Harris only received five percent of Republican votes — less than the six percent Joe Biden won in 2020 when he beat Trump, as well as the seven percent won by Hillary Clinton in 2016 when she lost to him. While Harris won independents and moderates, she did so by smaller margins than Biden did in 2020.

Meanwhile, Harris lost households earning under $100,000, while Democratic turnout collapsed. Votes are still being counted, but Harris is on pace to underperform Biden’s 2020 totals by millions of votes.

  • GoofSchmoofer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    89
    ·
    6 days ago

    My take on this is that the DNC has never understood that to win the presidency in the last 20 years you need to be a fire brand.

    I think this stared in 2008 with Obama who won I believe because he fired up the base with great speeches about hope and change. It didn’t really happen, BUT the man knew how to give a speech. That got people inspired to do something and they voted.

    Bernie was another fire brand - told it like it was and it appealed to a large population.

    trump won using the same idea, but just the opposite of hope and change yet it worked. It tapped into a visceral and deep frustration that this country has left them behind.

    The modern view of the American president to the population is less of a wonky politician and more of a cheerleader for big ideas, even if those ideas are abhorrent and exceedingly horrifying.

    Harris just wasn’t the person to pull this off, she was too wonky and it felt like the entire campaign was playing the old card of “we are not trump” Instead if they really wanted to win they would have found ( 2 years ago) a feisty out spoken progressive leaning firebrand that would have inspired people to vote for something better.

    The only reason that (bland) Biden won was because of how badly trump fucked up the Covid response.

    • Moah@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      69
      ·
      edit-2
      6 days ago

      I think when she was announced as the candidate, she fired up the base just fine. She was different.

      Then she spent the rest of the campaign reassuring people that nothing would change, pissing away that enthusiasm.

      • GoofSchmoofer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        32
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        6 days ago

        One of the frustrations I had was her solution to the housing problem was to just build more houses and give out some money. Sure great, but what I wanted to hear, and I think many other also wanted to hear, was her talking about corporate hording of housing and what she would do about that situation. But she just ignored it completely and so did Biden.

        I think instead if she came out swinging against corporate greed, even if she actually did nothing about it, would have given her more votes.

        My one hope out of this is that the massive swing to the right will be countered with more vocal progressives.

        • dank@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          6 days ago

          She didn’t even really have a plan to build more houses, just some subsidies that wouldn’t put a dent in the problem. She should have proposed something ambitious that people could get excited about. The crazy thing is Biden had some big ambitious policies that he actudlly enacted like the Inflation Reduction Act that dwarf anything Kamala campaigned on. It’s the opposite of a winning approach that sells the stars and delivers the moon.

        • Kalysta@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          6 days ago

          There are plenty of houses. Repossess then from Blackrock and sell them at normal rates

          • GoofSchmoofer@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            5 days ago

            I didn’t say it wouldn’t have helped. That wasn’t the point of the comment.

            What I was getting at was that if she wanted to motivate voters, especially more progressive voters, then she needed to go bigger than “build some houses and hand out some money.”

            What they wanted to hear from their candidate was a bolder and stronger solution like outlawing corporations from owning thousands of homes. Take a firm stand on corporate greed and corporate inflation. But she never talked about that.

      • PlantJam@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        23
        ·
        edit-2
        6 days ago

        Exactly. “I’m not trump” barely got Biden in when trump was the incumbent with covid running rampant. It didn’t work for Clinton in 2016 and unsurprisingly it didn’t work for Harris in 2024. The level of incompetence at the DNC really makes me think the actual goal is to prevent our politics/country from shifting to the left at any cost.

        • GoofSchmoofer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          6 days ago

          My feeling is that once the DNC starts to acknowledge the progressive ideas then they open the flood gates to challengers to their (limited) power.

    • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      6 days ago

      The Dems also need to get it through their skulls that it’s not just trump. The problem was present in McConnell and Gingrich. We need multiple parties willing to work together for the good of all Americans. Unfortunately the democrats are idiots with the policies of a quite reasonable right wing and the republicans are fascists who have spent 30 years rejecting their own ideas when said by democrats