In the same breath you call Hillary a terrible politician then admit you weren’t around so you don’t know any details.

I mean yes; I know the gist of why she was a terrible politician but I’d have to do some research to provide receipts like I could do for Harris on the spot.

You are underestimating how many people in the right geographical areas of this country will NEVER vote for a woman for president.

Then enlighten me? How many people in the right geographic areas of this country will never vote for a woman for president? Surely someone has already answered such a high-stakes question.

It’s not a matter of liberals admitting it, it’s that Isreal ramped up and ran out of targets with any military association but kept bombing.

See, you’re proving my point. That’s exactly what was happening under Biden. The UN was warning of a famine as early as mid-2024. Biden himself said Rafah was a humanitarian red line and proceeded to do nothing when Israel took it. If your point is that Israel was engaging in legitimate self-defense until November, then kindly fuck off.

There were so many obvious lies being pushed by both sides that even the extent of Isreal’s atrocities was questionable back then.

No it fucking wasn’t. People were yelling as loud as they could that Israel’s conduct was genocidal as early as October 9th 2023.

I mean sure you can find people who think or do basically anything; I haven’t seen any evidence that this is a significant group of people, even though if it was it’d show up on polls before and after the election. I’d also bet good money no such evidence exists, because if it did libs wouldn’t shut up about it. Meanwhile plenty of evidence exists that the most significant factors in Harris’s loss were the genocide and her being a rightwing ghoul.

times were a bit different then, that was before Isreal just started to murder civilians blatantly en mass.

No, it’s just before liberals started admitting that Israel was blatantly murdering civilians en masse. This had a lot more to do with a Republican being in charge than the actual blatant mass murder of civilians, which had been going on since October 2023.

And I wonder why?

Because you like Harris and don’t want to accept that someone can have a valid reason to hate her guts.

This is more of a rant than a response to anything I actually said.

all of them were objectively worse off.

I generally agree with you, but I thought real wages went up under Biden for low income earners? What metric are you using here?

We’re not talking about the right, though; we’re talking about the left and center. You know, the people who voted for Obama, and who would be expected to vote for a Democratic candidate. Why even care what the right thinks?

Acting like it’s currently the environment of 2008 is blind.

Sure, but that cuts both ways. Just like the right is more fascist today, the left and center-left are more progressive and more willing to listen to radical voices. Your implicit assumption that all of America shifted rightwards doesn’t match up with reality.

convince too many leftists that there’s something wrong with her for some reason.

I mean there is plenty wrong with her (TropicalDingdong makes a good case in that regard), but she’s the best realistic option barring a new national-scale Mamdani.

I mean do you even have reasons for thinking Harris was so bad?

Yes, plenty in fact.

Copy paste from elsewhere in the thread.

You seem well-meaning, but the racism/sexism card is way overplayed at this point in the game. The two examples DNC sympathisers point to for why an AOC run is a bad idea both lost not because they were women, but because they were utterly terrible politicians. I wasn’t around for Hillary so I can’t go into too much detail, but Harris specifically did her utmost best to destroy every single ounce of goodwill she had. And as for the racism, well, America did overwhelmingly elect Obama in 2008. Even on the far right you see MAGA elect women and minority politicians they agree with (see: MTG), so there’s no way the everyone left of Reagan coalition wouldn’t be able to elect AOC due to sexism. It’s just a complete and utter non-issue.

You seem well-meaning, but the racism/sexism card is way overplayed at this point in the game. The two examples DNC sympathisers point to for why an AOC run is a bad idea both lost not because they were women, but because they were utterly terrible politicians. I wasn’t around for Hillary so I can’t go into too much detail, but Harris specifically did her utmost best to destroy every single ounce of goodwill she had. And as for the racism, well, America did overwhelmingly elect Obama in 2008. Even on the far right you see MAGA elect women and minority politicians they agree with (see: MTG), so there’s no way the everyone left of Reagan coalition wouldn’t be able to elect AOC due to sexism. It’s just a complete and utter non-issue.

I mean why would they pay taxes if they’re not a money-making enterprise?

They’re not incompetent (well they’re that too, but not just incompetent); they’re also controlled opposition. What you see here is their job.

Except for all the times you negotiate with terrorists. “Never negotiate with terrorists” is what oppressors do when they don’t want to negotiate with the oppressed (who may or may not be terrorists), not a strategy anyone has ever seriously implemented.

That’s so surprising, I am shocked. I wonder if anyone could’ve predicted this.

That makes a lot more sense.

Uh… Why do you think terms matter for Putin? Though either way he’s popular enough to win a somewhat fair election.

Yes I know the cliche saying of “every president is war criminal” blah blah blah. But last president atleast were attacked or provoked by recognized threat.

And there you are. What you’re now doing for Obama, Bush and Biden the establishment is willing to do for Trump. Either they’re all terrorists or none are. For the record I believe “terrorist” as a label does more harm than good; I prefer terms like “fascist,” “imperialist” and “war criminal,” but also half the things you just listed have nothing to do with terrorism and the other half has clear equivalents for past presidents.

No other president has caused this much global terror in the modern era.

Uh… ever heard of the War on Terror?

Now to answer your question, the reason Trump is (mostly, some people are doing so) not being called a terrorist is that “terrorist” is actually a pretty mild label in the grand scheme of things; other labels (again, like “fascist,” “imperialist” and “war criminal”) better reflect the sheer depth and breadth of the depravity. Also some definitions of terrorism explicitly restrict it to non-state actors.

I mean sure but “how to build the best possible society” and “how to build the best possible capitalist society” are different questions with different answers. The state is/can be superfluous under socialism, but under capitalism it’s an unavoidable arena for fighting over political power, and the less political leadership is paid the more that arena is rigged in favor of the rich. Also you could multiply those hundred million dollars by ten and it’d still be a rounding error in the wider US government budget, so it’s not like that money is actually competing with anything.

Absolutely, 100%. There’s a reason those 17 (???) sanctions packages didn’t hit all at once in February 2022.

I mean things can get damaged in transit or go bad or anything else, so not really. Maybe if everyone in the MCD did so (since 10 to 11 is a ~9% reduction in sales), but if it’s only this guy it’d easily go unnoticed.