this post was submitted on 10 Jun 2024
676 points (94.5% liked)

News

23266 readers
3928 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Leviathan@lemmy.world 69 points 4 months ago (13 children)

I think Trump retiring and the Republicans replacing him with a charismatic, young, intelligent christofascist would be devastating for the Democrats (and humanity) right now and I don't know why they don't do it.

For that matter I don't see why Democrats don't replace Biden with a charismatic, young, intelligent social democrat which would be equally devastating for republicans. So who knows with these people.

[–] Croquette@sh.itjust.works 19 points 4 months ago (1 children)

They don't do it because it doesn't serve them personally. As we have seen time and time again, politicians are mostly griftfers that will flip on a dime and change their moral compass just so that they can benefit from the situation.

[–] Leviathan@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

By personally do you mean financially? Because I think an argument for personal benefit could be made for blowing the opposition out of the water.

[–] Croquette@sh.itjust.works 1 points 4 months ago

By personally, I mean money, power, favors.

Any influence they can use for themselves.

[–] taiyang@lemmy.world 18 points 4 months ago (5 children)

Charismatic + Young + Intelligent + Christofascist...

0 results found.

I think Republicans might need to remove one search criterion to make that work.

As for Dems... that might just be AOC? Lol

[–] Leviathan@lemmy.world 13 points 4 months ago

You're right. DeSantis would've been catastrophic if he wasn't such a little weirdo with no charisma.

[–] absentbird@lemm.ee 10 points 4 months ago (2 children)

I would love to vote for AOC. She will be old enough to run next year, but it will be four years before the next election.

[–] taiyang@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago (3 children)

She checks all the boxes unless you're the type to believe Republican spin (she was a bartender once but has more education than most GoP house members). I'm unfortunately sure she'll get the same DNC treatment as Sanders, though :/

[–] absentbird@lemm.ee 8 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I don't think the DNC will be able to stop her. They can only do so much. I was a huge Bernie fan, volunteered at rallies and everything, but even I can acknowledge that the support was not quite strong enough to overcome the establishment headwind. He came close twice, but I think there were a number of people who wrote him off over his age and whatnot.

I think AOC could tip the scales, she's young and smart and has real conviction. She has all the Bernie benefits with none of the baggage.

[–] Hellinabucket@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago

Honestly I think aoc is the only I could be excited to vote for right now.

[–] Leviathan@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago

That spin is hilarious when you consider the source, they voted for a reality TV personality and didn't bar an eye when he padded his cabinet with family members and inept grifters.

[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 2 points 4 months ago (2 children)

I'm unfortunately sure she'll get the same DNC treatment as Sanders, though :/

What, other than bleak cynicism, leads you to that conclusion?

[–] taiyang@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

Why, bleak cynicism of course!

No really, it's just my concern since she's on the progressive side and you know how the Dems are.

[–] lost_faith@lemmy.ca 1 points 4 months ago

History, history leads to that conclusion

[–] Burstar@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 4 months ago

Not an American, but AOC is who I hope the Dems go with next time. She's the only thing I envy about your political situation atm.

[–] Resonosity@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago

I'd love to vote for AOC too

[–] TheBraveSirRobbin@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I mean there's definitely intelligent enough people who just want to use people

[–] taiyang@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Of course! But I don't think there's any public figure Republicans who fit the bill.

[–] TheBraveSirRobbin@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago (1 children)

You don't think there's people out there to chirp the republican agenda for their own personal gain? People are definitely smart enough to say things they don't believe in to manipulate others

[–] taiyang@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

Who's both charismatic, young, and intelligent? Don't get me wrong, I'm quite aware people lie to manipulate others (that's like all religions) but I don't think there's someone in the GOP, or are GOP aligned celebs, who fit the description. Like... who? The best they ran celeb-wise Dr. Oz and he's am uncharismatic weasel.

Maybe two of the three, but even that's a stretch (DeSantis for instance might be two of three but I have doubts he's particularly intelligent; maybe by GOP standards). I guess someone could emerge but whoever they are, they ain't on my radar.

[–] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

I don't think you'll be happy with the one Republicans choose to get rid of.

[–] Starkstruck@lemmy.world 15 points 4 months ago

I think one of the big things is the MAGA voters vote for Trump and ONLY Trump. They don't turn out for elections without him in it. The Republicans know that without the MAGAs, they're not gonna win the presidential election.

Also this is purely theory but I wouldn't be surprised if Russia gives Trump information he can blackmail Republicans with. I'm sure Russian honeypots have dug up a lot of stuff over the years.

[–] ImADifferentBird@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Maga is a cult of personality. The Republicans' fear is they won't turn out for anyone but Trump.

As for the Democrats, the line they always give is that social democrats can't win elections, but honestly, I think the party elite is afraid of what would happen if they did.

[–] Blackbeard@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

I think both things can be correct at the same time. Unfortunately, they have quite a bit of evidence to support the former argument, which means they don't have to openly engage with the latter. The closest we got to the veil coming off was 2016, but whether or not we agree with them that the left can win elections, the fact of the matter is they generally don't except in the most ideologically homogenous districts.

[–] Donebrach@lemmy.world 6 points 4 months ago

Because the cult is about the man, not the idea. Ron DeSantis tried to be just that (not saying he holds any of those qualities that you mentioned, just that he tried) and failed because no one cares about what Trump actually stands for (when you listen to Trump supporters talk about him, you’d think they would actually vote for democrats considering the issues they bring up—barring the worst of the worst racist, homophobic deranged individuals of course). At the end of the day, they just care about their god-lord little-hand long-tie orange-faced crybaby and the made-up grievances he’s had to endure and how that somehow translates to their own impending persecution.

The reason the Democratic Party hasn’t does that is they hold the monopoly on milquetoast impotence in governing, as their corporate overlords have decreed.

[–] Tom_Hanx_Hail_Satan@lemmy.ca 6 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Not saying I take everything Biden says at face value but he has stated that he wouldn't be running if Trump wasn't. I think there is sound rationale behind it though. Trump just flings shit all over everything, Biden has already been through it. Why expose a promising young candidate to that? Next election cycle the GOP primary candidates are going to be trying to out trump and whoever is going to be the dem candidate will be looking that much better because of the shit the GOP smeared all over themselves.

The point I'm making is more than a little devils advocate though. Dems need to address the enthusiasm gap, it seems like theyre going to be leaning on the grassroots movement from pro-choice groups. Fingers crossed it's effective.

[–] PoliticalAgitator@lemmy.world 6 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Charismatic, intelligent people don't need fascism nearly as much as dumbfucks do but even for the few who get sucked in anyway, there's easier and more self-serving ways to express it than a grueling, always-on position in the Republican party.

But ultimately the answer to both "why don't they run someone actually good" questions is "because it would be a threat to neoliberals and their record profits".

[–] Maeve@sh.itjust.works 0 points 4 months ago

Neolibs can't countenance that their darling politicians are actually right of Nixon, let alone admit it.

[–] SuddenDownpour@sh.itjust.works 5 points 4 months ago (1 children)

There's a possibility that this would provoke demobilization among Trump voters.

[–] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world -2 points 4 months ago

That’s a good thing. Fuck cars.🚗

[–] slimarev92@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago (2 children)

They don't have anyone nearly as good as him. People give Trump a lot of shit, deservedly so, but he's one hell of a politician. Nobody can galvanize their base like he does.

[–] jas0n@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Yeah. Agree 100%. His greatest political victory was to convince people that a born wealthy real estate clown is an "outsider" to politics that can relate to the common folk. A true outsider would be an engineer, doctor, scientist, etc. Someone that doesn't have the ability to increase their wealth by millions with minor tweaks in the law.

Ever notice that corpo speak and political speak are exactly the same. Like how they can both run circles around any question without ever answering it? Yeah.

[–] samus12345@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

The worst part is that he's only a "good politician" because the system is so horribly broken.

[–] nucleative@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago

These old stodgy dudes have two things going for them that young guys don't (yet) have - a lifetime of building a support network of donors and mastery at playing "the game".

They should retire at 60 and pass along their donors and skills to a few proteges, but recently they cling until the very last breath.

[–] ipkpjersi@lemmy.ml 5 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Don't give them any ideas, please.

[–] Leviathan@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Yeah I figured it could be seen as encouraging christofascism but I just yearn for young politicians.

[–] ikidd@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Young = under mandatory retirement age

[–] Leviathan@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I'd accept under average age of death at this point.

[–] ikidd@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

Well, in any developed nation in the world except the US, they would be.

[–] outsideno1877@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago (1 children)

It would still be better then trump but i would like to see a party that doesn’t suck since we have a two party system with 0 good options which is why im voting for biden despite hating him (rather incompetent then malicious)

[–] dan@upvote.au 6 points 4 months ago

The USA really needs preferential voting, like what Australia has: https://www.chickennation.com/voting/

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I have to assume the reason is because they don't have anyone. If they did they'd be relatively forefront in politics and you'd know about them.

[–] Leviathan@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

Probably why the Republicans attacked AOC so hard and made sure all their followers knew exactly where they were supposed to stand in regards to her.