34
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] SirEDCaLot@lemmy.today 40 points 1 week ago

Oh please no. Not more establishment bullshit.

Find somebody young and energetic to bring some fresh ideas and new energy. A young Bernie Sanders type. They will mop the floor with Trump.

[-] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

Find someone you can't name then.

[-] pyrflie@lemm.ee -1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

AOC, Michelle Obama, Elizabeth Warren, or Jill Stein.

Kamala Harris is unelectable. She is a black female cop. The left won't vote for a cop and the right won't vote for a black woman. Who do you think is in her corner other than DNC mouth pieces? She was a threefer for Biden and that's it.

[-] finestnothing@lemmy.world 15 points 1 week ago

Aoc can't run until next election, Michelle Obama has zero interest in being president (didn't even want to be first lady), Elizabeth Warren isn't much younger than trump and Biden (and a lot of moderates still won't vote for a woman, see: Hillary Clinton), and Jill Stein is just as old too and part of the green party which isn't going to even have a chance at winning a presidential election until there is no climate left to change unfortunately

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Aoc can’t run until next election

Point of fact: she can run as long as she's old enough to take office before inauguration day, which she will be. But party leadership would rather nominate Trump to run against Trump than nominate a progressive.

[-] SirEDCaLot@lemmy.today 5 points 1 week ago

party leadership would rather nominate Trump to run against Trump than nominate a progressive.

Absolutely. I honestly think they would rather just not run a candidate (or pick somebody they know will lose and give them no money) than have an actual progressive win. There's a lot of establishment there. And a lot of desire to keep pounding the same stupid drums of social justice and abortion and gun control rather than deal with real problems like the bottom 99.9% getting fucked over by the top 0.1%, or the effective state of regulatory capture in many industries.

There is a divide and conquer strategy being used against the American people and it is working. We are at each other's throats over wedge issues that, while important and worthy of discussion, are not even close to the biggest problems facing our nation.
We now have two generations that gave up on having kids because wages are stagnant and housing prices are insane and rather than discuss the breakdown of the overall social contract and loss of upward mobility, we are at each other's throats over whether we should ban this gun or that gun or which bathroom we should be allowed to use. It's the modern-day version of the Arena in Rome- The population is distracted by gladiators while the nation is being run into the ground.

[-] pyrflie@lemm.ee 6 points 1 week ago

At least you're paying as much attention. As to Hillary, that's personality not sex; at least now. She has antagonized a huge section of voters over the last 6 years. She probably couldn't get into local office.

[-] SirEDCaLot@lemmy.today 4 points 1 week ago

Yeah there is zero chance for Hillary. She lost to Trump the first time, what would make anybody think she could beat him again? Besides even the left doesn't like her much. And the way she ran her campaign against Trump suggests she should be managing a hot dog cart not a country.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)
load more comments (22 replies)
this post was submitted on 06 Jul 2024
34 points (61.2% liked)

politics

18129 readers
3705 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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!
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. 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.
  6. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS