Israel is a client of the US, not vice versa. Turkey occupies the same geographic space. The propping up the Israel is an ideological policy by the right-wing, not a meaningful geopolitical one for our nation.
And possibly hello convicted felon, rapist, racist, Putin/Orban boot licker, veteran hater, who has had everyone remotely competent who’s previously worked for him leave and say what a horrible person he is to the presidency elect. Or sorry does that not rhyme as well?
Biden was going to lose to Trump. So from both a moral and pragmatic perspective, it’s good he’s gone. You might be pro-bombing Palestinian children, you do you, but if you want a Dem president, this is the only way. It just so happens to also be a referendum on Biden’s zionism.
She at the every least had the decency to distance herself from Joe’s fanaticism when he started giving his full-throated support for the genocide. She’s still culpable, but represents a step in the right direction, away from right-wing extremism.
I’m pro cease fire and don’t claim to know much on the topic, but neither side is doing the right thing from reports and what I’ve heard. This one moniker to show how bad Biden is is just so lazy and misinformed since nobody who will get elected on either side is going to do the right thing but please keep posting that on all Biden threads you seem to be an expert we can all learn from.
You’re not pro-ceasefire if you think this is a “bothsides” issue. Israel has all the power. You know how you can tell without being an “expert”? Just look at the skeletal, starved, mutilated bodies of the children in Gaza and compare it to what’s going on in Tel Aviv. Go look at the images from Gaza and try to tell me with a serious face it’s “bothsides”.
No. Joe is a genocide supporter, and so are those who make excuses for him.
Trump is Bibi’s bestie. There is absolutely no way on Earth he would do a damn thing to end the genocide. In fact, he’ll happily cheerlead it, without even the token hand-wringing we get from Biden.
Hell, I would say Biden was the better candidate from a pro-Ceasefire stance, since, at the very least, he is vulnerable to pressure from the left to push for a ceasefire. Trump is not.
Yes, and now we don’t have to choose between genocide hard and genocide light. Harris (or whoever) can come in with a generic pro-peace two-state message rather than defending the decision to send Israel big bombs for months. He’s off the ticket, you don’t need to argue that he’s bad but better than Trump anymore. The new candidate can just be not a genocide supporter.
Trump and Biden are both pro-genocide, yes, though Biden should be held accountable by democrat standards, not republican ones. It’s about the party principles in terms of those too, Biden had to pay a price for his fanaticism.
But I was talking about Israel and Palestine/Gaza.
But I was talking about Israel and Palestine/Gaza.
Who did you think I was talking about when I said Trump was Bibi’s bestie?
For future reference, Bibi is Benjamin Netanyahu. And if you don’t know that, you should probably educate yourself a bit more before talking about Israel and Palestine/Gaza.
In what way is Biden vulnerable to pressure from the left? What are they going to impeach him? The party hasn’t listened to those of us on the left in decades.
All this is true and Biden was still projected to lose to him, which says a lot about who the party leaders are grooming for the office. You should direct your anger at them not the people who’re having these terrible candidates foisted upon us. Imagine if they’d actually picked a likeable candidate back in 2016 and relegated Trump to the simple laughing stock that he is.
Lmao wait until Trump gives Netanyahu the green light to erase Palestine. Got what you wanted I guess. Hope you are prepared to do some more protesting, oh wait he will probably throw you lot in jail or deport for protesting unlike Biden. Reap what you sow.
On the one hand: “you can’t have her she’s ours!”. On the other, she’s out in 26 regardless, and she’s pretty good so maybe we can share with the rest of the country.
You forgot that she’s a POC and there are also tons of racists fucks out there.
Even before getting to her actual credentials (some great, others really not), people will be assholes. I still have hope that she, as a former prosecutor, could mop the floor with the fascists.
Americans divide 46-47% between Biden and Trump if the election were today, almost identical to a 44-46% ABC/Ipsos poll result in April. Among registered voters (though there’s plenty of time to register) it’s an absolute tie, 46-46%.
Were Vice President Kamala Harris to replace Biden as the Democratic nominee, vote choices are 49-46%, Harris-Trump, among all adults (and 49-47% among registered voters). Harris’ 49% is slightly better than Biden’s 46%, although she doesn’t have a statistically significant lead over Trump.
Also possibly key:
Both candidates [Biden and Trump] face a high degree of scorn. About 4 in 10 Americans say neither has the mental sharpness or the physical health to serve effectively, and as many say neither is honest and trustworthy. Sixty percent say Trump is too old for a second term, also a new high, up from 44% in spring 2023. And in a sign of the nation’s political polarization, 50% say that given his debate performance, Trump should step aside in favor of another nominee – although, in contrast with Biden, very few of Trump’s own supporters say so.
You can expect Harris’s numbers to drop given she’s vulnerable to almost every criticism Biden was except age and the fact that the Trump campaign has already been preparing to attack her.
No, they don’t. The Democratic Party can give the donated money to whoever is the candidate. Not sure where people are getting that.
Edit: After reading up, I am mistaken. If Harris is still the VP candidate, the money could be used. Otherwise a PAC would have to be setup to funnel money to the candidate.
That’s correct, but nearly none of the money is the direct donation stuff - it’s almost in PACs which are (due to a legal fiction) entirely independent of the candidate.
There are still more restrictions however on spending on other candidates and they would have to act like any other PAC, only helping via donating/running ads in support of (but importantly not directly by) any other candidate.
The $100 million warchest belongs to the Biden/Harris campaign, not the Democratic Party. They are separate organizations, and Biden/Harris only answers to Biden and Harris.
The DNC has its own funds of course, but nowhere near as much. And DNC funds are supposed to be shared with multiple Democrats, not just the one running for president.
And notably even if Biden/Harris were supporting the alternative, they’re an outside group. They can spend like a super PAC, but can’t pay bills or do direct advertising.
I find this so insane. People talk about who gets to keep the money, who has which rich asshole routing for them, which strategy has been successfull in the past, like always setting up the current president for reelection…
We need to focus on who has actually inspiring policies and ideas. We need to focus on these, because that is what the Reps lack. All they offer is “not the Dems” while the policies they propose are actually unpopular with many of their base. And the whole “Not Trump” strategy of Biden just fell apart.
Is there noone in the Democratic party who can actually come up with a coherent vision of the future and inspire people to follow it?
Is there no one in the Democratic party who can actually come up with a coherent vision of the future and inspire people to follow it?
This is why I think Pete Buttigieg should throw his hat in if they do have a primary. He just had a Bill Maher interview that just went viral because he knows how to talk to the common people. I think his visions are inspiring, he’s done a lot of work for his department, and he isn’t afraid to walk across party lines and go on Republican shows to talk about the real problems. He’s smart enough to smash Trump in a debate, calling out all his lies, and even if Trump is too scared to debate him, he has no problem laying out Trump’s lies elsewhere coherently and cognitively.
Half of America lost it’s mind when Obama was elected, and we’re still dealing with the fallout from that lovely dose of racism. There’s no way Kamala could win in this country.
She aint “black” as much as “brown.” Its an incredibly stupid hair to split, but indians are generally considered a “model minority” by racists, so it will likely hurt her but not as much as you may think.
Obama won. And then won again. Stop pumping up the reactionaries as some unstoppable force. They’re a minority and have been on a long term losing streak.
I don’t particularly like her, then again I detest nearly all politicians. That being said, I’m more motivated to vote, that’s for certain. I didn’t mind Biden, but it felt like elder abuse lol. He’s been better than anyone in my lifetime. Good God, I’d rather have her than Hilary as the first woman in the spot. Biden was just hard to watch and that position needs someone that will have to live with the consequences of the decisions in office. Will be curious to see who else puts their name in. 4 years ago he said he wouldn’t run again and he seems to be keeping that promise too. If they were clever, they’d put Biden as VP or as an advisor.
Hmm…not bad. Not amazing name recognition, but that could be remedied.
Having Gabby campaign for/with him, especially after the DJT assassination attempt, could be beneficial, too. (Or could look like a disgusting political plot, but that’s really all our politics.)
Buttigieg and AOC ticket? That would be the youth candidacy. Kelly and Buttigieg or vice versa would be more centrist but probably be the most robust candidacy.
I hate to say it, but in this political climate and with the threat of Trump, the best shot is probably two young-ish white guys.
Gavin is probably the least popular option of any names floated. I don’t know who likes him, apparently some people do, but it’s not anywhere near a majority of the country.
On top of that, you can add that there is no advantage to getting a candidate from California. This is why I never understood Harris as the VP pick. Ideally, you get someone from a swing state like Whitmer.
Literally any straight white man center-right democrat born after 1968 would wipe the floor with trump.
And before anyone jumps down my throat, that’s not what I want. I want president Cortez. But presidents are chosen by money and by about 10,000 generically stupid swing voters in Michigan and Pennsylvania.
And Kamala is the most logical choice, because there will be the least amount of legal hurdles, since she was already on the ticket.
And the Republicans already said they are going to mount legal challenges, which can easily lead to SCOTUS deciding the election. So I expect Sanders, AOC and progressives to strongly push for Kamala.
But I fully expect the DNC to push forward some corporate candidate like Bloomberg.
How is it that states can decide (or whatever the correctt word is) who’s on the ballot when the party hasn’t even officially nominated a candidate? I know that political parties are separate from election institutions, but it seems very strange. And it seems very early for states to have it set in stone.
They can’t. The nominee is chosen by the party and then communicated to the states. The states do have deadlines for being on it and this year some organizational genius scheduled the convention after the earliest deadline in Ohio. Ohio has since moved that deadline back, but the structure of the law leaves room for shenanigans so the DNC is moving forward with a virtual vote before the convention.
Yes, with a big asterisk on the “should”. The law that pushes the deadline back may theoretically not go into effect until after the deadline is passed, and they paired it with some other campaign finance rules that are probably unconstitutional, so there’s an outside chance the whole thing gets struck down.
All that said, the Democrats won’t win Ohio for the presidential race. They want to be on the ballot to help turnout for the Democratic senator who’s running at the same time. So if they took a risk and lost, it wouldn’t be the end of the world.
I am not a lawyer, but what is clear is that each State sets its own laws. By the constitution, States are in charge of elections.
What I have heard is that Biden has to release his delegates, who are already bound to him. Many states have already had their primaries completed with the Biden/Harris ticket winning.
Sending those electors to the Convention and letting them choose someone else is going to be a grey area.
If they choose Harris, it’s pretty sound. When a president steps down, the VP becomes president, so there is definitely precedent and a legal basis.
But if Biden releases his delegates and lets them vote for anyone? That will be challenged and it will go to the supreme court. And SCOTUS is corrupt enough to find some flimsy legal excuse that helps Republicans.
So yeah, that’s what I’ve heard. But I am not an expert.
You think the DNC is going to try to push out the centrist, sitting vice president of their party during a presidential election? The vice presidential that aligns with the majority of their constituents, has a huge war chest of money, and is a well know and generally liked member of the party?
The DNC are idiots, but that makes no sense at all.
The new candidate will be picked before then, they were already planning an early roll call vote because the DNC convention is too late for some state deadlines.
August 7 is the deadline. The problem is my state, Ohio. By law, the Democrats must nominate someone in 17 days or be left off the ballot. It's way too fast for a special primary election.
This is certainly going to face legal challenges in red states, too. The orange one will probably run unopposed in states like Florida.
Anything could happen. Most likely is the elected delegates will decide at the convention (edit: when you vote for “Biden,” you are basically voting for who the delegates that will elect him will vote for, so you still elected those delegates). Redoing a primary before then would be next to impossible. Takes weeks or months to get signatures to get on the ballot, then you need time to recruit staff to work the polls, etc.
Yup. I would be literally stunned if any state primary has no legal path forward for what to do if a primary candidate drops out before the convention. It could get messy, but this idea that the dems will not have a candidate in some states come November is FUD.
Broadly, when Americans vote in primaries, they are not voting directly for a candidate but kicking off a process that will ultimately send delegates to the party’s national convention. Those delegates are the ones who officially pick the nominee — and the Democrats’ convention hasn’t happened yet.
I wanted AOC but her last few posts have been cringe. She’s divisive, but that could have worked in her favor. Prob. will be Kamala. I think they should have an open convention & let delegates decide though.
I kind of expected them to announce another candidate, not just that their only candidate wouldn’t be. Do they have to elect a candidate now? For how long will only one party have a candidate?
Edit: Just read that they’ll choose the candidate in late August. So for a whole month there will be only Republican campaigning in the media, unless the Democrats can make their process interesting enough to catch the media’s attention.
Another edit: Seems they’re moving much quicker than that after all.
Biden has already endorsed Harris, at least on Twitter. I think that part is over. They already have to nominate someone early due to some deadlines, so the actual nomination will happen in the next week or two. It’s Harris. We should all accept it.
Goddamn this timeline sucks hairy balls (not to be confused with me cuz ain’t nobody sucking me). I didn’t like her as a VP pick and I don’t like the idea of her as President but she’s still 1000 times better than Cheetodick.
I’d love to see them nominate Bernie or AOC for VP. That’s how they’ll get the 18-24 year olds to come out to vote.
Bernie 2024, even if he dies of a heart attack first day his appointments would change the country for good and I don’t trust any party politicians on Palestine.
Seeing AOC oddly shill for Biden before he dropped out… which I’d expect from Pelosi, Schumer & Schiff, but not from her. She may actually be trying to get the VP spot.
She just did the calculus that Biden was our best shot, due to a whole shitton of different factors from Biden’s support among elderly voters, union support, money raised, polls being pretty crap for a few cycles now, shit like that.
Now there will be logistical challenges, we have a lot of uncertainty ahead. She wanted to avoid that until we got some better answers.
Or you could read her arguments, which were direct and pragmatic. She was talking about how difficult this would be logistically, and that it would have been better to do 6 months ago, you know, when the progressive wing of the party raised the issue.
AOC was “shilling” for some consistency, backbone and party unity out of a pragmatic need to beat back fascism. Now that this choice has been made, I’m betting she will continue with the same intent.
Further, Bernie and AOC are rather well aware that the progressive wing of the party would likely be blamed for “party disunity” if Biden stayed in and lost. They will not do anything to let the DNC scapegoat their caucus.
AOC has always been considered an outsider to Democrat leadership. She prob was thinking things through, but I don’t think it is because she thought Biden was going to win.
Maybe, but then the swing state could end up with a GOP governor. That’s one reason why VPs are often from safe seats, eg Harris, Pence, Biden, Palin, Quayle…
The shortlist I’ve seen thrown around a lot so far is pretty much Whitmer, Shapiro, Cooper, and Kelly. Maybe someone like Beshear, but I’d call that slightly lower odds than the others. I think they will probably lean away from a 2 woman ticket too
That would be cool but I suspect it will be a white, straight man to balance out the ticket for the racists and sexists. Maybe someone from a swing state.
As an outside observer I find it hard to believe that a place as right-wing as the US would elect a woman of colour as president. Isn’t that double red rag to the nutjob bulls?
If you’re not White, Male, Christan, Straight, a Citizen, Conservative, a Facist OR you’re none of the above BUT you’re in the 1% then you’re essentially fucked.
news
Oldest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.