Jump to content

John Oliver unloads into Democrats: "You had a centrist candidate... she lost!"


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 128
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • DevilsRollTheDice

    18

  • Communion

    15

  • Bloo

    8

  • Cruel Summer

    5

Posted
Just now, John Slayne said:

photo-output.thumb.jpeg.8c9cb685961e6117

Period.
 

 Home essentials:siptea: 

 

Posted
1 minute ago, Communion said:

The graph you're sharing quite literally proves that the concern was economic and dissapointment in right-wing Democratic economic policies.

There is literally an option for "Kamala Harris is too conservative" and it's second from the bottom. The inflation problem has been observed worldwide and has caused the largest turnover of incumbent power since WWII including in countries that have the economic policies you advocate for. The information environment also influenced the perception of that issue heavily. 

 
Instead of pretending that this was caused by millions of imagined voters who sat out that will magically appear when all your exact policy positions are on the ballot (Sanders couldn't even win a primary) it might be more productive to accept that voters WANTED Trump and swung right across many demographics. I agree with you about many of the economic policies Dems should be pushing but the problem is much more complex than that simplification or implying that Americans perceived Harris as too conservative rather than not conservative enough. 

  • Like 4
  • Thumbs Down 3
Posted

It really is such a shame they screwed her over so terribly. Reminder that Biden said he was going to be a 1 term president. His cognitive decline was well known. The democratic party lost 15 million voters because of how little they believed in them.

  • Like 3
Posted
2 minutes ago, Bloo said:

Can you cite a single time when Kamala said anything positive about trans people this race? You can't because she never used the word "trans" in the entire 2024 election cycle. The second half of the sentence about not caring about the working class is the relevant part. That's why we're saying we should move to the left and adopt economic populist ideas. Thank you. 

Your key phrase here is "in this election." Trump cited a policy position at the debate that she DID claim to support. Dems have spent years making identity politics a central part of the party's identity. The Harris campaign realized that wasn't being received well and tried to backtrack several years of public branding in three months. Trump ads revolved around identity politics so clearly found the Dem association with them strong and effective. 

  • Like 3
Posted
12 minutes ago, terrijoe said:

The way gays automatically think lefty ideals revolve around their blue hair and their 100 tumblr genders. No. Populism is not just the trans and non binary stuff. It's a Class war. Not a culture war.  The culture coincides with it sure but the extremist gays did too much. Don't forget the gays were  the ones performing sexually explicit drag shows in front of kids (Yes they are real) and  jockstraps at pride and the gay parents bringing kids to pride knowing this (etc.)  That's why the country is exhausted by us gays.  We did too much. The most. We need to realize we are too much. tone it down. The world doesn't revolve around us and we can't force our lifestyles onto others. 

Such boring trolling :zzz:

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
  • Thumbs Down 1
Posted (edited)
26 minutes ago, DevilsRollTheDice said:

Saying Harris lost this election because she wasn't left enough proves that some of the political takes on this website are as delusional as the pop ones. 

Leftism is significantly more than trans issues and culture stuff, and there is a way to run on it that isn't remotely focused on any of that and directly appeals to the working class and their economic worries.

 

Also, Kamala was notoriously quiet on trans issues except for the time when she deflected on it, and the party has all but shut down any push for trans issues (see there being no trans speakers at the DNC). The idea that she ran her campaign on it is separated from reality and the only way people can think she did are those who largely don't pay attention, and focus on attack adds and right-wing kool aid when they do. That's a misinformation and societal problem. 

Edited by EnigmaticAndroid
  • Like 2
  • ATRL Moderator
Posted
15 minutes ago, DevilsRollTheDice said:

There is literally an option for "Kamala Harris is too conservative" and it's second from the bottom.

Babe, people do not agree on what these terms mean. This is a terrible argument. Progressive policies passed this election in several red states, including Nebraska, Alaska, Kentucky, etc. Progressive policies are popular, Democratic politicians are not. The unpopular politicians are why the term "liberal" is maligned by the general public.

 

12 minutes ago, DevilsRollTheDice said:

Your key phrase here is "in this election." Trump cited a policy position at the debate that she DID claim to support. Dems have spent years making identity politics a central part of the party's identity. The Harris campaign realized that wasn't being received well and tried to backtrack several years of public branding in three months. Trump ads revolved around identity politics so clearly found the Dem association with them strong and effective. 

So you agree, this strategy of just running away from identity politics in the way Harris did is a losing strategy?

 

regina_george_so_you_agree_meme.jpg?auto=compress&fm=pjpg

  • Like 3
Posted (edited)
19 minutes ago, DevilsRollTheDice said:

There is literally an option for "Kamala Harris is too conservative" and it's second from the bottom. The inflation problem has been observed worldwide and has caused the largest turnover of incumbent power since WWII including in countries that have the economic policies you advocate for. The information environment also influenced the perception of that issue heavily. 

 
Instead of pretending that this was caused by millions of imagined voters who sat out that will magically appear when all your exact policy positions are on the ballot (Sanders couldn't even win a primary) it might be more productive to accept that voters WANTED Trump and swung right across many demographics. I agree with you about many of the economic policies Dems should be pushing but the problem is much more complex than that simplification or implying that Americans perceived Harris as too conservative rather than not conservative enough. 

The biggest contributing factor is something that would be alleviated by progfessive policy. Trump oversaw and associated himself with historic tax hikes on the working class last time. Are you dull or are you just trolling? :rip:

 

A progressive candidate would be able to do all the gum flapping about the middle class that trump does but would have an agenda that actually backs that messaging up. It would be a sweep for the exact reason that you're saying, you're so close to the point but intentionally overlooking it.

Edited by Sheep
  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
21 minutes ago, DevilsRollTheDice said:

There is literally an option for "Kamala Harris is too conservative" and it's second from the bottom.

You don't seem to know what you're reading. 

 

The graph is a list of criticisms voters were read and how effective each one the voter felt it was.

 

"Kamala Harris is too conservative" is not effective as a criticism - not because voters innately crave conservatism but because "conservative" is a nebulous term that doesn't convey anything to voters when they're asked, like they were here, to think about what it means.

 

As seen with "Kamala Harris is too liberal" not actually registering with most voters. 

 

See also: "Kamala Harris is too pro-Palestine" and "Kamala Harris is too pro-Israel". Voters in America do not engage in the Ideological divides of war - they dislike simply being at war, especially the costs associated with being at war.

 

Why? Because the average American hates the political establishment, political elites, and the idea that the political status quo doesn't serve people like them.

 

The most effective criticisms all relate to Dems' *right-wing* austerity politics that Trump exploited. 

 

Inflation was too high = Negative to Dems' austerity politics
Too much undocumented immigration occurred = Trump linked Dems' austerity politics not on Congressional Republicans but to claims of increased migration
Kamala Harris cares more about transgender people than helping the middle class = Trump linked Dems' austerity politics not on Congressional Republicans but to claims that Democrats were purposefully providing healthcare to trans people and not the rest of America

 

Literally the hallmark of Trump's anti-trans ad spending in swing states was not a moralistic, religious-fueled condemnation of trans people as freaks or sinners, but literally framing trans people as an out-of-touch pet project of Dems where - ! - taxpayer dollars were not going to most Americans but to issues most Americans can't relate to.

 

People who feel entitled to scream "Harris wasn't right-wing!!" have to answer to what they think voters consider kicking 15M people off Medicaid:

 

Edited by Communion
  • Thanks 2
Posted
16 minutes ago, DevilsRollTheDice said:

Dems have spent years making identity politics a central part of the party's identity.

You previously cited Switzerland banning Muslim headwear on the basis that it is associated with Muslim migrants in this thread as "overcoming identity politics" so I'm not sure you know what that phrase means.

 

  • Like 2
Posted
4 minutes ago, Bloo said:

Babe, people do not agree on what these terms mean. This is a terrible argument. Progressive policies passed this election in several red states, including Nebraska, Alaska, Kentucky, etc. Progressive policies are popular, Democratic politicians are not. The unpopular politicians are why the term "liberal" is maligned by the general public.

 

So you agree, this strategy of just running away from identity politics in the way Harris did is a losing strategy?

 

regina_george_so_you_agree_meme.jpg?auto=compress&fm=pjpg

I think you can't undo 4 years of perception, including some wildly unpopular stances associated with Democrats, in 3 months. Y'all always have to frame that if your exact political policy opinions were implemented everything would be perfect. I probably agree with you on a few or even several of them. We have to win first, and I think we have plenty of evidence to suggest that American politics and voters' political motivations are messier and more complicated than y'all want them to be. 

  • Like 2
  • ATRL Moderator
Posted
5 minutes ago, DevilsRollTheDice said:

I think you can't undo 4 years of perception, including some wildly unpopular stances associated with Democrats, in 3 months. Y'all always have to frame that if your exact political policy opinions were implemented everything would be perfect. I probably agree with you on a few or even several of them. We have to win first, and I think we have plenty of evidence to suggest that American politics and voters' political motivations are messier and more complicated than y'all want them to be. 

1928 Election

spacer.png

 

1932 Election

spacer.png

 

Things can change in 4 years. It's historically possible. Kamala just lacks the political talent to do it.

 

Kamala had every opportunity to change the race. The fact she didn't lose with Trump winning 400 electoral votes like Biden's internal data suggested would be his outcome speaks to that. However, her intentional choice to center her campaign around pivoting to the right (e.g., campaigning with Liz Cheney, bragging about adopting Trump's border policy, talking highly about how the only difference between her and Biden is how she will put Republicans in her administration) failed her. The very thing you are defending her for is exactly why she lost. People thought she represented no change because she chose to say she would be no different from Biden—refusing to acknowledge the failures in the economy and present inspiring ideas of how she would improve anything.

  • Like 5
Posted
7 minutes ago, Communion said:

You don't seem to even know what you're reading. 

 

The graph is a list of criticisms voters were read and how effective each one the voter felt it was.

 

"Kamala Harris is too conservative" is not effective as a criticism not because voters innately crave conservatism but because "conservative" is a nebulous term that doesn't convey anything to voters when they're asked - like here - to think about what it means. As seen with how most voters not finding "Kamala Harris is too liberal" not actually registering with most voters. 

 

See also: "Kamala Harris is too pro-Palestine" and "Kamala Harris is too pro-Israel". Voters in America do not engage in the Ideological divides of war - they dislike simply being at war.

 

Why? Because the average American hates the political establishment, political elites, and the idea that the political status quo doesn't serve people.

 

The most effective criticisms all relate to Dems' *right-wing* austerity politics that Trump exploited. 

 

Inflation was too high = Negative to Dems' austerity politics
Too much undocumented immigration occurred = Trump linked Dems' austerity politics not on Congressional Republicans but to claims of increased migration
Kamala Harris cares more about transgender people than helping the middle class = Trump linked Dems' austerity politics not on Congressional Republicans but to claims that Democrats were purposefully providing healthcare to trans people and not the rest of America

 

Literally the hallmark of Trump's anti-trans ad spending in swing states was not a moralistic, religious-fueled condemnation of trans people as freaks or sinners, but literally framing trans people as an out-of-touch pet project of Dems where.- ! - taxpayer dollars will not going to most Americans but to issues most Americans can't relate to.

 

People who feel entitled to scream "Harris wasn't right-wing!!" have to answer to what they think voters consider kicking 15M people off Medicaid:

 

You just make up things. Source for all of these claims/this analysis? Your own head and the theory you read :deadbanana2:

 

Like what are you even saying here? You present your diaristic musings about the world as though they are fact. I don't even know how to engage with that.

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
  • Haha 1
  • Thumbs Down 1
Posted
48 minutes ago, TeemoR said:

So what is he suggesting then, that if Kamala was more 'leftist' and talked about trans people she would have better chances to win? That's not why she lost...

People associating the "left" with only focusing on social issues is a part of the bigger problem with the democratic party. 

 

Some of y'all have such watered down views on politics.

 

:clack:

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, DevilsRollTheDice said:

I think you can't undo 4 years of perception, including some wildly unpopular stances associated with Democrats

The policy Trump ran his anti-trans ads focusing on is a policy that his White House came up with and is logically sound. 

 

Running away from the thing you're seemingly trying to frame as bad would mean giving prisons the right to deny prisoners the healthcare prescribed by their doctor.  

 

This is why you have to be a leftist to have the solution. You see how easily someone like yourself who is not a leftist and instead falls into reactionary liberalism just projects some grievance onto trans people without any actual evidence of this being something Dems centered in their politics, nor willing to engage with what your solutions look like if implemented.

 

Harris even attempted to point out that this policy started under Trump, but it was odd and ineffective, making herself look anti-trans and Trump pro-trans.

 

She should have pointed out how few dollars actually are spent on providing gender-affirming care to trans people in jail, how much money we waste when keeping largely non-violent offenders in jail for longer sentences (and thus have to pay for their healthcare), and how much Trump wants to increase people's doctor bills by dismantling the ACA.

 

But of course she didn't do that cause she doesn't even want to make healthcare universal and had Mark Cuban telling her to run on lowering taxes for millionaires.

Edited by Communion
  • Like 4
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, DevilsRollTheDice said:

I think you can't undo 4 years of perception, including some wildly unpopular stances associated with Democrats, in 3 months. Y'all always have to frame that if your exact political policy opinions were implemented everything would be perfect. I probably agree with you on a few or even several of them. We have to win first, and I think we have plenty of evidence to suggest that American politics and voters' political motivations are messier and more complicated than y'all want them to be. 

Voters' motivations have been skewed by disinformation. The policy people want the Dems to push is almost universally popular. It's not about "Kamala didn't do what I wanted so she lost" it's "Kamala didn't do what the people wanted so we said no". It's self-evident.

 

The establishment continues to silence and hold back progressive candidates because they're terrified of what it would mean for them and their donors. It's that simple. :deadbanana4:

Edited by Sheep
  • Like 3
Posted
2 minutes ago, Bloo said:

1928 Election

spacer.png

 

1932 Election

spacer.png

 

Kamala had every opportunity to change the race. The fact she didn't lose with Trump winning 400 electoral votes like Biden's internal data suggested would be his outcome speaks to that. However, her intentional choice to center her campaign around pivoting to the right (e.g., campaigning with Liz Cheney, bragging about adopting Trump's border policy, talking highly about how the only difference between her and Biden is how she will put Republicans in her administration) failed her. The very thing you are defending her for is exactly why she lost. People thought she represented no change because she chose to say she would be no different from Biden—refusing to acknowledge the failures in the economy and present inspiring ideas of how she would improve anything.

So you agree, Harris' campaign, which included reaching across the aisle to independents and moderates and toning down identity politics, lead to a far superior outcome than the incumbent ticket (that also included her) was destined for? 

 

regina_george_so_you_agree_meme.jpg?auto=compress&fm=pjpg

  • Like 2
  • Thumbs Down 2
  • ATRL Moderator
Posted
11 minutes ago, DevilsRollTheDice said:

So you agree, Harris' campaign, which included reaching across the aisle to independents and moderates and toning down identity politics, lead to a far superior outcome than the incumbent ticket (that also included her) was destined for? 

 

regina_george_so_you_agree_meme.jpg?auto=compress&fm=pjpg

Biden won with Bernie Sanders as an advisor to his campaign, while promising $15 minimum wage, expanding Medicare to include people aged 60 and older, and free community college. Kamala ran on building the wall.

 

Kamala's reaching across the aisle gave her less of the Republican vote than Biden and Hillary got in 2020 and 2016.

 

GbsMSB0bgAAVLpl?format=png&name=medium

 

Babe, reality is not on your side. Wake up.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Posted

@DevilsRollTheDice

 

Pay them no mind. Western leftists are too deep into theory due to their political impotency that they're divorced from how the average person thinks. 

  • Like 3
  • Thumbs Down 6
Posted
1 minute ago, Kimbra said:

@DevilsRollTheDice

 

Pay them no mind. Western leftists are too deep into theory due to their political impotency that they're divorced from how the average person thinks. 

Pay them no mind, yes. Keep paying mind to the Never Trumper Republicans and Ivy League consultants who can get us results like this:

 

spacer.png

Posted
1 hour ago, Communion said:

This is what being leftist means:

 

I don't think we disagree somewhere, that's what I'm saying. It's more about Economy rather than the issues raised on the James Oliver segment…

Posted

"Democrats lost because (Very online pet issue the average voter doesn't make give a rats ass about) I can't believe they're that out of touch.

  • Haha 1
  • Thumbs Down 2
Posted
15 minutes ago, Sheep said:

 

The establishment continues to silence and hold back progressive candidates because they're terrified of what it would mean for them and their donors. It's that simple. :deadbanana4:

 

Case in point :gaycat6:

  • Like 5
Posted

The social issue that Harris actually heavily highlighted in her campaign(women's rights) just won in multiple states that voted for Trump. Would-be Harris voters are saying they despise her similarity to Biden(another blue Republican/spineless DNC sockpuppet) and how they've suffered financially these past years. They're also saying she focused too much on trans issues when she refused to address them at all except to attack Trump on Fox News for being more pro-trans than she is.

 

Less identity politics and more right wing policy is literally the opposite conclusion to what's supported by the data. :redface:

 

  • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.