1355
submitted 6 days ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] [email protected] 11 points 6 days ago

It's not just Kamala Harris, it is democrats in general. I get that they want the first woman president ... but its not going to happen in this political environment. Many Hatian immigrants that voted for Trump just because they don't think a woman can be president. Copy that ... Trump said these people are eating cats and they still voted for him. Hispanics? News flash, they are predominantly Catholic ... so Pro Choice doesn't go over well for them. Then people got angry because Kamala skipped the whole nomination prosses. Stuff like this is why she lost. Biden should have ran, then resigned after he beat Trump again.

[-] [email protected] 23 points 5 days ago

Biden wasn't ever going to beat trump after that complete failure of a debate. Harris was the dems Hail Mary play after they finally realized that.

[-] [email protected] 8 points 5 days ago

Yeah I thought the odds of her winning were less than 50% but they were still bette than the odds of Biden winning again.

[-] [email protected] 20 points 6 days ago

No way Biden wins a second time. His mind was critically failing during the debates, the average voter saw that, and minorities didn't win him the election overall, white people did.

[-] [email protected] 3 points 5 days ago

His mind was critically failing during the debates, the average voter saw that, and minorities didn’t win him the election overall, white people did.

Remember saying that and being called a useful idiot who bought into Propaganda? Pepperidge farm remembers.

And now they blame non-whites for the failures of the old racist dude and his token friend.

[-] [email protected] 8 points 5 days ago

We have literal scientific proof that voters don't give a shit if the candidate is a man or a woman.

Please really do stop this narrative. It makes more damage than you think

[-] [email protected] -1 points 5 days ago

You can't have "scientific proof" on an opinion. That's dumb. If voters don't care if the candidate is a man or woman THEN WHY HAVE THEY ALL BEEN MEN? I think that ends your "science" right there.

This was the weirdest response I have ever had on Lemmy ... congrats.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 5 days ago

Yeah man, fuck scientific research I guess, your totally sustainable anecdotal evidence is proof enough

How's Kamala victory working out for you btw

[-] [email protected] 1 points 4 days ago

You make no sense.

My point: The US is not ready fir a woman president and won't elect one. Dems need to stop running women.

Your Point (apparently): Science says voters don't care if the candidate is male or female.

Let's test your theory in the laboratory of life. To be correct by your measure the US should have around a 50% male/female ratio, we will say 40/60 proves it as well.

There have been 45 people elected to the 60 US presidential terms.

Let's look at the elected presidents. By your measure, should it not matter to voters, we should have had 20-23 women as president. We should also have 40-50% women in Congress, the House, and Senate. Let's check those numbers ....

of US presidents in history: None

Women in politics is currently the highest it has ever been. The numbers are 28% in Congress, 29% in the House and 25% in the Senate.

Hmmm ... it looks like there is a substantial difference in how voters feel.

This is the part where you throw a fit and start name calling.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 5 days ago

Biden should have ran

Even before the Jun 27 debate fiasco, the polls always showed that Biden had very little chance of winning. He was trying to actively facilitate a AIPAC genocide and simultaneously win a close campaign race from the "left" party. If the DNC had run a real primary process, and if the media had held Biden to his promise to only run a single term, things might have been different.

this post was submitted on 30 May 2025
1355 points (98.0% liked)

politics

23874 readers
3926 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS