52
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 21 May 2026
52 points (94.8% liked)
News
37702 readers
1938 users here now
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 biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
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. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
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, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. 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 or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
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.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Ughh not even 1/6th of the way through it and it looks like the DNC just went over all of it with a yellow highlighter to say:
Nope nope nope nope wrong wrong wrong nope wrong nope nope wrong wrong wrong.
We Did Nothing Wrong and Plan on Learning Nothing!
I mean most of those would be pretty standard comments a reviewer would add, basically "citations needed", and for the vast majority of the ones I saw, there would be an easy citation to go grab. This looks more like a less than final version or like they didn't plan on even getting the final version completed. Like they saw this draft and said 'aight we've seen enough'.
It's also like.. not a good report so far. I read the stein section, which was fine as anecdote, but that same worked example happened in 50 other states. There is no reason to not to do a similar analysis across all states. It's not like they don't have the data.
That differential performance gap is the same basic approach I used back and showed here, in January of '24 which showed Biden was losing, and by May showed it as being a practical impossibility for them to win. It was not well received. Thinking back on it, I actually got banned from a few subs for posting the results of a basic and standard statistical analysis because it showed how bad Biden was losing. It was bad here in 23/24 for anyone who wasn't high on their own supply.
I'm gonna read for details on a bigger screen. The second half seems to be mostly about spending which, I don't think had a meaningful impact on the race. This was a very simple and very clear election that was blown first because (D)emocrats insisted on allowing Biden to run, and (d)emocrats insisted on defending this choice when it was clear as early as December of 23 that Biden couldn't win. It was Israel/Gaza and voters tried desperately to communicate that in the primaries, and the administration chose the path of having universities crack down on student protests.
The establishment disenfranchised the left volunteer base, and what the establishment failed to recognize, was that they don't actually win elections for themselves, the volunteer base does. Individuals who show up and do canvassing, work to convince others to vote for a candidate, they're always more engaged, further left than the average voter. They're your shock troops for any campaign, and without them, don't even bother, because you don't stand a chance.
The Democrats are on deaths door as a party. And their only path to survival is to become a truly leftwing, socialist party. Anything less than that the neolibs will have handed the rudder back to fascism for a third time. And the fascist won't be handing it back at that point.
This is where the pain is. I have absolutely no faith whatsoever that they'll ever do this. :/
What do you mean? They’ve saved democracy from those filthy lefty progressives. And anointed their king Trump, just not as loud as Fetterman.
I’m curious besides Bernie, AOC and a few others…. What elected officials even want to do it.
It was such a softball report as well. Everything was presented in this very soft manner that barely even addressed the major issues with Harris campaign and instead spent the majority of the report just pointing out all the places other campaigns outperformed Harris. But apparently even that incredibly mild bit of criticism was too much for them.
I won't be able to read it until later - anything surprising in there?
Did a quick search for Israel and Gaza. Didn't find them.
Nothing really major jumped out at me from my quick review other than how bland it was and how often the DNCs response was essentially "citation needed". The main thrust of the report seems to have been that Harris underperformed with men compared to other campaigns involving Democrats, and that the DNC didn't spend enough time running attack ads to discredit Republican candidates. The single most pointed criticism in the entire thing was one brief section near the end where it pointed out that Harris did a poor job differentiating herself from Biden.
Yeah its not a particularly convincing report. I think we as lemmings could probably crowd source something together of higher quality and better reproducibility in a few days or weeks.
Like the focus on one race as being the source of the performance gap is frustrating because it was ubiquitous and there is a real opportunity for a state by state district by district analysis there.