this post was submitted on 01 Nov 2024
-16 points (28.9% liked)

politics

19104 readers
2611 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Idk. I posted this piece from Medhi where he interviews Micheal Moore, which if you want to get a read on MI, thats your guy.

https://lemmy.world/post/21487386

The consensus I got from those two is that MI is lost for Harris since she didn't/ isn't going to pivot. I know we're seeing other data on women voters, but like, I don't see a path to the WH without Michigan for Harris. I just can't imagine how she could lose MI, but keep WI and PA, AND THEN ALSO pick up NC or GA or some other sunbelt state.

Its just very very difficult for me to imaging losing MI but picking up somewhere else. MI should be in the bag, incontestable.

[–] Sundial@lemm.ee 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Thanks for the read. I'll take a look at it when I get the chance.

MI should be in the bag, incontestable.

Yeah it should have been but the Democrats, and Harris, royally fucked this up with all that they've done and supported the past 13 months of this conflict. Trump going to Dearborn just goes to show how close it is to turning red.

[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago

The fuck are we gonna do at this point. The only possible saving grace is a literal tsunami of women voters. Harris really needed to be sweeping/ taking at least 5-7 of the swing states, to keep this thing out of the hands of the supreme court. That seems like an impossibility at this point.

[–] Asafum@feddit.nl 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I know a lot of people have been saying the polling shouldn't be trusted, but they always underestimate Trump and he's basically taking every swing state even still. Harris only has like .8% in one or two which in reality is like +3 Trump.

We're so fucked it's stupid.

[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Harris was on track to end up at around +4, +5, +6 if she would have been able to follow through on the momentum she gathered going into the convention. She took all that good will and threw it in the trash to spur Muslism voters and anti-war voters, then went on to put Liz-FUCKING-Cheney on stage.

I can tell you the exact moment Harris started to lose this election and it was right here:

Ruwa Romman explains what happened at the DNC

It was the moment Jeff Duncan, a pro-abortion Republican, got the stage instead of a Palestinian.

[–] Asafum@feddit.nl 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Yeah but have you considered that the military industrial complex and Isreal are more important than people's lives and even our own country?!

"Never underestimate the astounding ability for Democrats to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory."

/wrist :(

[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

I mean, apparently going along with the donor class is more important than winning the election.