Here's why she lost — Bernie Sanders bluntly dissects Kamala Harris's collapse against Donald Trump in 2024
Live Events
FAQ
(You can now subscribe to our
(You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel
Bernie Sanders said it was not Joe Biden's fault that Kamala Harris lost the 2024 election, it was Harris and her consultants' fault. He explained that the Democrats ran a bad campaign that didn't connect with working-class people. Sanders said Donald Trump was beatable, but the Democrats failed to talk about the real problems people face, as per reports.He personally traveled around the U.S. to help Kamala win and begged the campaign to focus on working-class issues. He wanted the campaign to talk about raising the minimum wage, fixing the healthcare system, building more affordable housing, and stopping greedy landlords. But the Harris campaign ignored him and instead focused on rich friends and anti-Trump Republicans, as per BBC Radio 4.He pointed out that Kamala spent too much time with Liz Cheney, a Republican, which confused working-class voters. Sanders also said it was a big mistake to use Mark Cuban, a billionaire from "Shark Tank", as a campaign supporter. He said this election should have been an easy win, but the campaign was misled by wealthy elites and bad consultants. He asked a very direct question to the Democratic Party: 'Which side are you on?', which means are you with the rich or with regular people?, according to a HuffPost report.In a separate interview, Sanders told The Washington Post that Democrats don't do enough to actually help working-class families. He said the problem is not fighting Trump harder, but not offering a strong plan that actually helps normal Americans. He believes even some Trump supporters would vote Democrat if the party had a better agenda for working people, as per The Washington Post report.Even before the election, people were already worried that Democrats were depending too much on celebrities like Oprah, Beyoncé, Clooney, and J.Lo. After the loss, many political experts said these celebrity endorsements backfired and made the party look out of touch. One Republican strategist, William F.B. O'Reilly, told The New York Times that celebrity support now looks elitist and is a 'kiss of death' in many parts of America, as per The New York Times report.He said her campaign ignored real issues like wages, housing, and healthcare.No, experts said it made her look out of touch with normal voters.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Economic Times
20 minutes ago
- Economic Times
Trump travel ban on citizens from 12 countries leaves arch rivals China and Russia out
Trump has imposed a travel ban on citizens from 12 countries, citing security concerns, but notably excludes China and Russia. Despite frequently criticizing both nations over trade, technology, and military actions, the US President has not restricted their citizens' entry into the US. Even though Trump is frequently seen threatening both countries with more tariffs and sanctions, they are not included in this travel ban. US President Trump's latest order bans travelers from 12 countries over security concerns, but the list leaves out Russia and China even as they have on multiple occasions warned the US of grave consequences. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Trump's big moves against countries Trump's threats to China and Russia The citizens of China and Russia, the two countries which threaten the US hegemony in technology and military power, have free access to America. Even as US President Donald Trump on Wednesday, June 4, announced a complete travel ban on people entering the United States from 12 countries, he did not mention China and an executive order signed by Trump, he has also implemented a partial ban on several other countries. The citizens of Afghanistan, Burma, Chad, Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen will not be allowed to enter the US from Monday. The fresh travel restrictions are set to come into effect from June 9, latest order bans travelers from 12 countries over security concerns, but the list leaves out Russia and China even as they have on multiple occasions warned the US of grave consequences if pushed to the corner using military power. Even though Trump is frequently seen threatening both countries with more tariffs and sanctions, they are not included in this travel a video posted on X by the White House, Trump announced the travel ban and cited the recent attack in Colorado where a man was accused in an attack on a group of demonstrators who gathered on Sunday, June 1, in support of Israeli said that it illustrates the "extreme dangers" of foreign nationals entering the US without being "properly vetted".After returning to power in 2025, Trump has gone about some serious business and signed around 150 executive orders ranging from law enforcement, immigration to education and healthcare. The orders also included the one which called for imposing higher tariffs on goods imported into the instance, back in 2020, during his first presidency term, when the world was reeling under the impact of Covid 19, Trump blamed China several times for the pandemic and called on Beijing to be punished for how it handled the disease. Besides this, Trump has accused Beijing for trade violations, technology and security threats. But he never banned people from China from travelling to the May 2025, Secretary of State Marco Rubio took a swipe at China, saying the US is confronting the Chinese Communist Party's influence globally and ending the era of allowing it to abuse trade practices, steal US technology, and flood the country with fentanyl. Despite all the blame game, Trump never stopped Chinese nationals from entering the far as Russia is concerned, after assuming office, Trump has been seen making serious efforts to intervene between Russia and China to ensure a ceasefire between the war-torn US President has blamed Moscow majorly for escalating the war in Ukraine through a massive drone and missile attack. He has also lashed out at Putin for being 'totally unserious' about peace talks and refusing to end the has resorted to similar ploys in Russia's case as those in China's. He has repeatedly warned of 'devastating' new sanctions and tariffs. He even proposed a 500% tariff on countries that buy Russian energy - if they don't agree to a ceasefire. He has repeatedly said that he can mount more sanctions but has never shown any intentions of banning Russian nationals
Economic Times
20 minutes ago
- Economic Times
Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth confident NATO will commit to Trump's defence spending target
Pete Hegseth confident NATO will commit to Trump's defence spending target Synopsis NATO countries are in talks about raising their defence budgets. US wants members to spend 5% of their GDP on defence. The goal is to strengthen the alliance. Mark Rutte suggests a 3.5% defence spend and 1.5% on security. New targets for troops and weapons are expected. Germany may need more soldiers. U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said on Thursday he was confident that members of the NATO alliance would sign up to Donald Trump's demand for a major boost in defence spending, adding that it had to happen by a summit later in June. ADVERTISEMENT The U.S. president has said NATO allies should boost investment in defence to 5% of gross domestic product, up from the current target of 2%. "To be an alliance, you got to be more than flags. You got to be formations. You got to be more than conferences," Hegseth said as he arrived at a gathering of NATO defence ministers in Brussels. "We're here to continue the work that President Trump started, which is a commitment to 5% defence spending across this alliance, which we think will happen," Hegseth said, adding: "It has to happen by the summit at The Hague later this month." Diplomats have said European allies understand that hiking defence expenditure is the price of ensuring a continued U.S. commitment to the continent's security and that keeping the U.S. on board means allowing Trump to be able to declare a win on his 5% demand during the summit, scheduled for June 24-25. "That will be a considerable extra investment," NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte told reporters, predicting that in the Hague summit "we will decide on a much higher spending target for all the nations in NATO." ADVERTISEMENT In a bid to meet Trump's 5% goal, Rutte has proposed alliance members boost defence spending to 3.5% of GDP and commit a further 1.5% to broader security-related spending, Reuters has reported. Details of the new investment plan will likely continue to be negotiated until the eve of the NATO summit. ADVERTISEMENT CAPABILITY TARGETS In the meantime, Rutte said he expects allies to agree on Thursday on what he called "historic" new capability targets. ADVERTISEMENT The targets, which define how many troops and weapons and how much ammunition a country needs to provide to NATO, would aim to better balance defence contributions between Europe, Canada, and the United States and "make NATO a stronger, fairer and a more lethal alliance", he said in opening remarks to the meeting. Germany will need around 50,000 to 60,000 additional active troops under the new NATO targets, German Defence Minister Boris Pistorius said as he arrived at the NATO meeting. ADVERTISEMENT Countries remain divided over the timeline for new pledges. Rutte has proposed reaching the 5% defence target by 2032 - a date that some eastern European states consider too distant but which some others see as too early, given current spending and industrial production levels. Estonian Defence Minister Hanno Pevkur said that to meet the capability targets, "we need to agree on the 5% in five years. We don't have time for 10 years, we don't have time even for seven years." Sweden would also like to see NATO reaching 5% defence spending in 2030, Defence Minister Pal Jonson told reporters. There is an ongoing debate over how to define "defence-related" spending, which might include spending on cybersecurity and certain types of infrastructure. "The aim is to find a definition that is precise enough to cover only real security-related investments, and at the same time broad enough to allow for national specifics," said one NATO diplomat. (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel) (Catch all the Business News, Breaking News, Budget 2025 Events and Latest News Updates on The Economic Times.) Subscribe to The Economic Times Prime and read the ET ePaper online. NEXT STORY
Mint
26 minutes ago
- Mint
Parmy Olson: AI chatbots could become advertising vehicles
Chatbots might hallucinate and flatter their users too much, but at least their subscription model is healthy for our well-being. Many Americans pay about $20 a month to use the premium versions of OpenAI's ChatGPT, Google's Gemini Pro or Anthropic's Claude. The result is that the products are designed to provide maximum utility. Don't expect this status quo to last. Subscription revenue has a limit. Even the most popular models are under pressure to find new revenue streams. Unfortunately, the most obvious one is advertising—the web's most successful business model. AI builders are already exploring ways to plug more ads into their products, and while that's good for their bottom lines, it also means we're about to see a new chapter in the attention economy that fuelled the internet. Also Read: Rahul Matthan: Brace for a wave of AI-enabled criminal enterprise If social media's descent into engagement-bait is any guide, the consequences will be profound. One cost is addiction. OpenAI says a cohort of 'problematic' ChatGPT users are hooked on the tool. Putting ads into ChatGPT, which now has more than 500 million active users, won't spur the company to help those people reduce their use of the product. Quite the opposite. Advertising was the reason companies like Mark Zuckerberg's Meta designed algorithms to promote engagement and keep users scrolling so they saw more ads and drove more revenue. It's the reason behind the so-called 'enshittification' of the web, a place now filled with clickbait and social media posts that spark outrage. Baking such incentives into AI will almost certainly lead its designers to find ways to trigger more dopamine spikes, perhaps by complimenting users even more, asking personal questions to get them talking for longer or even cultivating emotional attachments. Millions in the Western world already view chatbots in apps like Chai, Talkie, etc, as friends or romantic partners. Imagine how persuasive such software could be when its users are beguiled. Imagine a person telling their AI they're feeling depressed, and the system recommending some holiday destinations or medication to address the problem. Also Read: Friend or phone: AI chatbots could exploit us emotionally Is that how ads would work in chatbots? The answer is subject to much experimentation. Google's ad network, for instance, recently started putting ads in third-party chatbots. Chai, a romance and friendship chatbot, serves pop-up ads. The AI answer engine Perplexity displays sponsored questions. After an answer to a question about job hunting, for instance, it might include a list of suggested follow-ups, including, at the top, 'How can I use Indeed to enhance my job search?" Perplexity's CEO Aravind Srinivas told a podcast in April that the company was looking to go further by building a browser to 'get data even outside the app" to enable what he called 'hyper-personalized" ads. For some apps, that may mean weaving ads directly into conversations, using the intimate details shared by users to predict and potentially even manipulate them into wanting something, then selling those intentions to the highest bidder. Also Read: Netflix's 'Adolescence' and the cost of profits: Why kids online are not okay Researchers at Cambridge University referred to this as the forthcoming 'intention economy" in a recent paper, with chatbots steering conversations toward a brand or even a direct sale. As evidence, they pointed to a 2023 blog post from OpenAI calling for 'data that expresses human intention" to help train its models, a similar effort from Meta and Apple's 2024 developer framework that helps apps work with Siri to 'predict actions someone might take in the future." As for OpenAI's Sam Altman, nothing says 'we're building an ad business" like poaching Fidji Simo, the person who built delivery app Instacart into an advertising powerhouse, to help OpenAI 'scale as we enter a next phase of growth." In Silicon Valley parlance, to 'scale' often means to quickly expand your user base by offering a service for free, with ads. Tech companies will inevitably claim that advertising is a necessary part of democratizing AI. But we have seen how 'free' services cost people their privacy, autonomy and even their mental health. AI knows more about us than Google or Facebook ever did—details about our health concerns, relationship issues and work. In two years, chatbots have also built a reputation as trustworthy companions and arbiters of truth. When people trust artificial intelligence that much, they're more vulnerable to targeted manipulation. AI advertising should be regulated before it becomes too entrenched, or we'll repeat the mistakes made with social media—scrutinizing the fallout of a lucrative business model only after the damage is done. ©Bloomberg The author is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering technology.
