555
this post was submitted on 23 Oct 2025
555 points (98.1% liked)
News
37121 readers
1757 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
All the people that didn't vote are partly responsible for this.
More than 1 in 3 people didn't vote.
Excuse me, but HOW THE FUCK do you LOSE INTEREST in politics?!
Is there too much lead in people's food or something?
I don't mean to be mean, but you need to talk to more people.
A lot of people in America simply do not believe they can change anything. Either because they don't know how, they've never shown up to a town hall, or because the only politics they hear about are from states and federal buildings they'll never live or work in, or because the only politics they hear about outside of Trump being a dipshit is some 2% thing that will do something which might lead to something else maybe, or because South Park taught them that caring about anything is cringe and, actually, the smartest people spend all day making fun of anyone with an idea.
I mean, let me ask another question: how the fuck do you lose interest in unions? And yet, the US lost interest a looong time ago.
It's a self-fulfilling prophesy. Things don't change because they don't participate. They don't participate because things didn't change.
90% of things people claim are the reason they don't vote could be changed if they fucking voted.
There is an element of people wanting their fast food and being displeased that civil rights took multiple decades to build.
That said, it isn't just their fault. The Democrats, generally, do not know how to be exciting. As much as people say they're not interested, it's not entirely true; there is a spark that has yet to be ignited.
Mostly they just want both sides to burn down and be replaced with something less horrible
But the right has enough supporters to win.
And at this point, short of the SCOTUS getting overthrown before the finish, ushering in fascism, all the politics are just arranging deckchairs on the Titanic.
A bit a of a childish all-or-nothing argument.
They can keep hoping for unattainable perfection. In the meantime, others are happy to take power.
Ohh screw that. We've got a bunch of sleepers in the left that they activate everytime the fucking race gets close, 90% of the left is complicit, selfish and owned. There's nothing going on in the governemnt right now that's ok and getting the left back in won't change shit.
We need accountability, checks and balances and the scotus needs guaranteed representation
childish my ass, keep hoping for things to just get better and stay as they are or go back a couple years and watch it collaps around you. That's myopic and a pipe dream
It's hard to rig an entire country, but it gets a lot easier when you really only have to rig 7 states. Then it gets even easier when all you have to do is program the voting machines to switch the votes in a single race. That's how we ended up with MILLIONS of ballots with a straight Democratic ticket, but with Trump at the top.
Do you know a single person that voted that way? Have you ever heard of a specific person who did? Has the media ever trotted out a single person, anywhere in the country, that voted that way? I've never heard of a single example, and yet within minutes of the race going to Trump, the Dems were proclaiming that he'd won "fair & square," before the dust had even settled to start looking at an investigation.
They just conceded the election security of the race from the outset, as if they'd decided in advance that they knew they'd lose by cheating, and they didn't know how to stop it, so they planned in advance to pretend it didn't happen, rather than explain their spectacular dereliction to the nation.
That race was the worst example of election fraud in American history, and it was done in the wide open, and the Dems did absolutely nothing to stop it or investigate it. This was the one race that Donald Trump absolutely had to win to stay out of prison. He has cheated at literally EVERYTHING in his entire life. Now we are supposed to believe that the one race where his life literally depends on winning, is the one, single instance in his entire life where he decided to play totally by the rules, and NOT cheat.
Please, others may be that stupid, but I'm not.
The Trump/ Putin/ Musk cabal rigged the election, and we ALL know it.
He won EVERY swing state? Puh-leeeze. I've got good Critical Thinking Skills, and they have been screeching in my brain ever since Election Day 2024.
"The overall turnout of eligible voters in the 2024 general election was 63.7%. This was lower than the 2020 record of 66.6% but higher than every other election year since at least 2004."
People did vote. Constantly blaming the small group of disillusioned voters is just weird.
"The small group" of more than one in three people that didn't vote.
Oh, you were actually aiming at 100% turnout. Well, that's just silly.
mandatory voting looks like a small price to pay for a (more) healthy democracy, Australia seems to be doing a lot better than the other British colonies right now
of course with the US, something like that would have to be combined with an extensive overhaul of public education (moving away from the "breed compliant factory workers"-goal), because healthy democracy also requires an educated population capable of knowing when they're being lied too
Argentina has mandatory voting and they have Milei. How healthy is that?
Argentina also votes on Sunday (a change way simpler than reforming education) and last elections they had 77% turnout. A lot of people simply don't participate in the democracy and there's no way around it. No one serious expect 100% people to vote and blames the 30% that doesn't for the outcomes.
No one expects 100%. Australia hovers around 90% turnout.
The rest below is me just working out some numbers, and isn't meant to convince anyone of anything.
There are ~236 million Americans citizens of voting age, of whom 73.6% (174 million) are registered to vote.
Of the 174 million registered voters, 155.2 million voted.
Of the 155.2m, 77.3m voted for Trump, 75.0m voted for Harris, and 2.9m voted for someone else. Not that this is how the system works, but more people voted for "someone other than Trump" than voted for him.
If 90% of the 174m voters had voted, that would have increased turnout by 1.4m voters. Not enough to change the popular vote, even if they were all for Harris (though depending on distribution there is at least some small chance the Electoral College votes would have changed enough).
If 90% (212.4m) of the 236m eligible voters had voted, that's 57.2m more votes to cast.
Pew Research says that polled non-voters went 44% for Trump, 40% for Harris. Applying that to our hypothetical 57.2m voters, it's 22.9m more for Harris and 25.2m more for Trump, bringing our totals to 102.5m Trump, 97.9m Harris, and a new block of 9.2m undecided. Note that two of those figures rounded up, so the apparent total is 212.6m rather than 212.4m.
The difference between Trump-Harris at this point is 4.6m votes. For Harris to tie/win the popular vote on the new undecided block, she would have needed 75% of them (Harris 6.9% vs. Trump 2.3m).
All of that hinges on polls reflecting reality, which lately is much easier to question (not based on misinformation, just with polling managing so often not matching the real vote results).
Thank you for going on this numbers journey with me.
90%, 80%, hell, even 70%. The general wisdom (not necessarily as true today) is that the higher the turnout in U.S. elections, the more likely the democrat is to win. That was the driver of the attached:
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/26/upshot/turnout-2024-election-trump-harris.html
NYT reported that data suggests that nonvoters would have given Trump a larger win.
Every non-voter in California is responsible for this /s
At some point we need to tell the "internet people who tell us who to blame" that hillary would have won in 2016 if not for the electoral college. At some point people just give up and that was the entire democratic party in 2024.
Not a single person in the democrats has a plan to fix democracy in the US and until they do the gerrymandering, electoral college and republican rule by minority will continue
Why? They won in 2020....
Did you all fucking forget or something?
Keep waiting for perfection, dumbass. Meanwhile, Republicans are destroying the country.
Cool story, would still have been nice to avoid the transgender genocide or killing health insurance.
I'm sure all the finger pointing at neighbors will help, instead of, you know, taking 5 minutes to understand how we got here and why its going to continue.
65 million don't vote. "But Trump" is not a legit platform to run on. You have to give voters something to vote for. Dems fucked up
That's exactly it. Dems keep throwing winnable elections and when they do get power they don't attempt to implement any reforms to make it harder for republicans to hold power both electorally and monetarily so their voters get poorer and disenfranchised and leave.
Yeah all that "reform" is really happening now, isn't it?
I mean Zorhan is a good sign things might finally be changing.
I can do both, don't worry.
That's EXACTLY what OP is doing.
All the people who did vote for the cheeto are responsible as well. And I think that was the point, marriage equality was on the ballot 14 years after the supreme court ruling
The point I think is that this was largely preventable from within our own ranks. Because we didn’t turn out, the minority was allowed to rule. Yes, the minority is responsible but they were a forgone conclusion. Inaction on the left allowed a preventable outcome to occur.
Democrats aren't "left."
And those who refused to vote against.