148
this post was submitted on 28 Jun 2024
148 points (75.9% liked)
politics
19089 readers
4209 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
While I agree, it's way too late in the game to change up now. There's no strong candidate waiting in the wings. It's not about willing, it's about alternatives.
Gretchen Whitmer would run away with the election. Plus, we get Michigan (swing state) and the suburban moms. I really can’t see a downside.
There are so many better options at this point. I can't help but shake that the two party system is doing exactly what it was designed to do. Make people think that mediocrity is the best we can get if we're lucky.
We got FDR and LBJ and Lincoln and Washington. So if you think that then that's on your own faulty thinking.
You're free to keep supporting Biden at this point but hopefully when you see all the Democratic news outlets saying the same things tomorrow and this coming week and the polls showing Biden's support dropping you'll reconsider
WTF are you talking about. What I want is for Biden to drop out and be replaced by Gavin Newsom. Nor did I vote for Biden in the 2020 primary. I'm just saying that you're completely wrong that the system cannot produce good candidates since we've had great presidents in the past.
There doesn't have to be a strong candidate, just anyone stronger than Biden who's basically zombie-crawling across the floor.
He absolutely can be replaced at this stage, and by nearly anyone.
Only if they can convince him to step aside and let someone else run. At this point the voters have selected 3,904 delegates who are contractually obligated to cast a vote for him at the Convention. If the delegates somehow simply ignored the primaries, they'd be quite literally ignoring the will of their voters and taking matters into their own hands. It's alarming how many on the left (who presumably had a problem with the DNC's treatment of Bernie in 2016) are cheering for the DNC to heavily influence the primary process again. I don't necessarily disagree that something drastic needs to be negotiated, but the irony of this is really hard to ignore.
This is the way the DNC set their rules up, they've been ok using the system to kneecap progressives, I see no reason that they shouldn't do that to Biden. I'm not precious about the DNC and I have no illusion that it's democratic, so they just need to stop pretending they're being held back by principles and just pull the levers they always pull to control the convention outcome.
Yes, and the rules were voted on by party members before the primary started. They're now in place, and they're obligated to respect them until this process plays out. Same thing happened in 2016. Say what you will about whether the rules were "fair" or not, they were agreed upon before Iowa, and they were respected through the Convention.
The way you use "kneecap progressives" tells me you're conflating DNC primary rules and campaign finance. The two are not the same thing. They could do to Biden what they did to Bernie and blast the airwaves with damaging, misleading attacks, but none of that would fundamentally change the fact that the primary rules were agreed upon and are immutable until the Convention comes to a close.
And to reiterate, it's not "principles" that are holding them back. It's a contractual obligation whose violation would open them up to civil litigation. Voters picked delegates and they're obligated to respect the voters who selected them. The DNC can't just tell them to take a hike.
But Biden can.
edit: AP just put out a piece that confirms what I've been saying. They'd be sued into oblivion if they usurped the process right now. The ball is very much in Biden's court.
He absolutely can't be legally replaced unless he agrees to that. ~~And the replacement would automatically be Harris unless she agrees to allow someone else~~. The DNC charter says that only the voters can select the nominee. Changing that charter this close to an election likely wouldn't stand up in courts. The only way to replace Biden would be to convince him to step down.
They argued in court that they could ignore this.
Nope. They argued in court that they could alter their charter.
AOC would be a really strong candidate. The right would freak out and she'd end up getting more press coverage than Trump. I imagine she'd make several Republican's embolisms pop.
The party would rather lose democracy forever than nominate AOC.
Yes, she's probably the only one with enough name recognition and veracity to take on the orange moron in my opinion. Problem is corporate Democrats wouldn't back her because she's too progressive and that goes against their corporate masters.
True... However if Trump gets elected and our government is able to prevent a dictatorship, in 4 years progressives will hopefully realize the DNC needs them more than they need need the DNC.
the progressives already know that the dnc needs them more than they need the dnc as evidenced by dnc surrogates perpetually shaming progressives for not voting for the dnc; i'm guessing there's a typo in your sentence somewhere, but i'm not sure where.
If the progressives truly thought that then the US would have a much different stance in regards to Israel.