546
European leader wonders why 'no one is asking about' Trump’s 'bizarre' ramblings: Senate Dem
(www.alternet.org)
this post was submitted on 11 Jul 2024
546 points (97.9% liked)
politics
19222 readers
2745 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Even if Donald Trump were young, handsome, well spoken, charming, and intelligent, he'd still stand for a repugnant and destructive cause. Meanwhile, the biggest albatross on the Democrats' relatively positive agenda is its weak leader.
If it takes a "weak leader" to pull the country out of recession, inflation, unemployment, create a fantastic infrastructure program and all the other amazing policies that Joe Biden has managed to accomplish, I will gladly take a "weak leader" over a strong criminal/rapist/felon/liar.
Biden has done exactly none of that.
Only thing close to "amazing policy" he's done is the student debt forgiveness that he's insisting on means testing to death. Not because it makes it more likely to pass Republican courts (it doesn't since they're pathologically opposed to even a single dollar being forgiven), but because that's what Dem leadership always do when something helps regular people but not their rich owner donors.
He's less awful for sure, but GLADLY?? Even if Biden miraculously becomes at least 50% more popular in the next 4 months and wins, that sets his successor candidate up for failure and Project 2025 still happens as Project 2029.
Down votes here are unwarranted. OP was being generous, I can only assume to raise support for Biden, which is a fine cause. The responder was simply recalibrating OP because its disingenuous to believe biden is the answer to all of these problems. That's not to say you shouldn't support biden for a myrid of other reasons.
Yeah, I'll vote Biden if I have to, but we really need a replacement. He's going to lose at this rate, and it's going to fuck the world up.
That's part of it, but we can't forget the Democrats' right-wing slide. Setting aside Gaza because that's obvious, things like their recent stance on immigration is making people wonder "why am I even voting for these people". Now you might say "because Trump" but that's not enough to get people to vote for a party that actively refuses to represent its constituents.
Their recent stance on immigration is much more broadly popular than you imagin.
Definitely not with Democrat voters. For some people not doing that shit is the reason they vote Democrat.
Yes among Democrats.
As an outsider, out of a US population of 333 million people - these two are the guys battling it out to be your leader?
I mean, have you considered, perhaps, someone else in the larger pool?
What you're seeing right now is how tough it is to get the geriatrics who already have power to leave the door open to someone else.