this post was submitted on 02 Jul 2024
0 points (NaN% liked)

politics

19073 readers
5811 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.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. 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.
  5. 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
outrageousmatter@lemmy.world
aidan@lemmy.world
HLMenckenFan@lemmy.world
jordanlund@lemmy.world
little_cow@lemmy.world
0
The Absurdity of the Dump-Biden Uprising (www.theatlantic.com)
submitted 4 months ago by Rapidcreek@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world
7 comments fedilink hide all child comments
top 7 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

: “I worked in five presidential campaigns for Republicans and helped elect Republican senators and governors in more than half of the country. For decades, I made ads attacking the Democratic Party. But in all those years, I never saw anything as ridiculous as the push, in the aftermath of last week’s debate, to replace Joe Biden as the Democratic nominee.”

“For many in the party, the event raised genuine concerns about the incumbent’s fitness for a new term. But a president’s record makes a better basis for judgment than a 90-minute broadcast does. Biden has a capable vice president, should he truly become unable to serve. The standard for passing over Democratic voters’ preferred nominee should be extraordinarily high—and has not been met.”

[–] kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

I can't read the article myself due to the paywall. But presumably these quotes are by the same individual? Why would any Democrat campaign take the advice of someone who has spent decades helping to get Republican presidents elected? Why would he offer his advice to them at all? Certainly not in good faith. And why would he be an expert at what makes a good choice regarding nominees? His campaigns have presumably lost as many as they've won and their electorate is motivated by fundamentally different things. And never has there been a situation like this for either party during an election, a former president and convicted felon and current president circling the drain.

I don't necessarily disagree with the sentiment, but given the source I don't give the slightest fuck what his view point is on matters of the Democratic Party.

[–] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago

Stuart Stevens is fairly well known as Mitt Romney's top strategist. He is a straight shooter, and his opinion is in good faith.

[–] pjwestin@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

This article is fucking absurd. It holds up the primary as a paragon if the democratic process, even though Biden was the only candidate to have universal ballot access, and ignores the fact that two-thirds of Democratic didn't want him to run. It compares the Drop-Biden advocates to the January 6th protesters, even though they're advocating for a contested convention, which is the same process that was used until 1970. And to top it all off, it's written by Stuart Stevens, AKA Mitt Romney's 2012 campaign strategist. Why should the Democrats be taking advice from a Republican strategist, especially one that's already botched a presidential campaign?

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

I voted uncommitted for a lot of reasons, and this is one of them. Getting Biden out and having a brokered convention certainly expresses my democratic will.

[–] Seraph@fedia.io 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Long story short is splitting up the Democrats is exactly what conservatives want, to the point I wouldn't be surprised if media moguls are spending millions to protect their billions by giving this movement any traction at all.

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

Ditching Biden is the only way to unite two important groups of Democrats: those with some grasp of reality, who recognize that Biden is far too old to run again, and those who still have their head in the sand about the issue, but will rally around anyone who isn't Trump.

If we stick with Biden the election is lost. This will not be the last time Biden has a poor showing in public, revealing just how hard it is for him to speak and think at his advanced age. Every time it happens, more voters pay attention, and his poll numbers will sink more.