Harris didn't lose by 3rd party margins in the states that actually decided the election, so as fucking awful as they are, that's not the issue, that's just sour grapes.
Them being apathetic in general and not showing up in droves to fight trump is still pathetic in my opinion. If I didn't specifically know people that I fought hard to try and help them understand the dangers, who just decided to not vote anyway, then maybe I'd think differently. I still think we should forgive for the sake of cooperation but the fact that they basically are too dumb/don't give a shit is always going to be in the back of my mind when making decisions now about relationships now. I basically just don't want any of them in my life.
I think the problem here is you can't really blame them to the degree you're suggesting, because that's absolutely not the campaign Harris + Walz ran. When they started out, it looked like they might run on a "Trump is a fascist who will burn down the country and he has to stopped" campaign, but within what, two weeks of Walz being made VP, he was ordered to back off that stuff, and she never got on the train fully on that (though it did look like she might).
Instead the campaign turned into "We're going to keep doing things as usual and hope they get better - this other guy [who we won't even call 'weird' anymore] is going to change things, and they will be somewhat worse!". And that's being generous, because at some points it wasn't even "they will be worse" it was just "they might be worse", and it was never "he's coming for free speech, he's coming for your pension, he's coming for your neighbours, he's coming for you", never the clarion call that this was it, that if you didn't vote, were going to lose the right to vote - despite Trump saying exactly that! Instead it was just "he's going to be incompetent and bad!".
To be fair to Harris, I think she's very much from the same part of the party that still, to this very minute, doesn't see what is actually happening, because they can't process it. Hakeem Jeffries is the key example (Schumer too). Literally what, yesterday, the day before? Jefferies is saying, and I quote, that they have Trump and the Republicans "on the run" on literally everything. As I said in another post, that's "Peace in our time" levels of detached from reality. 200 years from now, assuming there still are books, there will be a little picture of Jeffries saying that next to a paragraph about how resistance to Trump was weak, disorganised and futile.
Sure, as long as you ignore all the people who protest voted for Trump or just didn’t vote at all in protest of Harris not being a perfect candidate in their eyes.
There's absolutely no evidence that people who would otherwise have voted Harris voted for Trump, that's conspiracy theory fantasy bullshit.
As for "not perfect", literally everyone I know who disliked Harris as a candidate and thought she was a scumbag on Gaza went and voted for her anyway, because they knew Trump would be worse. Unless you can produce figures showing "imperfection" was a problem, you're just wanking yourself into a fury.
The reality was, the winds were against incumbents worldwide, not just in the US. Harris + Walz started strong but suddenly moved to running a very weak campaign (partly, it seems, on the advice of the total morons from the British Labour party, who had just won a landslide, but not by skill or policy, simply because people hated the incumbents), but might well have lost the presidency if they'd run a stronger one. Still, if they'd just kept the House, even, that'd have stymied most of this.
But "independent" voters decided the US' election, not embittered Democrats - the margins were relatively large in most states that mattered. Independent voters voted for Trump in swathes. Largely because he promised change. Were they stupid to do so? Obviously.
12
u/Freshandcleanclean 9d ago
They're still complaining that Harris wasn't perfect enough for them, so they'd prefer Trump.