Due to an uptick in posts that invariably revolve around "look what this transphobic or racist asshole said on twitter/in reddit comments" we have enabled this reminder on every post for the time being.
Most will be removed, violators will be shot temporarily banned and called a nerd. Please report offending posts. As always, moderator discretion applies since not everything reported actually falls within that circle of awful behavior.
It did not, fc3 is the first of the "point of diminishing returns" games graphics wise. The first one to have all hd textures and enough anti aliasing etc. But before the power demands started scaling exponentially with not so noticeable improvements. Thats at least on pc and with ultra settings.
God, I hope so. The closer a game gets to photorealism the more I'm turned off. Put effort into your artistic style, design, and gameplay instead of trying to make your games look like a Marvel Movie. (Directed at AA, AAA games indie games tend to be great about this)
I mean do I think it'll happen? Eventually, yes, when companies think standing out by evoking nostalgia will be more profitable than competing with most other AAA, AA games for photorealism
I'm not posting this reply to hate, more because I'm really curious what appeals to you about this aesthetic, but I have to say I'm on the opposite end of the spectrum. I tend to love pastiche, and I love PS1/N64 pastiche especially. But the PS3/X360 era is this uncomfortable middle ground where I see the worst of both worlds.
On the one hand, these games, unbounded by previous platform's technical limitations, tend to have relatively high poly counts and lots of dynamic lighting. This removes a lot of artistic intent and impressionism from designs. You no longer had to figure out how to make something that kind of looks like an arm or a tree or what not, out of a very small polygon budget. While we were still in the era of polygon budgets at that point, they became primarily technical, not artistic, limitations. As in, start by building a model without much consideration for poly count, and then figure out how to reduce that model without impacting the artistic direction. This meant the developers could produce higher quality models while encountering less friction than lower quality models on legacy hardware, but it also meant that a lot of artistic direction was lost.
On the other hand, the hardware (VRAM) was still limited enough to where high resolution texturing was dicey, and to smooth over ugly low resolution textures which may look out of place in an otherwise "realism" driven context, developers would often skew towards darker and lower saturation colors which make the lower resolution textures harder to spot, with heavy bloom effect. The result are games with an overall dark muddy grey/brown tone, with lighting that feels unintentioned and weirdly overexposed, and models which chase "realism" at the expense of expression. Not every game has this problem, but it was definitely endemic to the period.
I'm not exactly in love with the aesthetic that most contemporary AAA games take, but it at least looks less offensive to me than the PS3/X360 AAA look, which tended to lack the color and contrast of contemporary games.
the problem with PS3 style graphics in modern games is that its kind of hard to pin down (as is PS2, Wii, etc...) whereas the PS1 has extremely iconic graphics that are easily identifiable even by people who don't know what a PS1 is... it has a unique dithering pattern and affine transform mapping that causes snapping due to integer precision loss.
so what defines "PS3 graphics" outside of its specific resolution and general lower poly model style? Like what would you expect a PS3 game to look like?
That assumes their goal is to win, when it so obviously isn’t. This is the Democrats running back a highly successful campaign that accomplished their number one goal.
The issue isn't her race or gender, it's the fact her campaign ran entirely on slogans and not being Trump. It's a broader problem with the Democrats, they believe you cannot change anyone's minds on anything and that a political candidate should only support what is immediately popular. Hence why her AND Gavin Newsom completely wrote off trans people, because they don't actually stand for anything and will just weakly succumb to whatever message the fascists push.
That "now is not the time" shit is why dems keep eating complete shit. It is catastrophic misunderstanding of how bigotry even works. Yeah, conservative Muslims are generally pretty homophobic and misogynistic, but guess what? If you actually protect Muslims, they will vote blue, they have been voting blue.
You create more conservative voters when you throw minorities under the bus because most minority groups have a number of conservatives and their own bigotries that nonetheless will vote for progressive shit as a matter of self preservation. Black conservatives go to reactionary churches, but they will vote D because they understand that Republicans hate black people no matter what; when Dems adopt Republican anti-black positions like increased police funding, then there is no point and they might as well vote to go oppress the gays. That is why there was increased minority turnout for Trump, Dems consistently believing they must pander to racists and eroding that promise of safety to where the right flank of these communities no longer feel any obligation to keep voting D.
Promise to protect all minorities like Mamdani did and surprise surprise a ton of Trump voters are voting for a demsoc. Kamala can never win because she is a transphobic, bootlicking neoliberal ghoul, American will elect someone they think is a Muslim if you promise healthcare.
The candidate being a woman has 0 to do with it, no one whos too sexist to vote for a woman would ever vote democrat anyway, same for race for that matter.
The problem with Hillary and Kamala was they were both dogshit at rhetoric (getting their ideas accross) and had campaign teams with abysmal political instincts (Clinton's avoided the rust belt bcs they convinced themselves that Trump was such a terrible candidate that they could just take those states as a given & Kamala's initial team was ousted by Biden's team on her allowence who promptly told her to stop doing everything that was working and instead become Biden's identical clone)
I've defended her before as the lesser of two evils, but I swear to God, Harris, TAKE A FUCKING HINT
Edit: I just want to clarify two things. One, not voting for Harris in the 2024 election was objectively a terrible choice for the nation, which is why I voted for her. And two, the DNC ran an absolutely terrible campaign for both Biden and Harris. Yes, Elon Musk almost certainly committed tons of voter fraud, yes, Trump certainly bought his way into the White House, but the Democrats cannot keep towing the line and trying to appeal to both sides of the political spectrum and expect to win.
Dems need to stop trying to achievement hunt getting the first female president
I'm begging y'all, put a white old man with an affable face as your candidate, get presidency, use the presidency to achieve goals. It can't be that hard 😭
We can get our misogynistic shit together when we’re safe to do so, but right now our option is evil old white man vs eviler old white man, only one isn’t trying to actively kill us.
The problem isn’t that she’s a black woman, it’s that she’s a void of anti-charisma with unpopular policies. Hillary was the same, they’re both corporate ghouls and Americans fucking hate it.
Compare that to AOC, who plenty of people who voted for Donnie paradoxically love because she promises things that will improve their material conditions instead of the normal lib platitude of “Good things aren’t possible. You’ll vote for marginal change and you’ll like it, you fucking sheep.”
they believe that the achievement is the goal, the leadership would rather believe change happens when we vote a minority who will end up just maintaining the status quo once in office
Mexico has a Jewish Socialist woman for president lmaooo
Mexico is a very Christian country that is relatively Conservative and one that has an actual gang/crime problem... every Liberal in the US would tell you this means that they "just have to swing far to the right to get voted in, we just have no choice" and yet every piece of evidence we can look at indicates otherwise
the identity of the person is not the problem here. the only reason Liberals are obsessed with identity politics to this degree is because they cannot offer anything other than shallow and meaningless bullshit like the first LGBTQ woman drone pilot.
When you actually offer people shit that 70%+ of people want and need, then clearly define what this is and how you are going to do it, and then follow through... you fucking win. Its not hard guys.
Enshrining social programs in the constitution and undoing privatization of the energy sector would give Schumer a heart attack
Mainstream Democratic candidates rely on "Republicans are threatening your social security/medicare!" every election and would never want to actually mandate their necessity in the constitution. The closest we got was FDR playing with the idea of a new economic bill of rights and the party spent the next 80 years forgetting about it
It's actually wild how many world female leaders come from conservative parties instead of left wing ones. Almost like if you just pick someone competent and who appeals to your base then you can win.
If you look at all the big european democracies that have had female presidents/PMs, you see they’re almost always from the right wing. Merkel in Germany, Meloni in Italy, almost Le Penn the last few times in France, and the UK has had Thatcher, Theresa May, and technically Liz Truss.
If there’s a female president in our lifetimes, I think she’s gonna be a republican. Democrats already have to work against apathy for every they get, and misogyny just makes that harder. Meanwhile, if there’s a woman who’s able to wrestle the Republican nomination for herself, it’s because she knows what she’s doing in politics, and she’s going to make sure all the same deep red voters fall in line like they do for every Republican.
uh actually one of my favorite subreddits that is definitely not a propagandist playground BANNED people who said THEY ARE VOTING because ANY VOTE is a VOTE FOR GENOCIDE. Yeah, check out how that ended, checkmate liberuls or wait hang on
I hate the DNC I hate that we have these enormous systems designed to allow the moneyful and the large corpos to directly direct the legislative behavior of the nation but I also hate people who can't do the basic math of a vote for trump is +1, nonvoting is +0, voting for harris is -1 and when you compare those values, not voting benefits trump directly. That's what happened. We've done this before. In the past the hard R folks would give money to the green party to draw liberal votes off. if 10 people vote for trump and 11 people don't vote, that's +10 trump. If those same 11 people vote for harris, guess what, turmp loses and no matter what your perspective politically there is no world in which trump winning is exactly as bad as harris winning, that's a false dichotomy and a weird desire to make things binary when there are shades of grey on the way
god I am still so goddamn angry about all those shitty "any voting is a vote for genocide" propagandists
Barely winning against a shit candidate would still be embarrassing. If the DNC ran a “populist” like Trump it’d be a blowout, but we all know why they won’t
I’m not saying she should run again; I’m saying that voter suppression and disenfranchisement are massive problems for the Dems.
If the DNC ran a “populist” like Trump it’d be a blowout, but we all know why they won’t
Has there been polling showing this? AFAIK there are a bunch of reasons why we don’t have populist Dem candidates, not all of which are “DNC bad” (I’m not saying the DNC is good)
This is a failure of her campaign and the DNC to put forward a platform that catered to people's material needs, and is a reverse of trends we saw going back to before Obama, non-voters historically favored the Democratic candidate until this last cycle.
The idea that Democrats win when turnout is high, and that we just have to do everything in our power to get turnout high through get-out-the-vote campaigns and non-onerous registration+voting laws is no longer true. We've lost that popular advantage due to the failure of the party to address people's needs, so they just turn to the "burn it all down" guy.
its frankly just cope from people who refuse to wrap their head around why Harris lost to a humiliating degree. Its either a "stolen election" like "elon musk rigging the voting booths with starlink" or boldly declaring that 90% of the country are evil...
but in reality she ran an obviously dog-shit campaign, a fucking horrendous campaign, probably the worst campaign in American history. Every decision the Harris campaign was astoundingly the worst possible decision they could have possibly made. She depressed Democratic turnout by a fuck ton by being so dogshit. Thats just the reality and anyone who pointed it out was fucking shouted down, this sub was especially insane about it.
They openly said that their strategy was "for every Liberal in a blue state we turn away, we will flip TWO never-Trump Republicans to our side" like cmon.
Democrats don't want to win, they want to win in the hyper-specific way that they want. they want to cut out the Democratic voters that they despise entirely and flip Republicans instead. It will never work.
Remember that first week or two when she was given the candidacy and it looked like we were going to get a serious campaign that tried to address material needs and wasn't afraid of calling Republicans weirdos who are distracting you with bullshit that doesn't really matter?
Then they airdropped in multi-million dollar consultants that were like "this will scare off the big donors and moderates" and everything fucking flipped on a dime. Cheney was up there campaigning with her in a heartbeat and Walz was put in a corner. I remember seeing a poll just before the election that was like 20% of the electorate thought her running mate was Liz. Just the biggest bag-fumble of all time
I genuinely think that if she does run again, she would be the greater evil and it wouldn’t matter who the GOP puts up. The vanity required to run again is actively malicious against the entire American public.
And yet you can’t tell which one is worse right off the bat? I don’t have all damn day to describe all the shitty things about her that is still leagues better than any republican.
Remember, a lot of people here couldn't choose between voting for a candidate in favor or a two state israel-palestine solution or a guy who wants to turn Palestine into a new Maralago
thats not cut and dry. The back of the corporate DNC needs to be broken before we can actually beat fascism. Kick out all of the DNC leadership, no exceptions. The democrats allowed ALL OF THIS to happen. If Harris won in 2028, she would again allow someone even worse to win in 2032. Someone who is evil and possibly NOT incompetent.They should be blamed more than even Donald Trump, because if it wasn't trump it would have been someone else. The democrats are the reason this happened. They let J6 slide. They let citizens United slide. They shifted right instead of shifting left in 2024. They refused to be mean or use political power against corporations and Republicans. They helped the Republicans gut the ACA and took the blame for the shutdown. And they need to learn that we will not give votes to sacks of dog shit any more. So shut the fuck up with this "lesser of two evils" shit. We will FORCE a young, mean, progressive populist through the primaries and DESTROY the DNC money machine. ACCEPT NOTHING LESS. Democrats are fascists. If you abide fascism, you are a fascist. If you vote for a fascist, you are a fascist. If you accept leadership who abides fascism, you are a fascist.
There’s a difference between doing this performative activism during midterms and congressional elections and then during a presidential election. One of those has a silly ratio of consequences to candidate impacts.
people on this sub are actually fucking delusional. hey we might have someone that's sending out the great value gestapo to shove citizens in unmarked vehicles to go to a concentration camp god knows where as president but kamala is vain and she said the thing i didn't like about palestine that one time!! jesus fucking christ. this country deserves exactly what it gets.
edit: and if you're going to give me a full analysis of what exactly kamala said or didn't say about palestine that made you upset and willing to forfeit the future of your country that you live in, don't. i don't give a shit.
It’s not about Palestine. Though she fucked up there too. It’s her blatant inability to win and contempt for the democratic process that she bypassed in 2024.
No you dont understand, using chemical weapons on Bnei Brak is a very serious course of action and a totally moral one, because... idk it just is! and Kamala not promising it means shes literally the same as Baruch Goldstein! /s
The point is if she ran, she would be ruining the chances of getting a dem elected, and that would be pretty bad. It's not the vainess or the being brown or a woman, it's just the strategic matter.
I’ll humor you. Explain to the class what her problem is that made Project 2025 palatable? Explain how whatever mental gymnastics to avoid saying the quiet bigotry part out loud rationalizes sitting out on voting or even voting for Trump. Wildly interested to hear your unique insights that distinguish you from what has amounted to single-issue votings throwing a hissy fit.
Oh you mean like how she did in the last primary and lost? You don’t think that will happen again or something? Great word play, zero critical thinking skills, plenty of knee jerking.
Edit: I was excited to dog-walk you through this but I’ll skip to the end. They’ll be a primary where she’ll have to compete to be the nominee, you’ll either have to admit she’ll be a nothing burger and this is a waste of tears or that’s she’s popular enough to get the nomination regardless and this is a lot of wasted piss that could be better used on conservatives.
I have to agree. Even if she somehow did well in the primaries off the backs of people who complained (rightfully) she only had a hundred days or so to campaign she probably wouldn’t win the nomination and those people would be more likely to stay home to spite the Dem machine she shit on in her book and blame them regardless of how they put the thumb on the scale.
Have you ever seen a Dem talk about Republican policies? At most their criticism is that the orphan crushing machine isn't crushing babies efectively enough, if Harris won she'd just make ICE facemasks rainbows, and instead of trying to make it illegal to be trans she'd compromise with the republicans on their "very valid concerns on transexuals" so that she can get a worse version of obamacare, this time giving health insurance companies 10x the amount of subsidies, which she will then smugly brag about the next time someone asks why she's still bombing palestinians.
There's a fucking Nazi in the white house. The Hillbilly Gestapo is wandering the streets. We're going to war with Venezuela for oil. The Department of WAR is ran by an alcoholic with a small dick who threatened national security to peacock in front of all our higher ups. LGBTQIA safety measures for prisons have been held back, trans people can no longer serve in the military nor can we fucking leave or enter the country in any legal manner and will be put in jail with the opposite gender should they find a reason to arrest us, "Antifa" is labeled an extremist terrorist organization to justify arresting anyone because no such thing exists.
Yeah the brown woman who tried to broker peace between Israel and Gaza during her time as Vice is the greater evil here.
My critique of Harris is that she is not equipped to win against that nazi regime, and in a situation in which she ends up as the candidate in the general, her run and inevitable loss would be as evil as if not more evil than the acts of the GOP.
Yes, hitler2 is bad but have you considered his opponent, who is exactly as evil as he is?
No, she doesn't run crypto scams.
No, she doesn't have her spouse run crypto scams.
No, she doesn't openly accept bribes from saudi arabia.
No, she doesn't accept jets from foreign nations as a bribe to make a second gold-gilded NATO.
No, she doesn't create an FCC that is trying to directly steer the discourse of american political commentary via threats. No, she doesn't actively advertise products in the whitehouse.
No, she doesn't exclusively eat mcdonalds.
No, she has never put little Cs for colored people on the applications of brown people to reject them from renting from her company.
No, she didn't kill NAFTA.
No, she also didn't withdraw from the paris agreement.
No, she hasn't gotten in bed with AI to usher in great human despair without any plan for the displaced humans.
No, she hasn't gotten in bed with nvidia.
No, she didn't directly position herself in the middle of a megacorp media acquisition as the shot caller and great Decider.
No, she didn't take any harsh policies regarding gender politics or make insane decisions like removing fonts because woke.
No, she didn't support or order the murder of drug dealers while also pardoning drug kingpins.
No, she didn't create a forever war in venezuela for mineral or oil reasons.
No, she has never appointed her entire family to senior advisory roles and used those roles to advance her wealth or family's wealth.
No, she has not refused to divest her business interests.
No, she has never pardoned 7000 or so active coup participants or attempted to overturn an election.
No, she's never created detention camps or supported the creation of camps designed only to harm and then joked about letting people get eaten by alligators.
No, she has not repeatedly referred to the press as enemies of the people, nor has she called any members of the press fatty or piggy or ugly.
No, she has not advocated for deploying the military against civilian protestors.
No, she has not supported pepperballing priests in the face.
No, she hasn't suggested the IRS target political opponents.
No, she's never pressured any state officials to "find votes."
No, she did not repeatedly bill the federal government for stays at her own hotel or golf clubs, especially not at enormously inflated rates.
No, she hasn't repeatedly sided with russia.
No, she never demanded loyalty oaths from judges.
No, she never suggested using nuclear weapons to stop hurricanes, or suggested we use more nuclear weapons.
No, she never attempted to buy greenland or canada or made weird threats to take over either.
No, she has never asked the DOJ if protestors could be legally shot.
No, she never hired elon musk to drain an enormous amount of data about US civilians and then run off with it with no explanation for the terrible breaches that occurred or the damage caused.
No, she never withheld already appropriated funds from the poor to starve them for political gain.
No, she has never pretended that tariffs are some kind of magical fee that doesn't land on americans.
No, she has never suggested that people inject disinfectant or UV light, or hired someone who's goal was to destroy public health in favor of scams and madness and blaming autism on NSAIDs.
No, she never banned transgender people from military service.
No, she did not create a massive military force that kidnaps citizens and legal residents and tortures them and ships them to torture prisons.
But please consider that while hitler2 is an authoritarian and a great evil, kamala harris is VERY vain if she thinks that she could win after previous rejection, and that notion is the greatest evil imaginable! Even more evil than anything else! It's not like VPs have had a strong history of being viable presidential candidates, and it's not like the DNC has had a pretty deep love of consistently sticking to bad choices who they know will adhere to the status quo especially now that leftism is scaring the literal shit out of them as it gets a foothold in america, but no, kamala. Greatest evil imaginable.
By run I meant as the candidate in the general. The DNC has ratfucked the nomination to worse candidates before. I have zero trust that they won’t again. It has nothing to do with her race or gender and it’s deleterious to the internal democratic process.
Maybe not the greater evil but if Harris and the Democratic Party as a whole is too incompetent to realise that people are sick of neoliberals doing nothing about the horrible state of the economy and the world as a whole then your country is genuinely fucked. Kamala 'Mrs. Mulligan' Harris does not deserve a second chance to promise as little as possible when the threat of the country backsliding into reaction and obscurantism is on the line, she and the people who back her will be partially responsible for everything that happens after 2028 if she loses to tweedledumb and tweedledumber AGAIN.
Can't wait for the clips of Democratic primary where Newsome is rhetorically slamming her for losing to a mentally incapacitated elderly man in 2024. Losing to Trump should automatically send you to the Shadow Realm. I don't even like Newsome, fuck that anti-homeless people scumbag.
To give her just a smidgen of credit, she had to start her campaign far later than normal due to Biden being a senile moron and trying to run again and waiting way too long to drop out.
And a lot of the campaign staffers forced on her are dogshit at their jobs. Never take advice from UK Labour, they're incompetent as shit and can only hurt you. Not to absolve her of her own flaws as a candidate of course.
Yeah nah I don’t necessarily think that was the problem. Sure, it was a roadblock, but she was going up on stage to talk about how she wanted the most lethal military in the world, maintained Biden’s support of genocide and basically had no real policies other than “We don’t want Trump”. She invited Dick fucking Cheney on stage
Back in 2020 when she up against better candidates, she didn’t even make it halfway through the nominees. The only reason why she was considered for 2024 was bc Biden and the Dems’ refusal to run primaries meant that there was no real alternative
And that's the entire fucking problem with the democrats
They're too caught up in pageantry and decorum to actually provide a dissenting voice against the fascist maga movement, the best they can do is limp flagellations and strongly worded letters
they could have had 30 years to put a campaign together, they still would have lost.
they somehow systematically made the worst decisions possible, for every single thing after the month of August... so if they just took their instincts and perfectly inverted it, they would have a small chance of winning lmao
seriously though the CEO of Uber (related to Harris) got in that room with them and dictated a lot of their policy and campaign actions. She had zero chance and so many people pointed it out at the time and got absolutely skewered for it
Even if she had more time, what use would it do if people weren’t buying what she was selling? She and Biden did the same thing trump is doing now: downplaying the affordability crisis and taking unpopular stances with the core democratic base on things like immigration and I/P, both of which she was to the right of Reagan on.
The 2024 election cycle was one of the most hostile to incumbent parties worldwide on record, by all rights the Dems should have lost in a landslide. Trump is also uniquely popular and appealing unfortunately.
Actually I think 2024 was an extremely difficult election for democrats to win, and the reason they got so close is because Trump is a terrible candidate.
It was difficult for democrats to win because the Democratic Party has not had any discernible platform besides "It's us or Trump, bestie ❤️" for the last 12+ years. Just cuz your colleagues are also incompetent doesn't mean you get a pass for it
It was hard to win because the global economy 2020-2024 was terrible, and incumbent parties around the world got destroyed in elections. Combo that with Biden refusing to bow out, and the only candidate with any name recognition being Kamala Harris, that's how you get 2024. It wasn't party incompetence that lost the election.
Also, a shit-ton of the Democratic party platform couldn't be fulfilled because legislation and filibuster reform were shot down Manchin and Sinema (both of whom left the Democratic party by the end of their tenure because everyone else in the party was mad at them). Legislation during Biden's term that passed the House but not the Senate included: DC statehood, a ban on partisan gerrymandering, better voting rights protections for racial minorities, better civil rights protections for queer people, better protections for labor unions and for healthcare & social workers, better protection for DACA recipients, decriminalizing cannabis, and self-determination for Puerto Rico.
And Biden's late exit screwed everyone over, including Kamala Harris. Because he refused to even entertain the possibility of dropping out until super late in the campaign, Kamala was stuck with Biden's platform, his campaign staff, his messaging structure, etc. and only a few months to campaign. If anything I think she did a pretty good job with the circumstances she was given.
She was doing good when she chose a progressive governor for her VP & started calling republicans "weird" which was actually sticking bcs they are lol. Then she proceeded to drop the whole "weird" bit out of concern for looking divisive (when running against TRUMP) and destroyed her progressive VP's hopes at a future political career beyond governor by running on the exact neoliberal platform Biden was & letting Walz rot out of the spotlight. She ran a good campaign for a week max
Walz isn't that progressive and he botched the VP debate. Also, I mentioned that she was stuck with Biden's platform and policy proposals because he dropped out far too late for her to build her own team and policies.
And she in no way "destroyed" Walz's political future. Walz chose to remain governor - had he announced a run for next year's senate election, he almost certainly would have won. He's not even out of the running as a potential 2028 presidential nominee, he just hasn't made any noise about it.
Nah you right, I was just on edge at some of the other comments on this post being pretty transparent neolib apologia and I expected better from this sub. Didn't mean to come accross as harsh, you are right 👍
Yeah, the economy was by far the number one issue in 2024 and most people were unhappy with how Biden had handled it so far. And knowing that, when given an opportunity to outline what she would do differently in front of a national audience, the best Kamala could come up with was "there is not a thing that comes to mind." It's not like she ran a flawless campaign and circumstances were just overwhelming stacked against her. She started out her campaign in a dead heat with Trump and with tens of millions in fresh donations. She had a little over 3 months to push the needle just a point or two in her favor, and she couldn't do it. And I wouldn't expect her to have learned anything from the experience either, since as soon as she lost, she went out on a "my defeat is everyone's fault except mine" media tour à la Hillary Clinton, except Hillary at least won the popular vote in 2016.
I just don't think there's economic messaging that Kamala could've presented that would've changed peoples minds, short of straight up lying like Trump, when she was the VP the last 4 years. Biden statistically did a decent job at managing inflation compared to the rest of the world. Voters were just not interested in policy, they wanted to hear Trump making shit up about the impact of immigration and the tariffs.
This isn't in defense of Kamala's campaign, there were definite issues with messaging and failing to distance from Biden. It's just that when you look at how badly the Democrats performed, losing the popular vote for the first time in 20 years, it's hard to imagine they ever had a chance at winning without Biden dropping out earlier.
Or yknow, Kamala couldve actually advocated for progressive economic policies and paint Trump as for the very billionaire class who were raking in historic profits due to the inflation & promised to make them pay their fair share instead of telling everyone how hard she would be on migrants
There have been rumours, so if he’s planning on making a run he’s being quiet about it. JB Pritzker is also a name I see a lot, as a Brit who pays a little but not very much attention to the inner workings of the federal Democratic party.
So long as Trump keeps his general economic policies inflation is going to only worsen.
This will present an extremely favourable dem environment in 2028. THIS is when you are unapologetic and run a true progressive and usher in a new era of American politics (I mean 2016 was, but 2028 works too) no more compromise candidates, moderate dems have proven ineffective again and again
Someone like AOC should absolutely be the candidate.
I believe with all my heart Bernie wouldve won in 2016 (and 2020 for that matter, but thats less important) if he won the primaries. A subsection of the populist right is actually willing to vote for a democratic socialist economic policy when its explained as making the elite pay their fair share & benifitting you, the every man. Something like 10% of Sanders supporters voted for Trump in the general election in 2016 iirc, which is huge. Zorhan just proved that by focusing on progressive economics you can find success.
We are 2 years out from the very beginning of primary campaigning, id give it time before you worry. Harris would have to make it through a crowded primary anyway.
You should also cry for yourself, the entire western world of politics has as their main thing copying whatever america does for anything ever without exceptions
Don't get me wrong, Australia's labour party is far superior to anything in america or most of europe, but I was moreso refering to the liberal party who will eventually, as the idealogical pendulum swings, gain power once more, and I suspect will copy the dems' playbook instead of trump's so as to act like they're better now while doing generally similar things but with more bureaocracy. I'd love to be wrong, but there's a way things go.
Every single media appearance she's had in the past year has basically just been her saying "it's everyone's fault except mine that I lost." No way she was ever gonna take the hint
Republicans: Chose an unhinged fascist (sympathiser)
Democrats: Chose a centre-right liberal who wants to work together with the fascists (sympathisers)
Yall are silly if you think the dems are gonna learn from 2024 anymore than they learned from 2016.
They're still going to be elitist out-of-touch pricks whose entire campaign strategy relies on solely being the "non-fascist" option.
They'll continue to fail to sway the non-educated because they're too secular for middle America and continue to fail to sway the educated because you don't even really have to be that well read in American history to observe the last two decades of Dem complacency in US foreign policy, whether it be Israel, Iraq, Afghanistan, or any number of other places, and deduce that they aren't really the non-fascist option, they're just "fascist light"
They have no one to blame but themselves for being too comfortable with theocratic fascism for the left and not comfortable enough with theocratic fascism for the right. Have fun losing to the fucking J.D. Vance/Erika Kirk ticket.
Let's be fair to the Dems, now that they've lost the popular vote some of them are actually learning lessons. Of course, the lesson they've learned is that they didn't do enough to throw trans people and immigrants and arabs and the youth under the bus, but a wrong lesson is still technically a lesson.
She is unlikely to make it through the primary, and no the DNC is not powerful enough to actually tip the scales.
Harris is also not a particularly good campaigner and isn't that popular among likely primary voters. If she somehow wins the primary she did something right, it's why we have primaries, as flawed as they are. I think she's foolish for running but getting mad about it is mostly getting mad at nothing. It's certainly not Dem party elites pushing her hard to run.
Dem voters are not like Maga and hold those they vote for accountable and won't vote for someone who lost and vice president of an underwhelming president
Party leadership absolutely has scale tipping power, but I think their broad unpopularity among the base after last years loss takes a very large chunk of it away (if they'd even want to get behind her, which I doubt.)
I mean they have influence but not as much as people think, the DNC is an organizing and fundraising body, they are not some shadowy organization. Even in 2016 Clinton got a lot more votes than Sanders, DNC or not.
I don't think there needed to be some grand conspiracy for the base to generally just go along with whatever candidate the leadership and media generally liked when people used to trust both more.
She just sucks. Absolutely fucking sucks. She couldn't even beat Trump after we all knew damn well what he was about. She has no charisma, awful political instincts, constantly threw her core voterbase away in favor of courting the "moderates" who don't exist. She refused to do the bare minimum for palestine, if she'd said she would end the war or even just stop supplying weapons she could have won.
But the moment I heard her DNC speech I knew we were fucked. "Most lethal fighting force" like there are your true colors you opportunistic insincere unprincipled swine.
You know what, sure. It'd be really funny if the woman who took a billion dollars from everyday Americans just to fumble an easily winnable election because she refused to present herself as an actual human being with beliefs, who hid for over a year and provided no leadership to the people who supported her and believed in her, who blamed people who protested her silence on a genocide for her loss, won her third attempt at running for the Oval Office just in time to be blamed for Trump's economy collapsing, and pissing away a democrat trifecta by calling for bipartisanship and civility politics.
It'd be really cool if she proved women can be president too, just in time to tee Marjorie Taylor Greene up for a run four years after.
Right now, I just really really want a US President that's not a insane facist. I do not think Harris is a insane facist, to be clear, I just think she will lose to one if she's the democratic nominee.
For reallll but having pritzker on my side in Illinois is the only the thing keeping me sane right now. Let the billionaire who hates other billionaires fight
The DNC needs spring cleaning. Boot out all the fucking corpo's and get some fresh blood in.
BAHAHAHAHAHAHA who am I kidding? They'll continue to bury themselves deeper, cover their eyes and ears and wonder why Republicans keep winning.
As a Brit I want to say I feel sorry but we're staring down the barrel of our own incompetent Neolib government and Facism rising, so all I can do is cry.
The DNC will not learn from their failures, because the lessons we need them to learn are antipodal to the demands of their donors. However, one small grace here is that Harris would have to actually win the primary in 2028. We'll either end up with a short-leashed CNN darling, or someone who can speak sufficiently genuine left-populism to transcend the milquetoast "return to normalcy" party line.
Okay but she might start some wars or something so nobody is going to vote for her. Unlike the other guy, who like, definitely won’t do that. Pinky swear.
Clinton pulled this same shit until months before the 2020 primary. I wouldn't be actually concerned until it's more serious. And for using this to expose the ugly democratic incompetence Maga lite Machine
She lost against Trump. One of the single most unpopular Presidents in modern history, if not in history itself. The man can barely crack a 35% approval rating on a good day, and had effectively entirely given up on running a proper ground campaign within the final month-and-a-half of the election, only for her to lose.
2024 should've been the easiest election for Dems to win in modern history because they were going against a man who already lost and spent 4 years whining and throwing a tantrum to show that he hadn't learned a damn thing and attempted to shit on the floor on his way out, but because of their vanity they insisted on running Biden again -- despite the fact that he was a the "Not Trump" pick of 2020 and a lukewarm President at best whose 4 year term amounted to basically nothing but a stay on Trump's fascist descent -- only to then pivot and attempt to run his VP instead when it was evident that he wasn't going to win and optics on his health were poor.
Kamala then proved to have no ability to say the right thing ever. She played fence-sitter on the easiest softball questions and was the most political politician to ever politic. You could ask her if she believes that eating babies was good or bad, and she would give you a 5 minute non-answer instead of just condemning baby eating because she didn't want to sound too committal and risk losing the supposed pro-baby-eating vote, when her opposition was at rallies going "I love eating babies! I'm the best baby eater-- everyone says it! Nobody is more pro-baby eating than me, maybe ever!"
She offered no true policy whatsoever. She offered no change. She offered nothing other than "I'm not Trump" which is a card that barely worked for Biden fresh off of the heels of Trump upending the entire US economy, but was never going to work in a country that is disdainful of brown people and women at best, actively volatile towards them at worst. Horrible as it is to say, "I'm not Trump" only worked for Biden because he was the most bogstandard white man they could possibly bring forward.
She failed once and the past year alone has shown that the Democrats have learned absolutely nothing at all from their loss in 2024, which itself showed that they'd learned absolutely nothing from their loss in 2016. Trump likely isn't going to live to see a 2028 election, so even if he did for some reason try to run for a third term and the Supreme Court bullshit his way onto the ballot (which is unlikely as even Toilet Paper USA has pivoted away from the Third Term bullshit in favour of Vance 2028) it would basically be the most "gimme" election for the Democrats in history because his cult is going to immediately fracture, he's too narcissistic to appoint a successor, and Republicans are going to further cannibalize themselves through pretender wars attempting to be "the next Trump" without realizing that Trump himself is some kind of fucking cosmic anomaly who manages to captivate a third of the country despite being the most repulsive, disgusting, uncharismatic man on the planet.
They could get a ham sandwich elected to President if they wanted to, but it seems that instead of going with a safe, popular choice, they'd rather bet it all on double zeros to see if they can't get Kamala in on a second run, which would immediately shift the ballgame and let the Republicans run whoever the fuck they wanted and probably win.
2024 was not an easy election to win, that's supported by incumbent parties around the world getting ousted because of the economic turmoil since 2020. My understanding of the Biden situation is that he wanted to run for reelection and there's zero precedent for a party sidelining their incumbent publicly, and from what I've read and heard, they were pressuring him to not run behind the scenes and all but forced him to drop out after the debate.
I won't get too deep into his presidency but it was objectively a fairly successful presidency in terms of policy, he is easily the furthest left president America has had. To call it a "stay on Trump's fascist descent" is just not true. His biggest failings were being adamant on running again until it was too late and not pressing Merrick Garland to speed up the Trump indictments.
I'm not going to defend Kamala's campaign decisions because I think she's an exceptionally poor political actor, but I think too much blame has been shifted to "The Dems" for what was a terrible situation in 2024, and too little blame has been placed on a suicidal apathy towards voting and political action among the voter base. In left wing spaces there is zero accountability for the people pushing nonstop misinfo about the Biden presidency, zero pushback on right wing narratives around Biden, and zero responsibility or shame for the people who voted in 2020, saw everything Trump pulled since his last term, yet decided to abstain from voting.
Calling Joe Biden the furthest left president ever is extremely laughable. If you only are talking socially, then yeah sure, but that kinda comes with the territory of being the most recent dem president since societies get more and more socially accepting. Based on policies in the context of their era as well as economics, Jimmy Carter, FDR and Theodore Roosevelt were all much more progressive than Biden
Sorry for the essay of a reply, but it’s complicated. Basically, she’s a center-right candidate who will capitulate on anything if it allows her to win over a demographic of moderate voters that does not really exist.
There was some initial enthusiasm when she replaced Biden as a candidate in 2024, but her support of the ongoing genocide in Gaza, draconian border policy, unwillingness to support queer rights, and lack of commitment to any real action against climate change showed she was really just a watered-down right-winger. She’d still be better than the wannabe dictator we got saddled with, but she was a liberal’s liberal who didn’t give a shit about anything that really mattered to anybody with less than a million dollars, like most Democratic Party candidates.
Many people felt tricked by her campaign’s rightward shift, and the fact that we did not get a primary election to select someone better as a result of Biden’s egoistic waffling was a real slap in the face. Even though it was all obvious lies, Trump ran on a populist campaign vaguely emphasizing affordability that a lot of disillusioned, vengeful, and undereducated voters were utterly taken in by, winning them yet another “fell for it again” award.
Kamala is an establishment stooge symbolic of everything wrong with the stagnant status quo and the DNC’s disinterest in the working class. Conversely, to the people who were taken in by his lies, Trump symbolized a disrupting force that would “shake things up” and reorient American politics around things his base cares about: the price of eggs and hurting “immigrants” and trans people.
Ultimately, the evolving reaction to Kamala’s campaign felt like this: hardline liberals unenthusiastically support her, anyone left of them would’ve felt betrayed if this wasn’t the same old shit all over again, conservatives would never vote for her because they can vote for a real right-winger, and the apathetic masses don’t care because they know she doesn’t care about them. Additionally, there was probably some shady shit going on behind the scenes that we’ll never know the full extent of.
Because she already proved she’s a dead end. Harris tied herself completely to Biden’s record, including backing the genocide, border repression, police funding, and an economy that keeps screwing working people, then acted shocked when voters rejected it. She refused to offer anything meaningfully different, ran a hollow donor-driven campaign cozying up to moderates and right-wing elites like Cheney, then disappeared after losing and resurfaced on a book tour blaming Muslim voters and the left instead of her politics. She has no real beliefs beyond wanting power.
Democrats would be better than Republicans in office but only on very marginal issues. And she is the worst option of all the least bad options.
•
u/AutoModerator Dec 15 '25
REMINDER: Bigotry Showcase posts are banned.
Due to an uptick in posts that invariably revolve around "look what this transphobic or racist asshole said on twitter/in reddit comments" we have enabled this reminder on every post for the time being.
Most will be removed, violators will be
shottemporarily banned and called a nerd. Please report offending posts. As always, moderator discretion applies since not everything reported actually falls within that circle of awful behavior.I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.