this post was submitted on 28 Jun 2024
148 points (76.1% liked)

politics

18059 readers
2847 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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!
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. 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.
  6. 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

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The president often had a weak, raspy voice during his first debate against Trump, in what Democrats had hoped would be a turning point in the race.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Tylerdurdon 114 points 2 days ago (67 children)

I'm not in a panic. I knew this. Should he have run again? Hell no. I wish he would have had the courage to call it a day.

That being said, I'm fully willing to endure 4 years of Weekend at Bernie's if it means I won't have to go through the embarrassment of having the orange moron at the helm.

[–] timewarp 30 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (50 children)

Are you willing to let Trump win though than have Biden step aside? That is what the DNC should be asking themselves. The polls are way to close for Biden to have that poor of a performance. If Democrats are seriously worried about Trump being the end of Democracy then they would not be okay with Biden being the DNC's best choice.

[–] Tylerdurdon 7 points 2 days ago (18 children)

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.

[–] retrospectology 12 points 2 days ago (2 children)

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.

[–] Blackbeard 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

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.

[–] retrospectology 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

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.

[–] Blackbeard 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

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.

[–] btaf45 -2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

He absolutely can be replaced at this stage, and by nearly anyone.

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.

[–] Ensign_Crab 6 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The DNC charter says that only the voters can select the nominee.

They argued in court that they could ignore this.

[–] btaf45 0 points 1 day ago

Nope. They argued in court that they could alter their charter.

load more comments (15 replies)
load more comments (46 replies)
load more comments (62 replies)