politics
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
view the rest of the comments
And to that end, I think Newsom would be the safest choice for a pivot by far.
Reasoning:
We're trying to stop the fascists from winning. Anything else is (unfortunately, but necessarily) secondary at this point. Pragmatic triage of the situation MUST be the mindset with which the party is evaluating their choices.
Of course, the DNC is neither triaging the situation, nor being pragmatic about the candidate who can actually fucking win and stop the fascists, because from where I’m standing, it looks like Biden hasn’t done a great job at any point in his term of slapping down the Nationalist Christians + MAGA crowd (and friends).
Oh, and by the way I love the idea of Newsom, for exactly all the reasons you lay out.
It's been a long time, and I don't remember the exact quote and the entire context, but I remember Trae Crowder (the "liberal redneck") on Real Time just after donnie was selected by the EC and people were trying to do some kind of post mortem on just how the hell we ended up with donnie.
And Trae Crowder says something like, "....or do you want to fucking WIN?" I remember Ana Marie Cox looking kind of put out by the comment, but IIRC, it was about pragmatism. I'm pretty sure exchanges like that went on, in various forms, all around the country during 2015-2016 and they are playing out again...
If anyone has a link to that full exchange, or to a transcript of it, I sure would appreciate it, by the way.
Republicans hate few people in the nation as much as Newsom. They would rally hard against him as the Uber-Liberal boogeyman.
If you think about the Democratic parties base, two groups stand out. Lefties (like most people on Lemmy) and people of color, particularly black women. If you select Newsom over Harris you i.) deal an enormous insult to people of color, and ii.) don’t go nearly far enough left to satisfy Lefties. What part of the base would be enthusiastic about such a milquetoast replacement?
The part of the base that doesn’t want fascism (I.e. literally anyone who is sane) would be fine with a pragmatic choice.
Don’t fight all battles all the time. In this situation, it would be a grave strategic mistake to try to tick all the boxes in the face of an imminent fascist threat. Pick the guy who’s not going to offend (regressive-minded) people in flyover states, in the interest of, you know, not letting the fascists win.
I’m not saying those goals aren’t important. I am saying that those goals need to take a backseat for the moment to the goal of “let’s not elect the First American Reichschancellor in November”.