this post was submitted on 19 Nov 2024
473 points (92.0% liked)

politics

19126 readers
2393 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.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] cultsuperstar@lemmy.world 34 points 5 days ago (5 children)

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.

[–] HawlSera@lemm.ee 26 points 4 days ago (1 children)

The problem is Republicans are heartless, but Democrats are spineless.

[–] bunchberry@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Democrats are heartless genocidal freaks, and hardly "spineless" they just don't care. It's a party of billionaires. I have no idea how you can unironically believe this ethos that they're all a bunch of bleeding hearts but are just too scared, quivering in their boots to act but they all mean well... apparently! No, they just never fight for those values you want them to fight for because their party does not represent those values, and pretending they do at this point... I have a bridge to sell you.

[–] HawlSera@lemm.ee 0 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I have no idea how you can unironically believe this ethos that they’re all a bunch of bleeding hearts but are just too scared, quivering in their boots to act but they all mean well… apparently

Because that's what they are, soft-willed bleeding hearts

[–] bunchberry@lemmy.world 0 points 3 days ago

No, they are not, they are incredibly wealthy millionaires whose campaigns are bought and paid for by billionaires. The Democrat party is actively supporting an ongoing holocaust, an industrial scale genocide and ethnic cleansing of millions of people from their homeland. The idea that these people are all secretly saints who are just too scared to act on it is such a completely ridiculous belief. They do not do moral things because they are not moral. They are not saints. They simply do not represent those values. You elect a party that openly believes X and then claim they don't do Y because they're too scared to do it. No, they don't do Y because they don't represent Y, they represent X. Democrats are by no means in any way "soft-willed." Whenever it comes to something they actually believe in, they are very good at rallying the votes to get it passed, such as when they are passing something in favor of the military industrial complex or the Israel lobby.

[–] nucleative@lemmy.world 12 points 4 days ago

Those kind of things have to be done in every single district and costs millions of dollars. Unless there's a probable chance, it's probably better to save the cash and use it for something that could get results in the future

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

I do have problems with Democrats simply handing power to fascists that have literally told us that they will end our Republic on day 1... However, at this point, I think recounting at the level you're talking about would be a waste of time. Even if it changed the results, Republicans wouldn't accept it.

[–] cultsuperstar@lemmy.world 1 points 4 days ago

I agree it's a waste of time now, but loke the Wednesday or Thursday afternoon election, they should've put the wheels in motion.

[–] nieminen@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago

I saw that Harris's campaign was fundraising to pay for a recount, is that not the case?

[–] bunchberry@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago

Democrats like losing because they only disagree on Republicans on like 2 issues and their funding is great when Republicans are in power.