this post was submitted on 10 Nov 2024
68 points (89.5% liked)

politics

19104 readers
2524 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
outrageousmatter@lemmy.world
aidan@lemmy.world
jordanlund@lemmy.world
HLMenckenFan@lemmy.world
little_cow@lemmy.world
68
Van Jones on Trump win: ‘It turned out we were the idiots’ (thehill.com)
submitted 1 week ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world
17 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Summary

CNN analyst Van Jones attributed Vice President Kamala Harris’s loss to Donald Trump in the presidential election to the Democrats’ ineffective media strategy.

Jones argued that while Democrats focused on traditional campaigning, Republicans built a powerful alternative media ecosystem, leveraging podcasts, online shows, and platforms like X to reach key voter demographics, especially young men.

Trump bypassed mainstream outlets, appearing on popular programs such as Joe Rogan’s podcast, which helped him dominate swing states.

top 17 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz 55 points 1 week ago (2 children)

My take from the outside (i.e. not American), so hopefully I can be objective.

American politics and therefore the American electorate appears almost entirely tribal: you're either on the red or the blue team (or a third party team that is sufficiently small to ignore.)

The swing states just happen to be states where the balance between red and blue is pretty even, allowing outsized impact of relatively minor variances in voter turnout.

Tribalism within the red team appears far far stronger than within the blue team. Strong enough that anti-democratic actions that support the team are acceptable; e.g. voter suppression, gerrymandering, failing to adjust the electoral college based on asymmetric population growth.

The states' electoral systems are corrupted not by anti-democratic actions, but because such actions are possible. The crisis is that the system that was required when states had to send representatives in person by rail or horse to the capital is obsolete.

TL;DR: y'all need some constitutional amendment and electoral reform.

[–] Rhaedas@fedia.io 20 points 1 week ago (2 children)

There's other stuff too, but you got a large part of it. It is sports politics more than anything else, and the more left side has all sorts of fractures within that interferes with cooperation while the right side locks in step when called to act.

I will say that the US doesn't have a monopoly on such behavior. Watching politics in Europe there's some commonality of political games as well, the teams are just made up differently and play with different rules. Similar frustration from the fans though when important issues come up and things get stupid.

[–] adespoton@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 week ago

The US has political baseball where the blue team is a collection of players with different strategies who want to play the game in different ways.

Internationally, a lot of countries play cricket.

Some countries play Go.

[–] deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz 6 points 1 week ago

... the US doesn’t have a monopoly on such behavior.

Of course! Though I can't think of another democratic country that quite as readily and enthusiastically wear political affiliations on their sleeve (literally).

It's a dedication to a team that I personally only experience in terms of the dominant sports.

[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 15 points 1 week ago

TL;DR: y’all need some constitutional amendment and electoral reform.

Best I can do is fascism and open corruption.

[–] eran_morad@lemmy.world 29 points 1 week ago (4 children)

I'm not buying it. He won because the electorate specifically wants a vandal to wreck shit instead of an establishment figure who also happens to be a woman. Clearly, there are additional factors, but that's mainly it.

[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 22 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

Completely disagree. I know tons of conservatives that lovingly voted for trump, or voted for him "for the country." I've never even met a single rebel voter.

Small sample size, but still.

The election was a popularity contest, people live in their phone bubbles, and Democrats campaigned like its the 1950s. People voted for Trump thinking he's a hero, eyes wide open, because that's what their information environment is.

Hotter take, but the genie is out of the bottle, and Dems are going to keep losing until they start campaigning like influencer con artists. Fight fire with fire.

If they don't like it? Tough. They should have regulated social media when they had the chance instead of taking their money.

[–] MagicShel@lemmy.zip 7 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I remember hearing how great Kamala's TikTok presence was. It's hard to say, though, when these services all push you into a bubble. I saw barely any pro-trump messaging online. Partly because I'd rather not be online than watch that bullshit, but also because it all got filtered to the "other side of TikTok."

[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago

I saw barely any pro-trump messaging online. Partly because I’d rather not be online than watch that bullshit, but also because it all got filtered to the “other side of TikTok.”

Bingo.

Even Lemmy is (generally) a massive US left bubble, without any criticism its users honestly need to hear. And I fear the whole idea of the fediverse is going to reinforce that going forward.

[–] lastunusedusername2@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 week ago

Ok but anyone who's ever heard Trump say anything at all and still thinks he's a good choice is mentally disabled.

[–] someguy3@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago

"It's the economy, stupid".

[–] cdf12345@lemm.ee 2 points 1 week ago

It can be both.

[–] heavy@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 week ago

I think Van Jones has a point here, but you're not wrong either. It's a big mess and we're still pulling apart the knots, but for sure the Media ecosystem is part of our reality.

[–] scarabine@lemmynsfw.com 17 points 1 week ago

Ever wonder about how the rallies were really low attendance but Kamala’s were bumping? What if you had two entire social networks that were at a fever pitch for months, non stop? How about three? Just three 24/7 online rallies, unending, with most of America logged on and posting every single day?

[–] dhork@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago (1 children)

This campaign raised a billion dollars, and pissed it all away.

[–] EmpireInDecay@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 week ago

And then some $5m in debt

[–] someguy3@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I'm not sure I would call it media. It's a pretty vast, right wing conspiracy theory echo chamber. The more mainstream part of it is Fox and podcasts. It isn't just advertising and talking on podcasts. It's the mass conspiracy theory, misinformation, disinformation, and radicalization distributed on Facebook, telegram, Xhitter, etc. I'm even getting "they want you to eat bugs" ads on YouTube from who knows.