Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
I agree Michelle shouldn’t run. I’d argue, though, that we’re ready for a woman leader, but we need one presented without a bunch of past baggage (Hillary) or a party agenda (Kamala and arguably Hillary, too) and with their own ideas and not what the think tank says will win.
I'd say it's pretty hard for a woman to both have enough experience to be taken seriously as a candidate and simultaneously have no past baggage or party agenda.
And I don't think most male candidates are held to that standard, either.
The misogyny is palpable. In the country as a whole.
country as a whole
Species as a whole.
More progressive cultures are getting over this tribalistic, divisive stuff -- they will tend to flourish over time.
More conservative cultures will double down on division -- they will tend to wither.
While they certainly implode... I think there's the old problem.
Like say you have 5 co-operative communities that focus on building up great resources, polite trade with eachother, no focus on millitary.
Then you throw in 2 Viking type communities, extremely warlike, that have no independent ability to gather resources... but specifically focus on pillaging.
Obviously the vikings take out the poorly defended villages to build up resources, before going after eachother, in the long run everyone dies out because the vikings wreck everything for everyone, and leave nothing for themselves.
I feel like that's kind of a form of what happens with capitalism vs socialism types. we've got elements that really just want peace... but the warlike ones will just continue to survive, as long as there are enough peaceful societies to wreck... and unfortunately the peaceful ones are the ones to go down first, in spite of being the only ones that would survive long term without the others existance.
Not true. Clinton won the popular vote
I want to vote for a woman, but not a Zionist with plans for lots of tax rebates
I didn't vote for Biden, I didn't vote for Clinton, I didn't vote for Harris, and I didn't vote for Obama (but I did caucus for him because public option)
People laugh but I 100% believe AOC would win.
I think they're laughing nervously because deep down they fear that you're right. I certainly think you are.
What we also don’t need is yet another political dynasty.
We just don’t want neoliberals running. We’re done with that. Everyone is. I hope AOC runs.
They said that about a black president. So. No. I don't agree. AOC is very popular.
The problem with H. Clinton and Harris were that they were annointed. If a woman candidate was brought forth by a proper primary, I think she'd blow the Republican out of the water.
Or a progressive woman who wasn’t part of the Democratic Party at all.
Hillary won the nationwide popular vote, though.
"Ready for" is a pretty ambiguous qualifier. Considering that 8 years of Obama drove the racists absolutely batshit insane for the foreseeable future makes me think we weren't even ready for the first Black President, and we certainly aren't ready for whatever the fuck Trump is. Personally I think things like that are what shes referring to and it's not so much about just winning the election.
American here. I remember shortly after the election I was visiting Indian co-workers in Bangalore. Over dinner they were asking why it took so long for us to elect a Black President.
They were clearly expecting a nuanced and historical perspective about the South, colonialism, economy, yadda
But my only and honest one-word answer: "Racism"
I grew up in a city that had gangs and trailer parks. Racism as deep as (and virtually a part of) religion. Those undereducated fucks hated (n-word)
EDIT: ofc Obama being both educated and black ... he was their perfect nemesis
Hogwash. Women have come within spitting distance of winning the presidency. Twice. Kamala and Hillary were both very unlikable candidates running no the same neoliberal platform that voters have rejected in the last three elections.
The only thing holding them back was their support of the status quo.
If either of them had run on a platform of holding billionaires accountable for stealing from the working class, they would've won in a landslide.
They'd rather have fascism though so that's what we get. Fascists aren't going to raise their taxes.
Why is anyone asking Michelle Obama to run for president? I mean, I know the bar for presidential prerequisites is buried 6 feet down after Trump, but why do the democrats keep propping up women candidates based solely on the basis of “she is a woman that you know”?
Because the neoliberals are tied to identity politics over substance out of necessity.
This gets really ugly when Democrats start rejecting candidates for their minority status. Kamala explicitly rejected Pete Buttigieg as a running mate because he was gay. Kamala rejected him using the logic of a thousand other bigots, "I have no problem with it, but others won't understand and will judge me for it." This is the exact same logic that employers across the country use to deny hiring queer people, trans people, etc. Employers will claim to not be bigoted themselves, but that their customers wouldn't get it, so they simply can't hire the queer candidate.
Michelle Obama is not the woman I'm looking at to run. In fact, having launching the political careers if spouses and other family members on the political success of a family member is a terrible idea. This is the main reason why I thought having Hillary Clinton run for president was a bad idea, and I opposed Jeb Bush for the same reason (though I'd vastly preferred either over Trump).
Though I'm aware political dynasties in the US have a history going back all the way to the Adamses.
Yea, it’s toootally the sexism and not the absolute dog shit policies. Hilary even won the popular vote. Fuck off with this victim card crap.
TBF we elected the white man with the exact same platform and owners as Kamala.
The only real difference between her and Biden was her skin color and gender.
There were many many other differences, you just choose not to see them. The main example being that for Kamala’s election we just had 4 years of Democrat ruling so voters with a gnat attention span already forgot what Trump was like.
No, Biden was elected after Trump 1. Then people wanted more change and it became very clear that Biden was not going to win his reelection (not because of policies alone). Harris simply didn't either, but she didn't lose where the old white man would have won in the same circumstances and everything else equal. Harris being equal to Biden is what lost votes, not her gender.
I'd love for AOC to run. Tired of these geriatric out of touch assholes.
As a non-American looking in from the outside, from what I can gather in progressive online spaces, people are sick of career politicians in general that don't have any actual morals but are instead driven by marketing and advertising. This is a problem not just with the US Democrats but with the old guard in general worldwide.
That's part of why the door has been opened to right wing lunatics in the first place. Around 10 years ago, a lot of people thought Donald Trump was the "anti establishment" pick. As insane as that is to reasonably well educated people, simple people with shitty lives believed that this upstart really would "drain the swamp".
It's also part of why the career politicians aren't doing much to stop it either. They see the numbers on their marketing graphs, so they're evolving into another stage of parasite that can feed on the new generation.
There's no doubt in my mind that it would be a tougher battle for a woman than for a man in the USA. But also, they would stand a much better chance with someone like AOC than someone like Clinton or Obama or Harris. Because people are fucking sick of corporate undead ghouls whose sole purpose is to keep the Overton window in place.
I know that someone here is going to call AOC a sellout or something but come on, your anarchist socialist utopia is even further away now that the christo-fascists have undone so much progress. AOC is a thousand times better than almost anything else you've got right now.
You need more women with AOC and Jasmine Crockett energy, and less with Joe Biden energy. Someone to knock these christo-fascist clowns the fuck out on the mic and on social media, and to inspire people. Not someone that's going to go "oh well I tried nothing and now I give up" and fucking bore everyone to death.
It's not your genitals. It's because you're not a progressive
Also thank fuck she has no intentions of getting back into politics! But we had a kinda progressive option with Bernie. And the corpo dems torpedoed him harder than they ever fought against trump.
"As we saw in the past election"
Yeah.... Not so sure it was because Hilary and Kamala were women
The way they treated her and spoke of her while she was First Lady, i don’t blame her for wanting nothing to do with politics. Plenty of low key racists on the left too, so she would get it from all sides
Maybe the US will be mature enough to join the civilized world in a century or two.
Nearly one in five voters told an American University survey they or someone they know would not vote for a woman as president, including one-quarter of women under 50 and nearly 20 percent of men under 50.
In this survey, a larger percentage of women under 50 said they (or someone they knew) wouldn’t vote for a woman as president, compared to men who responded.
I agree the country is ready to be led by a female president, but I also agree with Michele Obama that the current electorate is not ready to elect that leader.
I think Russian misinformation efforts are currently far more effective than we are aware of at present.
Besides the entire "eeeeekkk a woman in the white house!!" Thing, can we please not have Michelle Obama there? I don't want families who time after time contro the government, fuck that.
If someone omin a family becomes president it should automatically rule out any other family member from even running for a presidency
Was it just young men? I'd like you to have a look at male minority votes in general. Maybe run a woman candidate who can offer something positive to everyone, even if it's bullshit like Obama's Hope.
It’s more about the electoral college and who is the elector for the state unfortunately. Which is why a trump is trying to make sure his people are in those positions.
Honestly, the US entire election system needs to be ripped out, getting rid of first past the post should be seen as a national emergency.
That would in an instant get rid of Gerrymandering, and open the way for new parties that actually has a chance to get a say.
Now, obviously neither the Dems nor the GOP is in any way interested in that, so it might take a full collapse of the current system for this to happen.
Sadly both current parties in the US are way to the right of a proper political compass, so both will fight proportional representation and getting rid of the EC...