this post was submitted on 19 Nov 2024
199 points (95.4% liked)

politics

19101 readers
4290 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
 

Summary

Trump’s popular vote share has fallen below 50% to 49.94%, with Kamala Harris at 48.26%, narrowing his margin of victory.

Trump’s share of the popular vote is lower than Biden’s in 2020 (51.3%), Obama’s in 2012 (51.1%) and 2008 (52.9%), George W. Bush’s in 2004 (50.7%), George H.W. Bush’s in 1988 (53.2%), Reagan’s in 1984 (58.8%) and 1980 (50.7%), and Carter’s in 1976 (50.1%).

The 2024 election results highlight Trump’s narrow victory and the need for Democrats to address their mistakes and build a diverse working-class coalition.

The numbers also give Democrats a reason to push back on Trump’s mandate claims, noting most Americans did not vote for him.

top 33 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] WrenFeathers@lemmy.world 3 points 20 minutes ago

I mean…. Does it really matter?

[–] Rentlar@lemmy.ca 36 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

58% of the deciding power with just under 50% of the vote?

This might be a catalyst for states to sign the NPVIC. Pennsylvania started the process to sign on this week in legislature.

Perhaps in the past, swing states enjoyed the attention they got.

Now, I have a feeling voters are frustrated from getting way too much attention with mailers, calls, texts, illegal lotteries, news stories, events. As a bonus, voters in swing states are and will be getting outsized blame for electing the returning rapist-in-chief. Anyways a potential silver lining in the impending sea of shit.

[–] cultsuperstar@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

It sucks that the Dems don't bother with a recount, even if it's still the same result. Republicans wanted recounts just about everywhere they could in 2020. Instead they just say "welp, looks like we lost. Here's the keys to the kingdom." Do some due diligence and have a damn recount.

[–] mercano@lemmy.world 89 points 8 hours ago (3 children)

The fact that a majority of voters did not want Trump to win makes me simultaneously feel happy (that I’m not surrounded by idiots) and more depressed (that the Electoral College has screwed us AGAIN!)

[–] empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com 108 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago) (1 children)

It's a lack of majority not a lack of plurality. Harris is still trailing Trump by 3m votes or so (and 1.6%), Trump is just not above 50% after further votes have been counted. So this isn't an electoral college steal

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 28 points 8 hours ago (3 children)

Yeah, but even if Kamala wins the popular vote, this is going to be the closest a republican has gotten in..

Decades?

Maybe longer?

But the DNC is going to latch onto this and try to claim if they had moved just a little more right they'd have won.

Regardless of what happens, the DNC will always say the answer is moving to the right.

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 11 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

The DNC brain trust is already claiming that they should go further to the right

[–] treefrog@lemm.ee 4 points 7 hours ago

Well yeah they're strategists are essentially corporate lobbyists.

[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 1 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Regardless of what happens, the DNC will always say the answer is moving to the right.

This isn't borne out by trending or statements. What kind of crystal ball are you smoking?

Two examples: ran on being humane to migrants and continued title 42 three years into the Biden term and proposed a draconian new immigration law.

Ran on reforming the police, flooded them with money.

[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 23 points 8 hours ago (2 children)

Don't worry, you're still surrounded by idiots no matter who wins the presidency

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 0 points 26 minutes ago

Typical liberal cope.

"We KINDA won!"

Face it y'all. Democrats and liberals are a LOSING block. FAILURES.

I'll continue to vote straight D, because it's the only choice I got. Fucking losers and failures.

[–] arandomthought@sh.itjust.works 7 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Yeah does it really make that much of a difference in terms of "being surrounded by idiots" whether 51% of the people around you are idiots or 49%? Sure, I'd prefer the 49% scenario, especially if there's an election happening, but you're still surrounded by idiots.

[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 9 points 7 hours ago

The fact that Trump could get elected at all, let alone twice, is proof that there's too many idiots to want to participate in normal society

[–] testfactor@lemmy.world 17 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

He still had more of the popular vote than Harris, it was just they were both less than 50% due to 3rd party votes. So neither had a "majority" of the vote.

So he still would have won, even under a purely popular vote based system.

[–] pennomi@lemmy.world 6 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Another thing it means is that if we had ranked choice voting, those 3rd party votes would be the deciding factor in who won the presidency.

[–] Not_mikey@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 hours ago

If we had ranked choice and got rid of the electoral college*

A lot of those third party votes are in solid red or blue states where it wouldn't matter. Also a lot of the third party votes this time was for rfk and the libertarian Oliver, who wouldve probably went to trump so the outcome would probably be the same.

[–] testfactor@lemmy.world 59 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

To be clear, because the headline I think is a bit misrepresentative. Trump still has over a million more votes than Harris. He just no longer has over 50% of the votes cast.

It's like 49% Trump, 48% Harris, 3% Other. So Trump still won the popular vote.

This isn't a "the Electoral College screwed us" situation. He still "won" the popular vote. He just didn't win a "majority" of the votes cast.

[–] Wrench@lemmy.world 2 points 3 hours ago

Yep. And as much as I'd like to blame 3rd party voters, even if they all voted Harris to giver her the majority, she'd have still lost due to electoral college.

I will absolutely blame the non-voters though. And the 3rd party voters still get part of the blame.

[–] TommySoda@lemmy.world 33 points 8 hours ago (2 children)

Wasn't it something like he only gained about 500,000 votes from the last primary election? The reason the Democrats lost was because they lost 10,000,000 due to people just straight up not voting for Kamala by either going 3rd party, switching to Trump, or abstaining. In my opinion it wasn't really Trump's popularity that won him the election but more of just the Democrats lack of popularity.

[–] empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Democrats lack of popularity, coupled with active voter suppression tactics in numerous states, four straight years of misinformation campaigns designed to decrease voter turnout and/or drive them to third parties maliciously, and most critically, no more covid lockdowns allowing people the free time to vote. People working full time wage jobs that are most likely to vote more blue are, quite intentionally, not financially allowed to vote in person due to work scheduling; 2020 was an outlier year.

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 1 points 12 minutes ago* (last edited 12 minutes ago)

OR, wait for it, it might be because Democrats absolutely suck at winning elections. It might be because no one likes them. And all that might be because they're total fucking failures at governing.

"But muh libs have done such wonderful things and the GOP is the devil!"

SELL it to us then.

"But LOGIC!"

No one votes on logic. Sales class, before lunch, "People buy on emotion."

Your post is exactly why libs so always fucking lose. Jesus, just say it out loud, "We lost because my pussy hurts!"

[–] iAmTheTot@sh.itjust.works 5 points 7 hours ago

Actually, Harris did nearly as well or better than Biden in the only states that matter, the swing states. In the ones the Harris didn't beat Biden's vote total, even if she had gotten it Trump would have still won the electoral college.

In other words, no it's not because dems didn't vote.

[–] 7112@lemmy.world 20 points 8 hours ago (2 children)

The big problem is we all think someone else will solve this issue. All the investigations, congress, and even the public... they did nothing.

Run for office. Start small. Kick them out of the school boards follow their playbook and work bottom up.

[–] Restaldt@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago

"If you have the ability to lead you have the obligation to. Because if you don't you need to consider who will"

This is the way.

[–] WatDabney@sopuli.xyz 15 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Since when has reality made any difference at all to Trump?

He doesn't believe he has a mandate because the numbers add up that way, so he's not going to believe he doesn't because they don't. He believes he has a mandate because he's the bestest and smartest and most perfect president ever in the history of ever. And he's never going to stop believing that.

[–] frezik@midwest.social 4 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

It makes a big difference to him, personally. He's a walking ego, and the fact that the American people aren't in a majority behind him will gnaw at him.

It means fuck all in any practical way. At best, the country isn't quite as giving into fascism as we thought. That's the best I got, and it ain't much.

[–] PunnyName@lemmy.world 2 points 7 hours ago

76+ million fascists voted for a fascist. Period.

[–] NeoToasty@kbin.melroy.org 8 points 8 hours ago (3 children)

Democrats need to stop wasting time by challenging the results of this election in any way. We're going to be under the control of a party that waives facts and truths so it doesn't matter.

The Democrats need to be re-worked entirely. The reason why they failed this year is like how they failed in 2016. They focused on the whole "TRUMP BAD!" wagon and expected that to carry them. That's great...as a platform. But it was all that they mostly had. Platforms aren't any good if you can't build off from them and that's what the Dems didn't do.

I know and understand that if Harris had a full year of campaigning instead of a handful of months, maybe she could've had a better shot and a better understanding of how she'd turn this country around. But, she fell into the same trap as Clinton did and that's why she lost. She wasn't the entire reason, the Dems had a part in that too collectively, but a part of the reason.

You cannot just scream "THAT MAN BAD" without backing it up and without promise of how you'll do things right - for everyone. Emphasis on 'everyone' because there apparently are some groups that Harris and the Dems failed on and lost their votes. That's important.

Right now, Democrats need to seriously reconstructure.

And I hope that within the first year of this fascist's term of how much shit they'd have to sit, watch and fight over on. That by the 2026 mid-terms, that they get their heads out of their fucking asses.

[–] PunnyName@lemmy.world 6 points 7 hours ago

I'm calling him a fascist, and those who voted for him fascists. Fuck this fascist country.

[–] alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml 1 points 6 hours ago

there apparently are some groups that Harris and the Dems failed on

That's every group except for republicans, who voted Trump anyway.

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 1 points 7 hours ago

I know and understand that if Harris had a full year of campaigning instead of a handful of months, maybe she could've had a better shot and a better understanding of how she'd turn this country around.

I think she'd have dug herself into a deeper hole, if anything. That's what she did with the time she had available.