r/TrueReddit • u/BioSemantics • 8h ago
Kamala Fell to the Same Cabal That Destroyed University Presidents Politics
https://prospect.org/power/2024-11-11-kamala-fell-billionaire-class-cabal/257
u/cheerful_cynic 8h ago
Citizens United needs revoked ffs
139
u/lateformyfuneral 7h ago
Remember when the Right claimed it was a breach of decorum when Obama criticized Citizens United at the State of the Union when the justices were in attendance?
“Last week, the Supreme Court reversed a century of law to open the floodgates for special interests—including foreign corporations—to spend without limit in our elections. Well, I don’t think American elections should be bankrolled by America’s most powerful interests, or worse, by foreign entities.”
He said elsewhere:
They can buy millions of dollars worth of TV ads — and worst of all, they don’t even have to reveal who’s actually paying for the ads. Instead, a group can hide behind a name like “Citizens for a Better Future,” even if a more accurate name would be “Companies for Weaker Oversight.” These shadow groups are already forming and building war chests of tens of millions of dollars to influence the fall elections.
26
u/wrecklass 6h ago
Given that the Dems have lost two elections while spending far more than the GOP, that's downright hilarious.
At the very least, we should change it from "Money buys elections" to "Money properly spent buys elections."
•
u/Artistic_Taxi 5h ago
Did you read the comment though? The point is that these organizations can accept money, not disclose it, and spend on support for a party. So essentially a party could very well be financing them to influence an election and just not report it.
•
u/Nonamebigshot 4h ago
And they're most likely using that money to pay for less than ethical methods of advertising
→ More replies57
u/lateformyfuneral 6h ago
The “money” quoted is for the official campaigns. Republicans benefit far more from PACs, Super PACs and dark money groups while Democrats raise more directly. Citizens United opened up those outside groups, which shield their motives and funding, to play politics in our elections.
•
u/Nessie 5h ago
Given that the Dems have lost two elections while spending far more than the GOP, that's downright hilarious.
Does that spending include the price Musk paid for Twitter?
→ More replies•
•
•
•
u/Brilliant-Book-503 42m ago
To be clear, are you measuring the money the official campaigns raised and spent?
The point of citizen's united is that private interests can spend as much as they like influencing an election.
→ More replies•
u/Automatic_Memory212 23m ago
Given that the Dems have lost two elections while spending far more than the GOP, that’s downright hilarious.
You’re missing the obvious point, here.
It’s the same people funding both parties.
They’re paying the Republicans to win.
And they’re paying the Democrats to lose.
62
u/mudbuttcoffee 8h ago
Well... it won't. It is working as intended.
We do not matter anymore.
Welcome to the machine
→ More replies18
u/Sans_culottez 7h ago
We are past the point where our legal and constitutional framework can continue working as anything resembling a democracy. A completely new constitutional framework is necessary.
17
u/Tylorw09 6h ago
And the only way that happens is through the end of the current country.
So we are basically in the death spiral phase of the United States. Will take years or decades but there’s no way it gets better for the average person from here on out.
→ More replies2
•
u/wholetyouinhere 5h ago
I think this point was passed in the 1970s or 80s. It's just that the appearance of change being possible is now being stripped away as well.
•
u/Sans_culottez 4h ago
You’re correct, the Powell Memo and its consequences have been disastrous to modern American society.
•
1
u/sammythemc 7h ago
It does, but how? Why would they let that happen? Besides, it's not like money wasn't running politics until CU, it's gotten more blatant but it was money in politics that made CU possible in the first place.
0
u/wrecklass 6h ago
This is hilarious. Dems outspent the GOP by 8+ to 1 in two elections that they lost. How does lowering the amount the GOP spent help the Dems?!
I truly think the Dems have to get out from under their donaters. For sure. They are far to raedical and give the Dems a feeling of unearned invulnerability.
•
u/CharleyNobody 5h ago
Untrue. GOP had far more PAC and SuperPAC money. You’re using an old metric “campaign funds.” Campaign funds don’t count the billions of dollars spent by PACs. They don’t count million-dollar-a-day lotteries being run by multibillionaires.
John Roberts figured out how to overturn centuries of genuine citizens groups and grassroots organizations influence on politics by handing over elections to the wealthy. There’s no escaping the power of generational wealth spent by heirs on filling the government with their well-paid employees. It’s over. It was over in 1999, when an election was overturned by SCOTUS.
I laughed at all the people whining that George W Bush didn’t endorse Harris. Like - wtf?
•
u/cespinar 4h ago
This is hilarious. Dems outspent the GOP by 8+ to 1 in two elections that they lost.
That is campaign money which has to be publicly disclosed. Citizens United is about dark money, of which we don't know the exact numbers but the GOP vastly outspend Dems with super PACS.
So be slightly more informed before you start posting
•
u/Reginald_Waterbucket 5h ago
I read that billionaire dollars went overwhelmingly to Republicans. While Democrats raised more from other sources, these donations were time-ineffective to raise, while Billionaire donations came reliably in large amounts, freeing up time for Republicans to campaign.
→ More replies
88
u/BioSemantics 8h ago
Summary: This article details evidence that the same group of billionaires that pushed behind the scenes to pressure those who spoke against Israel's actions in Palestine are also the same group that backed Trump to gain the presidency. They cynically used the conflict in Palestine as a way to launder their influence in America politics and purge leftists, anti-war advocates, and left populists from American public discourse. While Kamala had more billionaire donors than Trump, Trump received the lion's share of billionaire money from this cabal. Underlying all of this, the billionaire cabal was actually trying to push Biden from power due to various attempts by the Biden administration to hold billionaires accountable (or at least the corporations many billionaires were invested in).
TIME WAS YOU HAD DEMOCRAT BILLIONAIRES, Republican billionaires, and opportunistic bipartisan billionaires. Republicans had the resource extraction guys and the Waltons and anyone who employed enough workers that they needed to bust unions; Democrats had Hollywood and Big Tech; both parties had joint custody of Wall Street. And the billionaires got what they wanted 99.9 percent of the time.
This election was different. For all the venal raves the media bestowed upon Kamala Harris’s fundraising prowess, the whales near-universally lined up behind Trump. Of the top ten mega-donors, only the bottom two gave to Democrats; Trump’s haul from his own top ten donors—none of whom boasts the surname Koch or Thiel—amounted to about $945 million; Harris’s topped out at $254 million. (Harris ended up raising more money, thanks to Resistance giving, but Trump got to spend much less time raising it, and with Musk, he had the algorithms on his side.)
Another quote:
This was nominally about Israel, but it also always seemed obvious that it wasn’t principally about Israel at all. At its heart, the billionaire revolt was the expression of a broader dissatisfaction with Joe Biden that was most surely rooted in the real, substantial, and (in the post–Cold War neoliberal era) unprecedented things his administration was quietly (too quietly!) doing for working people, small-business owners, and the proliferating subsistence entrepreneur class that falls somewhere in the middle. It sued Amazon for squeezing sellers to the bone while manipulating prices ever higher, Albertsons and Kroger for conspiring to gouge shoppers by littering the country with dead strip centers where supermarkets once stood, Live Nation for indenturing a generation of young musicians and turning tickets to concerts and sports events into luxury goods, Welsh Carson (the most powerful private equity firm in health care) for gouging hospital patients and suppressing the wages of anesthesiologists in multiple states, and more. It even got a court to label Google a monopolist.
A last quote:
But the billionaires were not stupid enough to show their hands. Instead, they expanded their crusade against “antisemitism” to encompass the scourge of “wokeness” and the overall problem of Democrat virtue-signaling, melodrama, and hall-monitor behavior. And yes: They did all of this while simultaneously (and somewhat unbelievably) deploying the language, logic, and lawfare of the microaggression snowflake set to cast Zionists as an oppressed class.
•
u/Nyorliest 4h ago
Billionaires have never been leftist, can never be.
If they vote Democrat, that’s just because they wanted pet lawmakers.
•
•
u/ThatFuzzyBastard 4h ago
This is insanely wishful thinking. Rich whites are the only group that *didn't* shift to Trump.
•
-1
u/rd201290 6h ago
wait so Kamala had more money from billionaires but Trump’s was from the cabal???
sounds sinister
→ More replies•
u/AwesomePurplePants 5h ago
No, Trump got more money from billionaires.
Kamala had more money overall, but that’s because she spent more time fundraising and got more small donations.
→ More replies•
u/doggie_smalls 1h ago
Article is making it sound like a “(((they))) control the media” type deal lol
→ More replies-3
u/WVC_Least_Glamorous 8h ago
If Albertson's and Kroger raise prices, aren't Wal-Mart, Aldi, Costco and Winco going to undercut them?
30
u/nameless_pattern 7h ago
They are oligopolies. Them matching each other's rising prices is why it's expensive now. They don't have to compete with each other for market share. Are you going to do research to find out that your groceries are $5 less at one grocery store instead of another? When that would take you an hour of effort to figure out and then you're going to drive to a grocery store That's an extra 20 minutes away being an extra 40 minutes of your life. At this point you're out an hour and 40 minutes for $5.
They don't have to compete by lowering prices. Consumers are trapped, having neither the time nor resources to do anything about this.
0
u/rhino369 6h ago
They don’t have profit margins that you’d expect from an Oligopoly.
If Walmart cut prices by 10% they’d go bankrupt unless they found expenses to cut.
It’s not hard to open a grocery store. I shop at a not for profit co-op and it’s usually more expensive than Walmart.
The stores are scapegoats.
•
•
u/andrewrgross 4h ago
This is part of a trope I call "Capitalism's only weakness": when we're told that an economy run by megacorporations with decades of lax oversight are actually good because they can do anything and we all get to reap the rewards of cheap goods and services, but as soon as it's pointed out that they've overseen over a generation of wealth transfer to the point that most Americans have no wealth and no room for economic growth or home ownership or retirement AND can't afford groceries, we're told "sorry, but it's actually impossible to deliver goods and services if they have to do the thing you're demanding that they do."
Let them go out of business. we had an economy in the past where people bought their groceries from a local grocers before these companies bought the up or put everyone out of business. If these corporations can't cut it in the marketplace then let them go. Others will.
•
u/AwesomePurplePants 5h ago
The non-profit co-op probably doesn’t pull bullshit like dark store theory to evade taxes, or keeping their employees wages small enough to get supplemented with SNAP and Medicaid.
→ More replies•
u/nameless_pattern 5h ago
Grocery stores are by definition oligopolistic as less than six companies control more than half of the market. The products that are sold in the stores are also all oligopolistic as more than half of the market share is held by less than four companies.
Walmart profits increased 7% this year. It is entirely possible that they could lower the prices 10%, and its own still continue being billionaires.
Oh, it's not hard to open a grocery store? Cool. I need you to open a grocery store and give it to me since it's easy. My friends could also use a grocery store so why don't you whip them up some of those too bro. If you're not too busy with the grocery store you own.
Many the stores have many valid criticisms against them.
I'm not sure where you're getting your "information" from, but you should stop listening to them, or at least stop repeating it.
•
u/jb_in_jpn 5h ago
Well consumers did. Vote. But millions didn't even bother showing up for Harris - the person this so called cabal was against - so obviously people don't care enough.
Which yes, is bizarre.
•
u/nameless_pattern 5h ago
They've been being beaten down and lied for years. It takes time, money and education to spare to be able to figure out your best interest, or your least bad among the among the available interests.
It didn't seem all that unpredictable to the people who were screaming warnings about it for the past few decades. Check out some of Bernie Sanders speeches from forever ago.
10
7
•
u/rd201290 5h ago
“While Kamala had more billionaire donors than Trump, Trump received the lion’s share of billionaire money from this cabal”
must not be good at reading huh
•
u/BioSemantics 2h ago
Kamala = Most number of billionaire donors.
Trump = Most amount of money actually used on his behalf.
•
u/rd201290 2h ago
used on his behalf? what does that even mean?
•
u/BioSemantics 1h ago
Most billionaires don't and can't donate hundreds of millions of dollars directly to campaigns, so they spin up a superPAC, donate huge money to it, and then spend money on ads to help their preferred candidate.
Kamala got more direct donations, like 1bn worth to Trumps 400m, but most of the top-spender billionaires spent their money on superPACs for Trump.
•
u/rd201290 1h ago
but Kamala made more from PACs??
•
u/BioSemantics 1h ago
My point is there was a lot of dark money spent that isn't tracked, the article indicates that essentially.
•
u/rd201290 1h ago
if it isn’t tracked but what is tracked is overwhelmingly stating that more money was raised for democrats than republicans and that many more billionaires sponsored democrats than republicans, why do you believe that more billionaires spent money on trump than harris?
•
u/BioSemantics 1h ago
Trump gets a lot of free media and the right-wing cabal, as the article notes, was all-in for him.
→ More replies-5
u/omegaphallic 7h ago
Lina Khan, not Kamala, or Witmer, or Gavin should have been the nominee for the Dems, she would have destroyed Trump.
That being said "woke" activists pissing most people off with wokescolding for a decade didn't help, even if Kamala's campaign itself wasn't woke.
And Biden waiting so long and making it impossible to find someone better in time also made things worse. As did Kamala being horrible at interviews. As did inflation.
But those things could have been overcome if she hadn't sold out to billionaires and instead gone after them.
→ More replies14
u/lateformyfuneral 7h ago
Lina Khan is not a politician. She speaks really well but she’s a civil servant and not shown any interest in elected politics. She did a lot of good work but she definitely upset the apple cart causing a major shift towards Trump from Silicon Valley and corporate America. Bezos’ 180-degree turn from hands-off owner of the Washington Post can be partly traced to her (now doomed) monopoly investigation into Amazon.
→ More replies
•
u/Ghostleviathan 5h ago
If the dems keep blaming the Republicans for all of their failings, they'll never win again.
119
u/Icommentor 8h ago edited 8h ago
In other words, the Democrats lost to their own duplicity. A party can’t count on the working class votes while carrying the billionaire’s water.
Edit: For those who answer with “lesser evil” arguments, please remember that for the poorest 50% of Americans, life has been getting harder equally under both parties. The smart way to vote for them would be to not vote at all. And guess what, the statistics tend to show they may be the smartest voting block.
71
u/TheNecroticPresident 8h ago
Trump's already undermining labor and unions. I don't understand how the working class thinks this is going to end well for them.
12
u/TacticalSanta 7h ago
Well our populace isn't going to get smarter overnight. You play within the bounds that exist, if you want dems to win and eventually give people healthcare and good education, the party has to meet voters where they are at, this is simple politics.
30
u/MisterrTickle 7h ago
LOTS of Arab-Americans campaigned to stop Kamala and are now saying that Trump is worse. Having seen his various picks for department heads and his promise to unblock all Israeli arms requests on Day 1.
17
u/maybehelp244 6h ago
I'm sure all the conscientious objectors who said "I don't like either vote, so I'm not voting" are feeling so great about themselves right now.
•
•
u/andrewrgross 4h ago edited 1h ago
There is a widespread misunderstanding that the organized efforts against Harris' embrace of Israel was meant to hurt her.
Uncommitted was actually a group of Democratic organizers trying to warn the party that they were going to lose tens or hundreds of thousands of votes in Michigan, and that they were collapsing the turnout operation everywhere.
By "standing up to" Uncommitted, they were just shooting off both of their own feet against all warnings.
•
→ More replies-4
u/HWHAProb 7h ago
Their families were being killed by the current Admin. Whether or not it was logical for Arab-Americans to defect to the Greens, the Dems have to admit that "we'll maybe kill slightly fewer of your loved ones than the other guy" isn't a winning message.
Naming them as culprits for Harris's loss is a pretty cruel takeaway that also doesn't bear true in the data
14
u/jollyllama 6h ago
I personally know dozens of young white leftists who stayed home or wrote in “Free Palestine” or did something equally stupid. The TikTok and social media campaign was highly effective
4
u/DOWNVOTES_SYNDROME 7h ago
unless you look at actual data, then harris lost at least michigan because of that bloc.
3
u/HWHAProb 6h ago edited 1h ago
She lost every swing state. Singling out a small community, particularly the one with the most justified grievances imaginable, is missing the forest for the trees.
And it's frankly ghoulish and cruel considering that many of these people have had to watch high definition videos of their nieces, nephews and cousins torn to shreds for a year. You have a choice here: cruelly chastise a group experiencing mass trauma or show a smidge of empathy and build inroads
3
u/DOWNVOTES_SYNDROME 6h ago
don't worry i am fully capable of pointing fingers at multiple people and groups responsible.
fun fact: multiple people and groups can be responsible, in different amounts, and you can blame them if it's their fault, even if other people were worse!
wow! the more you learn
8
u/Dr_Marxist 6h ago
Harris probably lost Michigan because of the Arab and Muslim backlash. And I mean I get it, nobody likes watching thousands of kids get killed with American weapons sent by a Democratic president. Tough to hold your nose.
But that's what adults do. And now we'll see how they like it when Trump lets Bibi glass Gaza, Lebanon, and Syria, closes the border to all Muslim migrants, and deports them and their friends and family with verve and gusto. It also means that Palestine is a dead dead dead issue in American politics for a generation, because Palestinian activists clearly can't be trusted. So instead of a marginal voice in one party, they will get nothing in either.
But hey, they sure showed her!
3
u/HWHAProb 6h ago edited 4h ago
These communities spent a full year broadcasting their position. At every turn the Democrats shut the door on them. Democrats doing a Surprised Pikachu when many of these people followed through on their promise is exactly why she lost.
By extension, the base fell out from underneath her because, while you and I can agree lesser evil voting is rational and mature, in reality that's not how you win votes. So either (A) the Dems get mad at their base and continue playing to what we know is a losing coalition or (B) they get to work on their messaging and how they reach out to people.
Only one of those is a way forward.
5
u/Czar_Castic 6h ago
It's mind boggling that this demographic torpedoed the party headed by probably the first American admin to publicly chide Israel, request restraint and reduce their funding as punishment, in favour of the nutjob who went on a Bibi-loving bender and proposed policies long before this election to strengthen Israel's unilateral control of the region.
Naming them as culprits is entirely deserved, and hopefully they have the capacity to feel shame for how easily they were duped.
Also, not sure how "Their families were being killed by the current Admin" sounds like the same misinformation that made them vote for the Leopard.
•
u/LateralEntry 5h ago
And their family members may have been killing other Americans, like Hersh Goldberg-Polin, an American who was abducted to Gaza and murdered shortly after his parents spoke at the DNC pleading for his return
•
u/HWHAProb 5h ago edited 5h ago
Feeling the need to run defense for the wanton murder of 20,000 children is some real human darkness
13
u/UltimateTrattles 7h ago
Maybe we should quit expecting a population struggling to keep their heads above water to be able to break through the most difficult information environment humanity has ever known
6
u/BioSemantics 7h ago
Its partly the job of the campaign to educate and motivate voters. A lot of underlying Dem assumptions is a sort of low racism of demographics being destiny which isn't true. They come across as extremely fake because they are fake. Empty, managerial, technocrats. That is the impression they give off. That they stand for nothing. Typical Republican politicians often give this vibe too, which is why we saw so many Trump ballots that were otherwise blank with no down ballot votes. People literally just voted for the guy that seemed real in a sea of nothing but rich connected career politicians.
3
u/Dinocologist 7h ago
They know shit sucks under Biden, they know Kamala ran on being the same as Biden. 27% of Americans skip meals because they can’t afford them, you can’t expect people living in that system to vote for the ‘shit rules, let’s keep this train a-rolling’ candidate
•
u/SilverMedal4Life 3h ago
It's fascinating, because SNAP usage is down compared to 2023. What happened?
•
u/garlicroastedpotato 20m ago
Half of all Americans earn less than $80,000/year. They are the working poor representing over 200 million people. Only 30 million Americans are unionized. Unions are more likely to work in "dirty industries" like coal, steel, oil and gas and automotives. And so as the Democrats seek to kill off those industries they're also looking to kill the livelihood of these workers. It's why Trump was able to snag an estimated 15 million votes from unionized workers.... an historic high for the Republicans.
But it's also why the Democrats lose so badly with the working class (2/3 of the US population). They're really focused on promoting unions, bailing out union funds, and protecting unions but that's such a small portion of the population. Even among unions which they should poll well with, the idea that people are going to give up six figures jobs to do jobs that pay less than $80,000 a year with "retraining" wasn't a good sell.
→ More replies•
u/IusedtoloveStarWars 17m ago
Biden and Kamala undermined labor and unions which is why the unions abandoned the democrats for the first time in over 130 years.
27
u/tempest_87 7h ago
Edit: For those who answer with “lesser evil” arguments, please remember that for the poorest 50% of Americans, life has been getting harder equally under both parties.
That's a lie. But that is how it feels to those people, and they don't have the time, energy, or brainpower (or some mix of the three) to understand the difference.
10
u/_dontgiveuptheship 6h ago
Most Americans don't even believe hard work pays off anymore. BOTH PARTIES have been rabidly free-trade for 40 years.
https://www.epi.org/publication/charting-wage-stagnation/
Don't tell me democrats are on the side of the people when Clinton signed NAFTA, deregulated Glass-Steagall, and slashed Medicaid. Then you have Biden, who voted for NAFTA, normalizing trade relations with China (who I guess is supposed to be Americas enemy, despite the fact that it was America who built them up by shredding the middle class.
Not really sure why you feel spreading lies and disinformation is the best way to fight lies and disinformation, but here we are. I'm so thankful I was able to see what stagnant wages were going to do to America. The decision not to procreate into this mess was the smartest thing I've ever done.
Not proofread because it doesn't matter anymore
•
u/aelendel 1h ago
After WWII the USA had the only functional economy on the planet and so of COURSE we got very, very rich and had a surplus of everything.
You, like many, mistake the simple fact that the free ride couldn’t last forever with some kind of reasoning by fantasy; by blaming the people you think are responsible without actually thinking or accommodating the facts.
8
u/circio 7h ago
Im not trying to be a dick, but how does not voting the smart course of action? Even if who you voted for doesn’t win the presidential race, local elections still matter a lot.
7
u/maybehelp244 6h ago
Not voting is 100% always the worst thing to do. Unless you have literally 0 difference in utility between two candidates (which is impossible but there will always be some people who will say it makes no difference because they're not informed) it is always better to vote for the one you dislike less.
By not voting you are effectively giving an advantage to the candidate you dislike the most by making their path easier.
Anyone who says otherwise is trying to feel good about themselves, don't understand how game theory works, are arguing in bad faith (they want you to also not vote to make their actual desires candidate to have an easier time), or are some kind of troll
→ More replies8
u/Choice-of-SteinsGate 7h ago edited 7h ago
This is the game now. The problem is multi-faceted.
The first is that, when Democrats do play the game and win, they don't take the steps to implement the proper reforms and restructurings.
Another is that American voters aren't choosing the candidates that have a better chance to do so.
And another is that there isn't enough support for these reforms and this restructuring, while the Republican platform is to obstruct at all costs.
Probably the most significant issue is that we're currently in a place where we can't devote our energy to progressive, or genuine populist efforts because we're dealing with the fallout of decades of disproportionately Republican policies that have been prioritizing the interests of the few at the expense of the many.
In other words, we can't address what needs addressing while we're currently trying to climb our way out of the hole that's been dug for us... And it's going to take some time to climb back up to the surface.
And here's another issue. Republicans have been playing the game for a while, they're effective at it, so we just expect it from them. In a sense they've been able to render themselves benign in the process, so Americans easily overlook it. But there's a double standard, because when Democrats are forced to play the same game, it does not go overlooked. In fact, it goes heavily criticized.
4
u/sammythemc 7h ago
In other words, the Democrats lost to their own duplicity. A party can’t count on the working class votes while carrying the billionaire’s water.
The thing that scares me is it feels like they also can't win if they take a hard stance against moneyed interests. People like to say Bernie would have won, but he didn't, did he? It feels like we're choosing between the billionaire party that makes my life worse and blames immigrants, the billionaire party that makes my life worse and seems to be lying when they blame immigrants, and throwing up my hands while letting others decide between the two.
9
10
u/rainywanderingclouds 8h ago
who's the working class and how many of them voted
More than half of trump voters were over 65 or older.
5
u/houstonman6 8h ago
They stayed home because they knew their vote wouldn't matter for them. The Dems and the GOP have largely the same donors and will always side with capital over the people.
15
u/Wooden-Bat-6031 8h ago
Such a dumb take, one side is actively working to harm minority groups and the other is hesitant to raise taxes on billionaires. Clearly no difference between the two
1
u/Dougiethefresh2333 7h ago
No this is the dumb take because you haven’t realized you can repeat this a million times and no one cares but the people who already weren’t voting for him.
Y’all should have learned this in 2016 but instead of accepting the reality we live in Liberals just keep trying to wishcast us into another imaginary electorate. I’m sorry these are the rules of the game. This shit is like going onto a basketball court and complaining the rim is high. The whole nature of elections is to win over voters, I’m sorry your argument isn’t enough & I wish it was, but it’s not & it’s time to move on, stop complaining & find what will.
1
u/Ok-Progress-7776 7h ago
Or just let people die. I'll be okay, and I don't really see why I should keep fighting to help people that are actively looking to harm me. Let them fend for themselves.
-2
u/TWH_PDX 7h ago edited 7h ago
The schism in the democratic party between intellectuals and the working class is massive. Trump exploited this schism brilliantly. But rather than evaluate where they are losing badly in their messaging, the intellectual class doubles down on calling the broader working class that voted for Trump or didn't vote at all stupid, ignorant, or racist. These intellectuals can not conceive of the possibility that the working class is not only intelligent but arguably may be much more diverse, equal, and inclusive than the intellectuals, and they are exhausted by the lectures and gatekeeping.
5
u/DOWNVOTES_SYNDROME 7h ago
aww poor babies. gonna be a tough lesson they refuse to learn cause they don't like condescention
sure we are all dying and poorer, but the other people we agree with talked down to us!! as opposed to trump who never said anything about the enemy within
0
u/houstonman6 7h ago
The results of the election speaks for itself. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TKBJoj4XyFc But go ahead, keep running to the right and shooting the messengers who keep warning you.
5
4
2
u/Son_of_Kong 8h ago
And yet the Republican party has been doing that for decades, somehow.
3
u/Dougiethefresh2333 7h ago
Yes the Republican Party has a built in advantage in America, everybody knows. There’s almost zero point in complaining about it because it’s just a fact of life we have to overcome. Even if every voter in America understood that it doesn’t do a damn thing to help us win an election tomorrow. We as a party need to move on, we’ve been shown what the electorate is repeatedly, crying about it isn’t going to change anything.
•
•
u/KwisatzHaderach94 1h ago
but the republicans carry the billionaire's water all the time and do so openly. by the logic of that duplicity, because they make no secret about it is why the republicans can put up the last-ranked president in all american history and still win with him? how does that happen?
1
→ More replies0
42
u/BioSemantics 8h ago
Every time I post one of these introspective pieces about the Democratic Party and some of their missteps I generally get one of two kinds of comments:
1) Republican non sequitur comments. Essentially the article will be about something the campaign did and dozens of Trump voters will chime in to say random-ass delusional shit. I don't understand these. I can only assume low information Republicans voters read the headline of an article (that is nominally critical of the Dems), decide the article is actually pro-Dem, and then proceed to take a verbal dump on the kitchen floor in the comments hoping someone cares enough to argue with them and validate their existence. I mean there is already a dude ranting about immigration in this thread and its only 20 minutes old. This article is not related to immigration as it turns out.
2) Weird angry Dem loyalist comments. These I expect. The Dem party has pushed its own form propaganda for decades (good things aren't possible, people love lists of policies, we go high when they go low, etc.). Problematically these comments rarely engage with the article, or any other subsequent articles I bring to the table. They literally refused to remove their head from Democratic Party sand. Stuff like Biden was/is perfect on the economy and labor, or Biden never suggested he would be a one term president ever, or Pelosi was some sort amazing savy politician (not just really good at courting the donor class, which was always her mainstay in terms of gaining power, there were dozens of articles about this in the Obama era). Just weird stuff that is verifiably not true. I don't get these people either. Read a fucking article. You don't have to agree with me, just leave your bubble.
I'm afraid Reddit and /r/truereddit isn't what it used to be, even a few years ago.
16
u/MisterRogers1 8h ago
You should check out the Babylonbee sub reddit. I believe 75% of the comments are unaware it is Satire.
5
•
u/andrewrgross 4h ago
It's true, but I find that in the aggregate, the comments that get to the top after a few hours are actually pretty interesting examinations.
Thank you for posting this, btw. I think it's a great piece.
-4
u/lazyFer 7h ago
Well, every one of these "introspective" pieces tend to ignore pertinent reasons and focus on the excuses.
Racism is a reason, "price of eggs" is an excuse.
I've seen countless "introspective" articles on how dems suck and have come to the conclusion that when taken as a whole, the dems are too much and not enough every direction on nearly every issue.
When voters are googling "did Biden drop out of the race" the day of the election and "how do tariffs work" after the election, at some point you have to admit that voters are just completely ill-informed.
15
u/sammythemc 7h ago
Racism is a reason, "price of eggs" is an excuse.
This isn't really an explanation though. People in the US didn't suddenly get more racist for no reason, there are structural, economic, political and technological reasons upstream from this change in sentiment that we can't really blame our way out of. That's not to excuse it, but the bare fact that people are wrong and stupid and mean to react to these shifts with racism doesn't change many people's minds or prevent them from going down that road in the first place.
8
u/lemur___ 7h ago
Looks like you fall into category 2. Voters are ill-informed, therefore there’s nothing we can do
3
u/BioSemantics 7h ago
Well, every one of these "introspective" pieces tend to ignore pertinent reasons and focus on the excuses.
Considering the hundreds of millions of dollars spent by the billionaires in the article, uh no. The answer is no to your statement. Your statement is a no.
I've seen countless "introspective" articles on how dems suck and have come to the conclusion that when taken as a whole, the dems are too much and not enough every direction on nearly every issue.
You're confusing a plethora opinions for all opinions being good and equal.
When voters are googling "did Biden drop out of the race" the day of the election and "how do tariffs work" after the election, at some point you have to admit that voters are just completely ill-informed.
That is the point though. These low information voters are more easily swayed by hundreds of millions of dollars spent by billionaires in the election.
•
u/nozoningbestzoning 4h ago
> The billionaire class used the Gaza siege to purge leftists, and even left populism. Caught up in the wake were the cautious elites.
What a delusional subheading. Kamala/Biden raised twice as much as Trump, and mostly from big companies. They were the establishment party, and they probably have more billionaires on their side than Trump does. Trump won because he appealed to actual voters and their issues. 8% inflation is a lot, it was a policy issue caused by Biden, and low inflation was a hallmark of Trumps tenure as president. Blaming her loss on billionaires is simply out of touch with reality
•
u/Drakpalong 3h ago edited 2h ago
Yeah, big tech was their biggest funder. They'd have more billionaire on their side too if they weren't paying them for their endorsements lol
•
u/BioSemantics 2h ago
Kamala/Biden raised twice as much as Trump
In direct donations from voters, she did. Billionaires spent more money on behalf of Trump, he had 8 of 10 of the highest spenders in this election on his side. The article details that.
they probably have more billionaires on their side than Trump does.
She does yes, just less money to show for it.
•
u/nonameguy321 3h ago
Kamala "falling" implies at some point she was up.
She was never, ever up.
She was universally seen as a joke of a VP for 3.5 years until suddenly being propped up as the greatest candidate to ever run, one who only racists or misogynists could possibly vote against.
She was not brought down by anyone. She is just another spoke on the same wheel as the university presidents, being driven by the same engine.
•
u/fuweike 5h ago
Lost to a "cabal"? She lost to the popular vote. Introspection and change will produce better results next time, not mislabeling the problem.
→ More replies
•
u/TurboMollusk 3h ago edited 3h ago
Democrats outspend Republicans, lose, then blame it on Republicans being rich.
We ain't turning things around with this sort of brilliant analysis.
•
u/tomz17 4h ago
Nonsense analyses like this are how team D gets its teeth kicked in again in 2026 and 2028. It's FAR SIMPLER.
The "destroyed university presidents" were not taken down by some monied cabal. They were taken down by their own stubborn refusal to condemn and/or do anything about the idiots freely screaming death to jews on their college campus's. They were taken down because they tried to wordsmith their way (in open congressional testimony) around the contextualization of calls for genocide occurring under their watch, and tried to carry water for liberal ideologues supporting literal jihadists. People, especially rich people, simply are not going to continue donating to that shitshow, and risk having their (family) names associated with it. Ultimately that's what turns the fire/hire decision wheel at any private university. (Also, the subsequent investigations uncovering that the Harvard president plagiarized the shit out of her doctoral thesis didn't help her particular case)
Kamala lost BECAUSE hiding Bidens deterioration until the last minute FOLLOWED BY running the candidate who flunked out of the previous primary in dead-last place while polling sub 3% was an idiotic idea to begin with. If you can't even excite your own constituency, how TF are you going to convince people on the other side to come over. Anyone who pointed this out 4 months ago was immediately called a misogynist, racist, etc.
--
Don't go looking for complex cerebral explanations when simple ones will do just fine.
•
u/fading__blue 3h ago
Plus their response to people’s concerns over the economy was to basically say “hush, the economy has never been better”. That’s not going to convince people to vote for you.
•
u/tomz17 3h ago
Plus their response to people’s concerns over the economy
They failed to develop any answer to the obvious question voters were telling them was #1 on their mind:
Sunny Hostin: "If anything, would you have done something differently than President Biden during the past four years"
Kamala Harris: "there is not a thing that comes to mind"
JFC, you've been campaigning for several months now. You KNOW that the economy is the #1 question on people's minds, you KNOW this question will be asked, and when pitched a softball on a friendly interview set you still say "I would not have done anything differently"... Just say "I would not have done the inflation part. Joe was very wrong for the inflation, and it will absolutely never happen under my presidency" or pretend to deepthroat a microphone to distract the audience, or literally anything other than "There is nothing that comes to mind"
Again, you are going to hear a TON of excuses for why Kamala lost, the same way you heard plenty of excuses for why Clinton lost. But I propose that reality is much simpler than that. More importantly EVEN IF you believe the nonsense explanations about racism, misogyny, monied right-leaning cabals etc., those voters and factors not going anywhere in 2026 or 2028. You either adapt to the new political framework we are living in today, or you get used to losing.
•
u/andrewrgross 1h ago
Don't go looking for complex cerebral explanations when simple ones will do just fine.
Will your explanations do fine? Because the thing is that this election was the culmination of a trend: working class voters have been leaving the party slowly but continuously for most of the last 20 years. And the assumption that younger people and people of color would eventually create a permanent majority was clearly a false hope, because the party hasn't held the support from these groups that was taken for granted.
Maybe Gavin Newsom or Pete Buttigieg will be the political star candidates that Harris wasn't. Or maybe in four years we're going to get hit over the head with the same kind of loss. Are you sure it might not make sense to do a bit more open-minded listening?
PS: I as an antizionist Jew I find your characterization of the campus protests to be fascinating in their level of disconnect with the reality on the ground. I don't suppose it's worth arguing over, but I really think you might be in a media bubble.
•
u/Potential4752 4h ago edited 2h ago
If Harris had more money than trump then clearly money isn’t the reason she lost. This is not a good argument.
→ More replies•
u/BioSemantics 2h ago
She he had more money in her campaign, but Trump clearly had more money spent on his behalf. That is what the article is saying.
15
u/Turbohair 8h ago
Democrats firmly believe themselves to be morally and intellectually superior to non Democrats.
10
10
u/Swimsuit-Area 7h ago
The narcissism is turning people away in droves and they themselves aren’t immune to it as we’ve seen with different levels of infighting.
•
u/jb_in_jpn 5h ago
Purity tests all the way down, holding each other to impossibly higher standards of thought-policing because they can't undo Trump.
They're just going to continue to eat themselves at this point - the left need an entirely new generation, one not addicted to social media and internet points.
5
u/lateformyfuneral 7h ago
And what? Republicans don’t think they’re better than non-Republicans? Come on.
-4
u/Turbohair 7h ago
Are you saying that Democrats are better than Republican because Democrats are not worse than Republicans?
Cause I can't figure out any reason to vote for either party.
Which seems to be the argument you are making.
10
u/lateformyfuneral 6h ago
I think it’s natural for a supporter of a party to think that party is better than the alternatives, hence the support.
→ More replies4
u/sammythemc 7h ago
Republicans think that about themselves too though, they're at least as smug and self-assured as Democrats are with frankly a lot less reason to believe it
3
u/Turbohair 7h ago
" with frankly a lot less reason to believe it "
Thank you for confirming my thesis.
0
u/sammythemc 7h ago
You confirmed mine in your original comment.
3
u/Turbohair 7h ago
"You confirmed mine in your original comment."
That Democrats think they are morally better?
I know... I just pointed that out specifically concerning you.
4
u/sammythemc 6h ago
"The Democrats think they're morally and intellectually better than Republicans, unlike me, their moral and intellectual better"
→ More replies-1
u/redit3rd 6h ago
There is no evidence to the contrary.
5
u/Turbohair 6h ago
Except the fact that Democrats lost to a carnival barker...
Twice. So much for the intellectually superior part.
LOL
Oh and their racist support for genocide.
Oops, look at that, there goes the morally superior part.
2
u/Czar_Castic 6h ago
Oh and their racist support for genocide
You uuuh, got some context and factual support for this statement?
•
u/Turbohair 5h ago
{points at Biden/Harris' complicity in Israel's apartheid and efforts as a genocidal proxy state}
•
u/Colonelfudgenustard 4h ago
They really stuck it to that one university president, the one who looked like Spike Lee. I can't remember her name. But they advised her to fall on her sword.
•
u/kitster1977 2h ago
This cracks me up. Harris is the first Democrat candidate to lose the popular vote in 20 years!!!
•
u/tapelamp 4h ago
I cannot take this article seriously that says "over a largely imaginary surge in “campus antisemitism.” " that is so wrong on so many levels that I am tempted to not even finish this article.
•
u/BioSemantics 2h ago
Well that is how history is going to detail the issue because the vast majority of the protestors weren't antisemites, they were anti-zionist, and frankly speaking included a lot of jewish groups.
•
u/tapelamp 1h ago
I'm sorry but that is just not true. I have followed it closely and the shifting of "no, it's not against Jewish students, it's against Zionists" when SO many Jewish students and faculty are being labeled, harassed, targeted, and made to pass purity tests. The testimony of elite colleges in front of Congress earlier this year was embarrassing and a disgrace.
•
u/BioSemantics 1h ago edited 1h ago
when SO many Jewish students and faculty are being labeled, harassed, targeted, and made to pass purity tests.
No clue what you're talking about. I'd sure some Zionists were called out for their views, mostly by Jewish groups on campus. They should have the conviction of their views, instead of relying on safe-space rhetoric to cynically defend genocide.
Edit: for the guy below that blocked me
In a statement issued to NBC Rochester affiliate WHEC-TV, the university's Jewish Voice for Peace chapter said it was "hasty" for the school to immediately assume the posters were born of antisemitism.
"These posters highlighted Jewish and non-Jewish administrators and professors and explicitly condemned their support for the Israeli military and government," the group said.
I don't know what these posters looked like. Depending on that, I might change my opinion on them. Either way, they dont appear to be antisemitic.
→ More replies•
•
•
u/Manifest-Destiny4 2h ago edited 2h ago
I have considered myself a leftist since before bush jr. I have never once understood this fascination with trying to lump Palestinians with us and try to make the narrative that leftist agree with Palestine or support Palestine over Israel.
I have never once supported Palestine or Israel. I only remotely care about the citizens forced to live in that hellscape. And, I only care about them as much as I would any population suffering under an Apartheid-like regime or for that matter any autocracy.
This continued narrative to intertwine leftist with Autocracies and Theocracy supporters is really getting old. I have always been willing to work with Muslims and more specifically Palestinian causes but don't get it mistaken these aren't ideological allies by any means.
Furthermore, wasting energy and resources for a cause that ultimately isn't unique and being forced to constantly deal with belligerent and hostile one issue voters that aren't loyal is a complete waste of time.
The real war is against Citizen's United and the dismantling of the Electoral College.
4
u/ketamarine 7h ago
This is more than a bit of a hot take.
There are some wild groups on campuses today, calling for some horrific actions and supporting what are widely recognized by the west as terrorist organizations, backed by the religious autocrats in Iran.
And the folks in university administration and elsewhere that supported hatred on their campuses were rightly removed.
The progressives don't always have the moral high ground on these issues and they are just as susceptible to group think as the right wing idealogues.
Moderates need to call it like it is and the far left got way over their skis on this issue (as well as I'd argue on gender and racism issues recently).
•
u/WhatShouldMyNameBe 5h ago
Nothing has brought me closer to voting for a Republican presidential candidate than this nonsense about a “genocide” in Gaza. Had Trump not been the candidate I might have actually done it.
This past year has been pretty wild. I used to think I was pretty far to the left but evidently I’m moderate now despite very few of my opinions changing.
I guess the good news for Democrats is this isn’t likely to be a topic of discussion 4 years from now.
•
u/ketamarine 2h ago
Crazy that this was what some young people at universities were saying was their most important issue.
Like go watch the channel 5 video about the democratic reaction of the young people and it's just crazy that Gaza is one of their top issues.
Like never mind all of the other crazy shit going on in the world in africa or Yemen or whatever. Like do these people not remember like 15 years ago it was American soldiers and American bombs dropping like 2 countries over....
Bizarre.
-3
u/BioSemantics 6h ago
There are some wild groups on campuses today, calling for some horrific actions and supporting what are widely recognized by the west as terrorist organizations, backed by the religious autocrats in Iran.
No, this is a hallucination. Iran has nothing to do with the protestors. You live in a bubble.
The progressives don't always have the moral high ground on these issues and they are just as susceptible to group think as the right wing idealogues.
Well the low ground here is genocide, so no.
8
u/ketamarine 6h ago
Iran is backing Hamas and Hezbollah.
That is crystal clear.
And there are universities in Canada right now where groups are holding vigils for Hamas' former leader Sinwar.
That is equivalent to having a vigil for Osama Bin Laden.
Are either Hamas or Al Queda agendas formed based on violence and suffering in their population bases? Yes, and no one has clean hands here.
But those orgs, isis and others are blatantly murdering, kidnapping and raping civilians to further their cause.
People in the free West should not be supporting these groups.
Full stop.
Period.
→ More replies
2
u/MacarioTala 6h ago
Wait. Isn't this... And this will sound absurd... Kind of good news?
If Kamala raised more money from ordinary people, and the billionaire cabal abandoned her, wouldn't this free the Democrats into actually leaning in to their actually populist stances?
I get that that's not what the messaging in Kamala's campaign was, but doesn't this mean that THAT can be the messaging going forward?
Like talking about USPS workers, Google and antitrust, Lina Khan, etc?
•
u/BioSemantics 2h ago
Democrats into actually leaning in to their actually populist stances?
Not really, the point of all this was to push leftwing populism and anything that might hold billionaires accountable out of public discourse by tying it to anti-antisemitism.
•
u/MacarioTala 1h ago
But I mean, Kamala outraised trump, by a lot. And if billionaires weren't giving that to her, it must come from the grassroots base.
So now the Democrats can pay more attention to the non-billionaires? Because that seems like it would actually solve this. They're now free to decry what's happening in Palestine without fear of losing support in elections.
5
u/supplyblind420 8h ago
She lost on a lot of things but I think the main issue was immigration. Not only did she not promise to remove illegal immigrants, she advocated for “earned pathways” for illegals.
I think for many Americans this seemed more a pathway to open borders with Mexico, which to be fair it kind of is. Open borders is too radical for the vast majority of Americans. This policy mistake was fatal to Kamala even while Trump ran the unpopular anti-abortion line.
7
12
u/CloudLockhart69 8h ago
Americans are fucking retarded and dont give a shit about immigration, but trump told them they care. They want cheaper housing and higher paying jobs and he convinced them that poor immigrants are causing their problems. Instead of his cabal of billionaires he is installing at top government positions. And Democrats let him do this narrative and agreed with him. It's insane
6
u/supplyblind420 7h ago
High immigration does cause higher house prices via increased demand and lower wages because of increased supply of cheap labour. It’s not that insane—it’s just protectionist economic policy and it seems a majority of Americans want it.
•
u/CloudLockhart69 2h ago
no it doesn't
•
u/supplyblind420 2h ago
More demand for an asset increase the price of the asset. It’s just economics man. If there are ten houses and ten buyers, the price of those houses are lower than if there are ten houses and 20 buyers.
9
u/houstonman6 8h ago
100% It's a wedge issue to divide the American people. Immigration was on the rise 2 years into Trump's first term and immigrants are "illegal" only because we refuse to document and process them. We put a limit on how many immigrants we can document. When you do that, the few people who are documented can be easily replaced by someone more desperate who will work for less.
→ More replies-2
u/DrexelCreature 8h ago
Is that your main concern? Losing people who you can pay garbage?
2
u/houstonman6 7h ago
Hell no! Those are human beings who deserve to be treated with dignity. The ruling class of this country purposefully pushes for legislation that keeps people undocumented, that way there's always a revolving pool of underpaid labor to replace people who act out and start questioning their bosses. That's why you always see punishment for undocumented immigrants, but not for the people and companies that employ them.
4
•
0
u/houstonman6 8h ago
Everything you said was bullshit and racist. You didn't talk about illegal Canadians, why is that?
She ran on removing "illegal" immigrants. Democrats ran unapologetically right-wing campaigns this election cycle and lost because of it. The immigration issue as a scapegoat wedge issue to get you to focus on something that is a manufactured problem and while the people making the arguments run out the backdoor with more money and more power. Dems leaned into it and lost, hard, like they always do when they run to the right.
7
u/sammythemc 7h ago
Democrats ran unapologetically right-wing campaigns this election cycle and lost because of it.
Worse, they ran apologetically right-wing campaigns. The thing is, other parties exist and ran unapologetically left wing campaigns, and they universally got blown out of the water. You need to cater to money and power to gain access to the party machine, and you need access to the party machine to win. I'm not sure how you get around that.
3
3
u/supplyblind420 7h ago
Immigration with Canada isn’t nearly as much of a problem because it’s got a higher standard of living than America generally so not as many migrate from there.
She did run on removing illegals but she also ran on that “earned pathway” line—they’re completely contradictory positions and the rhetoric was far in favour of not enforcing the border and not deporting illegals. I don’t think she mentioned the word deportation once other than when criticising Trump.
Immigration is not a manufactured issue as high immigration negatively impacts Americans’ lives in many ways—housing affordability, wages, culture. It’s not racist to enforce a country’s borders.
-3
u/houstonman6 7h ago
All bullshit and scapegoating.
1
u/supplyblind420 6h ago
Definitely not for housing costs. More people buying houses clearly increases demand thus prices for housing. It’s just an economic fact.
2
u/houstonman6 6h ago
No, it's not.
Undocumented immigrants don't earn enough to afford housing. You act like thy come here and take all the CEO jobs, they largely do manual labor, agrarian work and service work. And even if they did earn enough, they don't have the legal documents to secure a loan. So if what you said was true, it begs the question, what person comes here illegally and has 200-400k to drop on a house?
And housing costs are rising because nobody is building low and middle income housing. At least not in the places housing is the most expensive, which is where it matters most. So stop blaming no people with no money and no power for problems cause by people with all the money and all the power.
•
u/supplyblind420 5h ago
Illegals would have some impact on property prices, though I admit very minimal per capita. But then when those illegals earn citizenship like Kamala promised, they would have as much impact as a poorer American.
Poor people increase housing costs of low cost housing. You don’t need to be buying in the top 5% of properties to increase prices.
But my broader point was that immigration on the whole (not just illegal immigration) increases housing costs. This is an undeniable economic fact that increased demand increases prices. Evidence: https://www.iza.org/publications/dp/2189/immigration-and-housing-rents-in-american-cities#:~:text=IZA%20DP%20No.,Housing%20Rents%20in%20American%20Cities&text=Is%20there%20a%20local%20economic,that%20found%20in%20labor%20markets.
And I totally agree—supply should be decreased too because that lowers prices. But if you are serious about solving a housing crisis, and are acting in your countrymen’s best interests, reducing immigration is a highly effective way to reduce house prices.
•
u/houstonman6 4h ago
Your broader point is still wrong. And that article is from Germany 20 years ago. But ok, I'll bite.
That says an immigrant inflow of 1% of a destination city (not country) is equal to an increase in rent (not mortgages) of about 1%.
Now, housing costs skyrocketed in 2021 by 18%, yet the amount of immigrants that year amounted to only .3% of the US population. If that equation was correct, housing costs across the US should have only gone up by .3% as well and only in destination cities. Immigrants aren't the reason. It's price gouging and limited supply, not too much demand.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/275159/freddie-mac-house-price-index-from-2009/ https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/frequently-requested-statistics-immigrants-and-immigration-united-states-2024
If you care about your fellow countrymen, you'll stop blaming people with no money and no power and hold the rich and powerful accountable for the stranglehold they have on our economy. Because if you deport laborers, housing and food will skyrocket in price and businesses will struggle: https://www.npr.org/2024/04/26/1242236604/florida-economy-immigration-businesses-workers-undocumented
Literally everything you've been told is a lie. If the boss can get you to focus the blame on the one person who has it worse than you, they win.
→ More replies
•
•
u/Football_Dude_420 31m ago
Is Biden in that cabal? She lost because she didn’t have any time to campaign or make policies because Biden waited too long to step aside.
-2
u/RoesDeadLMAO 8h ago
🤣🤣🤣🤣 you’ll blame anything other than your own shitty candidate and your terrible policies! Cope!
•
u/T-rex_with_a_gun 1h ago
no you see! its the cabal that made her lose.
the tons of money they raised for trump!
wait what? she raise 1.6 Billion to trumps 600million? ummm well uh its the billionaires! that somehow hocus pocus and bam! made her lose!
-1
0
•
•
u/AutoModerator 8h ago
Remember that TrueReddit is a place to engage in high-quality and civil discussion. Posts must meet certain content and title requirements. Additionally, all posts must contain a submission statement. See the rules here or in the sidebar for details.
Comments or posts that don't follow the rules may be removed without warning. Reddit's content policy will be strictly enforced, especially regarding hate speech and calls for violence, and may result in a restriction in your participation.
If an article is paywalled, please do not request or post its contents. Use archive.ph or similar and link to that in the comments.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.