110
Biden reportedly regrets ending re-election campaign and says he’d have defeated Trump
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 29 Dec 2024
110 points (86.2% liked)
politics
19267 readers
1745 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
Biden was behind by 5 points when he dropped out and was slipping by the day. He had zero chance of defeating Trump. Regardless of the reality of the situation or what you think of his policies, the general public wanted someone to blame, and they decided that person was Biden. Doesn't matter what he did or didn't do. People decided Biden was the scapegoat, and nothing was going to change that.
This is 100% correct. Biden gave Garland the AG slot as a make-good over the fact that his Supreme Court nomination got railroaded. I'm also sure that the thought process, even though it could never be spoken, was that Garland would aggressively pursue Trump as revenge for his SC nod getting snubbed. Instead, we got an AG who intentionally sat on his hands for four years and slow-walked prosecutions that a first-year intern should have been able to handle.
Biden made two mistakes in this regard. First, he allowed himself to be paralyzed by optics and fear that Trump would frame any action as political persecution and interference, as if Trump wasn't going to do that anyway. His second mistake was not replacing Garland as AG sooner. Optics my ass, if you know the AG is sitting on a case with overwhelming evidence and is not prosecuting that case, replace the fucking AG.
But at the end of the day, she could not overcome the greatest sin of all -- trying to run for President while being a black woman.
She didn't lose because shes a black woman, she lost because she was running the same campaign the old white man did.
And the solution to that problem is putting Trump back in power why?
How is that your response?
The person you responded to didn't advocate an opinion about who should be president, but rather why the Democratic candidate lost.
By what fucked up process does that end up translating into you thinking that person was advocating for Trump?
Who said anything about Trump? This entire discussion is about how Democrats lost.
Critique of one is not an automatic endorsement of the other.