politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
You're making the entirely unfounded assumption that sexism was the cause for those women's loss rather than them individually both being terrible candidates. And despite the Obama example showing you "racism exists, so only run white people" point is just completely bullshit. People literally made the same argument against Obama.
There were blaring warning signs that had absolutely nothing to do with sexism with both candidacies. Easy bad campaign choices and cultural movements that very easily explain the losses without diving into the dark heart of man, but somehow you just ignore those to focus on banning women and POC from running for pragmatism.
Whatever you believe about your non-racist internal beliefs, your actions are indistinguishable from racism. And I'm not sure you'll ever think there's an election so low stakes that we can select the best candidate if she's a woman, because you don't seem to have learned anything by the event that proved the whole philosophy as suspect.
My cousin told me yesterday that AOC isn’t left enough for her. That tells me that either we need a 3rd party, because clearly democrats are not even wanted by their own party. Or that women are extremely easy to make toxic. At the end of the day it’s a popularity contest and most people are not doing research. You will get put through the media spin cycle and people will choose to not like you because of your voice, or because you use too much head movement when you speak, or because their favorite comedian parroted a 10 sec tiktok clip about something you said on a social issue, or because of that one vote you made that one time. Women 100% get less leeway. Believing anything else is idealistic.
Run this exercise again like it's 2008 and you're taking about Barrack Obama's blackness. People don't want AOC to run because she's just the next woman on the conveyer belt, they want her to run because she's one of the best politicians in the Democratic party.
Sexism was a factor. Racism was a factor. As you know, surely? You do know that some people in america would say outright that they would never vote for anyone who wasn't a cis man and would never vote for anyone who wasn't white?
You're saying that the proportion of those people who might have voted democrat is too small to matter. I disagree. I can't remember exactly the proportions of the demographic which voted or didn't vote for kamala but it was clear that more traditional voters (Hispanics were one subset maybe) weren't voting for her exactly because she's a woman.
Answer this - if the dems would have wanted to run a trans candidate, would you have said this was a viable candidate to win the presidency? I'm not asking if you would have personally supported them (assuming they were a decent person/tested politically etc, but could they have won?
No, not in america today. And that's why taking the risk that a woman could win for the first time was a bad idea when the alternative was Donald trump and project 25, which is going to be a huge set back for anyone not a white cisman.