Harris Tried to Win Over Republicans. Democratic Support Collapsed Instead
www.rollingstone.com
Kamala Harris did not pull Republicans from Trump, and the percentage of voters identifying as Democrat declined, according to exit polls.

Harris only received five percent of Republican votes — less than the six percent Joe Biden won in 2020 when he beat Trump, as well as the seven percent won by Hillary Clinton in 2016 when she lost to him. While Harris won independents and moderates, she did so by smaller margins than Biden did in 2020.

Meanwhile, Harris lost households earning under $100,000, while Democratic turnout collapsed. Votes are still being counted, but Harris is on pace to underperform Biden’s 2020 totals by millions of votes.

  • nutsack@lemmy.world
    37·
    14 days ago

    yeah this was a really fucking stupid idea and I think any Dingus on Twitter could have told you the same. The Trump voter base does not move. everyone’s been saying this. I don’t understand the Democrat strategy at all

    I don’t know what the actual numbers are on this, but I have to imagine the number of progressive voters who want more progressive policies far exceeds the number of Republicans that will vote Democrat. if anyone has a source to this data, I am interested in it.

    • echolalia@lemmy.ml
      564·
      14 days ago

      I don’t understand the Democrat strategy at all

      Someone else summed it up better than I can. The democratic party is doing exactly what it set out to do.

      Nitter link.

      They have no interest in furthering progressive policies so they don’t. That’s why the DNC chair is calling Bernie Sander’s critique of the party’s platform bullshit right now, instead of admitting he’s right.

      The system is as it does.

      • pjwestin@lemmy.world
        10·
        13 days ago

        I mean, realistically, they’d adopt leftist talking points and then abandon them after they won, like they did in 2008.

        • Eugene V. Debs' Ghost@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
          51·
          13 days ago

          And in 2020. I think I can count on one hand the policies he ran on getting put into place, and I lost track of how many some Boogeyman kept it from happening.

          But we always gave more weapons to Israel without question or congressional approval.

          • pjwestin@lemmy.world
            2·
            12 days ago

            Yes, and to be fair, i think his failure wasn’t due to a lack of desire. Biden is an institutionalist, past the point of logic and reason. My understanding is that they can procedurally remove the filibuster without a super majority at the beginning of each session, but he failed to consider eliminating it until late in his presidency. He also still refuses to entertain expanding the court; I know he couldn’t do it, but if they had any sense at all, they’d be running on it. He has to much, “respect,” for these institutions to do anything to change them, even as they crumble in the face of fascism.

          • futatorius@lemm.ee
            1·
            12 days ago

            without question or congressional approval

            Do you think Congress wouldn’t have approved it? The Democrats are mostly in AIPAC’s pockets, and the Republican would send them even more arms if they could, since they are openly, vocally pro-genocide.

            • Eugene V. Debs' Ghost@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
              1·
              12 days ago

              At the least, we could have had a shot at getting congress to stop sending arms. We did to Saudi Arabia based on what they were doing to Yemen, thanks to Bernie Sanders.

              Would they have? 90%, both parties are in the pocket of AIPAC. But to at least try to do something is better than sitting on our hands and going "welp, brown people are gonna die anyways, next dude will do it more.*

      • nutsack@lemmy.world
        51·
        14 days ago

        i think some of this is true, but I don’t think that they would be implementing all of the same policies. maybe all the things that they actually care about are common between the two, and that’s what he means.

      • kreskin@lemmy.world
        3·
        13 days ago

        That’s why the DNC chair is calling Bernie Sander’s critique of the party’s platform bullshit right now

        Holy crap. I read your link–the hubris of these DNC chairperson idiots to call names after losing so thoroughly. Its like they havent gotten the election results yet.

    • IndustryStandard@lemmy.world
      133·
      14 days ago

      Democrats called those Twitter users Russian trolls. They are now advocating to restrict social media so this cannot happen again.

      • nutsack@lemmy.world
        42·
        14 days ago

        They are now advocating to restrict social media so this cannot happen again.

        source?

        • IndustryStandard@lemmy.world
          154·
          13 days ago

          Saw a brazen example yesterday about how social media is the fault of it all. It was an article like this one https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/11/07/10-democratic-thinkers-on-what-the-party-needs-right-now-00187993

          What we’ve seen is that tens of millions have opted into a right-wing information bubble, largely online, that has grown to eclipse almost the entire traditional media infrastructure. Often, in that bubble, they’ve become the willing consumers of lies and outrage. Trump’s real misdeeds are whitewashed while audiences are encouraged to embrace cathartic rage against rotating groups of enemies — many of which seem to suspiciously mirror historically unpopular minorities. In this fractured information environment, clownish strongmen thrive, their meme-like public personas enrapturing otherwise disengaged voters — a trend we’ve seen across the globe, as social media increasingly displaces traditional media.

          Democrats need to recognize that it is impossible to win votes by improving voters’ lives, when your opponent has a national rage machine it can toggle on or off at will. We will see the next iteration of this game soon enough, when the right switches to praising the precise economy they blasted for years, likely spiking economic satisfaction through the roof. This capacity — dominating media and social media, and its power to shape public opinion — has been the obsessive focus of the right for years. Democrats have almost completely ignored these questions in favor of wonky policy and kitchen-table economics. If the party continues to ignore this problem, it courts oblivion. Democrats must find a way to make headway in modern media, and wrest more control of the national information environment from Trump and his band of thugs.

          My favorite line

          Let’s start with where Democrats should NOT go. We should not blame Vice President Kamala Harris or her campaign.

      • futatorius@lemm.ee
        1·
        12 days ago

        Any social-media platform that serves as a propaganda outlet for a hostile foreign power should be shut down, and its entire C-suite imprisoned for a long stretch.

        If you are consistently seeing the same messages on X as on RT, that’s a problem similar to that of broadcasters of hostile propaganda in wartime. You say First Amendment; I say Lord Haw Haw. They’re giving aid and comfort to the enemy.

        • IndustryStandard@lemmy.world
          1·
          12 days ago

          And normal media does not? The propaganda storm from newspapers in favor of Israel is beyond obvious. It is easy to explain why boomers love Israel and zoomers do not. One of them watches CNN or Fox.

    • Microw@lemm.ee
      2·
      13 days ago

      Well the actual numbers in the article above are misleading, as they talk in percentages of self-identified/registered voters. And what we have seen in this election is that there has been a big move of people who used to be ® to moderates (according to NBC on their election coverage). So it’s not making sense to compare percentage numbers.