Why are the journalist bending over to Musk?

  • sparky1337@ttrpg.network
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    11 days ago

    They weren’t beaten badly, it was barely a 1.5% margin. Electoral votes….different story. But even then, this illustrates that a few more votes in key states would have had a drastically different outcome.

    • Snot Flickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      60
      ·
      11 days ago

      I think they mean “beaten badly” as in “lost control of all three branches of government” not so much “Trump landslide vote.”

      The person you responded to even said “Dems got beaten pretty bad” not “Harris got beaten pretty bad.”

      By the metric of losing the house, losing the senate, losing the judiciary, and losing the presidency is a pretty deep blow.

      • sparky1337@ttrpg.network
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        17
        ·
        11 days ago

        I didn’t think “Dems got beaten pretty bad in the election” was open to mean all elections.

        • Stovetop@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          11 days ago

          There was only one, there are more seats than just the president up for vote on election day.

    • tyo_ukko@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      11 days ago

      Ok, you’re right in this sense. However, I meant beaten badly in the sense of expectations vs. reality. If you followed any media, it was supposed to be a slight edge for Kamala, or at least a good chance for an upset. In the end the R’s got president, senate and congress. And the outcome was clear after the first few hours, unlike something like Gore vs. Bush.

    • BananaTrifleViolin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 days ago

      Thats still beaten badly. The election is entirely about winning electoral votes, and the dems failed that. They didn’t win votes in the right places and lost votes compared to the last election.

      The entire presidential election campaign is always about winning electoral votes and that means winning votes in swing states.

      • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        11 days ago

        I find this line of thinking so defeatist. Yes, we all know the electoral college is the system, but all also know it’s a sham and almost every honest person hates it because it undermines the idea of democracy. Imo the day people stop thinking the popular vote is what should count is the day we all collectively gave up on democracy.

        • Stovetop@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 days ago

          It’s truth, though. I don’t like it either, but we know the popular vote is currently meaningless. I’ll champion any cause that wants to change that, but there’s zero chance of that happening while the GOP controls the house, the senate, the courts, and the presidency.

          • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 days ago

            Your line of thinking however prefers to dismiss talks about the popular vote as though what people are thinking in the country broadly is off topic or irrelevant. How the hell do we change this if no one is ever allowed to mention the topic without a naysayer reminding us the popular vote is meaningless?

    • Toribor@corndog.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      11 days ago

      Maybe next time they’ll lose by even less! That’s about the best progress I can hope for in this country in my lifetime.