this post was submitted on 13 Dec 2025
104 points (93.3% liked)
politics
26716 readers
2168 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I just skimmend the article and the accompanying report. But the analysis of what happened is contrary to my understanding. As far as I'm aware voter turnout in swing states (aka the ones that are actually important) was actually higher in 2024 compared to the few last election cycles.
Compared to Clinton and Biden, Harris was able to draw from the not-voting pool in states, where it mattered. Just Trump did it better.
The conclusion, that following the populist narrative of your enemy instead of drafting your own looses you votes, may be right, but I think the analysis, how they got to that conclusion is not what actually happened.
Not a US citizen or particularly versed with US politics, so I would be happy to hear something contrary.
I posted a longer reply below about some of the exit polling and the pictures that kind of info paints. And yes, it's in contradiction to this article.
Objectively, the last several federal elections had the highest turnout of voters in US history, including highest percentages of youth voters. There was a LOT more wrong than "Dem voters stayed home." That's the same tired BS they've been shoving down our throat for decades.
I immediately distrust any article or "study" published by a group who also claim to have the strategy to "fix" it and have an investment plan for "getting voters to the polls." This smells a lot like attempt #4,497,349 to grab people's money and run.
Trump ran a better campaign and got more votes. It's as simple as that.
I think it came down to 2 moments
Trump getting shot in the head then standing up, raising his fist and yelling "fight!". I dispise the man and even I thought that was badass.
Biden at the debate. He was clearly sunsetting in front of our eyes, rambling about golf scores and saying "and by the way" over and over like it was his mantra.
If Biden had stepped down and endorsed harris from the beginning, idk if trump could have pulled off a win.
That and dems shit the bed in their campaign like it was an olympic sport and they were aiming for gold.
Stack on that, a LOT of effort made by billionaires like Musk to subvert people's attention spans towards political news. It was a concerted effort of bad-faith actors getting paid a living salary in other countries piling on Twitter to share and promote pro-trump propaganda, and so much sensationalized stories and arguments and overblown contention across all media, that most people just stopped watching or caring.
Exit polling, the only info that really matters, asked voters who they voted for and why, and the overwhelming responses were that people didn't know who to vote for and just associated Biden and Harris with the administration that was in power when egg prices went up.
Seriously, eggs played one of the major motivators. And people are so uninformed or uninterested that they couldn't really tell the differences between candidates. People don't broadly read or watch news, they get like, an hour of current events from Facebook and Youtube shorts every week because they have to fucking work 7 days a week just to survive. I know like, a dozen people who fit this picture.
A quarter of the country can't read. About half are uninterested in politics, and everyone else is too busy trying to stay alive when healthcare costs more than mortgages and bread is $7.50 a loaf.
people vote with their wallets first and foremost
“It wasn’t because Biden voters shifted to Trump—but because so many of them stayed home.”
I'm sorry but that is bullshit. That's like saying that the protestor died because the gun released a bullet, completely forgetting that the police aimed at them in the first place.
Voters stayed home because they felt uninspired by whatever democratic candidates tried to represent. The thing is, i'm in europe and i do follow the news, but i barely ever heard any specific plans from Kamala. i never got the "oh wow that's a good idea" thought, because there was poor communication, no exposure, etc. It's all a bubble. If you're inside it, it seems like there's a lot of communication. But that communication doesn't leave the bubble because it doesn't speak the other's language. It refuses to communicate with people who are not already on the same page. That's why a lot of commenters are gonna reply to my comment, saying "no, actually, Kamala's messaging was great". Because they experienced it like that, because they actively seeked out the communication, and found it. But to the typical voter, who's not specially politically involved, and not specifically seeking out the communication, they don't get exposed to it.
On top of that what i'm strongly considering is that our political stances need to recognize that people really just want to live, both now and in the future. They want to have the economical perspective that they can buy nice stuff, and that the world is somehow gonna develop into a better tomorrow. A political party is gonna win exactly if it can provide these two to the people. That's what we need.
I really agree that communication is where the American "left" is way behind. Both in terms of individual campaigns and as a whole.
The American "right" now has endless well-funded platforms to push messages and narratives. Podcasts, streamers, YouTube channels, news networks, social media accounts, etc. They also embrace AI to increase exponentially the amount of content they can shovel out. And they understand you need to use apolitical or quasi political interests as an entry point.
There are examples on the left of all of these, but not at the same scale and with the same financial backing.
her messaging was 'let's just keep doing what we are doing'. so if you liked Biden, yeah it was 'good'. But if you didn't like Biden or establishment Dem politics it was a nothingburger.
which was stupid and not want american voters wanted. they wanted change. Trump offered it to them.
THEN STOP FUCKING RUNNING CONSERVATIVE DEMOCRATS WITHOUT MEANINGFUL PRIMARIES
Not a meaningful reason to let a facist win.
Wow then good thing I voted for Kamala huh?
You’re making absolutely no sense to your point troll
It doesn't make sense to both vote for the Democrat in the general and to also want an actual primary and a candidate that isn't as centrist as possible? Do you have 3 brain cells total?
load more comments
(10 replies)
We've known since the day after election day something like 33 million fewer people voted, though.
These comments clearly show that people are completely fine to repeat the same mistakes that opened the door for a fascist to take up the throne.
Just report them as Russian bots cuz that’s what they are. They got away with this on Reddit. Let’s not let this stand on lemmy.
Naaah. They’re coddled here. Political correctness has gotten mods/admins so scared of making a mistake that they even protect a person using the well-known “attack helicopter” bullshit to antagonize the trans community.
I’ve been banned for calling this person out here.
Was also banned from a bunch of communities I don’t even post in for “bad jacketing” because I called out a well known troll that has tons of sock puppets.
Mods/admins are too chickenshit to make any big splashes here. Even when given proof.
It's better than before but not everyone gets it yet. When you see a comment like that the solution is to acknowledge or understand their concerns and then explain why it's still important to vote. The most common misunderstanding I see is that some people claim that both sides are the same because of one particular issue that is only a small part of what a candidate's policies are. We can do a let's look approach by asking them if they are the same on other issues and seeing if they are truly the same on the issue they are concerned about.
Or might be better to just educate people who are willing to learn instead of arguing with those who won't.
Also with that said on more reflection I do realize that some of these issues are past grievances that people bring up and hopefully next time they will vote. For example I do think not having a primary did cause some people to stay home. We must not repeat that same mistake, the next primary must be done fairly.
I’d normally agree, but I’d say we’re way past that now.
What happens is we try and reason with these people when they clearly show no desire to see anything reasonably. They then scream at everyone and call them some some shit like “bLuEMaGa” and then have the nerve to whine when people don’t treat them with the respect they demand.
They don’t want to respect others, they just want to be respected. They don’t want to help others, they want others to help them. Their way or the highway. And it’s been this way from the beginning.
It’s entitlement.
I was here last election. I was among those trying to explain that no one was asking anyone to stand in an obedient line and ritualistically fall on their swords if the dems so much as asked-
We were simply asking for people to consider voting against fascism.
We were insulted, berated, disrespected and yelled at as if it was our fault Trump was even a candidate. Then they tried to prop up unknown and untested candidates that promised shit that was virtually impossible to achieve, like…. Abolishing prisons.
Not a single one of their spoiler candidates had a feasible plan to enact ANY of the policy they promised. And this isn’t from me, this is from pretty much anyone with a brain and authority on the subject.
So yeah… I’m done trying to reason with the unreasonable. They’re not going to budge on their rhetoric and nothing will change their minds. And I’m not the ass-kissing type.
The left is irreparably and permanently divided and these kids wouldn’t have it any other way.
Now, let’s see how quickly they all rush to prove my point.
they also report you and/or ban you if they are a mod. because if you don't agree/respect their massive whiny entitlement you are literally 'the enemy' and must be silenced.
Yep. Definitely run into that before. And a few (who I won’t name) that actually try and bait you into saying shit that they can report you for.
If you want me to vote, then you need to stop nominating corporate puppets.
I've showed up at every primary, for example.
I guarantee you that for whatever district or race if you compare the Democrat and the Republican running in that race you'll find that the Democrat is less corporate and cares more about the people than the Republican in that race does. Voting for the Democrat even the one who wasn't your first choice in the primary brings you closer to where you want to be and helps shift the Overton window. Primaries typically happen every election cycle and eventually by electing enough Democrats flipping every seat you can will either result in the Democrat you believe is too corporate to shift their beliefs or will result in their ouster with someone who is less corporate.
if you compare the Democrat and the Republican running in that race you'll find
This is the fucking problem, right here.
People dont make """"rational"""" choices when they're driven toward frustration and desparation, and democrats marketing themselves as 'not republicans' in lieu of offering any significant change is a massive source of that desparation.
load more comments
(2 replies)
I wouldn’t have thought that voting against fascism would have been something arms needed to be twisted over. But what do I know?
Everyone loves a good grassroots movement to outrage one another over!
If the next Dem presidential candidate would refrain from getting buddy buddy with Republicans it would be a lot easier to put in the effort to overcome voter suppression.
load more comments
(3 replies)
Maybe have a fucking primary and people won't stay home.
Yes, please no shit candidates...ni one over 60 please. There is literally no reason to pick anyone in their 70's. Sure the rules allow this, but please don't. Also no repeats, no Clintons, bushes, trumps, Obamas, etc. There are plenty of other people with other last names. Bernie and AOC? Yeah I can get behind that. AOC would make a great president and Bernie can probably survive a presidency.
No one over 60... Bernie...
Bernie is 34 in his heart. He'll be eligible when the time comes.
Okay, so AOC and Stephen Colbert?
Someone got it!
Way to Win pointed to three main problems that cost Democrats last year: Voters were upset not just about rising prices but about longer-term economic trends, and wanted change; Republicans and the far right have a built-in media advantage, thanks to years of investments, which made it harder for Democrats to break through; and movements on the left around issues like Gaza, racial and economic justice, and immigration weren’t aligned with the party.
Yea... Close...Not quite though. Basically, YOU HAVE TON FUCKING ACT YOU DIP SHITS! Do real things people can fucking believe in.
As it stand I still want both sides out of all the offices. When you actually represent me and the voters.... Not some corporate lobby group, PAC, or persons with more money than sense but "We The People", then I might vote for you.
Mamdani is a good start... If he follows through.
view more: next ›