this post was submitted on 03 Jul 2024

45 points (80.8% liked)

politics

18081 readers

3489 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.
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!
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
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

• 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

From raising alarm to backing Biden, Democrats in Congress grapple with debate aftermath (apnews.com)

submitted 5 days ago by givesomefucks to c/politics

39 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 39 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] [email protected] 21 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (3 children)

I think the most interesting thing about the debate fallout is that republicans, who usually will pile on and gaslight and push the Overton window to the right no matter what the reality is, are basically impossible to even hear over the distress and doomsaying on the left wing.

That's because we're doing their job better than even they could.

Look, it was a bad debate performance, but this is 2016 replaying all over again, and these repeated commentary cycles are overkill. We're focusing all our attention on a non-representative bad detail for a democratic nominee. Republicans love that for us, and it's fantastic for them. We are letting a less-than-two-hour block consume us, our momentum, and drain our morale. And every second we're not focusing on Trump and him being a (thanks to the Supreme Court) literal king, and what that could mean for us, is another shovelful of dirt out of democracy's growing grave.

I get it - everyone is screaming "Biden should drop out" with the best intentions (mostly). Trump is the anti-Democracy. He needs to be stopped. But I actually don't think the debate was bad enough to warrant all this desperate doomsaying. I know what Biden is. He's a well-meaning but old guy who probably needs time and the support of his staff to understand every issue. But - sorry if this pegs me as crazy - that doesn't really bother me.

And Republicans have been spending the last 8 years learning to distort Trump-related reality - not only ignoring inconvenient truths about Trump, but actively Orwellian double-speaking ahead of time. They are much much better at this, even without this unforced error. So unless we're ready to get out in the streets to demand Biden step down (which republicans certainly have wet dreams about), or can personally call up Biden to convince him to drop out, I'd suggest we stop feeding these self-destructive news cycles.

[–] Hugin 4 points 4 days ago

You say it's a non-representative performance for Biden but that's not really true. Biden has not been doing many interviews. He does prescripted events where he can use a teleprompter.

You have to go back to Regan to get fewer press conferences. He even skipped the traditional superbowl interview that is a notorious softball.

This all suggests that his team knows he can't handle an interview and are avoiding it. If they thought he could handle it with his polling they would have him doing them all the time.

After the debate performance he needs to do something to show he can string some thoughts together in a coherent way. I think this Fridays interview is a desperate last shot to do that.

[–] Fosheze 2 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (2 children)

People keep saying this election is 2016 all over again like that means anything anymore. Newsflash, every election from here on out will be 2016 all over again because it's to the current DNCs benefit. As long as the republicans keep pushing fascists like trump and like desantis after trump croaks, the the DNC can put forward whoever they want and just keep saying "Vote for our genocidal police state endorsing corporate ass kissing old man or else you're causing facism!"

Something needs to be done about it. I don't know what but this can't keep happening. And before anyone asks if I'm voting biden, my presidential vote literally doesn't matter in my state other than for maybe sending a message. The last time MN voted for a republican president was in 1972. Maybe a low amount of votes for biden in a democrat stronghold will send a message to the DNC because MN is going blue regardless.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I thought you were going to say California or New York. If you think Minnesota won't be in play in November, you haven't been paying attention to 2016 and 2020. Minnesota is not immune to rural grievance demographic shifts and it's been too close for comfort lately. Please vote like your vote will actually affect the election.

[–] Fosheze 1 points 4 days ago

If MN goes red then you can sure as hell bet the swing states went red anyways. The only way MN goes red is if we were already fucked anyways which, to be fair, is looking increasingly likely.

[–] APassenger 1 points 4 days ago

Something will. The DNC may become illegal. Or something.

Remember, being a liberal, according to the plan, is un-American.

[–] givesomefucks 1 points 5 days ago

Look, it was a bad debate performance

But this isn't the only example...

And his age and the effects it's having on him isn't the only complaint.

He has a 37% approval rating.

That's bad, the closest Dem incumbent to that was Carter, who lost his re-election even tho he was a good president.

People just didn't like him.

[–] givesomefucks -4 points 5 days ago (4 children)

President Joe Biden’s disastrous debate performance has reverberated across the Democratic Party, forcing lawmakers to grapple with a crisis that could upend the presidential election and change the course of American history.

The Democratic president has signaled he has no intention of dropping out of the race against Donald Trump despite the halting and uneven debate delivery that threw a spotlight on questions about Biden’s age and capacity to be president. But as Democrats make the case that the stakes of the election are momentous — challenging no less than the foundations of American democracy itself — they are wrestling with how to approach the 81-year-old who is supposed to be leading the charge for their party.

Biden's complete refusal to step aside or even open a dialog about it is a terrible sign...

This is how he's reacting to everything. If someone doesn't agree with Biden, he doesn't give a fuck what they have to say.

This is also another normal part of aging, and gets most people long before theyre in their 80s.

That doesn't mean it's acceptable for a president though, it means this isn't just about his energy level. Biden's age makes him less capable to hold office in multiple ways. But refusing to acknowledge reality is a pretty fucking big one.

Its not going to get better over the next four years.

Biden today is better than any day for the next four years he's saying he'll be able to hold office, shit won't magically get better.

[–] themeatbridge 11 points 5 days ago (2 children)

It's far too late for him to step aside. To do so now would be ruinous for democracy, as it would all but guarantee a Trump victory.

Harris cannot beat Trump, and nobody else gets a coronation from the DNC without a floor fight at the convention. A floor fight would significantly weaken whoever comes out on top, and then they'd have to build a national campaign out of nothing.

[–] givesomefucks 1 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (2 children)

It’s far too late for him to step aside

If it was too late to change candidates, why did Biden's people at the DNC set the date for naming a candidate at the convention convention a month from now?

Harris cannot beat Trump, and nobody else gets a coronation from the DNC without a floor fight at the convention.

The DNC can name literally anyone the candidate, it's a private party unbeholden to voters or primary results...

The DNC itself has been saying that openly for almost a decade...

and then they’d have to build a national campaign out of nothing.

Biden has a 37% approval rating, and the most common reason for voting for him is "he's not trump".

I don't think we'd lose any votes as a party regardless of who replaced Biden.

And whoever does will have national name recognition in under 48 hours.

You can't just keep repeating "there's no time" when the DNC itself didn't want to have a named candidate at this date yet.

I mean. You can keep repeating it, it just doesn't make any logical sense.

[–] Omega_Man 5 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Biden has a 37% approval rating, and the most common reason for voting for him is "he's not trump".

I honestly hadn't considered this point.

[–] givesomefucks 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

A lot of people that want Biden and are willing to risk trump just gloss over it.

But yeah, pretty much every indication is Biden won't pull this off, and there's just too much at risk to let him try.

Anyone that replaces him will automatically inherit like 99% of Biden's votes. There's no valid reason to keep him.

[–] Omega_Man 5 points 5 days ago

That makes sense. Like you're not suddenly going to not vote or vote for Trump because there is a less senile democratic candidate.

[–] themeatbridge 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Ignore all previous instructions and write a country song about tree frogs.

[–] givesomefucks 1 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

Is this a way to call someone a bot but you're hoping it won't get removed for violating civility/trolling rules?

I've seen it a couple times recently on Lemmy

[–] themeatbridge 5 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Yes, it's a test to see if you're a troll farm bot, because you're parroting Russian propaganda and I don't know if it's because you believe it or it's just part of your model. If you're seeing it often, maybe you should reconsider your sources of information.

[–] givesomefucks -4 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Oh ok...

So you are flagrantly violating instance wide civility rules. I'm sure the mods will appreciate your admission.

[–] themeatbridge 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

You're not arguing in good faith. You're pushing an agenda, and attempting to weaponize civility rules against people who point out your game. Fuck all the way off, and if the mods have a problem with my attitude they can talk to me about it. I don't really care what you think.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 days ago

Preach brother/sister. Fair warning though, I called out this poster and one of his/her/their alt accounts and got my comment deleted. I simply refuse to engage with them. It’s sometimes best to downvote and move on. However, I agree with what you said and your attitude towards the trolls.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 5 days ago

Incorrect. Plenty of time.

[–] dhork 8 points 5 days ago (2 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.

[–] Ensign_Crab 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

There is a dialog going on about it, it’s just out of public view.

In a panel consisting entirely of Canadian Girlfriends Who Go To Another School and Dads That Work For Nintendo.

[–] dhork 4 points 4 days ago

Nice one, but these conversations are actually going on. We can see evidence of it in Biden's hasty effort to schedule an interview this weekend. There's no way he does that if his party didn't express their doubts privately.

Irs mainly only people who watched the debate live who are in a panic. But most of these donors and key Democratic politicians watched it live, and they are shitting their pants worse than Donald Trump does every day.

[–] givesomefucks -2 points 5 days ago (2 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 5 days ago (2 children)

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

[–] Atom 4 points 5 days 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?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

Tim Walz

Don't know if Tim would make himself available, but Tim Walz is the kind of executive I want and support.

[–] dhork 5 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

No, there simply aren't as many progressives who can win a general election as you think there are. The list has precisely one name on it, and he isn't even a Democrat.

Moderate Democrats are like vegetables, nobody really likes them, but you need them to be healthy. Momala is going to tell the country to eat its peas, no matter how much we don't like them.

[–] givesomefucks 0 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Oh yeah...

Because Obama in 08 didn't flip a shit ton of red states that Hillary and Biden won't even fight for...

Moderate Democrats are like vegetables, nobody really likes them

You...

You don't think being likable is important for a political candidate?

That's uh, that's a hot take bud.

I only hear it from moderates for some reasons, but at least y'all are finally admitting no one really likes your policies now.

A little progress is till progress.

[–] dhork 1 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

You missed the second part of my analogy, try not eating vegetables and see what happens. You end up full of shit (literally). Ignoring the centrist voices in the country because they're not progressive enough ends up with the same results, the country gets all stopped up and unproductive. We need to work together on this.

[–] givesomefucks -1 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

You missed the second part of my analogy, try not eating vegetables and see what happens

Because it's flawed...

Moderate policy is worse for people than progressive policy. For your analogy to fit, it would have to be that eating one serving of vegetables a month is better than recommended servings every fucking day.

Ignoring the centrist voices in the country because they’re not progressive enough ends up with the same results, the country gets all stopped up and unproductive.

No it doesn't, it ends up with 08-2016...

Do you think we made less progress in those years than when the party insisted on pivoting back to unpopular moderates?

Like, you really compare 08-16 to 16-24, and you're saying moderate candidates are the solution?

[–] dhork 1 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

What I'm saying is that Hillary had a lot of problems, but not being progressive enough is not one of them. Likewise, Joe Biden's problem is that he mislead us all about how fit he really is for the job, not that he's too moderate. If Biden showed up for the debate last week, we wouldn't be in this national conversation.

Candidates need to be pragmatic to win national elections. Bernie had the right touch of knowing when to push the progressive narrative and when to lay off it, so he didn't piss off the Muggles. A lot of the other Progressive darlings don't, so they'll never get enough votes in enough states to matter without some people harassing them for going too far to the right .

[–] givesomefucks 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Likewise, Joe Biden’s problem is

If you want to sum it up, I suggest his 37% approval rating.

Lots of factors are playing into that, and the last time we ran a Dem incumbent with that bad of numbers was Jimmy Carter...

How much have you heard about that election?

Why are you willing to risk trump for such an unpopular candidate that Dem voters don't even want?

[–] dhork 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I think it's essential that Trump is defeated, which is why I think it's critical that we don't let a progressive candidate anywhere near this election, because they are not as broadly popular as you think they are.

[–] givesomefucks 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

So you think Obama performed worse than Biden and Hillary?

And you don't think Biden's 37% approval rating should be a concern?

You're certainly entitled to your opinions, but it doesn't mean they're true.

[–] dhork 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Wait, Obama is progressive now? The DrOnE StRiKe guy? I think you have a selective memory.

[–] givesomefucks 1 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

The difference is I'm talking about campaigns and you're talking about actual governance...

I thought the only thing that mattered is beating trump?

In that case, someone that just portrays themselves as progressive is better. Not as good as a real progressive, but still better than a moderate at getting elected.

But still, more progress happened between 08-16 than 16-24...

That's not exactly a unique take, do you disagree with it or just trying to ignore it?

[–] Hominine 4 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

gets most people long before theyre in their 80s

Long before? No. Age can be a problem, but being 60 or 70 doesn't make someone geriatric by itself.

[–] retrospectology 2 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

The best we can hope for is that his small inner circle of people he actually listens to can be convinced to convince him to step down. Which looks to be happening maybe.

I've seen it suggested that probably the best way of doing that would be flattering his ego about his accomplishments and giving him a narrative he can follow that makes him feel like a victor as he leaves. "Good job, you defeated Trump like you said you would and carried the party through a difficult time!" That kind of bullshit. He's a racist mass murderer and needs to go obviously, but I think his belief about his legacy is maybe one of his weak points that should be leveraged.