• Baron Von J@lemmy.world
      172·
      2 months ago

      That was such a face slap of sound bite propaganda. From your linked article

      Clinton did tell a town hall audience in Columbus, Ohio in March that “we’re going to put a lot of coal miners and coal companies out of business.” But that was part of a longer answer about the need to help blue-collar workers adjust. “We’re going to make it clear that we don’t want to forget those people,” Clinton said. “Those people labored in those mines for generations, losing their health, often losing their lives to turn on our lights and power our factories. Now we’ve got to move away from coal and all the other fossil fuels, but I don’t want to move away from the people who did the best they could to produce the energy that we relied on.”

      The $30 billion plan she released last fall calls for of increased job training, small-business development, and infrastructure investment, especially in Appalachia. The plan also seeks to safeguard miners’ healthcare and pensions.

      But years later all I ever hear brought up is that one closing sentence.

      • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
        202·
        2 months ago

        But years later all I ever hear brought up is that one closing sentence.

        Because that closing sentence ended her political career.

        You can’t ever tell voters you’re going to put them out of work. Ever.

        You tell coal miners “I want you to have better, safer jobs that don’t involve risking your lives underground for business owners who don’t care about you just so your children and grandchildren can survive and thrive.”

  • forrcaho@lemmy.world
    364·
    2 months ago

    Harris’s policies are misguided on a number of issues, but her main commitment is to strengthening the nuts and bolts of our democracy, so we will still have mechanisms available to challenge those policies and get them to change.

    Not only is Trump a thousand times worse than Harris on every bad policy she has, his primary commitment is to destroying the mechanisms of democratic participation, so that there will be no way to hold the powerful to account.

    I’ve read many thoughtful articles in TNR; I’m disappointed they would publish this one.

  • leadore@lemmy.world
    3012·
    2 months ago

    Almost half the country is right wing and the electoral college gives their votes much more weight. That’s just a fact. That means you can’t win a national election without tacking toward their views in some areas, mainly the areas of concern to those in the swing states that will decide the election. You can’t win by pleasing only your own base. Until we either abolish the electoral college and move to popular vote, or liberals/left wing/whatever you want to call it, reach a majority of the population substantial enough to overcome the electoral college.

    Neither of those things looks likely to happen anytime soon, so the only option is to deal with our current reality and develop a strategy to win under these circumstances, but at the same time we should also be working to create a movement to amend the constitution to decide national elections by popular vote.

    edit to change “half” to “almost half”–gotta recognize there are some more in the middle.

    • nifty@lemmy.world
      7·
      2 months ago

      Half the country is not conservative or right wing, the highest percentage of red votes are in low population density areas, so thats maybe like 35-37%, and that’s why the electoral college is important for republican wins

      • leadore@lemmy.world
        33·
        2 months ago

        It is almost half. There’s a spectrum on the right (as there is on the left of course). The hardcore maga cultists are a little over a third – like you say, 35-37%. But then there are the conservatives who aren’t extremists like them but are still very conservative, so yes, it’s almost half the population. Trump has 42-45% who are definitely going to vote for him no matter what–the rest beyond the maga contingent are the conservatives such as the one-issue anti-abortion segment and the rich who want his tax and deregulation policies; they don’t care about his character flaws or even preserving democracy for that matter.

        There are also some conservatives, not many, who previously voted for him and would again, but have come to recognize that trump is so extreme and dangerous that they either won’t vote for him or will hold their nose and vote for a Dem this time, hopefully enough to tip the election in her favor.

    • Chocrates@lemmy.world
      2·
      2 months ago

      Yeah but a majority of voters want to fix climate change. The GOP platform is “let the planet burn so we can make our quarterly target” but if you take politics out of it a lot of gop voters are on the same page with Democrats.

      Both of them couldn’t give a single shit about liberals though.

    • phoneymouse@lemmy.world
      6·
      2 months ago

      I feel she also may be saying certain stuff just to close off avenues of attack for Republicans. She’d rather just say something conservatives would like to hear than give a hedging response to appease the base that Trump and co would run with. For example, when asked about guns, she said “I’m a gun owner, so is Walz” — it’s just not worth losing this election over being pure on a handful of issues that might trigger moderates and swayable conservatives.

    • MegaUltraChicken@lemmy.world
      21·
      2 months ago

      I’m pretty far left of Harris and I would be furious if she got up there and said she was going to ban fracking. We might like to hear that, but it’s a goddamn fact that swing voters she needs to win in PA do not. She can say whatever the fuck she wants about fracking as long as she wins.

  • normalexit@lemmy.world
    5·
    2 months ago

    Palin sounded like such a disconnected asshole with “Drill, baby! Drill!”. I almost did a spit take when Harris basically said the same. Pro fracking? Really?