politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
She lost an unwinable election.
No time in American history has an incumbent quit mid-campaign and had their VP win.
No time in American history has a challenger survived an assassination attempt and lost.
No time in American history has the incumbent party won with both an economic downturn and an unpopular war.
That Harris nearly won is astounding. And since she's eligible to run, it's natural and sensible for her to be the default candidate.
Any 2028 contender who can't persuade dems that they'd be better than Harris shouldn't bother.
Anyone can cherry pick reasons one way or the other.
Trump was impeached.
He was found guilty of sexual misconduct (rape).
He was besties with a pedo and there's plenty of evidence he himself is one.
He attempted to impede a peaceful transfer of power.
She lost to convicted felon and sex pest who was already impeached. It's the fault of the American people as much as her own, but that's embarrassing regardless.
The thing is, there isn't supposed to be such a thing as a default candidate. We're supposed to have a primary race where candidates come out of nowhere and try to make the case for their platform. It's been a while since Americans got that luxury.
There is nothing saying that there shouldn't be either. For most of American history the public had no vote or direct say in presidential primaries.
There have been no real rules outside those the parties made up. Highly centralized nations, parties, and governments are always a problem. Doubly so when the parties make up their own rules.
I agree with your position that even the most popular candidate we've had in a long time -- Obama -- most likely would not have won that election, but we cannot know for sure. What we do know is that if you're up against stacked odds, then you need to maximize -- over-perform -- with the quality of your candidate.
I voted Harris. She was better than Trump in every conceivable way no doubt -- and yes, including on Gaza and most certainly Ukraine, Climate Change, LGBTQ+ rights, etc., -- but she was still just an average candidate. Can't have average against stacked odds of billionaires putting their weight on the scales of democracy.
The only persons I think could've won that is probably 2016 Bernie, or Michelle Obama.
If Harris wants to run again in the Democratic Primaries, then sure, go for it. I hope we have lots to choose from. But honestly, I'd rather Michelle run.
There has not been a statistically significant number of times that those things have happened in a presidential race to say whether they contribute to winning or losing. By that logic, no time in American history has somebody won an election against a senile, elderly, white man. Biden had to drop out of the race because it'd have created a logic paradox for either of them to defeat the other in the election.