Off to oblivion
Just 22 days and it's now 2nd page clicks.
I wonder what happens to her.
At some point in American History, she was the 2nd most famous person in the Country.
And then she lost...
Happens to almost all the corporate sellouts.
People are desperate for change, the vast majority suffers under the current conditions, they want something to change and they keep looking for options.
Every time somebody comes up with some talking point that on first view looks like it could be different from the same old same old, people jump at it because they see at least a possibility for a change.
In some cases they get to the point where someone actually gets into government, i.e. Syriza in Greece in 2015.
But as soon as they get to government they sell out to the rich and run the very same politics as all the others, people turn away, looking for another alternative.
Most of them, like Harris, never get that far but people discover they are sellouts before they get elected.
You can look even much further to the left than Harris will ever be and you'll still see the same thing.
Bernie Sanders and AOC, as popular as they were a few years ago, lost most of their fans when they showed their real face when they refused to "force the vote" (if anyone remembers what that was about).
I don't know.
If she runs for Gov. of California I can see her easily winning.
Yea I know, but that's still the same old same old as with all the others, positioning themselves just a little bit less far right and a bit less authoritarian than Republicans and then coming up with "vote for us, we're the lesser evil".
Given the options Harris would in fact be "the lesser evil", but with her war mongering in Ukraine and Israel this lesser evil is still too bad to vote for, for many Democratic voters.
I voted against Harris when she ran for California Senate in 2016, and I'll volunteer and campaign against her if she runs for Governor. I have never liked the woman.
However, this big lie they're pushing that she lost by a landslide is ludicrous. Even the mainstream "liberal" media is saying it. It was a very narrow election. She lost by under 2%. I have no clue why they're pushing this bullshit that she was trampled and can't recover. Again, she almost won. Half the people in the country voted for her.
Dude, Harris is a corporate pawn, a hack. Any other Democrat would have trounced felon Trump 60/40.
There has been a survey recently among Democratic voters who stayed home and didn't vote, where an overwhelming majority of them said they didn't vote because Harris wanted to keep the wars in Ukraine and Israel going.
The amount of people who switch their vote from one party to the other is minimal, in the media they always find some, but in percentage of voters that's next to meaningless.
Republicans run propaganda suggesting to Democrats it wouldn't be worth voting because it makes no difference, but then they all go to vote themselves, which means pretty much all elections of the last 50 years have been decided by how many Democratic voters stayed home and didn't vote.
If all voters would go to vote, Democrats would win every single time no matter who their candidate would be, the problem is only that Democrats often nominate corporate sellouts or war mongers that make so many Democratic voters stay home.
The poor, the working class, the minorities who naturally vote Democrat are generally lazy and uninterested when it comes to politics so they stay home on election day. The white middle class who vote Republican love going to the polls and being seen on election day. That's why Republicans hate mail-in voting. Lazy ass Democrats prefer to mail their ballots.
Yeah, even a horrible Democratic candidate like Harris almost won. Again, this Big Lie that even liberal media like CNN are pushing, that Trump won by a landslide - they're idiots. Which makes me think the established order and even the media moguls wanted Trump.
Haha. They think Trump and Elon Musk are not Deep State? They're both insider billionaires who have been running things for decades. Foolish that the workers can't see through this bullshit. They're populists!!!
There hasn't been a landslide victory of anyone in any election for many decades.
They call it a landslide when one party in the previous elections was 2% ahead and in the next election the other party comes out 2% ahead, but that's not a landslide, next to nobody switched their vote from one party to the other, it just means 8% of Democratic voters stayed home.
Yeah exactly, the last real "Landslide" in terms of electoral votes was 1984, but even then you don't see the popular vote margins divert that much.
I think the word gets tossed around fairly liberally, as 2024 was a comparative "landslide" to the squeaker that was 2000.
The landslide was represented in massive gains from nearly every segment of the population that resulted in a huge shift away from the rampant but destructive liberal Democrat Socialist and leftist agenda and the miserable damage inflicted on the country.
*That* was the landslide.
That's not what "landslide" means. Harris almost won. 78% of black males voted for Harris. Same old same old.
"Any other Democrat would have trounced felon Trump 60/40"
your tears are so sweet.
Trump won the electoral vote. He won all of the swing states. He won the popular vote by more than 2,000,000 votes. There was nothing "narrow" about it. It was a landslide. He trounced Harris. Trump is not a "felon". The case was nothing but a political ploy to prevent him from running for president. The charges were fake. The DA and judge were corrupt. It will all be erased after an appeal.
If California Democrats vote Harris into the governor's office, they are even more stupid than they already seem.
No, that's not a landslide in the history of American politics. It was one of the closest races in history.
Reagan 1984 was a landslide: 58.8% 525 electoral votes to Mondale 40.6% 13 electoral votes.
Nixon 1972 was a landslide: 60.7% 520 electoral votes to McGovern 37.5% 17 electoral votes.
Trump 312 49.8% 312 electoral votes to Harris 48.3% 266 electoral votes was a standard election and a narrow victory.
See the difference now when you compare Trump's win to Reagan's and Nixon's real landslides?
I just don’t think those past election results mean anything today. Modern gerrymandering, demographic changes, and our polemic media have all changed the definition of a decisive presidential win from the days of Reagan or Nixon.
shareI'm referring to the bogus claim that Trump won by a landslide. He didn't. The nation was evenly split between two awful candidates. Smart people learn from history and history shows us what real landslides look like.
share