This stupid topic again

But sure

  • sunbrrnslapper@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 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
      ·
      11 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

      • warbond@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 months ago

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

      • halferect@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 months ago

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

        • mozz@mbin.grits.devOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          11 months 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
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            11 months 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.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      11 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.

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

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

  • PunnyName@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 months ago

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

    And it’s 🔵🔵🔵

    • xmunk@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months ago

      I will too, but my concern is that Harris won’t be able to excite the voting base.

      My vote is secured - it’s whoever has a D next to their name… I’m worried that not enough democrats will turn out if we choose poorly.

      • MagicShel@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 months ago

        I’m worried black voters will not turn out in the needed numbers if they interpret skipping Kamala as the presumptive nominee to be a betrayal. I’m very concerned about a damned if you do, damned if you don’t scenario.

        Biden has done a good job as President. I don’t love him as the nominee, but I’m afraid the chaos of him stepping down is going to create a no win scenario. Some folks think he is the no win scenario. If it’s truly impossible for us to put forward a candidate who can win, that’s not a problem we can pin on the other side - we did that to ourselves. And at the worst possible time for it.

        • Blaine@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          11 months ago

          The average black person cares way less about having a black president than the typical white Lemmy user assumes they do. Only the most off-the-rails liberals support allowing race to be a factor in hiring decisions. Hell - even far-left California outlawed affirmative action.

          If you’re picking a president based on race, you are implicitly racist and therefore part of the problem.

          • PunnyName@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            11 months ago

            Every black voter I’ve talked to (pretty limited, but enough) is asking “what did Biden do for us?” and that’s a valid question. Especially after the George Floyd priests, barely anything happened for the black community. And they’re already living under the oppression of what amounts to Project 2025.

  • BertramDitore@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 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.

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

      Consider working towards passing electoral reform in your state so you can vote for something that is not evil, secure in the knowledge that your vote would still count for the lesser evil.

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

      If the party leadership goes with Kamala, we’d damned well better have a real primary in 2028.

    • ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months ago

      I think someone like Newsom would be a better sell. Fact is, it’s a dangerous election and getting Republicans that don’t like trump very much to actually jump the fence a bit is going to be easier with a white man in his 50’s who isn’t too “extreme” of a leftist Democrat.

      They could also choose someone from a swing state, too.

    • retrospectology@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 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.

      • mozz@mbin.grits.devOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 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
          ·
          11 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
            0
            ·
            11 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 would be feasible to do. Holding another primary election would not.

      • BertramDitore@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 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.

        • WraithGear@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          11 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
            ·
            11 months ago

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

            Feeling free yet?

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

          If we used Ranked choice voting, then we could simply switch to the next in line. That is, if the democrats would grace us with a primary.

          Please sir, but a scrap of representative democracy.

        • dhork@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          11 months ago

          If there is an actual primary, it will not be with actual voters, but amongst the named delegates (99% of whom are pledged to Biden and are obligated to vote for him of he is still in the race) and the superdelegates.

        • half_fiction@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          11 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
            0
            ·
            11 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.

            • Bilb!@lem.monster
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              11 months ago

              You know, they could be. But I agree right now they aren’t.

              Personally, I don’t think it matters in this case. It’s not like we had a robust primary from the Dems this time around.

          • knightly the Sneptaur@pawb.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            11 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.

      • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 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
            ·
            11 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
                0
                ·
                11 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
                  0
                  ·
                  11 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

    • MagicShel@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months ago

      Bypassing her could have a powerful effect on black voters, who we need if we’re going to win. If Harris can’t win because no one likes her, and no one else can win because black voters are affronted by skipping her when it’s her turn, we’re just well and truly fucked.

      • ShinkanTrain@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        Black voters are going to be upset if they skip the person who disproportionately prossecuted black people?

        Well, then do what they should have done 5 months ago find a likable person as a replacement.

      • xmunk@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 months ago

        Black voters aren’t a monolithic block and they aren’t as identity focused as people accuse them of being (well outside of Obama being the first black president). If the candidate has a solid track record of helping minority communities we’d likely see a pretty good turn out.

        • MagicShel@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          11 months ago

          No, but if they turn out in lower numbers we are in trouble. They don’t have to leave as a monolith, just takes agitators to decry the action as racist hypocrisy by the left and maybe 10% of them stay home. That scenario works hurt a lot.

          I mean it’s speculation. I don’t know what the risk or damage would actually be. Maybe I’m overly concerned, but I am concerned.

          • Revan343@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            11 months ago

            It’s definitely worth being concerned about, but the entire democratic shitshow has been worth being concerned about for a good while now.

            I think it would depend heavily on who they skipped over her in favour of. Unfortunately I can’t really think of an obvious replacement that won’t ruffle feathers one way or another, it’s just a matter of minimizing it. A pretty middle-age-or-older white guy is right out, bad plan, so that’s probably the plan the DNC would go with

  • Ulvain@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 months ago

    Well it’s risky either way. That said Kamala as vp was supposed to represent the “in case of emergency break glass” younger democrat - not too left, just neolib enough for the party, yet younger - that would step in if Biden’s age became an issue.

    It’s now an issue and she didn’t play a role in reassuring the public, so…

  • JayCeeFOSS (He/Him)@twit.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    @mozz

    I think so. This attack is coming from a higher income bracket than Biden.
    I believe the doner class has spoken and the democratic leadership is tripping over their own balls to remove them both.

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 months ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    New York Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez went on Instagram Live early on Friday morning to share her thoughts on Joe Biden’s floundering re-election campaign - and warning that many of those who want the President to drop out of the race, also want Vice President Kamala Harris off the ticket too.

    “If you think that there is consensus among the people who want Joe Biden to leave … that they will support, Vice President Harris, you would be mistaken,” she told viewers.

    She slammed her colleagues for giving anonymous quotes to the press, calling it “bull****” and urged those resigned to a loss to Donald Trump to give up their seats.

    This comes amid mounting pressure on Biden to leave the race.

    While he remains publicly committed to staying in the race, Axios reports that in private, the president has resigned himself to increasing calls from lawmakers for him to drop out amid bad polling and mounting scrutiny of his age and mental acuity.

    “I’m here to tell you that a huge amount of the donor class and a huge amount of these elites and a huge amount of these folks in these rooms that I see that are pushing for President Biden to not be the nominee also are not interested in seeing the Vice President being the nominee,” she added.


    The original article contains 335 words, the summary contains 221 words. Saved 34%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

  • kingshrubb@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 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.

  • deaf_fish@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 months ago

    I don’t really care what happens as long as the Republicans don’t win. If AOC’s only problem is that Kamala won’t be on the ticket, then is that problem really worth risking putting the fascists in power?

  • madcaesar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 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.

  • kromem@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 months ago

    The whole “but they might not be on the ballot in Ohio” rings a lot less worrisome when you see that Trump is +9 in the state vs Biden:

  • SSJMarx@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 months ago

    What does AOC hope to gain by going so hard in the paint for Joe? Like the initial statement of support I get, even if I don’t like it, but it seems like everyone else was content to just say their support and move on, and she’s stuck saying it over and over.