view the rest of the comments
politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
There is a significant cohort of lemmings living in a gaslit fantasy where they've lost themselves in a gamblers fallacy around Biden as candidate. They'll come back around, much later, after he's replaced as candidate, and pretend they were never the person they were.
As far as the posturing and jockeying, game is on I suppose.
Any Democrats who can stand up and show leadership right now stand a very good chance of becoming the most powerful person in the world. Trump is a deeply unpopular candidate. It won't take much to expose his weakness for what it is, we just currently happen to have the weakest possible candidate. Swap the candidate, adopt the positions of the base, and whoever ends up being the nominee can coast into office.
My problem with the whole thing is there hasn't been anyone stepping up and saying how about me. I haven't seen any mention of any actual names whatsoever.
You gotta decide what else to make before you dump the water.
I could be wrong, idk.
Anyone who has enough name recognition to get into and be a competitor to Biden isn't going to turn traitor against the party's incumbent unless he explicitly bows out. If they're seen as ousting Biden... it's going to be a shit show of epic proportions. look at the criticism that phillips took. (And philips is basically a younger version of Biden.) In the primary, the only candidate to get on the ballot in more than half the states was Biden. Most got on around half the states, give or take.
Most of the states only had a ballot because they were legally obligated to. the 2024 Primary for the DNC wasn't a real primary.
They will. We're "just on the other side" of a whole paradigm shift. Its only been a week and we're still a good bit out from the convention.
It should be telling that Newsom was on screen within 15 seconds of the debate, and Kamala about the same "surrogating" for Biden. Whats them applying for the job.
Marianne Williamson offered her candidacy post Biden's debate debacle. The billionaire-owned media isn't reporting it.
Or, its very late in the game and this chaos causes the dems to splinter, leaving trump ripe for victory.
You act like you know exactly what will happen, when in reality things can end up pear shaped whether we stick with biden or get a new candidate.
Polls and MSM are focusing on biden, allowing trump to gain ground. Whatever is gonna happen needs to happen NOW.
If he was merely sick, then one good press conference followed by a second debate might be able to turn things around, just enough, maybe?
But if not...
Nah, I just watched his "come back" interview with George on ABC News. Biden isn't dead yet but he's absolutely sundowning. I would give his performance a grade of C (A being the top grade, B being second best, and F being the worst grade).
Biden has no vitality, and as far as Biden is concerned a desperate underclass and wealth inequality aren't even a thing. Biden is grossly out of touch.
Arguably the President's chief job is not to execute the law of the land, but rather to inspire hope. He is too tired to be able to do that. But nothing is perfect, and he does keep trying, and we gotta respect that effort at least:-).
reddit is tearing Biden a new asshole for his (paraphrased) "It's OK as long as I gave it my all" answer to the question "How will you feel if you lose to Trump?"
They would not even give him a C like I did, it would be a straight F.
https://old.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/1dwe58u/biden_at_peace_if_he_loses_to_trump_as_long_as_i/
Brutal.
Who though... Comments like this are useless unless there is a valid replacement. So again... Who, or STFU.
It doesn't matter the name. You will immediately dismiss it, because you intended to do so when you asked the question.
Harris. Newsom. Whitmer. Buttigieg. Franken.
I think this is rather obviously true. Many on the left have been pushing for a different, and presumably better, candidate from the beginning, so in a way, all that's changed since the debate is that many more have joined them. So really, all the Dems have to do is provide the people with that candidate, and it'll be a runaway.
BUT...
I'm starting to worry that the DNC is going to fuck it up yet again, and specifically because, just as was the case in 2016 and 2020, they're not only going to not adopt the positions of the base, but are going to instead manipulate the process in order to shove another establishment hack down our throats. And quite likely not even just any establishment hack, but the one that's already proven to be even less popular than Biden - Hillary Clinton.
This is a moment for the DNC to get out of the way and let the people come together and choose the candidate they want. That's the exact thing that will motivate the base, and in turn guarantee Trump's defeat.
I'm just afraid that the DNC won't be able to do that - that in their all-consuming self-centeredness and greed, they're going to fuck it up for all of us, yet again.
Your caution is well warranted.
The biggest mistake the DNC could make would be not taking the advantage that an open convention offers them. They desperately need to put out an air of at least 'presumed' democracy in the shocking un-democratic process which is Democratic elections. The delegates are all corporate, Biden/ Harris democrats. But at least put on a show of democracy. And build the theater a bit. Give the audience some action and some drama. Use the opportunity to build some headlines.
It is 100% going to be an establishment hack, I have no doubt in my mind about that, but I don't care. Biden is an establishment hack, but one who most importantly can't win the election. We're not getting worse moving to a different hack that can form thoughts on the fly.
Though I don't like it a bit, that's my position too, but with one glaring exception.
The thing that keeps haunting me is that I really think there's a good chance that they'll go back to Hillary, who's basically everything that's wrong with the current Democrats turned up to 11 - a plainly corrupt, transparently power-hungry and entirely self-serving opportunist who gives paid speeches on Wall Street, idolizes Kissinger and has all the charisma of a damp rag. As far as I can see, her only real qualifications for the office are that she wants it so desperately and she's so willing to sell herself to anyone who will contribute to getting her there. And she's the one possibility that I would say is far and away the least likely to win. But she brings in the corporate money, and that's obviously the DNC's main priority.
If it's pretty much anybody else, that's fine by me.
Nah, not a chance. She hasn't been mentioned in anything, feels old when we want someone who isn't, and is a proven failure. Some diehards can say it's "not her fault", but we're all traumatized due to her failure. Same way some people still post Notorious RGB style memes, but they just cause discomfort among the rank and file that now associate her with stubbornness resulting in massive Democratic backslide. Normies don't hate her, but they rightfully recognize that she's problematic and power brokers know when someone's dead-on-arrival. There are plenty of corporate Democrats that haven't been publicly tarnished for them to invest in.