148
submitted 2 months ago by girlfreddy@lemmy.ca to c/news@lemmy.world

The House minority leader Hakeem Jeffries said he shared lawmakers’ “insight, heartfelt perspectives and conclusions about the path forward” in a private meeting with Joe Biden yesterday.

The meeting came after more than a dozen House Democrats publicly called on the president to end his bid for re-election after his stumbling performance against Donald Trump in their first debate.

Jeffries had promised that he would talk to Biden after speaking with all of the 213 Democrats in the House of Representatives, and, in a letter to lawmakers today, he indicated that he has done so, without elaborating on Biden’s response.

Deep-pocketed Democratic donors are putting multimillion-dollar pledges on hold and saying they won’t hand over the money until Joe Biden abandons his re-election campaign, the New York Times reports.

Others are holding off on giving any more money to Future Forward, the largest Super Pac supporting the president’s campaign.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Reverendender@sh.itjust.works 15 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Who is the best replacement and how do we choose?

EDIT: It was a collective "We," people. As in, all of us who aren't fascists. I'm well aware of how the democratic party chooses candidates.

[-] PugJesus@lemmy.world 29 points 2 months ago

Harris is the obvious choice, though I would be thrilled if it went to someone else. The DNC, unfortunately, will have to discuss amongst the delegates who will get the final nod. What's important is that we have unity going forward - which is one of the reasons why it's so important for Biden to step down and get onboard with this.

[-] tiefling@lemmy.blahaj.zone 19 points 2 months ago

Man, if only they had given us a real primary 🙄

[-] PugJesus@lemmy.world 20 points 2 months ago

Yeah. Or rather, Biden shouldn't have announced he was running for a second term, since as soon as he announced, any serious contenders cooled their ambitions. I understand that you don't get into politics without a little bit of an ego problem, but it really fucked us.

[-] ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works 8 points 2 months ago

He could full out resign, putting Harris in office and be able to appoint a new VP that inspires more confidence than Harris. Could satisfy party brass who want to control the appointment for getting Biden out.

Or he could drop out of the race and endorse Harris at an open convention which would be more democratic.

Hold a national primary over the next month.

[-] polonius-rex@kbin.run 8 points 2 months ago

people want to replace biden because they don't think he can win the election, not because they want harris as president

why would biden saying "no totally trust me guys i'll step down for harris after i've won" make him any more likely to win, especially after he already told the world he'd be a one-term president?

[-] prole@sh.itjust.works 5 points 2 months ago

I think they were suggesting that he resign before the election, and Harris chooses a new VP

[-] protist@mander.xyz 6 points 2 months ago

The problem is the convention is happening after the ballot deadline in Ohio, which has historically been waived by the Ohio legislature for both parties, but which has not this year with Republicans in charge. That's why there was going to get a virtual roll call before the convention to nominate Biden. There needs to be a nominee solidified and nominated before the convention or risk having no Democratic candidate for president on the Ohio ballot

[-] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

That makes too much sense so it will never happen. My vote is for a “Thunderdome Convention.” And we all know Buttigieg would wipe the floor with his Gramsci quotes.

[-] Reverendender@sh.itjust.works 8 points 2 months ago

I have to say : I think AOC is FAR more electable right now than Harris. And we definitely need the most electable person we can find.

[-] girlfreddy@lemmy.ca 9 points 2 months ago

If the DNC doesn't like Sanders - enough that they manipulated his defeat to Clinton - just how receptive do you think they are to AOC being their candidate?

[-] protist@mander.xyz 7 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Harris is the only candidate who would be able to access all the money the Biden campaign has already. Anyone else would start from scratch

[-] PugJesus@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago

Which is why Harris needs to be onboard too. And, unfortunately, one of several reasons why she's the most likely candidate.

[-] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 4 points 2 months ago

The issue is contribution limits and what it can be spent on. Harris in control of the money, but not a candidate, means $5k goes to the new candidate and the remaining hundreds of millions become an outside funding entity. That can't pay for staff's salaries or do other sorts of direct spending. It's not an insurmountable hurdle, but it is a pretty meaningful concern. On the plus side, people's donation limits would be reset.

[-] ShepherdPie@midwest.social 1 points 2 months ago

She's just as unlikable as Biden and Clinton. It would be pointless to switch to her when she doesn't bring any enthusiasm from voters.

[-] protist@mander.xyz 1 points 2 months ago

She'd troll the shit out of Trump in a way neither Biden nor Clinton ever did

[-] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

Obamna 2.0 and I’m here for it.

[-] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

I’m subscribed to DNC donor lists and get texts 3, sometimes 4 times a day for donations. Lately, I’ve been getting surveys about Biden’s performance.

Today, I got a survey asking if I would support Kamala Harris. The entire survey was about Harris. Not sure if that means anything, but it was unexpected. I said I would support her btw, she would enrage Trump.

[-] CaptainKickass@lemmy.world -1 points 2 months ago

Harris would lose. She has too much baggage, real.or imagined. And as much as I hate it, this country isn't going to elect a black woman any time soon. 🤦🏽

[-] polonius-rex@kbin.run 10 points 2 months ago

she has baggage for the left, but that the right would probably find it very difficult to attack

"she went too hard on criminals" isn't exactly something they can use to their advantage

[-] bobs_monkey@lemm.ee 2 points 2 months ago

While I agree, the cold unfortunate reality is that a black woman is a nonstarter for a significant portion of the US population. Being a woman is a hurdle enough, being a black woman is a hell of a climb.

[-] PugJesus@lemmy.world 10 points 2 months ago

We elected a black man in 2008. A woman won the popular vote in 2016.

I'm inclined to agree she has an uphill fight, and that I would much prefer other candidates - if we're going to have an uphill battle, let's at least have a charismatic candidate - but Biden is... not really viable at this point.

[-] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

I appreciate the weight “viable” was carrying in your comment.

[-] Blackbeard@lemmy.world 13 points 2 months ago

I'm not opposed to the idea of a contested convention. The risks today aren't what they were in 1968, and the internet mediasphere makes that kind of spectacle really valuable for generating high levels of media coverage. I think a 4-day contest that resulted in one person coming out on top would do a lot to bring disengaged voters into the conversation. Whether we like it or not, politics are all about showmanship, and there's value in generating buzz and anticipation.

[-] mozz@mbin.grits.dev 8 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

So… I don’t disagree, and a contested convention (after Biden agreeing to release his delegates saying that he’d love to re-win the nomination but recognizes that the complaints are valid and wants what’s best for the Democrats as a whole) sounds like not a bad strategy.

There’s one pretty chilling thing though: How difficult to do think it would be for a Russian influence operation, or a GOP one working with a few friendly players in local politics / law enforcement in Chicago, to create a giant violent shit show of cops assaulting protestors and creating the exact types of events that will overshadow anything good that comes out of the convention and turn off a whole bunch of left wing people, because they can’t tell the difference between the Chicago cops doing something and the Democratic Party doing that same thing, if it happens at the convention?

I don’t think it would be difficult at all. And that’s before even adding in whatever any boogaloo people who want to show up might do.

I think the DNC could easily be where the fighting in the streets fireworks that continue into November get started for real, and in a way that depresses Democratic voter turnout a lot more than the debate did.

[-] girlfreddy@lemmy.ca 5 points 2 months ago

How difficult to do think it would be for a Russian influence operation

That is the biggest worry rn, esp after The Guardian just reported today there was massive "coordinated networks of accounts spreading disinformation (that) 'flooded' social media in France, Germany and Italy before the elections to the European parliament."

[-] Blackbeard@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

Yikes. I hadn't even thought about the possibility of violence. Maybe the fact that they've got a slightly better handle on these clandestine operations now than they did in 2016 will help with the Russian ops. I think the risk of right-wing agitators provoking a violent clash is higher, to be perfectly honest. They'll certainly have to take security very seriously if this is the path they choose.

[-] mozz@mbin.grits.dev 1 points 2 months ago

Man I fuckin hope so. Their efforts on Lemmy are just kind of comical, but that’s because those are the 2-ruble-a-day clowns sitting in a big cube farm somewhere. The real pros are perfectly capable of cultivating an online friendship with some armed right-wing loons in or out of the CPD, and nudging things along very effectively in a terrifying direction, I think.

[-] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

I’ll find your treasure one day, I know it’s there.

[-] prole@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 months ago

The risks today aren't what they were in 1968

Are you saying there's less risk now than 68? Because, if you weren't aware, we are on the cusp of literally losing the Republic.

[-] Blackbeard@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

No. I'm saying the risks of a contested convention turning sour are not what they were in 1968 when this happened.

[-] ShepherdPie@midwest.social 1 points 2 months ago

Which is why we need to do this. Polling shows Biden losing this election. To continue to support him is to hand Trump a victory this fall.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 11 points 2 months ago

Why are we still pretending that it's our choice?

[-] oxjox@lemmy.ml 9 points 2 months ago

We don't choose - the DNC does.

the choice of a nominee is party business — not state law, not federal law, and not constitutional law.
https://www.factcheck.org/2024/07/qa-how-biden-can-be-replaced-as-the-democratic-nominee/

[-] crusa187@lemmy.ml 5 points 2 months ago

Lighting round debate showdown at the convention, it’s gonna be great!

[-] FattestMattest@lemmy.world -3 points 2 months ago

Good or bad, no one is going to beat Trump except Biden. I'll take the last 4 years we've had, where he's had times that he seems out if it, but the country is doing a lot better and doesn't seem like we are at each other's throats. If he dies the day before election, I'll vote for his corpse.

this post was submitted on 12 Jul 2024
148 points (94.6% liked)

News

22831 readers
4583 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS