It only depends on which network you watch.
Neither of these two candidates is suitable to lead, but depending on your network of choice, one is a messiah or a crazy person.
!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.
All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.
Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.
If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.
Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.
If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.
Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!
The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!
It only depends on which network you watch.
Neither of these two candidates is suitable to lead, but depending on your network of choice, one is a messiah or a crazy person.
It's because she wasn't a major contestant in the 2016 primary because people voted for better candidates. Also, she seems to be a 1:1 copy paste of Biden, which isn't good because people didn't like Biden half assing his promises in office and giving republicans an easy time making a counter campaign.
On top of that she basically told the uncommitted group to get bent, so that gives Trump more voter leverage similar to how he beat Hillary.
Biden was met with the same voter response because he was voted in explicitly to remove Trump. Otherwise he's known as being Obama's VP, of which even Obama said that he should retire afterwards because he was a centrist.
It's the same deal as 2016, where the DNC thinks campaigning on "lesser evil" is a viable strategy in order to retain their lobby money. If the RNC actually had more than two brain cells, they could easily win this election by having their candidates not act like insane asylum criminals.
I do agree that if Republicans ran different candidates, ones that had any semblance of ideas (even bad ones) instead of the tired personal attacks, they'd be formidable. They've dug themselves into a hole with the MAGA movement, even worse than they did with the Tea Party, and they seem committed to ride this one all the way off the cliff. This really is Harris' election to lose, and that seems to be a repeated pattern, which says a lot about the DNC. If they'd try to appeal more to the progressive side and stop trying to keep the centralists, I wonder if it would be a more of a sweep from people seeing something different finally.
Shes a woman, shes not white, and shes a democrat. Take your pick.
Because a huge percentages of white guys are huge stupid pieces of shit and there are a lot of us out there.
To give you an example there was a poll in the swing states that showed that guys preferred Trump 56 to 44 and women the reverse. Nationwide in the last go round white men across the entire nation showed near as big a split again 56 44. vs 51 to 47 in Biden's favor.
It's about bigotry.
Firstly Republicans have their guy so they are just going to pick at any weakness.
Second, all news media has consolidated and is owned by right wing rich fuckers. There is a wealth tax proposal and the ftc is super strong right now. So rich people are being cry babies
Third, there is a genocide happening right now with bullets paid for and made with USAs stamp on it. People are super critical against it
Fourth, left wing people always want better so you got to do something to succeed and if you do something we want you to do better since politician rarely go far enough. All the right wing people need to do to succeed is to obstruct and do nothing.
Fifth, Democrats are courting the middle. With the military policy, fracking, border wall, immigration and the tough on crime rhetoric Kamala sounds like a moderate Republican from 8-10 years ago. Leftists have no choice but to vote Harris or we run the chance of having Trump. While some of may vote third party because Harris doesn't go far enough if we do that in battle ground states we will be blamed again and we are strongly discouraging that. So the only voter base Kamala can pick up is republican never Trumpers and people in the middle and independents. Kamala's rhetoric reflects that.
Lastly Kamala is really untested. She has flip flopped and people hate that and hypocrisy. They can't push Trump nor give him more attention so they push Kamala. She lost her last presidential run really badly dropping out before the primaries. She only had one term as senator in a very safe district to get elected in as a democrat. As an Attorney General she ran 2 elections and only served 1.5 terms. Her district attorney stuff has been her best and most notable thing followed by her AG stint. But DA and AG stuff isn’t the same policy stuff as a politician. As senator she only passed one law having lots of words about other stuff though
People really really want to root for their side. If a comparison can be made in the slightest that your side is also doing something right, or that the other side is also doing something wrong, they can twist their viewpoint to see both sides as equals. You have to be flawless to prevent this. Your worst has to be better than their best.
Because we can't mock Trump and their supporters if Kamala fumbles. As long as she doesn't fumbled we can mock them with impunity
Because Trump
She is female.
She is black.
She is strong.
She is not a puppet.
She is EVERYTHING that the power structure fears, because she will be hard to control, and likely cost them a lot of money and power.
Why the fuck do you think? People hate women
Part of the issue is the push by many left-wing voters to get actually progressive politics on the table after years of alternating between regressives and complacent centrists* that prefer making small concessions to the right over big steps to the left. They don't want another presidency marked by lukewarm promises kept poorly. They're tallying up all the ways in which Harris still isn't as good as she ough to be.
For Trumpers, he is good enough. He is everything they want: A public role model enabling them to be an absolutely shameless asshat.
The complexity arises when people advocate voting for a third party instead. By and large, no third party has the traction to beat the Republicans. You'd need to get the entire Dem voterbase and then some. If that fails, you've split the non-Rep voterbase and the enabling asshat gets the plurality. On the other hand, there's a risk that leaning too far left in the attempt to keep the progressive voters may lose the centrist* voters, which is a gamble whether that will end up a net positive. Harris has a tough job: walking a political tightrope, particularly if it's consistently being tugged at by people.
And there are good reasons to tug on that rope. You'll find some in these comments: Settling for "Good enough" doesn't help getting actual change. For the ultra-rich, on the other hand, progressive policies are a detriment, so they'll want to tug it the other way. The left doesn't want to cede ground and keeps pulling. The centrists* that don't like Trump but also fear dramatic change pull her to the other side again. The "centrists"** pull just to see her fall.
And that's exciting! That's an actual conflict of ideologies! That's her having to work for her voters' approval! You'll see the complaints flying left and right, see her try to keep an ever-shifting balance, see drama and tension! People love drama and tension. Corporate media loves drama and tension because it gets attention, clicks, revenue, all that. "Assholes still support Asshole" just isn't as interesting as " criticises Kamala for , calls her ".
Also, splitting the Dem voterbase serves the corporate executives and shareholders that want the right-wing tax breaks and erosion of worker protections because it makes them even richer. That's probably not a coincidence.
*Centrist as in "I don't want things to radically change", not as in "I think both parties are equally bad, so I'll sow dissent in the Dem voterbase, pretend that I'm not helping Trump with that and get to feel superior to both".
** The latter group of the above footnote. It doesn't really matter whether they're intentional agents of disunity or idealists that care more about voting with their heart than the actual outcome. The result is the same: At best, they've achieved nothing. At worst, they've contributed to Trump's victory.
What I didn't see in the reactions yet is that a lot of Americans do not want any government involvement at all. Save for things that are supposedly written down in the Bible. The Republican party is providing just that, anti-establishment, anti-intellectual and don't forget: anti-minority. Just people being tough and dare to support the party who will turn the clock back to when times were perceived to be better. Same sentiment is present in Europe by the way, like it was a century ago.