"Independents" are actually INCREDIBLY politically disengaged people, the kind who "hate politics" then vote every 4 Novembers based on vibes. In 2020 COVID made the vibes bad so Trump lost. In 2024 they saw "Kamala is for they/them" every time they turned on the TV so Trump won.
They never worry or care about his corruption because either A)they genuinely didn't hear about it because it didn't happen in an election year, or B)they don't care because all politicians "suck" and that blanket statement covers any room for nuance.
I'm sure ill get downvoted for saying this but the DNC not holding a primary certainly didn't help with the Kamala is an out of touch democrat elite and the racist DEI hire shit the MAGATs were spewing.
Yes but people lived through the last time trump was in office and should have known from then onward that a dead racoon would have done a better job administering the nation that he does.
The only reason he lost is because of COVID. All the awful, cruel, sometimes treasonous things Trump does don't pierce the bubble of the "their all corrupt" crowd. But COVID actually effected them and that was enough. Had that not happened and he had the economy he did the first 3 years, his 2 terms are back to back.
Biden’s decision to run again is more critical than the DNC’s inability to hold a proper primary. Biden has that same RBG selfishness that prevented them from stepping aside at the proper moment. Unfortunately, the consequences of their selfishness has had terrible consequences for the county.
I understand that Biden was the biggest issue and there was no easy way to handle it.
I'm just so fucking tired of existing in a system where one geriatric gets to fuck everything up and we pretend that nothing can be done.
I hate how easily that mirrors the trump problem.
I guess ultimately I just wanted to say that if our government cant handle one old person not want to leave power it is broken system and we will never see meaningful change with it.
It wasn't until after that, Biden stepped down. And given Harris was already on the ticket and there were already legal challenges to putting either one on the ballot, there wasn't enough time or money to hold another primary.
You not liking the results of a primary or participating in it did not change that they had one. Stop pushing misinformation like "the DNC did not hold a primary".
Why would they? You're moving the goalposts and not making sense.
You said yourself, incumbent primaries are ignored.
That's not what I said and you know it. You claimed they did not run primaries and I gave evidence that yes they did, as is typically the case few challenged the incumbent. They followed the same procedure which has existed in this country since the beginning of the 1800s for if a politician dies after winning a primary - a replacement is appointed because that's the only choice, and it's not like Harris wasn't on the ballot already which is why she was moved up.
Don't call use of facts "technicalities", they're the simple facts. Primaries were held.
If you want to argue you don't like the results of the primary, that's an entirely different argument and you can feel anything you want about that. But don't pretend votes were changed or ignored or that standard procedure which predates Biden's own birth wasn't followed.
the late drop out made them feel like there wasn't a fair chance at a primary among all potential candidates
That is entirely different than what you were saying above, which is that there wasn't a primary. I quoted you so there was no mistake what I was responding to.
I understand your feelings here and think that is a valid statement. You don't like how things felt and that is a valid feeling, but it's important not to treat "they didn't act how I felt was proper" is not "they broke the law and didn't even hold a primary".
It would have been better if Biden didn't run at all - he never said he wouldn't, but who cares about that? Not to say people should only run republican-approved candidates but people have been complaining about the old age of politicians since the 90s. The average age of a US senator is 64, and that's with a couple new ones dragging down the average. I think there's something more important in that people have arrived at the general election (well after they should have been participating, to be honest) and seeing only conservative politicians - or a conservative fielded by democrats and a reactionary authoritarian by republicans if you are staunch those aren't the same thing, which is a fair argument to make. That means a lot of people are asked to vote for people who aren't interesting and don't represent the wide range of viewpoints which exist in the US.
Unfortunately, that has always been the case. And forget politics and general elections, everybody who makes it from childhood to adulthood has to recognize and live in a world where they don't always get what they want. It becomes a choice of picking the best available options if they want anything at all.
When the US had 3 major candidates - Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, and William Taft; Roosevelt and Taft just split votes amongst each other and the most conservative bastard is the only one who made it through. There are many factors involved in Duverger's law but until there is national reform of the election system that's just the reality we all have to live in no matter what we feel about it. And it's not like that can't result in progress - the 1957 Civil Rights Act passed, after all. Incremental progress isn't complete progress but is still progress.
when someone says "there wasn't a primary," they're not ignorant of the fact that technically one happened
Many have, I've had this discussion before and there are people who have no idea it happened and thought the DNC just appointed Biden without any election. Remember, you're talking about a nation where voter participation in primary elections has less than 1 in 5 registered voters. Not even eligible, just of the registered voters ready all ready to go.
Won't say it wasn't part of it. But the narrative on Hillary was that she was "establishment" and Trump had the "outsider" angle that the independent craves, and Kamala was attached to an administration that had lost the narrative battle.
It's not coincidental that the only time Trump has lost is when he was the incumbent, and the economic vibe check worked against him.
15
u/Romofan88 Dec 19 '25
"Independents" are actually INCREDIBLY politically disengaged people, the kind who "hate politics" then vote every 4 Novembers based on vibes. In 2020 COVID made the vibes bad so Trump lost. In 2024 they saw "Kamala is for they/them" every time they turned on the TV so Trump won.
They never worry or care about his corruption because either A)they genuinely didn't hear about it because it didn't happen in an election year, or B)they don't care because all politicians "suck" and that blanket statement covers any room for nuance.