This stupid topic again

But sure

  • spikkedd@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Just remember that during the 2016 election, the “If not Bernie, then Trump” bros turned out to be Russian interference.

    I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s just Russia trying to split the Dem base.

    • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Ever wonder why it’s rich media companies who are screeching from the rooftops that Biden is old and needs to step down, while AOC, Bernie, and all the actual progressives are standing behind him?

      This is a revolt of the ownership class against Biden’s proposed tax hikes. Nothing more. And Leftists are falling for it hook line and sinker.

      • approval4363@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Two issues with Biden:

        1. A lot of people on the left disagree with his policy on supporting Isreal on Gaza.
        2. He’s acts like a senile old man when he’s communicating. Yes maybe he’s still clear headed. But the low information voter who doesn’t really pay attention to politics will see his saying “I trust my VP Trump” and automatically just vote for the person who doesn’t seem like they belong in a nursing home.
  • madcaesar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    Reading these comments here, it’s obvious either 1. This thread is filled with shills or 2. Democrats have learned NOTHING from Hillary and are ready to score an own goal at the 89th minute.

  • PunnyName@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    I’m voting for the administration that will keep democracy alive in our country.

    And it’s 🔵🔵🔵

  • mlg@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    doyee

    Literally no one wanted Kamala in the primaries. Everyone knows she got picked as a token diversity VP and not because she was actually popular or anything.

    She has a higher chance of losing than Biden. If we’re gonna axe the incubent, then you better open up some serious candidates, otherwise this will be a repeat of 2016 and no one will vote.

    • freddydunningkruger@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      lol, token diversity VP! Racism and/or misogyny is so funny! let me guess, do you pretend to care about palestine too?? i bet you do! lol, what a comedian

  • mozz@mbin.grits.devOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    The courts are bad now people think, wait till more seats are replaced.

    People don’t understand what a big deal this is. Corrupting the trusted-by-tradition institutions like the courts is one way fascists can get the whole country in a chokehold.

    Gunned down a bunch of BLM protestors? Eh, they were asking for it. Probation.

    Climate change demonstration? 10 years

    We’re already about 60% of the way there. It’s already happening that people are committing really major crimes and it’s okay if they’re on the right team.

    VOTE

  • BertramDitore@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    Ugh. I agree that Kamala sucks, but I think it’d be a mistake to try to go with anyone else at this point. She has a pulse, a functional brain, lots of political experience, a long life ahead of her, and yeah, she’s made some terrible decisions and gaffs in her career, just like Joe Biden.

    I don’t like that she was a cop, but Joe Biden chaired the Senate Judiciary committee for like 100 years, and got us Clarence Thomas, so…nobody has the moral high ground here.

    We just need to win, and frankly I think if we try to go with someone new and untested, we’ll lose. We’ve been in a “lesser of two evils” situation for some time now.

      • BertramDitore@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Ideally, yeah, but think about the logistics of pulling something like that off. And would it be a full primary redo? Like fresh ballots sent out to all dems? Or do you mean a mini primary just with the existing delegates? Because we already voted in the Democratic primary election…

        I’m just really trying to be pragmatic about this, I can’t imagine a scenario where we pull this off and come out stronger. I would love to be wrong.

        • half_fiction@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Saying a month is “plenty” of time to plan and run any kind of election on a national level is so ridiculously out-of-touch I read it back like five times thinking maybe it was sarcastic. Off the top of my head there’s booking polling places, securing & training staff, voting machines, ballots that need to make their way through the entire supply chain starting all the way back at pre-production. Mail in ballots alone usually go out like a month ahead of time to compensate for issues with the mail.

          At this point in time, there’s a higher probability of Superman flying around the world backwards to rewind time and correct the gunman’s aim to actually hit Trump at that rally than there is of the Democrats being able to successfully pull off a second primary in a month. And that’s not even to touch the “coming out stronger” piece of it, which again, no chance in hell that happens with the kind of chaos a second primary would cause.

          • Fecundpossum@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            People live in their fantasies, where national primary elections are just a cut and paste affair that takes two days to set up.

          • knightly the Sneptaur@pawb.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            The idea that elections take years is an artifact of our broken news cycle. England can call for snap elections and install a new government just 25 days later, and that’s England.

            • half_fiction@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              Um OK but surely they already have policy, processes, and infrastructure in place to successfully execute it within that time frame. There’s a big difference between being already set up for it and the Dems randomly deciding that they’re going to run another primary next week.

        • WraithGear@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Probly just the superdelegates choosing in secret, like they threaten too if they don’t like the public vote. If their going to only be Democratic when it’s convenient, they might as well as course correct. I am for replacing Biden, but if they are even talking about it now they best get a move on. Apathy is gaining ground every second they are not at the wheel.

          • UltraGiGaGigantic@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            Probly just the superdelegates choosing in secret, like they threaten too if they don’t like the public vote.

            Feeling free yet?

      • mozz@mbin.grits.devOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        plenty of time to run an actual primary

        Look at what a practical idea this is

        As with other things e.g. Bernie Sanders as the nominee, there actually is a sensible option here, which is running a contested convention… it is highly notable to me that a lot of the people offering such constructive criticism on this topic are so studiously avoiding those sensible strategies when they are trying to “help”

        • BertramDitore@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          I dunno, there are actually quite a few sensible and practical ideas in this thread, your thread, btw. Your post has elicited a good discussion, why throw shade on the people earnestly participating? If you actually want a contested convention, this thread is nothing compared to some of the wild shit that would go down in that scenario.

          • mozz@mbin.grits.devOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            Because redoing the primary is an absurd idea

            And I am, probably to an excessive and embittered degree, made cynical by the amount of open propaganda in and out of the media which is attempting to put out bad ideas on purpose to hurt the Democrats and help the fascists

            And you’re not wrong. A contested convention would be a massive shit show which might doom the Democrats in the election irrevocably. But it might also produce a nominee with some kind of mandate, which would be nice. It would also be feasible to do, whereas holding another primary election would not.

      • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        But only Harris can keep the funds accumulated for Biden’s campaign, right? Wouldn’t make much sense to go for another candidate I think…

          • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            “The only candidate I like is the one who has no chance of winning!”

            Fucking leftists getting played like a fiddle by purity testing.

              • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                2 months ago

                You fuckers call everyone center-right. By your insane definition, the Democratic party is center right so you should stop demanding they put up a candidate that statistically no one in the country wants.

                • knightly the Sneptaur@pawb.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  By your insane definition, the Democratic party is center right

                  That’s most of the world’s definition. America has a conservative party and a right-wing nutjob party.

                  If you don’t like facts, you’re going to hate it when I start pointing out policy differences between them and left-of-center parties. XD

    • retrospectology@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Yep, I really do not like Harris, but in this context she’s the most realistic option and she’s slightly better than Biden on basically everything. Otherwise it becomes a battle against right-wing establishment democrats, and we have no more time for that really. Getting Biden out is hard enough.

  • goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    GIVE IT A FUCKING REST

    The whole fucking front page is already filled up with this stuff

    WE ARE AWARE OF THE BIDEN STEPPING DOWN THING

    • mozz@mbin.grits.devOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Dude I felt bad even posting these two

      Because if the whole problem is “RED RED RED RED RED RED” overwhelming anything useful then “RED RED NO IT’S BLUE RED RED BLUE RED NO BLUE NO RED” is not really an improvement

      But yes I did feel like both of mine were factually relevant and the minority report should be presented, and I anyway couldn’t produce any real percentagewise increase in the tide if I made it into a full time job and hired assistants

  • sunbrrnslapper@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months 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
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months 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
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months 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.

  • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Harris has done so little I had to think for a second to remember what her name was. Other VP have really gotten coverage, like Pence or Gore. But Harris has really stayed mostly on the sidelines.

      • abracaDavid@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        I think it was, because people really don’t like her. She’s got that same super condescending energy that Hilary has.

    • RampantParanoia2365@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      I never would have picked her. But the excitement and unity she’s inspiring in like 2 days time is undeniable. It almost feels like a bad tv show plot twist.

    • dhork@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Moderate Democrats like Harris are like broccoli. Nobody really wants it, it’s not the highlight of the meal, but you need your veggies to get the proper nutrients to fight fascism. (Plus, if your diet has too little fiber you end up full of shit.)

      Eat your broccoli!

    • hddsx@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      I would vote for any viable candidate not Trump. I would prefer not Biden and not Harris. In fact I’d prefer a sane Republican… but there seems to be a distinct lack of them.

      I’d vote for AOC though. She reminds me of the principled republicans of yore, albeit with different views

      • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        In fact I’d prefer a sane Republican…

        This is a trap. Even with a “sane” Republican in office, the administration will still work to accomplish the policy goals of the GOP.

      • octopus_ink@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        In fact I’d prefer a sane Republican… but there seems to be a distinct lack of them.

        The three I can remember from the Trump years (Kinzinger, Cheney, and Romney) have pretty much been run out on a rail haven’t they? Republicans don’t want sane Republicans, and anyone who appears to be one is going to get ostracized within the party, or turn out to be just like all the rest.

        They are walking around with bandages on their ears in solidarity with a man who immediately rushed to sell shitty Chinese shoes to commemorate and make a profit off of the assassination attempt which killed one of his own supporters. There are no sane Republicans. There are crazy Republicans, cowardly Republicans, and probably a few with Stockholm Syndrome. They let the inmates take over the asylum and there is no cleaning house now.

        • retrospectology@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          There’s never really been such a thing. Anyone who would be an old school republican today has just become an obstructionist right-wing democratic, so arguably worse than a Republican because they sabotage from the inside.

        • hddsx@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          The thing I really admired about Republicans was that they had principles and held to them. AOC fits that bill. Plus, I believe that you have a right to your viewpoint even if I disagree with you.

      • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        He turned out to be a decent president, except for the massive, glaring failure to build any sort of meaningful bulwark against fascism. He had, like, the absolute best justification and mandate to aggressively crack down on the neofascists with Jan 6, but he pussyfooted around and dragged his feet on fucking everything so much that basically nothing has been dealt with or constructively changed since the coup attempt occurred.

        • corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          I love how you skip the part where Congress blocked everything the SCotUS didn’t. That’s so efficient.

  • Seraph@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Ask anyone that wants to remove people off the ticket: Who should they be replaced with?

    I haven’t heard a good answer yet.

      • Seraph@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        You legitimately think the Democratic party will get behind any of these nominations enough to defeat Trump? I’d say most are considered more controversial than fuckin Hillary was.

        • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          I legitimately think that this was what you intended to reply with regardless of what I said, and I very much doubt you actually bothered to read it.

          • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            Seriously. This is a pretty mild list of semi-proven politicians with national recognition. Warren (or maybe Franken) are the only ones I can see being potentially controversial and even they’re both still broadly liked within the party.

            Also, how does someone who’s not familiar with Kelly or Duckworth have a strong opinion about who’s controversial in the Democratic party? They’re not superstars, but you weren’t exactly digging up no-names.

            • mozz@mbin.grits.devOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 months ago

              It is extremely notable to me that the “get rid of Biden” is so HUGELY emphasized over “let’s figure out who instead”

              It makes me look suspiciously at what would initially be the pretty sensible idea of subbing in someone younger

  • Fedizen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    This is why you never listen to panicking morons by themselves. If you remove the whole ticket they won’t even have ballot access.

    • John_McMurray@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Idk if they can even remove half the ticket, unless Biden dies. Even then, that may result in a Trump acclamation

    • retrospectology@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      It really depends on how they do it. It will get challenged regardless, but I think Harris still has the best chance there too.

      If Biden stepped down because of health reasons, Harris is his VP, her job is literally to step into the presidency in that case. It’s her and Biden’s ticket that got elected, so there can’t be any talk about it being undemocratic. The people who were allowed to vote in the primary voted for Biden-Harris.

      It sounds like AOC is freaked out by all these incompetent idiots around her talking about what their donors want, when really they should be coming up with a plan that has the best chance of running the gauntlet of legal challenges. The obstacle to success will be donor interference by rich idiots trying to handpick their own random people.

    • audiomodder@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      I don’t want AOC to run yet. She’s got a long political career ahead of her and folks tend to bow out of politics after they’re president.

      • paf0@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        She would be an amazing elder statesperson after her time in office. I hope to some day see it.

        • Ferrous@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Bruh, why are you getting excited about the idea of crusty old genocidal American beaurocrats who inevitably sell out? No US senator is a friend of mine.

    • LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      AOC isn’t even in the conversation though. I think she’d face fierce opposition to even getting the nomination. She’s a pretty divisive figure.

      • Evotech@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        She’s not old enough anyway, need to be 35 to be president, she’s 34

        Downvoted for stating facts lmao

            • Xerø@infosec.pub
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              It is correct if you understand American politics. The candidates are officially nominated in August and she will still be 34 then.

              • Thteven@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                The law says you have to be 35 to BE president, it says nothing of nomination. She would be fine by the time she was sworn in.

  • kingshrubb@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    I’d prefer Buttigieg simply because he is such an effective communicator. Other than that I’d prefer someone much more leftist than him.

    • Saprophyte@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Lots of Christian conservatives have turned away from Trump and have a chance of voting couch over him. Now if there’s a chance a gay man might be president it may motivate a lot of people to get up and keep the gay man from being in charge. Nothing motivates voters like fear or hate. The left would have to be 100% behind him and foaming at the mouth to go out and vote, or else it’d be a win for the Rs. That being said, a black woman carries a slightly less chance of that. The racists are already 100% behind trump and motivated to get Mr. Very Fine People on Both Sides back in the oval office.

      I’d vote Pete though… I was hoping he’d get the 2020 nomination.

      • WoahWoah@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        There has been some gurgling from (very few) faith leaders, but polling show an increase in conservative Christian support for Trump.

        The bigger concern might be minority voters. Polling suggests a gay candidate could lose some support from some minority communities, namely African Americans.

        That being said, it’s a problem anyway. Biden has lost a lot of black voters. Polling shows Trump has more support from likely black voters than any republican candidate in the last 60 years.

    • WoahWoah@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Imagine this person debating Trump: https://youtu.be/IQ5SMO8567s?si=EHBa4IMXvBSLiijX

      And just imagine the optics of old, orange felon vs. this guy.

      I think he also ticks the box for people that want “normalcy.” He is just very much an articulate, succinct, polished communicator/politician. And he’s a white guy, which, sadly, gains him free extra votes automatically.

      Edit: bonus video: https://youtu.be/4U3MDy8FF8E?si=OAQTdUrdlASuDoIk

      I find it hard to believe democratic voters wouldn’t rally around Petey B.

    • abracaDavid@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      I don’t love Buttigieg, but he is at least much more progressive than Biden or Harris.

      I think he would be a better candidate than either of them.