this post was submitted on 03 Jul 2024
44 points (78.2% liked)

politics

18984 readers
3703 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! 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.
  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

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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] dhork 8 points 3 months ago (16 children)

I agree with your post, except for the part where he needs to "open up a dialog" about it. There is a dialog going on about it, it's just out of public view. As far as the public is concerned, all the major power brokers in the Democratic Party are 100% behind Biden, unless something changes, then they'll be 100% behind the next one. But privately, there are a lot of really consequential conversations going on.

Yes, it sucks that we didn't have an actual primary to sort this out. But here's my current conspiracy theory: the same puppeteers who orchestrated Hillary in 2016 and Biden in 2020 really want Harris in 2024. But they were throw for a loop when Biden decided to stay in the race. You can't very well have the sitting VP run against the sitting President in a primary, can you? So, they were reduced to waiting until after the primary for to convince Biden to back out. It's a wild one, but not the wildest plot the writers for this season have come up with.

I continue to believe that if Biden resigns, and hands Harris the keys to the country, she will trounce Trump. I am so looking forward to her debating Trump.

It also has come out that Trump is delaying his VP announcement, because he doesn't want this focus on Biden's weaknesses to leave the news cycle. But I think it's really because he will make a different choice if that VP nominee debates Harris than if that person debates someone else.

[–] givesomefucks -3 points 3 months ago (13 children)

I don't think it was explicitly for Harris...

They just knew if a primary happened, a progressive would have wiped the floor with Biden, but moderates would just pull votes from Biden.

They still could have ignored the primary results, but it would piss off most voters.

So we get this shit show where are only option is Biden or likely another moderate that Biden's people at the DNC pick, and who will keep Biden's people running the DNC.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Givesomefucks, which progressive candidate would you suggest take Biden’s place?

[–] Atom 4 points 3 months ago

They never say who they'd like to see, at least not that I've ever seen. This user posts a lot though.

This presents a problem though, progressives are making the call for Biden to step aside. Cool, that's their view. But if he did, the DNC picks the candidate without primary input. Anyone remember the last time a block of Democratic voters saw the primary process as the DNC picking a candidate against the wishes of the voters? How did 2016 go? Whether you subscribe to the "Bernie won" talking points or not, it does raise the question. Would the DNC pick satisfy the voters calling for Biden to drop or would they pick a moderate Democrat (the majority of the Democratic base) and further upset progressives?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)
load more comments (13 replies)