this post was submitted on 29 Nov 2023
227 points (93.2% liked)

politics

19090 readers
5573 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
 

Given the current state of partisan polarization, it’s unlikely Biden can get majority job approval next year even with the most fortunate set of circumstances. But the good news for him is that he probably doesn’t have to. Job-approval ratings are crucial indicators in a normal presidential reelection cycle that is basically a referendum on the incumbent’s record. Assuming Trump is the Republican nominee, 2024 will not be a normal reelection cycle for three reasons.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Democratic party middle ground wouldn’t be likely to jump ship, yeah.

They did in 2008.

You misunderstood and got mad at me lol.

You mischaracterized what I was saying and never stopped gaslighting.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Democratic party middle ground wouldn’t be likely to jump ship, yeah.

They did in 2008.

What do you mean? 2008 United States presidential election? Didn't Obama have a hefty win in that?

From that photo, to me, it looks like they solidly got their own party behind them and plenty of the independents (which, like I said, I feel is one important aspect in winning).

You mischaracterized what I was saying and never stopped gaslighting.

I was talking about how in elections in the US, it's important to win the middle ground and undecided voters. You started talking about how that means "vote blue no matter who" were hypocrites, even though we were thinking of two different groups. Misunderstanding, those happen, it's not a huge deal. It's not gaslighting to resolve a misunderstanding lol.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

What do you mean? 2008 United States presidential election? Didn’t Obama have a hefty win in that?

I addressed this already. Clinton supporters literally formed a pac to fundraise for McCain/Palin when they didn't get their first choice in the primaries. I'm glad they failed, but their failure isn't from lack of trying.

Misunderstanding, those happen, it’s not a huge deal. It’s not gaslighting to resolve a misunderstanding lol.

It wasn't a misunderstanding. You repeatedly pretended I was talking about a group that I made perfectly clear I wasn't talking about, and now you're doing the same thing about the Clinton supporters who jumped ship in 2008.

This conversation has reached its conclusion. Go gaslight someone else.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago

I addressed this already. Clinton supporters literally formed a pac to fundraise for McCain/Palin when they didn't get their first choice in the primaries. I'm glad they failed, but their failure isn't from lack of trying.

Pretty interesting. There's even a Wiki article I didn't find before https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_and_liberal_support_for_John_McCain_in_2008

Not like expecting them to fall in line would’ve done anything if you’re losing a hefty chunk of the moderates.

So “vote blue no matter who” was a crock of fucking bullshit put forth by hypocrites who never intend to follow their own advice if a candidate isn’t their very first choice.

I think this was the misunderstanding. We were talking about two different groups here. Unless it was purposeful on your part. But either way, it was very confusing.

This conversation has reached its conclusion. Go gaslight someone else.

You really like that term. That and "grifter" have had such an inflation.