509
submitted 1 month ago by mozz@mbin.grits.dev to c/politics@lemmy.world

This stupid topic again

But sure

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] sunbrrnslapper@lemmy.world 19 points 1 month ago

As damning as it is to the US, the best bet for winning is a good-looking, smooth-talking white guy who will look presidential when compared with Trump.

[-] sudo@lemmy.today 12 points 1 month ago

Jon Stewart. He adamantly opposes the suggestion he run, which is exactly what we need. He's got decades of experience in global politics, he's likeable, got name recognition. And to your suggestion he's a smooth talking attractive white man

[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

He’s got decades of experience in global politics

It's hilarious that people genuinely believe this.

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

He made the right call on a whole bunch of foreign policy issues that the Very Experienced Professionals were assuring us they had a handle on. Just because he doesn’t have the relevant real skills, doesn’t mean the establishment candidates have any of it, either.

[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

He made the right call on a whole bunch of foreign policy issues

You're confusing setting actual foreign policy with heckling from the sidelines. Stewart wasn't overseeing any US Departments or writing big policy whitepapers adopted by either of the parties. He was spitting jokes from a news desk in a 30 minute segment four days a week.

Just because he doesn’t have the relevant real skills, doesn’t mean the establishment candidates have any of it, either.

Whatever you might say about Biden's policies (re: bellicose, economically ruinous, genocidal), he definitely has the skills to implement them. That's a big part of the problem. If he was properly incompetent, a bunch of these nightmare programs wouldn't be put into effect.

[-] halferect@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

Being a comedian/activist is different than running a country, John Stewart has power outside the government and would be broken inside.

[-] warbond@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

Have you noticed a worrying shake to his movements ever since he started back with the daily show?

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

Dunno about him, but I did. I hope he's okay, he's a national treasure.

[-] AA5B@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago

A little bit of Palsy would help him fit right in with the octogenarian candidates

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago
[-] sunbrrnslapper@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago

You know, I'm not picky. My primary requirement is must be able to win.

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

Under conventional rules he has the best fighting chance.

[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

the best bet for winning is a good-looking, smooth-talking white guy

Oh no, they're trying to run Beto O'Rourke again, aren't they? Dude's going to come out on a skateboard playing the guitar and lose by double digits.

[-] UltraGiGaGigantic@lemm.ee 1 points 1 month ago

It would be very in character for the democratic party to disarm the population right before the Republicans force through their fascist plans.

this post was submitted on 19 Jul 2024
509 points (94.7% liked)

politics

18821 readers
4657 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! 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.
  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

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS