this post was submitted on 14 Nov 2025
251 points (93.1% liked)

politics

31105 readers
1885 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. 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 other users of being bots or paid actors.
  3. No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
  4. No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. 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.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have 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. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

In 2020, she had all the time in the world, and she mismanaged things badly enough that she ended up dropping out before a single vote was cast. What happened in 2024 was purely advantageous to her, she got to skip the primary altogether and only had to keep it together for 15 weeks. Few people in history have ever received such a privileged ramp towards the presidency.

The primary process is an additional hoop that a candidate has to jump through, they have to appeal to a different segment of the people than in the general, which may leave them having to pivot or backtrack on their positions. They may have to endure bad blood, or harsher criticism from people who had been invested in another candidate. You could say that the lack of the primary cost the Democrats the election but only in the sense that Kamala probably wouldn't have won a primary and we'd have gotten someone better.

15 weeks is also plenty of time to get a message out. Other countries do much shorter campaign lengths. And in the current situation where most people are driven by "negative partisanship," voting against the people they hate more, being relatively unknown (not that a VP is that unknown) can be advantageous.

The main thing was policy but she was also just an unpopular politician with bad political instincts (campaigning with the Cheney 's lol), and she basically got to fail upwards and bypass any of the checks that would've recognized that unpopularity before it was too late.

[–] YiddishMcSquidish@lemmy.today 1 points 10 months ago

The funding is what was forced. And unfortunately the candidate with the most funding wins for the last two decades.