this post was submitted on 16 Nov 2024
240 points (100.0% liked)

politics

22959 readers
3672 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

Kamala Harris’s presidential campaign failed to connect with low-income workers due to a perceived lack of listening, according to AFL-CIO, the largest federation of labor unions in the US.

While union members largely supported Harris, many low-income voters backed Trump, swayed by his messaging on economic insecurity.

Despite Biden’s pro-labor policies, including infrastructure investments, the AFL-CIO now faces challenges under a likely Trump presidency.

AFL-CIO emphasized labor unions’ resilience and commitment to fighting rollbacks while advancing organizing efforts.

With public approval for unions at a near 60-year high, the labor movement plans both defensive and offensive strategies to protect workers.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Nougat@fedia.io 25 points 5 months ago (2 children)

The larger whole either voted for fascism or couldn’t be bothered to vote against it. That’s the country we live in.

Was there some other “larger whole” you were referring to?

[–] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 18 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

yeah. a full 3/4ths of the country brought trump into office.

1/4th voted for him

2/4ths didnt give a damn about voting and let him in via their own inaction. and are just as responsible as the ones who voted for him.

So the voters are idiots.

That doesnt mean the democratic party arent fuckheads that got what they got cause they dont listen to what the people are screaming for.

[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 2 points 5 months ago

listen to what the people are screaming for.

Progressives promise "better for the American 99%".

People screaming for something no party could deliver or neither candidate could promise were confused. People who voted for the worst option imaginable for all factors including the impossibilities they were demanding are morons who deserve the leopards.

[–] Flocklesscrow@lemm.ee 5 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Sure, but you seem like you've already found answers that satisfy you. I'm no Sisyphus to push online boulders up a hill, but I will give you my two cents:

In essence, our perspectives differ on apportioning blame. You heap it on voters, while I would argue that, in a two party system, culpability lies with the party who failed to engage and motivate their electorate. That is quite literally their entire raison d'etre.

So it's easy to say we have ignorant, uneducated, and mean-spirited voters- and I wouldn't argue that those descriptors are valid in many cases. Which says nothing of decades of declining public education, massive media intervention, oligarch pie-thumbing, or unaddressed racial tensions dating back to the Civil War.

But if that is the clay that an artist is given to mold, then it is incumbent upon the ARTIST to rise to the occasion and find a way to produce a grand work. And if they are unable- if they cannot MAKE GOOD on the necessary products required for civil social union, then they are something worse than an enemy. Ineptitude (feigned or real) is simply no longer tolerable when the stakes are this high.

And the stakes ARE high, despite the constant flip-flopping of messaging from the current administration. We either face clear and present dangers to the Union, or we accept that decorum is MORE important to our leaders than efficacy and the hope of America remaining a going-concern. And if our Leadership chooses decorum over action, if etiquette is their only talent, then the harshest criticism is not only valid, but a requirement of every citizen who still hopes for the erstwhile fantasy of living in and being part of the better American Dream.

[–] Nougat@fedia.io 11 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I addressed this in my very first comment.

How do you appeal to fascists without being more fascist than the alternative?

It seems you’ve put all your effort into being condescending, and none into reading.

[–] Flocklesscrow@lemm.ee 5 points 5 months ago (1 children)

lol, ok.

If you take any counter argument as condescension it's probably a lot more about your own insecurities rather than the merits of the arguments. I would guess it's a pattern in your life. Best of luck to you.

[–] Nougat@fedia.io 7 points 5 months ago (1 children)

You opened with condescension.

That's a pretty reductionist take, eh? Did it make you feel better to vent? It's okay to vent. But also consider that you're only seeing a small part of a larger whole.

And then left "larger whole" dangling without definition, presumably in an attempt to bait me somehow.

I didn't play your game, and now you're mad.

[–] Flocklesscrow@lemm.ee 4 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Ok, whatever makes you feel better.

[–] Nougat@fedia.io 6 points 5 months ago

It seems you’ve put all your effort into being condescending, and none into reading.