this post was submitted on 08 Nov 2024
303 points (95.0% liked)

United States | News & Politics

7211 readers
410 users here now

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

It's literally 2016 but worse somehow.

One source close to the Harris campaign tells Rolling Stone they reached out to several staffers in and around the campaign to voice concerns about the candidate embracing Dick and Liz Cheney.

“People don’t want to be in a coalition with the devil,” says the source, speaking about Dick Cheney. They say a Harris staffer responded that it was not the staff’s role to challenge the campaign’s decisions.

A Democratic strategist says they warned key Harris surrogates and top-level officials at the Democratic National Committee that campaigning with Liz Cheney — and making the campaign’s closing argument about how many Republicans were supporting Harris — was highly unlikely to motivate any new swing voters, and risked dissuading already-despondent, infrequent Democratic voters who had supported Biden in 2020. The strategist says they also attempted to have big donors and battleground state party chairs convey the same argument to the Harris campaign.

Another Democratic operative close to Harrisworld says they sent memos and data to Harris campaign staffers underscoring how, among other things, Republican voters, believe it or not, vote Republican — and that the data over the past year screamed that Democrats instead needed to reassure and energize the liberal base and Dem-leaning working class in battleground states. “We were told, basically, to get lost, no thank you,” says the operative.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago

I agree, it was a colossal mistake for Harris to try and win over GOPers. But Harris’s policies remained those I listed.

[–] [email protected] 120 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (74 children)

I recall reading early on that DNC campaign advisers were recommending against continuing with the "weird" rhetoric, and the article mentioned some specific people who had worked on the 2016 campaign. It floored me that those people still had jobs. I guess they got their way eventually. I now have no expectation that they won't be doing the same shit in 2028.

DNC Leadership would rather lose with a neoliberal candidate than win with a progressive one.

[–] [email protected] 55 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (5 children)

DNC Leadership would rather lose with a neoliberal candidate than win with a progressive one.

That's because they're paid by big money donors to prevent any movement to the left while big money donors pay the GOP to move further right. This shifts the center (Overton Window) further and further right over time, causing the Democrats to ultimately move towards the right over time.

Obama said that if he was a politician in the 1980s, he would be considered a Republican, and he wasn't wrong.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 29 points 1 week ago

It was all Hillary people. Why the DNC keeps hiring hillary and her people? Well Hillary owns the DNC. It's a private corporation that has private share-holders and their product is ballot access for the Democratic party.

If you want to run as a democrat for almost any office in the entire country you have to go through the DNC.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

"DNC Leadership would rather lose with a neoliberal candidate than win with a progressive one."

I think I had this exact revelation during or right after the 2020 primaries and it has deeply impacted my approach to voting ever since.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

I had that same revelation back in 2016

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 week ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (71 replies)
[–] [email protected] 38 points 1 week ago

You know you're cooked when Bill Kristol is going around like, "Hey, shouldn't you be running a more progressive campaign to turn out more voters?"

[–] [email protected] 32 points 1 week ago (2 children)

It only makes sense if you assume the Harris campaign was trying to lose, like in The Producers.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

The idea that democrats would abandon their base and try to flip republicans was idiotic beyond belief. The exit polls show that practically no republicans were swayed by this, as anybody with a functioning brain could've told the democrats. What they ended up doing was to alienate and demoralize the people who might've showed up to vote for them while having no impact on the republican vote.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I'm really curious as to whose colossally dumb idea it was to campaign with Liz fucking Cheney?

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 week ago

The capital class. Kamala was up 10% with Tim Walz and their progressive platform, but then lobbyists and donors demanded that she adopt a more moderate platform. No one knows for sure what they said to her, but she immediately did a 180 and ran as a moderate Republican.

load more comments
view more: next ›