General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThis is what happens to when Democrats and other progressives stay home and don't vote.
'nuff said.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
lostincalifornia
(5,603 posts)
SocialDemocrat61
(8,104 posts)is for good men to do nothing" or vote third party. 
leftstreet
(41,300 posts)Knowing why so many reliably Democratic voters went for Biden, but not for Harris, should be analyzed
RandySF
(86,782 posts)leftstreet
(41,300 posts)Seemed pretty niche to me, but I don't know
Not sure that explains the losses in NV AZ PA WI, but hopefully they're analyzing all the results
SocialDemocrat61
(8,104 posts)without the spin of the media and public getting in the way.
AloeVera
(4,476 posts)Not releasing it was the decision of the DNC.
Not hard to guess though what the autopsy concluded.
SocialDemocrat61
(8,104 posts)and there is no way to know what it concluded.
AloeVera
(4,476 posts)When running for DNC Chair, Martin criticized the party for refusing to release the 2016 autopsy and promised to release 2024. Not only is it a bad look to renege but is counter-productive to rebuilding trust when you run on transparency and then keep the report secret.
No way to know what it included? Perhaps if someone has been in a coma since about October, 2023. Otherwise I fail to see how that could possibly be true.
SocialDemocrat61
(8,104 posts)Martin can promise anything he likes but in the end it’s not up to him. Like it or not not it’s up to the members of DNC. The average voter doesn’t give a damn about this. They are more the cost of groceries and gas. Promises are broken in politics and government all the time. If not releasing a report that 99% of the public doesn’t care about is worst, they are ahead of the game. A presidential candidate promising to not get the country into an unjustified war and then doing just that is a lot more serious.
And you’ll have to forgive me. I haven’t read the report so I don’t know what it has to say. Any thing else would be pure assumption on my part and I’m not arrogant enough to do that.
haele
(15,645 posts)Because the big money donors keep wanting to drag the Democratic Party to the "Reasonable Right" instead of moving incrementally from Center to Center Left.
The voters want a Center - Left candidate. Scandinavian style Socialist based Capitalism
The donors (and the consultants they pay for) want a true Centrist Candidate who supports their particular political focus and not rock the current Capitalist boat.
The conflict between what the majority of voters want and the majority of consultants and donors want is wide enough that the captive media propagandists can sneak in and create doubt and the appearance of weak waffling.
That's the problem from what I can see.
yardwork
(69,773 posts)I will add that in this environment where entitlement, selfishness and greed is normalized from the top down, it's not surprising to see blocs of voters go rogue. This toxic environment promotes single issue voting.
AloeVera
(4,476 posts)Dying a slow death after Citizens United. That anti-democratic travesty by the SC has put Democrats in a no-win position. Damned if they do...
The problem seems insoluble at the moment.
Rob H.
(5,948 posts)because there are likely some painful truths within it that they don't want to own up to, much less acknowledge.
AloeVera
(4,476 posts)Very painful truths indeed.
Rob H.
(5,948 posts)from candidates on down.
yellow dahlia
(6,614 posts)because some of us don't believe it.
gab13by13
(32,889 posts)Kamala Harris won the election.
Botany
(77,979 posts)Kamala won. It wasn’t that her voters didn’t turn out but those votes were deleted, flipped, excluded,
and manipulated in order to make Trump President again by shits like Musk, Thiel, A.I., Silicon Valley
billionaires, crypto men, and companies like Eaton.
Trump in 2024, “I don’t need more votes.”
questionseverything
(12,018 posts)Bookmarking
Cirsium
(4,154 posts)Last edited Wed Apr 29, 2026, 04:13 PM - Edit history (2)
The Common Coalition - whoever that is. If it is Adam Zarnowski, who puts out This Will Hold, there are some questions about motives and credibility.
This Will Hold is a pseudonymous Substack publication launched by an author known only as “@thiswillhold,” who claims their previous Twitter/X account was banned after a viral election thread. The publication is tied to a broader investigative project called The Common Coalition Report, which frames itself as a watchdog of election manipulation and technocratic overreach. The publication blends journalism, activism, and speculative analysis.
The site is reader-supported, with both free and paid subscriptions on Substack. It does not run ads or receive institutional backing. The author(s) operate anonymously, with no visible bylines or credentials beyond association with The Common Coalition. This lack of transparency in identity limits accountability, although the platform itself discloses no outside funding or political affiliation.
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/this-will-hold-bias-and-credibility/
According to the article, a person named Adam Zarnowski, who was identified as an ex-CIA agent, alleged that he was "personally involved in an NSA-authorized forensic audit of the 2024 election." That audit supposedly revealed that Harris won the 2024 presidential election "by a wide margin" while Trump "lost dramatically," Zarnowski was quoted as saying.
According to Zarnowski's Substack bio and LinkedIn profile, he has worked on cases involving human trafficking, sexual assault, domestic violence and crimes against children for organizations that aren't affiliated with the federal government.
Both his bio and the Substack article also listed him as the author of a book titled "Jӧrmungandr: A Study in Global Human Trafficking." The Substack article suggested that Zarnowski's book detailed allegations of election fraud. However, Snopes didn't find any evidence to support that claim.
https://www.snopes.com/news/2025/08/04/harris-nsa-audit-2024-election/
A recent entry is a manifesto by Adam Zarnowski, an individual styling himself as a former CIA paramilitary officer. His post, “‘Unleash Hell’: Pulling up the dragnet,” and its companion e-book are not a disclosure, but a performance—a Live Action Role Play of whistleblowing that demonstrates key techniques of modern disinformation.
The document is a dizzying Gish Gallop through nearly every major geopolitical event and conspiracy theory of the last decade. In Zarnowski’s telling, the 2024 election was stolen by a "junta," Russia and Israel are in a secret alliance to start World War III, Havana Syndrome is linked to COVID-19, and all of it connects back to Jeffrey Epstein, QAnon, and a Mormon polygamist cult in Utah. This isn’t analysis; it’s a work of weaponized apophenia, the cognitive bias of seeing connections in unrelated data, marshaled here to construct an all-encompassing theory of global intrigue.
By braiding dozens of disparate threads together, Zarnowski makes his central claim functionally unfalsifiable. To debunk it, one would have to disprove not one but a hundred assertions, from the technical details of a supposed “quantum crypto algorithm” (???) used to rig elections to the backroom dealings of Mossad and the FSB. This is a classic disinformation tactic: to create a winding narrative so vast and convoluted that any single point of refutation can be dismissed as missing the “bigger picture.”
...
Zarnowski has produced not a work of investigative journalism, but a piece of political mythology. It offers a simple, all-encompassing explanation for a world that feels chaotic and out of control. It assures the reader that everything is connected, that a secret history exists, and that they, the reader, are now among the initiated. While the narrative is powerful, it is ultimately obviously a work of fiction.
An attempt to vet the author himself through open-source intelligence (OSINT) reveals a public persona that is not just thin, but a transparent effort at strategic credentialing and reputation laundering. While "Paramilitary Operations Officer" is a legitimate, if highly specialized, role within the CIA, Zarnowski’s LinkedIn profile is a constructed identity designed to create an aura of authority. It features a scattergun approach to credentials, from an online ministry ordination to recently acquired financial licenses (Series 7, 63) that are entirely disconnected from his stated expertise in human trafficking.
https://substack.com/inbox/post/170417588
On edit - excerpt from questionable source removed. Thanks, questionseverything.
questionseverything
(12,018 posts)Either.
So I will simply say, I disagree with you
Cirsium
(4,154 posts)Misunderstanding cleared up. Thanks.
Botany
(77,979 posts)
Cirsium
(4,154 posts)I think there are many ways that Republicans cheat in elections, including in the 2024 cycle. I would just be careful about that source. I simply posted what I could find about the source so people can decide for themselves. I did NOT post any "red herrings." A red herring is something that distracts attention from the real issue, not something that helps people decide whether or not to trust a source, even if that source appears friendly. I am not trying to distract people; attention but rather to encourage more attention.
The classic example of how we can be duped is the case where Karl Rove shafted Dan Rather back when Bush was running. They created a copy of a legitimate document, and they did it in such a way that it could be easily debunked, and then they had somebody feed it to Rather. He published it, and a chorus of right wing mouthpieces immediately debunked it. They not only discredited Rather, but they also buried what was a very legitimate story about Bush's activities in the National Guard.
Be careful. That's all.
yellow dahlia
(6,614 posts)pleeease. One of so many things that don't match.
N/t
yellow dahlia
(6,614 posts)RANDYWILDMAN
(3,182 posts)why is every razor thin election given to repubs ?? $$$$ support repubs
Why do we have win by an overwhelming majority and even then itś not enough to keep repubs from coming back and wreaking havoc even though they do not have any new or good ideaś.
The arc of justice bends towards progress...slowly
MustLoveBeagles
(17,641 posts)I wasn't angry at MAGA for voting for TSF. I expected that. What make me angry was the Independents breaking for dump and Dems that sat on their asses and stayed home. 
W_HAMILTON
(10,455 posts)Last edited Thu Apr 30, 2026, 10:55 AM - Edit history (1)
CivicGrief
(304 posts)Republicans. How do we change that? I think Democrats have to stick to their core principles in order to get respect and win. Running Republican-lite candidates makes the party look weak and muddled (I don’t mean Harris—she was a great candidate in a nearly impossible situation). What progressive policies are not worth fighting for? Strength does not come from capitulation, and there is too much of that in the Democratic Party. They need to be out in front of cameras every day explaining why they are better for the country. It seems that is starting to happen, but too slowly.
get the red out
(14,072 posts)No "girls" allowed and a lot of "boys" liked it that way.
CivicGrief
(304 posts)When I was canvassing for Harris, at least one woman told me she couldn’t vote for a woman. It was sad to hear. I think she at least wasn’t voting for the dickhead.
Response to RandySF (Original post)
Post removed
betsuni
(29,358 posts)Some people still refuse to see reality. Right here in this thread Democrats called "Republican-lite." Oh hell.
gulliver
(14,117 posts)Days like this continue to confirm just how willfully uninformed the average American voter is and how their willful ignorance puts everyone at risk. Imagine the work a progressive SC could do. Hillary told us that the court was on the ballot but people voted based on vibes and feeling like the guy that got fewer votes in a primary was somehow robbed so they sat out. This is why I couldn’t care less about what some of these people have to say now about how to win elections and what the party needs to do because they are as equally responsible for today as Trump is.
krawhitham
(5,096 posts)'nuff said.
cayugafalls
(5,984 posts)The real trick is to accept that the system is flawed and that We the People are expendable...
Do what you can to survive and be happy because in the end...the elite will get what they want even if they have to start shooting people in the face on the streets...
Oh wait...
Pris
(169 posts)Two women lost to Trump.
The women were heavily scrutinized and criticized.
Give women a fair chance
Initech
(109,379 posts)
angrychair
(12,545 posts)And even felt the same way at one point but not any longer.
Tired of progressives being the whipping post for everything that is wrong in the Democratic Party and this country
Medicare for All should not be controversial
Living wage should not be controversial
Clean air and clean water should not be controversial
Equality for all should not be controversial
Not committing genocide should not be controversial
That is all progressives want and I do not see that as a high bar. Plus I think it's important to add that progressives just want meaningful progress and a plan to move those things forward, not everything, all is once.
So in short, help people and stop murdering people as a policy of the US government.
If that is controversial please explain how and why.
quakerboy
(14,916 posts)Wikipedia says Biden got 81 million votes (of 155m) and Harris got 75m votes( of 152m)
Per CNN, 37% of 2020 voters were democrats (29million) and 31% of 2024 voters were democrats (23 million). So we lost 6 million dem votes, which is almost exactly the margin of loss in popular vote.
But when you look at ideology, 89% of "liberals" went for Biden (24% of total voters, 31.7 million votes for Biden). That actually jumps up to 91% of liberals voting for Harris (23% of total, 31.8 million).
That, to me, doesn't say that Progressives stayed home. The number of Lefty folks voting for Harris was actually higher than for Biden, despite the number of total voters being down, and the number of registered Democrats being down.
Our apparent loss was based in Conservatives rallying and Moderates swapping sides. Lets be real about that and avoid sowing pointless dissention among our base with hard feelings that are not reality based.