politics
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 US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted 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 other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. 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 an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have 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. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
what makes it false is the idea that she lost because she was a woman.
the numbers do not agree
it is a sexist point because it pushes the thought that democrats can not run female candidates if they want to win.
this is provably false, even considering misogyny. and like i said, is sourced from political operatives looking for a wedge. misogyny is just not that influential.
Harris was polling to win the election, up until the listed slights against the progressive base.
you can see that even within the democratic party a push to reaffirm conservative power by reassigning failures of the party on such things like inclusiveness, sexism, racism, ect. they attempted to hide the result of their internal investigation that counters their talking points.
it is also a thought terminating accusation with no one to blame and fights against progression in this regard. and should be shouted down when ever and where ever it crops up.
I don't believe this either. Her polling was dead wrong up until the last minute, same with trump but the warning signs were there early. I don't think it was reflecting reality so it's a bad measuring stick for the situation. Also, don't shoot the messenger here I'm not supporting this but it's an important aspect of why she lost even if you disagree with me...
Edit: I'm going to copy one of my other comments with sources below to support my argument, and why this should be brought up and identified.
Here's an article on what I'm talking about
If they aren't shown and it's normalized that a candidate can garner just as much political support then it's a headwind...
There's also the belief I'm talking about where people say a woman can't win, which becomes a self fulfilling prophecy. It also comes down to advertising and education (which are hamstrung by mudslinging during elections)
There are a lot of studies like this. I could go on for quite a while.
There's also a double bind racial bias where black female candidates are viewed as highly competent but unsuitable for a general election.
These issues need to be:
A) recognized as real.
B) dealt with through education and normalization.
Ironically your style of comment is undermining A and B by saying none of this is real, and shutting down any conversation about potentially fixing it...