this post was submitted on 04 Jan 2024
130 points (68.7% liked)

politics

18968 readers
3232 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
 

In a letter published Wednesday on Medium, an anonymous group of Biden's campaign staffers demanded the president call for a ceasefire in Gaza, citing concerns that not shifting his policy on the issue could hurt his 2024 chances.


"Biden for President staff have seen volunteers quit in droves, and people who have voted blue for decades feel uncertain about doing so for the first time ever, because of this conflict," the Medium letter read.

"It is not enough to merely be the alternative to Donald Trump," the campaigners continued. "The campaign has to shift the feeling in the pits of voters' stomachs, the same feeling that weighs on us every day as we fight for your reelection. The only way to do that is to call for a ceasefire."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] OpenStars@discuss.online -2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I must disagree with the last paragraph, if you meant it more broadly beyond sociologists. For one, Obama was a Harvard constitutional scholar - though I don't think he was "barely above the poverty line for decades" - so we already tried someone who at least paid attention in school as opposed to merely paying to cover their transgressions (I am speaking about GWB, who basically flunked Yale but then went to great trouble to hide that fact - you probably already know that a "C" in grad school is flunking). Much of the criticism that he received was undeserved and horrifically out of line - e.g. how his wife & children all looked like various forms of monkeys, do you hear that dog whistle? - but some of it was also probably deserved (unfortunately I do not know precisely how to distinguish which is which, and we likely will not know for another decade or so until historians are able to piece it together; and then the likes of me may never find out b/c I'd have to sift it through all the misinformation also being spewed out, and the idiocy besides).

More recently, Fauci provided a great example when he was asked what policy he would recommend implementing during the pandemic and his response was basically "I do not know. I will help with the factual questions though." - thereby displaying humility, and precision in stating where exactly his sphere of knowledge lay, and having the wisdom to know that that target was beyond it. i.e., scientists tend to know very little beyond the fields that they choose to study.

So for the same reason that you may not want a brain surgeon coming over to fix your toilet problems - nor vice versa I might add!!!! - just b/c someone went through grad school means very little, in terms of their ability to LEAD.

That said, ofc leaders should LISTEN to experts, not shit on them as DT did, especially within their area of expertise. Much of the economic struggles we are having today derive from the power of "corporations", which were a thing that did not used to exist, but Bill Clinton (as he says many times) ignored them (he did set us up with many overseas treatises I am told, but domestic affairs on the other hand tended to be neglected under his administration - I thought the consensus was? oh right, you probably know way more than that than I!:-D), and ignored Robert Reich his cabinet secretary who tried to help with domestic policies.

So this is a lot of words to say that people can do well what they have been trained to do, but that does not mean that they can do everything, especially things that have very little to do with their training. Angela Merkel could, so ofc it's not mutually exclusive, just not a sure thing either.

Also, at this point you probably would have to be insane to WANT to enter the political sphere, unless you were doing it for the $$$$$.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

just b/c someone went through grad school means very little, in terms of their ability to LEAD

You out arguing that not ever sociologist would be a good president...

Cool man, no idea who told you they should, but I think everyone agrees