Why is Kamala Harris being held at such a higher standard than Trump this election?

Because too many people treat politics like a sporting event. You root for your team no matter what, and against the other team. You have to do it this way, because if the other side wins that means your side loses.

So there are too many people who view Trump as "Their Guy", and are "rooting" for him. Anything they hear that might portray Trump in a negative light (like a criminal trial, for instance) must be the Other Side trying to cheat to win unfairly.

I remind people that Roger Ailes was Nixon's media consultant, and the lesson he learned from Watergate was that Nixon could have gotten away with it if the media was more sympathetic. He then went on to be the CEO of Fox News. That's no accident. There is a direct line from Nixon to Trump, and Roger Ailes drew it.

the lesson he learned from Watergate was that Nixon could have gotten away with it if the media was more sympathetic.

Then we got Reagan, Bush, and Trump, and he proved it.
- The media almost singlehandedly bringing Watergate to the average American's attention was why Murdoch created Fox News. It was created specifically so they could force control of the narrative to their advantage.
  
  And then we allowed every other media corporation to be bought and do the same once they saw it worked so well.
- How Regan didn't get impeached over Iran Contra is baffling.
- Well, yeah, thanks to Fox entertainment.
Also white supremacy is a hell of a drug.
- That is why I move to bigger more ethnic cities or countries where I am wanted at and dont have to put up with that shit. Just worked with a nazi/neonazi/skinhead or whatever and I while he would talk to me about his beliefs I woulld always find an excuse to walk away
Thanks for that info, I never about the Ailes Nixon-Trump connection. This is so frustrating to see unravel in real time.
I have heard from friends of mine that like Trump claim that since he's a business man he is good for running the country. I could't roll my eyes hard enough after hearing that remark.

I have also found that there is nothing you can say to sway a trump supporter.

The problem isn't that Harris is being held to a higher standard. The problem is that Americans think of elections the same way they think of a sporting match. It's "my team is going to win!" not "I'm going to vote for the candidate that is best aligned with my beliefs." A huge number of the people who are voting Republican are doing so because the Republican party is their "team," and damn it, their team is going to win even if it kills them.

Many years ago, I was discussing politics with a coworker (always a bad idea, but whatever). It went something like this:

"So, you don't think the less-fortunate should be able to afford medical care?" "No, of course not, everyone should be able to see a doctor."

"You don't think gay people should be allowed to marry?" "I'm not gay, but they can do whatever makes them happy."

"You support the war in Iraq, then?" "I support our troops, but the war is kind of a waste."

"We definitely should legalize weed, right?" "Um, I'd smoke it if I didn't get drug tested."

"So why are you voting Republican, then?" "My family is Republican; we always do."

“So why are you voting Republican, then?” “My family is Republican; we always do.”

Republican politicians would eat this person and their family if it ever came to it
- After raping them all first.
- Sadly, they would probably volunteer to be eaten so they could "own the libs"
As an outsider looking in, I've seen a lot of footage of rallies and events (on both sides) that are just absolutely crazy to me. Almost dystopian. People with painted faces, all kinds of merch, hollering and shouting and cheering like it's the X Factor or a rock concert or something. You see people being interviewed outside the events and it's like a festival in the background. It's really, really bizarre. We have problems with our politics here too but not like that. I can't believe that all of those people are ACTUALLY that passionate about any policies themselves, it's just vague culture wars nonsense with a bizarre personality contest as a proxy for it.

As I say, I'm not trying to act superior. My country has its share of problems too, just a very different sort.
- You have to understand, you are seeing people of VERY low intelligence. I know that's tough to accept, but demographics are really frightening in America. Millions of voters with intelligence not very much higher than outright mental retardation. And so, the system learned long ago, you don't bother trying to get them to think you're right for the job, you don't want them thinking at all. So you just get them to ally with you as a tribe, and that way they're yours even if you're doing the opposite of what they want.
We call this indoctrination. Cult. And fucking sheep. Lmao
Here in Canada I've seen much the same behaviour for both Liberal and Conservative voters. "I vote Liberal because I've always voted Liberal" is a surprisingly common statement especially among the older generations, and to a small extent even the Green party has a few loyalists in BC.

Always voting the same way no matter what happens is just giving your vote away for free.
Horse race politics

Because a cult leader is automatically the purest one can be and needs no scrutiny.

I understand the MAGA cult, but do moderates not see this?
- There the opposite is true. They already know that the other guy is a villain. Their candidate will have to prove themselves not to be.
- Because moderates pathological like to bring up "both sides"
- Moderates are conservatives with a sense of shame.
- "Moderates" are a fiction. They're just an excuse Democrats make for pandering to corporate donors while giving only the barest scraps to their leftist base.
That only explains the cultists, and I doubt the entire media industry is in the cult.
- Trump gets views. That's why they love him.
- it is

Can't believe you are asking this now. In the 70s, I don't believe any of these yokels would have been elected. Lauren Beaubert, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Trump, they've all done things and said things that are so far over the line, it isn't even funny. Nixon? Please, he would be small potatoes today.

Why? Gerrymandering. Social Media. Lack of critical thinking skills. A sense of hopelessness. Apathy. Billionaire brainwashing. The list goes on. The strange thing is, conservatives want to go back to the way things were. For them that means when women had to go to back alleys to get abortions, when gays were stoned, when blacks weren't allowed to vote. For me it means when people didn't justify these ridiculous notions, but instead just said, "No!"

conservatives aren't conservative any more. they are radically backwards. the things they want are so far back, they don't even want democracy any more. i don't really have a say in that, but maybe the time has come to stop calling them conservative.
- I'm conservative vs. most of lemmy and damned if I'll vote anything but straight D right down to dogcatcher. I wouldn't vote for an R even if I liked them! The message must be sent. Even if it's a loss, your vote ends up as a percentage on a spreadsheet. It is still seen.
- They are "regressives".
- Yeah there was a long time ago when conservatives voted to protect national parks. These aren’t those times
- Conservatives are exactly the same as they have always been. It's just that conservatives define their priorities and their values and priorities around their identity, and that means their values and priorities shift with whatever is best for the conservative at the time. There are no universally conservative values, just the generic resistance to change things conservatives like. When a conservative benefits from a strong federal government, they support it. When a conservative benefits from abortion, they support it. When a conservative is a minority, or gay, or a woman, they support equalish rights for themselves. It's narcissism wearing the cloak of stoic preservation of their "heritage," and it's always paper-thin.
  
  This also means anyone opposing the conservative is not a member of the self, but a member of the other. The other is evil, because they are outside of the self. Anything the other does in opposition to the self is evil. An other could save a busload of nuns and kittens, and the conservative would complain about the traffic caused by the other. Anything the self does in support of the self is good. Lying, cheating, stealing, killing, raping, everything is on the table if it can be justified in support or defense of the self. From the outside of the self, it looks like hypocrisy, but it's really not, because the conservative never truly holds an opinion. They just say what they need to say to win.
It’s wild that Trump has done things far worse than watergate, and still got the nomination.
- It is. The world is stranger than I could possibly ever have imagined. Sometimes I play a thought game. What if I had to explain this to, an alien.
  
  "Yes, this is how it works. Are you going to destroy us now? Yeah, we probably deserve this."
- It's not wild, it's the GOP plan since Nixon got nabbed.
  
  Drumpf just happened to have that crazy crowd draw, so they yoked their hopes that he would be the first king of America, and disregarded everything else to forward that goal.
  
  Cheetolini could eat a baby live on national television and his numbers would barely dip.
The right wing has been actively working to undermine our educational system since the early 80's. A poorly educated populace, particularly one without critical thinking skills, is much easier to manipulate. After four decades of underfunding, restrictive policies, and anti-intellectual propaganda, those efforts are really paying off.

Newt Gingrich and his co-conspirators have been waging war against the people of this country since Reagan was elected. And they are now dangerously close to winning that war.
- I don't think the attack on education was a long-term manipulation thing. Rather, it evolved from the question, "Why are all these educated people turning into liberals?!"
  
  That question demands an answer. They can hardly let the appearance that they're dumb stand! So guys like Limbaugh started attacking "ivory tower liberals". That resonated, they rolled with it. Then the Christians saw the opportunity, got their filthy fingers into the cracks, started undermining public education in favor of their own.
They're probably just young.
MTG would have been right at home as a Dixiecrat.

She would have neen standing beside George Wallace.
- If you say so. I'm more of an 80s person. All I know about George Wallace is that he was shot.

Because the media are largely in the hands of the oligarchy that will stop at nothing to get another tax cut.

All those things you said against Trump are actually working in his favor. His base sees it as persecution of their chosen one.

But he can’t just win off his cult votes. He has to get moderate votes too.
- Not if he cheats as hard as they plan to!
  
  Literally, the Supreme Court just made clear they're helping promote the false narrative of "illegal immigrants voting," which helps promote the understanding that the plan is to contest the fucking election, no matter the outcome.
  
  That's why they have those electioneering hooligans in Georgia and why people are fighting it.
  
  They have zero intent to make this a fair fight. That's why they don't give a fuck about actual votes.
- That doesn't seem realistic. I don't see how you can vote for Trump 2024, and claim to be a moderate.
His base sees it as persecution of their chosen one.

yeah, cuz he's a criminal, who did crimes, that's normally what happens to criminals that do crimes.

You must be young. Because Republicans will vote for a criminal before they vote for "communism". Because the Republicans attempt to destroy the educational system to keep people dumb enough to vote for them has worked. Because dispite the corporate media pandering and acting like they want Harris Because that's what their viewers want, their billionaire owners don't. They want the republican led centrist enabled tax breaks on their money. Harris has also brought in the progressives which have zero tolerance for the centrist mindset. She is in a situation where she has to dance a dance of trying to reel in the progressives even though they are going to throw a fit when she panders to the centrists and the corporate overlords.

The system is made and controlled by the billionaires. No hard progressive that doesn't play the game a little is going to get elected... right now. They will destroy anyone that threatens their billions. Everytime she goes a little too hard left they throw a fit.

Welcome to end stage capitalism.

No hard progressive that doesn't play the game a little is going to get elected...

Poor Bernie...
- I still Bern myself, though at least Harris's votes have aligned with Bernie's more than any other congressman.
The United States went so hard on being anti-communist that we became anti community.

Can you imagine a woman or a black man (let alone a black woman) running for president while being three-times divorced with kids from multiple partners and having cheated multiple times on top of that? Even if they were rich like Trump, it would never fly.

You forgot to add convicted felon
Obama’s political career would’ve ended the second “grab em by the p****” got leaked.
- Obama got so much leeway throughout his career, shit like PRISM and Snowden, Benghazi, the invasion of Ukraine, the rise of isis, all under his watch.
  
  Drone warfare as we know it was popularized under Obama, say what you want about trump, but when he took over he stopped bombing Somalia, Obama and Biden bombed the shit out of somalia

Trump is an outrage machine, and we have a media that deals in an economy of outrage.

Trump gets outrage. Outrage gets clicks. Clicks get money. It's a pretty simple chain to follow.

We need to wake up and realize that a profit-driven instantaneous news system that leverages strong emotions is not good for anybody. Truth is subjective nowadays, (always has been, really, but it's especially evident in the current media climate) and all that matters is getting information and narratives (not necessarily facts) out and people consuming it (and all the ads embedded with it) there, first, and right now.

I am shocked to see this pseudofascist apologia so highly upvoted.

It's not the media's coverage of the fascism that's the problem.

You would rather deflect blame to the media than point the finger at the fascism. Shame on you.
- I don't think the fascism would exist if it wasn't profitable to give it a platform.
  
  It's like My 600lb Life.
  
  Trump is the bedridden 800lb lump of a human. And the news cycle that brings him hamburgers by the pallet is the enabler spouse.

I feel like a lot of people on Trump's side don't care and all of his issues have been documented in the press. If people cared, he wouldn't be this close.

You also have enough people left of Harris who don't want to hold their collective noses and vote for her. They'll complain about the Overton window shifting right, but won't be a bulwark for keeping it from shifting right. Hell, there are people on Lemmy complaining about political utilitarianism as a reason for voting for Harris and will even complain about Bernie if he says something being done by the Biden administration is good.

it's so frustrating. I admit I used to vote green, but the entry of Trump opened my eyes. Things like judge appointments, incremental advances in fighting climate change, and NOT having a seditionist as president are all issues we can't afford to lose on in the next 4 years just for some rhetorical vote for the Green Party.

in a perfect world we'd have ranked choice voting, but we aren't in that world.
- Demand ranked choice voting and make sure you are doing so locally
- move to maine, and you'll have it.
  
  Realistically, you shouldn't move to maine, and you should popularize moving towards something like IRV instead of FPTP

Because some Democrats have standards, and Republicans don't.

I don't believe it's possible for anybody to be held to lower standards than Trump.

It's a good thing she's held to higher standards. I don't want anybody held to his standards running anything.

Because MAGA is the largest cult in the world and they won't believe their great father could do anything wrong...

Especially against a (1) colored (2) women (3) democrat
- please provide more idpol reasons thanks
The whole of USA is something 300+mln people, now do Christianity, then do Islam, then do Hinduism, then do Communism, and then do Fascism.

Because Harris's supporters have standards.

One thing particular to Trump is the percentage of his supporters in polling that support him no matter what. Trump has maintained some of the most sustained, consistent support of any modern political candidate. His base polling numbers basically haven't moved in like 10 years.

Trying to have his VP executed, injecting bleach, porn stars, felonies, treason, domestic use of military, anti-veteran sentiment, belittling the disabled, racist comments, sexist comments, sexual assault, etc., etc., etc. None of that meaningfully moved the needle.

You are not going to "get" Trump on anything like that. If you want him to lose support, he needs to be seen as weak, ineffective, and laughable in the eyes of his supporters. None of the above does that, because that isn't what Trump supporters care about. They care about hurting people they don't like or see as lesser-than. If Trump stops doing that effectively, he will lose support. But, frankly, he's really good at it.

Yep, do we want to have 2 parties where the candidate isn't accountable to viewers, or just the 1?

Because so many trump voters are low-information, rabid and impervious to fact and/or reason. They will vote orange even if he shoots someone on Fifth Avenue to death, or if there are 32-or-whatever felony indictments/verdicts.

Meanwhile, many potential Democrat voters are also low-information in their own way - impressionable, fickle and with little memory retention, they seem unable to act upon a clear and present danger until it punches them in the goddamned face (and by then of course it's too late), somehow have normalized the orange threat and are easy prey to an algorithm pushing a "both parties are the same" divide-and-conquer propaganda.

The difference between a parasite-laden excrement chip cookie and a raisin oatmeal cookie, "But I wanted chocolate chip! bOtH cOoKiEs ArE tHe SaMe!"

USA as a society is mentally ill, where sociopathy is often seen as a virtue. For instance denying poor people health care and food, denying pregnant women with potentially lethal complications the right to abortion. Allowing (white) people to kill (black) people without reason based on stand your ground rules. Refusing stricter gun rules despite countless school shootings. Denying workers a living wage. The list of sociopathy permeating US society goes on and on.

Now I know that despite this, about half the population see the problems. There are also Americans that fight this, and are world class people. But the other half, somehow confuse Trump's sociopathy with strength, and admire him for it. Yes this is how it is in USA, sociopathy is widely not only accepted but admired, people want Trump to hurt people, the poor, emigrants, people of color, LGBT. Many Americans want all these people to suffer, for no other reason than their mere existence. Somehow this is OK to even extend to women in general too! As Trump is clearly a major misogynist.

If you are a normal well functioning person, it's near impossible to grasp that such hate can be this widespread, and Trump is fueling it, and before him Republicans have been fueling it for decades.

This makes all the hateful illegal stuff Trump does nearly irrelevant, people simply don't care, his followers just want to see the people they hate burn. It's not that Trump isn't called out at times, it's just that it doesn't really make a difference.

For what it's worth, alot of us see the problem and are doing what we can to help. To stick up for queer folks, to not buy products from places like Walmart, and tell everyone we know to vote for people with empathy.

Greed is good, became the norm.

Conservative folks want to conserve what they have, at any cost. Simple as that. Fuck you, I got mine.
people want Trump to hurt people, the poor, emigrants, people of color, LGBT. Many Americans want all these people to suffer, for no other reason than their mere existence. Somehow this is OK to even extend to women in general too!

I can understand that this might be true of people, but sooo many people in this country are women, poor, emigrants, people of color, LGBT. To have as much support as Trump manages to have, clearly there are people within these groups that target themselves.. it makes no sense.
- Remember in 2016 there were LGBT for Trump?
  It was absolutely insane!! No it doesn't make sense, but there are always a percentage that are delusional, and sometimes they manage to convince others.
  Probably there are people who actually believe they don't deserve equal rights, this can be indoctrinated through religion, and religiousness in USA is VERY high.
  There are probably also people who don't see themselves as part of one of the groups even if they clearly are.
  Remember the MAGA woman who was extremely surprised when her husband was expelled because he was an illegal alien? That's how stupid people can be!
  Because it's "all the others" not "me" they think.
- Common things that pop up in regards to Republicans voting against their own interests:
  
  Women with the attitude that "the only moral abortion is my abortion."
  
  Immigrants who are angry at other immigrants, wanting to close the door behind them. (Just look at Cubans in Florida)
  
  Log Cabin Republicans, LGBT+ members who are somehow shocked when the party turns on them.
  
  What do most of these people have in common? Money.
  
  Trump supporters are more likely to be small business owners. Capitalism doesn't care about your skin color, your creed, your nationality, your history, it just wants your fucking money.
  
  It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.
  
  Upton Sinclair was talking about jobs, but this can be extended to... women who financially rely on their husbands becoming more politically aligned with their husbands (especially if they like the lifestyle), immigrants financially relying on the "good people" willing to hire them as an immigrant (stockholm syndrome?), and the number of rich white gay dudes who may as well have been rich white straight dudes at any other point in history is too damn high (they love to hide behind their sexuality when anyone critiques their horrible positions, "You can't critique Tim Cook for tax dodging at Apple, he just came out, he's BRAVE!").
If you are a normal well functioning person, it’s near impossible to grasp that such hate can be this widespread, and Trump is fueling it, and before him Republicans have been fueling it for decades.

the only reason this shit ever gets this popular is literally because of fascism.

People who would ever consider voting for the Toupee have no standards. No bar, no logic or even thought goes in to who they vote for.

The people who are planning to vote against the Toupee have standards. And the Democratic party has continually failed to meet those standards. And the only time the people have any power to pressure a politician is when they're running for office. Anyone claiming "just vote in the D, then we can focus on getting progress made" is a centrist who is ok being perpetually part of the oppressed class.

Yes, we need to vote against the Toupee, and the GOP in general. We also need a presidential administration who will get progress done. And since the human species has, at best, 30 years left before the majority of the world is uninhabitable, little baby steps won't cut it.

So Harris and the Dems have a high bar. Because the alternative is fascism, or death by climate change.

Anyone claiming "just vote in the D, then we can focus on getting progress made" is a centrist who is ok being perpetually part of the oppressed class.

Well if that isn't just the dumbest thing I've ever read.
That would add up if you thought people should choose fascism or death from climate change over some sense of chance.

We need to make larger demands, but voting for those options you listed shouldn't be 50/50 as the post is questioning.
Your entire comment is written like Biden and Harris are not currently complicit in Genocide.
- Okay do what are you doing to further your goals to stop the genocide?
- This poster doesn't care one whit about the plight of Palestinians. It has but one goal -- to be the nerdy girl that helps peel votes off the votes from the nerdy guy so her friend, the jerkish cheerleader favoured by the Jocks, can win the SGA election 49 to 48 to 3 (I've posted this example of how government works in First Past the Post if you'd like to understand what I mean by nerd girl and cheerleader in SGA). The purpose of this poster and others like it is to throw the election to Trump so we're subjected to Project 2025, which incidentally aligns with Putin's and Xi's goals.
  
  Please think carefully before you listen to this poster or any other like it.

You ever see one of those families where the drug addicted high school dropout gets everything handed to them by the parents but the successful honor student gets beaten because they passed the entrance exam to harvard but didn't pass it good enough?

It's like that.

2 of my cousins (brother and sister) are 2 very opposite people. The older brother has been a career fuck-up since grade school; always getting in trouble, failing, not caring, running with the wrong crowds, knocked up a girl when they were 16, got kicked out of 1 school and barely graduated. He's never held a job more than 6 months, if that, each job is minimum wage with minimal skills, been kicked out of the house a few times, has a sordid legal history, dated some questionable women, and eventually got into a relationship with a single mom of 3 kids who inherited 6-figures when her dad died and dude thought he was on easy street from that point forward...until 6 months later when he blew threw half the money and she kicked him out to where he's now crashing in a camper working a lawn job.

His sister, honor student in HS, went to college, got a degree but had difficulty finding a job in graphic design that wasn't freelance. Seeing the 27 2nd chances her enabler-parents afforded her brother...she stopped caring and moved back in with the parents bouncing from middling job to middling job. He's in his mid-30s and she's in her upper 20's

Theres several reasons

Part of it is good old fashioned bigotry

A big part of it is the systemic advantage the Electoral College gives Republicans

And of course there's the matter that Traitor Trump voters don't have standards while the rest of us do

Because the kind of people who run CNN and other staples of traditional media are the same people who covered for people like Jimmy Savile.

Mark Thompson is Chairman and CEO of CNN. Here's some blurbs from his Wikipedia, the Savile one being the most salacious.

In September 2010, Thompson acknowledged some of the BBC's previous political bias, which he said he had witnessed early in his career. He stated: "In the BBC I joined 30 years ago there was, in much of current affairs, in terms of people's personal politics, which were quite vocal, a massive bias to the left". He added: "the organisation did struggle then with impartiality".

Fucking news to me, mate.

Although Thompson departed the BBC before public exposure of the Jimmy Savile sexual abuse scandal and is not noted in the BBC chronology of the unfolding coverage, Thompson faced questions about his role in the events around Savile's actions and BBC coverage of them. According to a New York Times review, Thompson denied knowing of a BBC Newsnight programme on accusations against Savile before it was dropped soon after Savile's death in October 2011.

Literally everyone around Savile is fucking trash.

In a 4 February 2024 investigation by The Guardian, some CNN staff blamed their channel's newly appointed director Mark Thompson for what they described as biased reporting of the Israel–Hamas war. The staff criticized their network's coverage of the war, charging that it had promoted Israeli propaganda, and gave more attention to Israeli suffering, and the Israeli narrative of the war. One staffer claimed that this bias was systematic and institutionalized, as many journalists' stories were forced to be cleared by channel's Jerusalem bureau before publication. Staffers claimed that statements by Hamas and the Palestinian Authority were rarely reported on, while Israeli statements were taken at face value. A CNN spokesperson denied the charges of bias.

That's to say nothing about the pro-Trump head of Discovery (which owns CNN) David Zaslav slobbing this guys knob.

Discovery CEO David Zaslav shared, "I am confident he is exactly the leader we need to take the helm of CNN at this pivotal time."

Thompson was also formerly at the New York Times, another publication that has been swinging to the right. However, if you check out the Lifestyle section of the NYT, you quickly realize why, because it's aimed at rich fucks with a second house in the Hamptons.

It's literally in their short-term-financial-interest to get Trump. They don't give a damn about long-term-interests at all.

Jimmy Savile sexual abuse scandal

Most Americans don't know about Jimmy Savile btw.
- It's so huge it has it's own Wikipedia page:
  
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Savile_sexual_abuse_scandal
Thompson was also formerly at the New York Times, another publication that has been swinging to the right.

The NYT has been right wing since it was purchased by the Ochs-Sulzberger family in the 19th century.

The New York Herald Tribune was America's premier left wing newspaper, but they got bought out by John Hay Whitney, a multimillionaire Wall Street investor, who ran it into the ground less than eight years later.

The NYT only looks liberal by comparison to the surviving media landscape. They have routinely played host to anti-environmentalism, war hawkery, and bigotry of every persuasion, going straight back to the Eisenhower Era.

Unlike the Tribune, the Times has focused first and foremost on cultivating a rich vein of lucrative advertisement. It's a creature of Madison Avenue and K Street. Always has been.
Oh yeah I definitely know all about Zaslav’s love for Trump, hopefully the investors give him the boot soon, he’s been awful for WB.

First election?

Seriously... A fucking toddler will be held to a higher standard than Trump and Republicans will hold that toddler to that standard while Trump could fart on the Queens grave and Republicans would just support his "strong thoughtful message"
- Memba tan suit?

Because what passes for journalism these days subsists on engagement metrics, and Harris doesn't say crazy off-the-wall shit every 10 seconds.

Don't forget 'and are largely owned by old rich conservative white men with a vested interest in keeping a black woman who would raise their taxes out of office'.

Trump is more than a candidate. He validates and supports a state of mind. To many, he is a champion of a lifestyle and a way of thinking. That isn't something that is easy to overcome.

I think this is a big chunk of it and the other large portion is the fact that the DNC picks terrible candidates to back. Harris is leaps and bounds better than Biden, but Biden was the nominee up until a monthish ago despite everyone's objections. He barely beat Trump I'm 2020 and prior to that they backed Clinton who gave Trump four years in the White House to begin with.

They need to stop catering to the right and fucking get behind the leftist people that actually support the party.

Kamala proposed a corporate tax hike. They will be pulling out literally All. The. Stops.

Lots of promises get made in an election. But you still got to make it happen if you win.

It's the same when it comes to any other countries. The right always gets away with corruption because it's expected. Whereas the left has a higher moral standpoint so it is being accused of hypocrisy and things get blown out proportion even if small scale corruption occurs. For example in UK the previous government were giving jobs and contracts to friends and family all the time and nobody cried about it. It became accepted. The new left of centre government comes in and gives a temporary pass to a donor and suddenly it's a huge scandal...

It's the same if you care for the environment and ever took a taxi somewhere, or a vegetarian or vegan and have shoes made out of leather. Sure you are doing better than everyone else to help but you are still the devil and worse than everyone else somehow...

vegetarian or vegan and have shoes made out of leather.

I'm certainly not going to throw away perfectly good shoes until they are no longer repairable. Or the leather belt my sister sent me from New Zealand in the late 70s.

Some people will give me stick for that though, all the time living their disposable lives.

P.S. My last two pairs of boots came from Wills Vegan Shoes 😉

I'll take racism, sexism, propaganda and capitalism for 500 Alex.

They've got pretty firm control of the business sectors through tax cut agenda. They've got pretty firm control of the farmers for the same. Through fear and propaganda they've got pretty strong control of the poor and some of the educated middle class in the rural areas. A lot of the red states are doing everything they can to impede their education systems. If you keep people from becoming educated there's less competition at the top and a lot more red voters.

All you've got to fight them are the poor and the middle class in the cities and suburbs and the occasional upper class that isn't so self-serving that they're willing to stand on everyone else.

Every politician in U.S. history has been held to a higher standards than Trump. And thank God.

Our electoral system is just shit.

She's way more popular and so are her policies, but having the support of the majority of voters doesn't guarantee victory like it would if we lived in a democracy.

It’s insane how the PA suburbs are essentially deciding the next president…

you're asking why fascists and leftists have different standards and morals?

Because the Billionaire owners of the media— FOX NBC ABC CNN are all conservatives who support project 2025.

They are predominantly white and they want their tax cuts while passing the bill to the plebeians.

Because apparently half of the active voters in this country are either greedy corporate cunts, wealthy sociopaths, MAGA morons, authoritarian Christian ideologue crazies, psuedo-intellectual "centrists"/independents that somehow conflate basic human respect for minorities and outright fascism as "both sides are the same", or some combination thereof. Those type of people are the type that think the ends always justify the means and that the ends they want is a US that looks like a cross between A Handmaid's Tale, Atlas Shrugged, and modern day Russia. It is one of the most disheartening realizations of my adult life to learn that so many of my fellow Americans are fucking vile people.

Do keep in mind, that roughly half of voters is not the same as roughly half of Americans. The highest turnout of voting eligible people in the last century was only 66.6% in 2020. Basically every Trump nut votes. It is there entire reason for being these days, to support and vote for Trump. And in 2020, Trump only got 46.9% of the popular vote, i.e. only 33.03% of the US voting eligible actually cast a vote for Trump. The rest of us are either actively trying to stop Trump or are at least not actively supporting him. The absolute BEST thing we can do as a country is to bump those numbers up. There is no excuse for 1 in 3 people to not vote, leaving another 1 in 3 people to have disproportionate power over everyone else's lives. Complacency and apathy or counting on enough others to do their civic duty so you don't have to is how Trump wins again. Vote and make every single person you know go vote too. Tell them to register. Tell them to vote early if that is more convenient for them. Whatever. Just go vote.

Update: The second best thing you can do is vote for state and federal epresentatives and leaders that will advocate for election reforms like joining the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC) and/or abolishing the electoral college, fighting Gerrymandering, establishing new, more fair and representative voting systems (Ranked Choice, Approval, Proportional, etc.), term limits, etc. The goal is for representative government is to actually represent the popular will of their voters. It absolutely does NOT do that right now. That should be our first and greatest goal for our government.

It is one of the most disheartening realizations of my adult life to learn that so many of my fellow Americans are fucking vile people.

I think this is one of the single most important realizations of my societal awakening as well. I actually think a lot of the cognitive dissonance we see daily is a refusal to accept this premise. People refusing to believe that evil people exist in a real, meaningful capacity HAS to have some effect on the amount of people that deny republican politicians are That Bad and attack the left for truthfully acting like they are.
You know what was eye-opening to me? I was once talking to a couple homeless women sitting outside a parish on a cold Canadian winter day, they were saying government needs to restrict access further to free and subsidized programs.

Apparently there were too many undeserving homeless people using the program that can’t take care of a place if it's free, so according to these poor women, they shouldn't let people like themselves have a roof over their head unless they can put up a $1-5k deposit for a unit. I wished them a good day, and gave them $10 each and my gloves...

because Trump has spent the last 9 years going so low, his cult no longer has standards. anyone would look like a saint compared to him.

Black. Female.

I keep seeing the same bozos say they're the same

One is literally a criminal rapist who has made tens of thousands of public lies, doesn't pay contractors, and said obvious non sensensical stuff during covid leading to mass deaths and whose own ex staff warns he is an asshole.

The other is a normal person you could probably eat lunch with. She's absolutely normal.

And Kamala supports an illegal Genocide

Harris Will Continue to Ignore U.S. Law and Arm Israel, If Elected
- That doesn't mean she supports it. There's evidence that even with Biden there were things potentially happening in the background to try to stop it. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-06-03/israel-accepts-joe-bidens-gaza-ceasefire-proposal/103926614
  
  Trump literally asked Russia publicly to find dirt on Hillary to win and praises dictators constantly.Kamala isn't praising dictators.
  
  If Trump went to court for every crime he committed, he would have no time to campaign. In fact, with lawsuits they likely have to compress them and limit the contents to the worst offenders to facilitate their processing time.
  
  You haven't heard even a small number of crimes that Mafia don has committed. But a guy who goes and laughs on social media when one of his followers attacked pelosis husband obviously supports assault.
  
  So just to clarify, Trump = actual criminal who uses violence to gain power Kamala = normal person
  
  You're also assuming that Trump will end the war. He won't. He'll do what he normally does and just shout at both parties. If he gets forced out of office, he'll sabotage the next president
  
  Walz in particular is ex military and I seriously doubt he is pro war either. There might be stuff happening in the background again we don't know about (Trump will brag in public about every single thing he does, but sometimes negotiations require the opposite). It's similar to criminal investigations which take a long time

A nice illustration is Republican media operatives are trying to attack Harris with "we checked with McDonald's corporate and they have no record of her working there!". For one, McD's is franchisees and I doubt corporate tracks every burger flipper. Next, of course they're trying to claim she's dishonest, but what about the greater question: Did fuckin Trump ever come anywhere near McDonald's? No, he inherited about $400 million, has misconstrued it it repeatedly ('a small loan of a million dollars', as if that is relatable either) and has never had any sort of normal job that required discipline or labor, ever.

I think he's famously at least eaten a lot of McDonalds.
- Probably $400 million worth.

Because Democrats want someone who will run the country and Republicans just want someone who will maintain their minority control. We are concerned for the country, they are scared for their very existence and self reflection itself is dangerous for their existence. Basically self reflection is necessary for what Democrats want to do, and it fatal for what Republicans want. So we do it, and Republicans avoid it at all costs. We get a Kamala who we hold to a high standard, they get a Trump who can punch them in the face and they'll still support him because of the party.

Okay so here's dinner context you may be unaware of. I believe it was Newt Gingrich who either came up with or standardized the core modern republican propaganda pillar: Attack attack attack, always attack, never compromise, concede only if you have literally no choice, then attack harder. That's why the left has slid so far center; they keep trying to compromise and the right will not budge. Now the Democrats look like the Republicans back in the 80s, which is why I call them Republicrats.

Meanwhile Dems are trying to hold themselves to at least some level of standard. Add to that that Trump and his kind are authoritarian; their psychology allows for no criticism of any kind, seeing them exclusively as attacks against them. So now you have not only GOP and Trump cultists jumping on every single thing they can as hard as they can, and the self-aware Democrats calling out what they perceive as bad. The Republicans won't do that; they never attack their own side without orders from the top, which indicates to them that the target is out of favor with the leadership.

Tldr; because the Democrats refuse to accept that the Republicans can't be beaten by playing nice.

and the right will not budge. Now the Democrats look like the Republicans back in the 80s, which is why I call them Republicrats.

key distinction here, what the left needs to do is not to concede, but demonstrate moral superiority, and political strength. Conceding is the part that fucks us, and it also confuses the republicans when we don't.

We just need to treat the republican rhetoric like it is, rather than real words actually being said, it's mostly bullshit, ruthlessly destroy and deconstruct it, don't leave them anything to stand on, they put themselves in this situation.

we should also probably consider focusing more on rhetoric and specifics, rather than individuals, ignoring extremes like trump. Trying not to alienate the moderate conservative is going to be a huge potential boon for the democratic party here. If we can demonstrate that we're a real party that actually exists and does things for the public good, the republican party has no choice but to disintegrate.
- They kind of did that at the DNC.

Over a million deaths from covid...

It was over 200k come the 2020 election
Ok......and like 3/4ths of that was under trump. I don't get what you're getting at here.
- It was way more than 200K.
- I think they were just correcting the number in the post text block that should have read about 1 million dead under COVID during the Trump administration in the US alone, rather than only 200k.

Because the media is heavily conservative and advertising driven.

Giving republicans new things to throw at Kamala is the #1 priority of the news right now because they need a close race to sell ads.

Years of ownership by conservative billionaires and pundits has also saturated the media environment with a broad conservative tilt. This is why you don't see a lot of articles about why like immigration went up under trump etc.

Indeed. Notice, too, that the concerns about Biden's cognitive abilities have instantly stopped? He's still the President, and still in charge of the nukes. But no more news stories.

Meanwhile, the other guy has recently developed a habit of swearing at rallies, and there are a few articles about his wife asking him to knock it off, but nothing pointing out that a sudden increase in swearing is a symptom of dementia. At a town hall in La Crosse, WI the other day, he didn't know why he was there at first. Still radio silence from the news media.

Funny, isn't it?

Bigotry and idiocy

Because Trump being an asshole has stopped being a novel newsworthy event.

Because the people who own news corps are hella rich, and hella rich people mostly prefer Trump because he’s gonna give them a HUGE tax break again.

Rich people believe that no matter how rough the world gets they will be fine as long as they remain rich. History has shown repeatedly that this is a false assumption, demonstrating that the rich in America really are just as dumb as poor conservatives who get suckered into voting against their own interests every election.

Also many of the absurdly wealthy are sociopaths and narcissists (because our economic system allows people like that to succeed by stepping on everyone else). To them, all that matters is how they look among their "in group." So if they think they'll look better by being a few billion richer they do whatever it takes to get there... No matter the long term consequences. Either to them or anyone else.
They either just don't give a fuck at all about future humans (including their own children) and just want all the profit for themselves now, or they are genuinely stupid and don't actually understand economic theory at all.

Because long-term Trump's policies will wreck the country economically.

Either way is a bad look. It reveals them as either outstandingly stupid or outstandingly selfish.
- They’re just trying to min/max their personal financial gain:effort ratio.

Because racism and sexism is still very prevalent in the US.

She is a minority. And she is a woman.

The news is a shit hole funded by the ultra wealthy who will benefit from Trump's tax cuts for the ultra wealthy. Which explains the coverage.

Many voters are still racist and sexist. Which explains the polls.

Because she’s a black woman who has demonstrated herself capable of behaving appropriately. Meanwhile a trump is not only a rich white geriatric man whose political career has kept expectations low, he’s also Donald trump, a reality tv star, which must be compared to Dr. Harris, former DA of San Francisco, a nationally significant city.

So yeah: racism, sexism, and past behavior.

republicans have such a low media standard, while democrats have such a high media standard that they're busy eating themselves over it.

republicans will literally run anybody living and breathing, democrats want the next FDR basically. Thankfully it seems like the dem party is finally moving away from this mostly useless social campaign bullshit, and more into the "broad political problems" shit which actually matters (the federal government is also way more functional from this perspective) if this continues, whether the dems win or lose this cycle, the dems will have a formidable and quite strong campaign machine. Once the media unfucks itself, which is bound to happen with how people are treating it (keep treating it like shit) we should have a pretty strong basis to run on.

It's looking like the dems are building up a strong political base right now, at the expense of the republican party not existing, and as long as we don't kill it, things will continue to get better.

Literally all we have to do, is capture the moderate voter, focus on popular policies rather than left leaning/dem policy shit. And then campaign on energy, rather than policy.

The media is working as intended, to expect it to "unfuck itself" based on market signals is unserious.
- the media will do anything that makes it money. This is why fox was sued by a voting machine company and then immediately settled.
  
  They will literally ONLY run what's popular, and if blatantly lying is not popular at all, they won't run it.
Agreed, the key to victory this election will be the moderate voter.
- absolutely, the far progressive sect is so small and will likely vote in line anyway, they don't really have much options. But the ability to pick up the moderates has vastly increased. Especially across the cities and midwest region, which are the most populous regions of the US.

they're not voting trump they're voting against the democrat party

Cuz most ppl knows trump dumb, need to grade him on a curve.

Also, he's our spesho widdle boy who can do no wrong 👶

Kamala Harris is a non-white, non-GOP woman. Period.

It's because democrats are unwilling or unable to deliver on real policies for working people. Of course, republicans are the same, but they more or less don't even pretend to, choosing instead to whip up their constituents with culture war nonsense. Nobody has any faith in things improving. Repubs just want to get revenge on their cultural enemies, and democrats (voters) just want to prevent a total slide toward the far right.

Dem politicians can't whip up excitement because it is impossible to get people excited by neoliberal policies, but that's really all they have. Vague platitudes only work so many election cycles in a row before voters just can't even pretend to be excited anymore.

tl:dr republicans are awful but at least their base believes in them.

Their base believes in them simply due to decades of propaganda and brainwashing coming from AM radio first and then normalized on fox "news"

I'm sure if democrats were lied to about nearly everything and were told republicans were immoral enemies that are the cause of all your problems for decades just like conservatives have done, they'd have more belief in the democrat party.
- It doesn't matter why the republican base believes in their party. Incidentally, you're not entirely wrong about why, but they've had rebellion too: see the TEA party.
  
  The democrat party strategy is different. Their base isn't aggrieved axe-grinders. They're earnest believers in the system. The problem is that the leadership doesn't actually want to accomplish anything that would threaten corporate profits. Trump is great for them, since all they have to do is not be him! Policies be damned.

Because one is a traitor that attempted to overturn a lawful election result.

No matter what you think of Kamala, supporting Trump is a joke.

I don’t think it’s that Harris is being held to a higher standard, it’s that trump is being held to virtually no standard.

The people supporting trump have no standard either except for “beat the other team, even if for no other reason than to piss them off.” They don’t care if the world goes up in flames as long as it fucks over a lib.

Corporate media likes elections to be close and exciting because that draws ratings. Hence the reason they put on kid gloves for the idiot fascist.

It's really hard for some people to believe that this would ever be the truth. At the very minimum, this is like 50% of the truth, and the other 50% is worse.
I know one thing if Trump wins I am going to get really really obliterated drunk and high.

No one hold trump to any standard. Thats what the trash like about him. He is just as shitty as them.

The Republican Party and it’s base are anti-intellectual, why do you think they care about logical consistency in their politicians?

Because not only do women have to work 10x as hard to be seen as being on the same level as men, but she has scruples. Trump doesn't care about perception.

1: She's a woman of color so she has to be 75% better than average for anyone to pay attention.

2: Executed moral standards are more important to the left than the right. Declared moral standards are more important to the right.

What standard is trump being held to again?

Exactly, the NYT claimed that mass deportations and Trump taxes will help solve the housing crisis.

There absolutely no standards for Trump; the MSM have lost their damned minds.

Grabbed 'em by the pussy.. And they liked it!

https://truthout.org/articles/yes-55-percent-of-white-women-voted-for-trump-no-im-not-surprised/

That's the sad truth. Misogyny is not enough of an issue to sway American women as a voting bloc. They get it every day from people close to them and have internalised it to the point where it's not a dealbreaker. Abortion however, is.

Just shows you how shitty and stupid his base is.

But it can’t just be his cult keeping him in this race. How can any moderate or independent support this guy over Harris at this point? Do they not have functioning eyes & ears?
- The fact you even look at politics puts you in like, the top 20% of the US population.
  
  I would wager the majority of people that do vote, just look for an R or D next to a name and check the box for their team and move on.
  
  There were about 160 million people who voted in 2020, an unprecedented amount of engagement from the voting populace, and still not half of Americans voting.
  
  People don't really care. Do they have a job? Are their basic needs met? If yes, vote incumbent, if no, vote competition. I expect to see tweets in November asking where Biden went and who is Kamala.
- Those are just embarrassed republicans who are identifying as other parties in the hopes they can get laid.

Because Trump's base does not care and Harris' base does. It's really that simple.

Yeah, you can't shame that which feels no shame.

2 things:

Remember 2016 when the media gave Trump an absurd amount of free publicity by covering every stupid thing he said and did then he won? It wasn’t the only reason, but it clearly didn’t help.
People know who Trump is at this point. He’s awful in a way that’s really easy to see and either you’re someone that’s a problem for or you’re someone who loves the awful.

Whoever is the current corporate lackey being put forward by the DNC is the one that needs to claim to be the good one, co-opting the language of progressives while taking corporate money and maintaining the brutal status quo.

So for people who come looking for someone who’s gonna do good, the bad stuff represents inconsistencies with that narrative and despair at a lack of representation in a supposedly democratic system.

Remember 2016 when the media gave Trump an absurd amount of free publicity by covering every stupid thing he said and did then he won? It wasn’t the only reason, but it clearly didn’t help.

2016? Shit the press gave him all the free press when he was doing the birther shit with Obama.

Because most media companies are owned by rich conservative white men that don't want a black woman into office that might raise their taxes.

It's as simple as that.

Because the standards are relative to the voters, and Trump is appealing to a voting base that's very big on misogyny and racism. That's what they want out of their preferred candidate.

But in general, you need to look at redistricting, gerrymandering, voter suppression, all of the standard tactics that Republicans have effectively used to give themselves more weight in the presidential race. Of course the electoral college is part of the problem too. The low population red states are disproportionately represented. This has been going on for a century? Longer? The exact details have changed over time, but the general strategy is to change the rules or ignore the rules and hope you don't get caught or if you do get caught rely on the courts backing you so that your party wins.

They are trying to break through the misinformation being fed to Republicans. And trying to ensure anyone on the fence otherwise doesn't have any excuses.

Because 95% of GOP members have the IQ of a starfish.

I'm going to offer an answer because the top responses are either bad or just totally miss the mark. The later responses are just thoughtless kneejerk drivel. It's worth asking and addressing this question because it's impact on electoralism are very material, and it's not for no reason that you made your observation; it's also not necessarily a bad thing that some politicians might be held to a higher standard than others.

The question is:

Why is Kamala being held to a higher standard is the question.

But "higher" than what?

Was Joe Biden being held to a "higher" standard? Do Democrats in general get held to "higher" standards? Rotate the question and it's "Why do we hold politicians to standards?" Are Republicans held to any kind of standards?

First, I think we need to focus on on if politicians are being held to standards by their voters. I won't be addressing any kind of cross party criticism in that I want to focus in on the issue of "potential voters" and if those voters hold a candidate that there is some chance they might vote for to some standards ( or litmus, whatever. The first step will be to address if voters hold politicians to standards (not yours or mine necessarily, but the voters own standards).

Second, I'll address the "higher-ness" of these standards. Are they relative or absolute? Are the candidate or party specific? Do they change?

Finally, I'll address the impacts of this and what it has done over the previous several election cycles.

I think we can look at the recent case of Joe Bidens candidacy to address if Harris is unique in being held to a standard. Joe Biden started campaigning in earnest in around October/ November 2023. This came at the same time as the horrible October 7th massacre that galvanized world support for Israel in the face of a terrorist threat. Joe Biden had historically been the most oro-isralli politician of any party, long before his bid for even vice president.

Relatively quickly after the massacre it was clear that Israel was in no way operating in good faith for their purported goal of recovering hostages. It was obvious that they were targeting journalists and iad workers, that there bombing was indiscriminate and focused on population centers and infrastructure for maximum destruction, and that this was in support of the broader colonial mission that Israel has been in since it's inception.

Because of this, during the primary process, a movement of voters set a standard: that they could not vote for Joe Biden in good conscience based on the manner in which the US was relating to and supporting Israels now obvious extermination policy regarding Gaza. Biden failed that standard with regards to the Undecided movement, and it had cost him the election long before his disasterous debate performance. Joe Biden had been floundering in the polls well before that debate. Because of this, Biden lost his position as candidate, explicitly because the voters had a standard to which the candidate did not meet.

Democratic voters are not the only ones who hold standards for their politicians. Consider the case of a post DJT electoral landscape for Republicans. A Republican candidate basically could not get through a primary not towing the MAGA line (even if this hurt their chances later in the election. So even if they are not your or mine standards, Republicans too are held to standards by their voters (if even we find those standards abhorrent). It's important to understand that in fact these voters do have standards, they just aren't your standards, and they do hold their politicians to them.

To conclude section one: all politicians get held to standards. One of the most important politicians of the modern era just had his career ended by not meeting some of them. Both bases of voters have standards which are different and unique to that bae, and both bases hold their candidates to them accordingly.

Now we come to the question of "higher-ness". Do bases hold these officials to standards equally? Or is there some sliding scale or uniqueness into the way things are applied. I plan on withholding discussion if the consequences of this to the final section, but I am not disregarding it's importance.

In 2008, Barack Obama led one of the most historic campaigns of all time, under the twin banners of "Hope" and "Change". The iconography of Obama's 2008 campaign has and will continue to represent a high water mark for political symbolism and its use in electoralism. Barrack ran as a left-wing populist and won his presidency accordingly. However, once in office, Obama struck a decidedly more rightwing/ centrist stance, effectively governing from the center right. His principal legislation was a Heritage Foundation piece of legislation, a lift and shift of what Romney had implemented in Massachusetts, the ACA, effectively ensconcing private control of health care in the US. While voters did give Obama his second term, there was a distinct feeling of a bait and switch from the populist times of 2008 Obama to the 2012 technocratic, neoliberal approach with which he governed.

This set the stage for 2016, where the demand for "hope and change" was now stronger than ever. Obama has failed to deliver in his messaging and this created opportunities for both right wing and lefty wing populist candidates: Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump. The voter recognized that they had not held Obama to a sufficiently high standard, and because of this, they raised the bar (each group according to their own principles). On the left we saw purity tests around no corporate pac money and a wide suite of progressive litmus. On the right we saw "america first" and isolationism. Both the left and the right bases established a higher standard. However, due to reasons behind the scope of this discussion, only the right were able to effectively hold their candidate to that now higher standard (their standards, internally defined). Leaving the era of technocracy and neoliberalism, it was the candidate held to a higher standard that won that election.

Now examine 2020. Now firmly in the populist era, it was a race on both the left and the right to meet the associated higher standards now established by voters. The Democratic candidates had maybe the most progressive across the board suite of policies ever. And likewise in the right, excepting that they be regressive polocies. Both suites representative of the now higher standards required by their associated blocs. This time however, the more established political players had caught the buzz and responded accordingly. While the DnC was ratfucky as ever, Biden did adopt almost all of those higher standard policy positions to gather those voters into his coalition. His campaign identified the higher standard, held themselves to it, and they won.

Now we have the opportunity to draw some conclusions. There is a "higherness" to standards but they are not necessarily specific to politicians so much as the demographics and voting blocs those politicians draw from. Standards have changed and increased in scrutiny. Standards are also bloc specific, so it doesn't make sense to compare standards across blocs: why a progressive chooses to vote or not vote and why a conservative chooses to vote or not vote are wildly different motivating concerns.

Do standards matter? Objectively yes. Holding candidates to a "higher standard" has represented a winning strategy for voters for the previous 20 years. While those standards are relative depending on which voting block you are courting, the general rule has been that the candidate coming closest to a higher standard wins. This is largely due to a shift away from the kind of technocratic allure of neoliberalism and the general shift towards populism we've seen in the past 20 years: it is distinctly the case that we reside in a new political hedgemony.

Because of the, the prior generation politics of "we know better. just elect the "best" and that should do" has died, and been replaced by stronger willed voters who have specific demands of their politicians. Those politicians who can read and come closest to those demands are the most likely to win: this is an age of populism. Both the MAGA and progressive movement didn't their roots in the technocratic neoliberal approaches emphasizing credentials and expertise over the will of the voter. This was effectively the political hedgemony of the US from about 1967-1978 until 2000-2012. That was the era of technocratic neoliberalism, which has been fully replaced with populism of two distinct variants (which is typical in populist eras).

The idea that voters shouldn't hold their politicians to standards and should just vote for "the one who knows best" is a residual trapping of a previous hedgemony, and extends to almost all aspects of political life and policy.

Holding politicians to higher has also been a demonstrably effective strategy for getting them into office. In the current political hedgemony, the politician held to and able to meet a higher standard typically wins. In this way a "higher standard" benefits both the politician and the electorate. By extending a higher standard for Harris, we're making her a more electable candidate. It doesn't hurt her to be held to a higher standard so long as she strives to meet that standard. It's good for her as a candidate and good for her electorate in that they get closer to accomplishing their political goals.

I don't expect trump to be decent. I expect the democrat to be.

Because, on Trump's side, it's a full blown cult.

Trump can literally poop his pants on national tv and eat a mouthful of shit and his acolytes would clap in unison

However, most people not deranged enough to worship a politician could/would be turned off if that politician, Kamala on our scenario, blatantly lies or makes fun of a disable person or rapes someone

aside from great comments here, trump is associated with some religious imagery of having wings. even i can't believe that flies.

nothing goes as tunnel vision as blind faith.

It's simply tribalism at this point. Most people who still support Trump are simply supporting their tribe, whereas on the left most people still believe in the virtues and merits of democracy.

I still feel like democracy will win the day. Most of Trump supporters are 50/60+ and his message doesn't seem to resonate as well with younger people.

Feel free to post any political stuff to [email protected] if you'd like. You're welcome to crosspost this there too if you'd like more discussion on it.

The media has to maintain the charade of democracy.

Yes, that is true. Unfortunately, as I see it, this tragedy once again reinforces my belief that many humans can be so stupid and ideologically blinded that they forego any rationality and connection to reality. No rational person could ever want Trump to be their candidate unless they had something to gain from it. Almost no one has anything to gain from a potential second term except some schemers and ultra rich.

This seems to be an inherent flaw in present-day democracies. I am from Germany, and we are experiencing the same thing with an alt-right party that is set to win the most votes in the 2025 election, with an ultra conservative party likely being second (or maybe their positions will be flipped, it does not matter effectively). Germany, just like the U.S., is on the cusp of losing freedom and democracy. And once it's gone, it will be a hard fight to get it back.

Anyway, for future attempts at democracies, I think we need even stronger constitutions that make such stances and policies like the ones from the Republican party illegal, and we need institutions that are willing to enforce such constitutions. Furthermore, rigorous civic education should be implemented so that the populace becomes less susceptible to populism. Finally, in order to qualify for the privilege to vote, would-be voters should pass some kind of (equity-compatible) test every election year that assesses whether they still possess critical and rational thinking capabilities.

But I imagine that the most effective measure would be to treat conservatism and related ideologies the way that fascism / national socialism is treated in Germany. Exclude radical conservative and nazi opinions from the right to freedom of expression and make advocation for them punishable. Furthermore, outlaw all political parties along those ideological lines.

These measures are not pretty, but as it stands today, much of the votership in Western democracies is just not qualified for partaking in national elections.

test every election year that assesses whether they still possess critical and rational thinking capabilities.

personally, i think im more in favor of entirely banning campaigning. It's funny, but holy shit is it corrupt, and if we had none, people would actually have to research their candidate choices.

Because a huge percentages of white guys are huge stupid pieces of shit and there are a lot of us out there.

To give you an example there was a poll in the swing states that showed that guys preferred Trump 56 to 44 and women the reverse. Nationwide in the last go round white men across the entire nation showed near as big a split again 56 44. vs 51 to 47 in Biden's favor.

It's about bigotry.

Because the media, which supplies political "information" to the masses (a) wants to sensationalize things for viewership/ratings and (b) is generally owned by extremely right/conservative/Republican entities and will not allow it to be a fair representation between the two candidates.

And more than that the MAGA side doesn't campaign on or care about political policy because their base doesn't know or care about policy, they campaign on hate and dirt and smear. So you could explain all the awesome policy of the other side until your throat is sore, they won't care because policy is not their concern.

It's funny to see the latest moanfest from Trump, claiming no-fair because he spent $100m campaigning against Biden and now that's all a waste. That's the thing. He/they aren't campaigning for issues or policy, they are fighting against an individual. It's all they know how to do and all their base really cares about.

Because the media is running the same game they did with Hillary Clinton playing "hardball" when in reality theyre chums.

Please do not make this another 2016, and assume Kamila will win.

The Russian bots are out in full force to pacify voters that "they have this in the bag". This is an indication that the only way we lose is by not voting. And the sentiment is changing, I see calls to vote less and less now, and comments assuming Kamila has already won more and more.

It's not over till it's over.

Might be her skin color, might be her gender, might be misogyny, or it might be racism.

What I didn't see in the reactions yet is that a lot of Americans do not want any government involvement at all. Save for things that are supposedly written down in the Bible. The Republican party is providing just that, anti-establishment, anti-intellectual and don't forget: anti-minority. Just people being tough and dare to support the party who will turn the clock back to when times were perceived to be better. Same sentiment is present in Europe by the way, like it was a century ago.

I'd argue that's more archeoconservatism, what Trump represents and what has reinvigorated the right is more a regressive progressivism -- forging a sort of Dune/Handmaiden's Tale future that resembles an idealized past but is more a SciFi future reimagining of it, and government has an active role in producing that just as in normal progressive progressivism because you need the government to drive the change.

"See! She's not perfect, so you cant criticize trump for any of his flaws or you are a hypocrite!"

All politicians are the same! Our quarterback is cooler than your girl! Go Red team!

Because Trump

It is the way of Dems vs GOP.

And Fox essentially being a GOP mouthpiece.

honestly aside from explicitly right wing outlets, I don't see any particular bias against harris. most outlets will almost alway criticize trump on everything while most of the time they praise harris and sometimes they criticise her on her more progression policies (because most of the media tilts fiscal conservative). it's rather more of a perceptions of the audience thing. trump has done so many outlandish shit that now most of his bullshit gets filtered out as noise.

also i don't wanna be mean but the question "Why does it feel standards are much higher for Harris than Trump?" sounds like it's coming from an agitated"vote blue no matter who" democrat who is baffled about why would people not vote for the obviously better candidate.

there are a lot of reasons as you said "this race is STILL either 50/50 or tilt Trump". maybe it's because she's black or female and there are a lot of racist and misogynists out there, maybe it's because of the electoral college, maybe it's because of the hold the MAGA cult has over its members, or maybe it's because harris is refusing to stop arming and helping a genocide and that is turning people off.

the Harris campaign right now can only change one of these factors. even if you plan on voting, lie on the polls and organise and protest against the genocide because if enough people do this to force the hand of the Harris campaign then it wouldn't be a close race at all.

I disagree on the genocide. I’d love for Biden to stop cucking to Israel, but I don’t think that’s nearly a big enough issue to sway polling fully in Harris’ favor. I’ve yet to see a single focus group video or cross tab where Gaza was a major issue for these voters.
- I’ve yet to see a single focus group video or cross tab where Gaza was a major issue for these voters.
  
  and even if it is a major issue for them, the vast majority of them are going to concede that issue at any cost.
or maybe it’s because harris is refusing to stop arming and helping a genocide and that is turning people off.

in terms of this argument, i don't understand why i never see I/P people talking about russia and ukraine. Russia has lost upwards of 300,000 people in the war effort alone, an entire magnitude more than Palestinian deaths. Most of these being random people conscripted out of nowhere.

Do we not care about the lives or russians or something? Is this covert racism? Are we just politically tuned into only I/P because modern progressives have only the brain space for one single conflict? (and i don't blame them, i don't have time for I/P either lmao)

They literally only talk about I/P and it's so confusing to me, do they go outside or anything? It seems like thats the only thing they care about?
- It's a bit different because Russia are the ones who are invading another country. While obviously the insane loss of life is still terrible, I think people would view i/p a lot differently if it was Palestine actively invading and trying to annex all of Israel.

Part of the issue is the push by many left-wing voters to get actually progressive politics on the table after years of alternating between regressives and complacent centrists* that prefer making small concessions to the right over big steps to the left. They don't want another presidency marked by lukewarm promises kept poorly. They're tallying up all the ways in which Harris still isn't as good as she ough to be.

For Trumpers, he is good enough. He is everything they want: A public role model enabling them to be an absolutely shameless asshat.

The complexity arises when people advocate voting for a third party instead. By and large, no third party has the traction to beat the Republicans. You'd need to get the entire Dem voterbase and then some. If that fails, you've split the non-Rep voterbase and the enabling asshat gets the plurality. On the other hand, there's a risk that leaning too far left in the attempt to keep the progressive voters may lose the centrist* voters, which is a gamble whether that will end up a net positive. Harris has a tough job: walking a political tightrope, particularly if it's consistently being tugged at by people.

And there are good reasons to tug on that rope. You'll find some in these comments: Settling for "Good enough" doesn't help getting actual change. For the ultra-rich, on the other hand, progressive policies are a detriment, so they'll want to tug it the other way. The left doesn't want to cede ground and keeps pulling. The centrists* that don't like Trump but also fear dramatic change pull her to the other side again. The "centrists"** pull just to see her fall.

And that's exciting! That's an actual conflict of ideologies! That's her having to work for her voters' approval! You'll see the complaints flying left and right, see her try to keep an ever-shifting balance, see drama and tension! People love drama and tension. Corporate media loves drama and tension because it gets attention, clicks, revenue, all that. "Assholes still support Asshole" just isn't as interesting as "<prominent person> criticises Kamala for <policy>, calls her <incomplete quote>".

Also, splitting the Dem voterbase serves the corporate executives and shareholders that want the right-wing tax breaks and erosion of worker protections because it makes them even richer. That's probably not a coincidence.

*Centrist as in "I don't want things to radically change", not as in "I think both parties are equally bad, so I'll sow dissent in the Dem voterbase, pretend that I'm not helping Trump with that and get to feel superior to both".

** The latter group of the above footnote. It doesn't really matter whether they're intentional agents of disunity or idealists that care more about voting with their heart than the actual outcome. The result is the same: At best, they've achieved nothing. At worst, they've contributed to Trump's victory.

Shes a woman, shes not white, and shes a democrat. Take your pick.

Because we can't mock Trump and their supporters if Kamala fumbles. As long as she doesn't fumbled we can mock them with impunity

Because we all know what trump is.

We know, but many do not know.

People really really want to root for their side. If a comparison can be made in the slightest that your side is also doing something right, or that the other side is also doing something wrong, they can twist their viewpoint to see both sides as equals. You have to be flawless to prevent this. Your worst has to be better than their best.

It’s worth noting that Harris is still pretty new when it comes to being the presidential nominee. Nobody even considered it until the Biden debate.

So partly the media is making up time when it comes to analyzing her and asking and expecting answers.

Trump has been running for president since the day he lost, so we all know everything there is to know about him.

I'm pretty sure Trump is Darkseid and MAGA are literally being subjugated by the Anti-Life Equation.

That's all the explanation that is needed.

Why the fuck do you think? People hate women

It only depends on which network you watch.

Neither of these two candidates is suitable to lead, but depending on your network of choice, one is a messiah or a crazy person.

People where willing to let trump win because they didn't like biden

Because the standards for a regular 60 year old are higher than for a 74 year old pedophile with severe mental illness

It's so harrisover

Firstly Republicans have their guy so they are just going to pick at any weakness.

Second, all news media has consolidated and is owned by right wing rich fuckers. There is a wealth tax proposal and the ftc is super strong right now. So rich people are being cry babies

Third, there is a genocide happening right now with bullets paid for and made with USAs stamp on it. People are super critical against it

Fourth, left wing people always want better so you got to do something to succeed and if you do something we want you to do better since politician rarely go far enough. All the right wing people need to do to succeed is to obstruct and do nothing.

Fifth, Democrats are courting the middle. With the military policy, fracking, border wall, immigration and the tough on crime rhetoric Kamala sounds like a moderate Republican from 8-10 years ago. Leftists have no choice but to vote Harris or we run the chance of having Trump. While some of may vote third party because Harris doesn't go far enough if we do that in battle ground states we will be blamed again and we are strongly discouraging that. So the only voter base Kamala can pick up is republican never Trumpers and people in the middle and independents. Kamala's rhetoric reflects that.

Lastly Kamala is really untested. She has flip flopped and people hate that and hypocrisy. They can't push Trump nor give him more attention so they push Kamala. She lost her last presidential run really badly dropping out before the primaries. She only had one term as senator in a very safe district to get elected in as a democrat. As an Attorney General she ran 2 elections and only served 1.5 terms. Her district attorney stuff has been her best and most notable thing followed by her AG stint. But DA and AG stuff isn’t the same policy stuff as a politician. As senator she only passed one law having lots of words about other stuff though

It's because she wasn't a major contestant in the 2016 primary because people voted for better candidates. Also, she seems to be a 1:1 copy paste of Biden, which isn't good because people didn't like Biden half assing his promises in office and giving republicans an easy time making a counter campaign.

On top of that she basically told the uncommitted group to get bent, so that gives Trump more voter leverage similar to how he beat Hillary.

Biden was met with the same voter response because he was voted in explicitly to remove Trump. Otherwise he's known as being Obama's VP, of which even Obama said that he should retire afterwards because he was a centrist.

It's the same deal as 2016, where the DNC thinks campaigning on "lesser evil" is a viable strategy in order to retain their lobby money. If the RNC actually had more than two brain cells, they could easily win this election by having their candidates not act like insane asylum criminals.

I do agree that if Republicans ran different candidates, ones that had any semblance of ideas (even bad ones) instead of the tired personal attacks, they'd be formidable. They've dug themselves into a hole with the MAGA movement, even worse than they did with the Tea Party, and they seem committed to ride this one all the way off the cliff. This really is Harris' election to lose, and that seems to be a repeated pattern, which says a lot about the DNC. If they'd try to appeal more to the progressive side and stop trying to keep the centralists, I wonder if it would be a more of a sweep from people seeing something different finally.
It’s the same deal as 2016, where the DNC thinks campaigning on “lesser evil” is a viable strategy in order to retain their lobby money. If the RNC actually had more than two brain cells, they could easily win this election by having their candidates not act like insane asylum criminals.

the DNC isnt so much campaigning on the lesser evils this time around as it is campaigning for the moderate american position.

There is some lesser evil, but it's more akin trying to appeal the most broadly to the general public while heeding the historical american roots that politics has lost as of recent.

The president isn’t in charge of COVID. States are in charge of COVID. Pandemics are handled by the states with help from the federal government. BLM protest are once again state issues. I’m not sure why so many Americans don’t understand how the government is run. Presidents are not dictators. They are limited by the constitution and laws.

No why is the split so close? Harris isn’t a good candidate. She’s wildly unpopular and has been for years. He policies are horrible and the average American doesn’t want them. They are the opposite of what Americans want.

Biden has always been fairly unpopular. I’ve always thought the guy was an idiot but he isn’t far left. He fairly moderate to Leaning a little right.

We also have a large red/blue divide in this country and presidents are picked by the EC.

Trump is a horrible candidate but things ran well when he was in office. People will remember that.

The short version is we are running two awful candidates and that’s why the elections are close.

Idk about that, several polls are showing Dem enthusiasm around 75-85%. That’s way more than Biden earlier this year. Harris’ base seems to like her.
- They’re just excited the person isn’t half dead.
  
  She wasn’t able to get a nomination through the standard channels. They had to put her in the back because they felt she was damaging Biden approval ratings.
  
  He approval rate is low.
  
  https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/approval/kamala-harris/
  
  More people disprove than approve.
  
  I proudly voted for Obama Kamala is not Obama. She’s not Clinton. Hell she’s not even a Joe Biden.

She is female.
She is black.
She is strong.
She is not a puppet.

She is EVERYTHING that the power structure fears, because she will be hard to control, and likely cost them a lot of money and power.

You really should have stopped before

She is not a puppet

I don't get why my restaurant gets so much scrutiny over a few rat turds in the soup when Gusteau's has a literal rat village in the kitchen

Meanwhile, you doubtless have a restaurant you can point to which is rat and insect free?
- Enjoy the rat shit.

You're asking good questions, but I don't think you're actually open to hearing the actual right answers.

I’m open to your answers.

Because Trump has better policy and she doesn't. So it becomes a battle of policies vs personality.

Better as in how?

Edit: sounds of crickets intensifies

It feels like Harris has to run a damn near flawless campaign

Literally supports Genocide lmfao. Was Adolf Hitler running a flawless campaign too?

What about trump? Pretty sure he’s just glass Gaza if he had a chance.
- Yeah but that doesn't count because uhhh reasons
- Trump will do whatever Bibi whispers in his ear when it comes to Israel and its ~~enemies~~ neighbors.
- Did OP say Trump is running a flawless campaign somewhere too?
Proving OPs point, I see
- Kamala Harris is running a flawless campaign for Genocide?
Trump also supports genocide. Nobody who doesn't can possibly win.

If this is your line then you should probably just never vote ever, because this won't ever change.
- I’m pretty doubtful the luminary you replied to lives in or has ever even been to the US.
- It's funny that "candidates have to support genocide or they can't win" is motivating you to punch left instead of rioting in the streets against AIPAC
- Stop pretending Harris is running a flawless campaign and ButTrUmP when the stupid lie gets debunked.
Completely missing the point while also proving their point with a bonus side of refusing to allow any topic of conversation that isn't the one you want. 10/10
Fuck Putin. Lol.
Was Adolf Hitler running a flawless campaign too?

Not flawless, but his moves to boost the German economy and reduce unemployment had pretty wide support in Germany, especially after the extreme troubles the Germans had economically after the first World War. His rise to power was only made possible by a wide base of support that existed during the 1930s in Germany.
Клоун
- 10 replies and all of them either deflecting or insulting.
  
  At least Democrats voters aren't pretending they aren't voting for Genocide anymore.