." to "it is entirely possible" is progress of a sort. Of course, this is only if somewhere along the way you imagined me making the argument that this is what swung the election one way or the other, then in your own mind managed to successfully debate against the point I never made.
And for the statistics in question, yes, 2020 voter turnout really does have nothing to do with 2024 voter turnout in the argument you are making unless you are making the assumption that the same exact slate of people showed up for both elections.
Close to the same total number of people showing up ≠ the same exact group of people showed up +/- net difference
You cannot expect me to believe this schtick where you pretend this information doesn't belong in the context of the broader discussion about the outcome of the 2024 election. This is not a free floating factoid you happened to be interested in for the purely intellectual pursuit of understanding the motivations of Democratic voters. What is the importance of this information outside of that context?
If you’d stop reading into things I didn’t say, this whole discussion would have been much less frustrating for you. It’s literally in the title of my post. The top reason Biden 2020 voters sat out of the 2024 election was Gaza. Literally that is the point. The point is that it was actually a reason people chose not to vote.
So yes, given this data it is entirely possible that people staying home because of Gaza mattered
can you Indian number system
if Dem voters in 2024 are different from Dem voters in 2020, it means that Gaza turned people off yes, AND ALSO that something Kamala did BROUGHT IN ADDITIONAL VOTERS. MEANING THE NET LOSS IS ALMOST BREAKING EVEN.
So yes, you can consider them equivalent big picture. She lost a very small fraction of voters, which is irrelevant to the whole reason of why she lost.
Yes, it is entirely possible that policy on Palestine is irrelevant to the reason Kamala lost. Have you also considered that people showed up for other reasons that weren’t Palestine related at all?
Net change in vote between 2020 and 2024 means literally nothing here. It gives you no useful information other than comparing the vote totals. It does not tell you who did/did not vote and why, it tells you how many people did/did not vote.
The populations of those six states increased by 1.6% in that time. In proportion to that, Harris effectively lost ~257,000 votes, while Trump effectively gained ~634,000 votes. Trump's gains were greater, but not by a factor of 10.
This is much more telling than the suppressed voter turnout. Excellent find.
anothe unfun stat is that overall women voted for kamala less than they did for biden and trump gained votes from women
i get the joke but lets be real. when kushner was "advisor" last time he invested in settlements and oversaw the expansion of settlements into palestinian land. recently he has invested more money in israeli firms who are looking to expand settlements into the west bank and gaza. trump fully plans to erode palestinian land to israel under his tenure
I don't think they ever denied this? I think they were simply 1000% willing to ignore the facts and lose. You know, like the democrats always are. They would rather have nothing then move to the left. This will not change by presenting them facts.
In future if you bring this up, expect to be told to suck it up and vote because this is the most important election of your lifetime. Nothing will fundamentally change.
