this post was submitted on 22 Jul 2024
0 points (NaN% liked)

politics

19047 readers
4851 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.
  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
 

The former president has always considered himself to be the ultimate disrupter. But this time, the disruption is on the other side.

Through the weekend, there were an awful lot of questions that were going back and forth from people in the president’s tightest circle, and one of the questions that kept being asked was whether Joe Biden was going to endorse Kamala Harris or not. And the question didn’t revolve around whether he wanted to or not, but whether people in her camp thought it would be better for her to fight for it, win it on her own, and not be seen as somebody who was tapped by President Biden and so, in her own way, have a fresh start going into the campaign.

So the timing seems to be about as good as it could have been to end what has just been one of the craziest two or three weeks in American politics in quite some time.

top 21 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] simplejack@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

He’s already trying to weasel out of the next debate. He’s scared.

[–] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Can you blame him? Kamala was a District Attorney and an Attorney General. Even a competent opponent who based their arguments on facts would be intimidated.

Trump wouldn’t stand a chance on that stage.

[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

IDK, considering the MAGA crowd consider Trump lies better than facts, because everybody know by now, that facts have a liberal bias.

[–] 14th_cylon@lemm.ee 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

the fight is not for maga votes, it is for the undecided morons in the middle.

[–] ryathal@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

The fight is against the couch, idiot undecided voters are basically a coin toss. Getting 80%+ of your supporters to actually vote for you is all you really need.

Nothing was more demoralizing than Biden in the last debate. Trump against someone under 60 could have the same thing happen to him.

[–] timewarp@lemmy.world -1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

People on the couch are the undecided voters. The more Democrats call them idiots, the less incentive they have to vote for whoever the Democrat nominee is.

[–] lemming741@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Trump loves the poorly educated

[–] timewarp@lemmy.world -1 points 2 months ago

Okay... and what are Democrats going to do about that to help educate America? Are they going to tax churches who act as a conduit for the Republican party and think tanks like The Heritage Foundation, who wants to defund the Department of Education?

[–] timewarp@lemmy.world -1 points 2 months ago (2 children)

We haven't heard Kamala debate. She was not very popular in 2020. Sometimes she comes across as cringey and foolish. I wish people would stop acting like she should be coronated. She needs to prove herself before being the nominee. Just handing everything to her on a silver plater isn't going to get the response Democrats are hoping for.

[–] scarabine@lemmynsfw.com 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

“Coronated” is a real tell as to what your opinion diet consists of.

[–] timewarp@lemmy.world -1 points 2 months ago

My opinion diet? What are you on?

[–] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

She’s the VP, and the President’s nomination. She’s already on the ballot, so she has access to existing campaign funds. There are no outspoken challengers, and there are eight weeks until early voting ballots are sent out.

What do you suggest instead?

[–] timewarp@lemmy.world -1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

There is at least one outspoken challenger that I know of. She should hopefully be starting some live interviews today on news networks. If she's like Biden and stays hidden unless there is a teleprompter and has her team silence anyone else, she's toast too. She was also running cover and part of the team shielding Biden which is what put us in this predicament. If she intends to beat Trump, she needs to come out and start speaking about how she is different. The further she can distance herself from Biden altogether, the better.

[–] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Care to share a link or her name? Your comment reads like disengagement propaganda by putting down Harris without supporting your nameless alternative.

[–] timewarp@lemmy.world -1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

https://marianne2024.com

BTW I'm not putting her down. I'm saying handing it to her without any public debate or discourse, and just acting like cause she was Biden's VP that she's already got this, isn't a winning strategy. She's got to distance herself from Biden now and show America what she's got that will be superior and better.

[–] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Williamson didn’t break 10% in the 2020 primary. What makes you think she’s going to capture more of the Democratic vote now?

[–] timewarp@lemmy.world -1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

I didn't say she would. I said Kamala needs to prove herself... she needs to have some public discourse with other people to show the public she is the best candidate. If another candidate makes her look weak and she can't talk about an agenda in details, then she's not going to do very well.

[–] p5yk0t1km1r4ge@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

She has been the fucking VICE PRESIDENT for awhile now, and she's been an attorney general AND a district Attorney. She does not need to "prove herself".

[–] timewarp@lemmy.world -1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

So the Joe & Kamala ticket was losing in polls badly, causing other Democrats to suffer. Kamala is going to have the exact same issue if she doesn't prove herself. What she proved so far was she was fine with genocide, she was fine with elder abuse. If she doesn't distance herself from Joe and show us something different, then Joe might as well have stayed in. What is a democracy if the voters have no say in the matter, and the nomination is just given to the same corporate puppet that stood alongside the losing candidate?

[–] MagicShel@programming.dev 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I remember her from her last campaign. She is pretty articulate on stage, but she has some really fucking loony beliefs. Way too much spirituality and love. That's a fine message for self-help books, but it was a bad look when Nancy Reagan was dialing Miss Cleo for advice, and it would look even worse today.

Trump would tear her up one side and down the other.

You want Kamala to prove herself? The clowns I've seen stepping forward - Manchin and now this - aren't going to prove or disprove anything.

[–] timewarp@lemmy.world -1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Because the DNC did what they always do. They said sure we'll change the face but not give you choice. They hope just having a younger black female version of Biden will be sufficient, even though nothing is really changing. Voters weren't just worried about Biden's age, they are also tired of being manipulated and gaslit about their party.