this post was submitted on 19 Jul 2024
509 points (94.7% liked)

politics

19120 readers
3218 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.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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
 

This stupid topic again

But sure

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] MagicShel@programming.dev 6 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Bypassing her could have a powerful effect on black voters, who we need if we're going to win. If Harris can't win because no one likes her, and no one else can win because black voters are affronted by skipping her when it's her turn, we're just well and truly fucked.

[–] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 6 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Black voters aren't a monolithic block and they aren't as identity focused as people accuse them of being (well outside of Obama being the first black president). If the candidate has a solid track record of helping minority communities we'd likely see a pretty good turn out.

[–] MagicShel@programming.dev 7 points 4 months ago (1 children)

No, but if they turn out in lower numbers we are in trouble. They don't have to leave as a monolith, just takes agitators to decry the action as racist hypocrisy by the left and maybe 10% of them stay home. That scenario works hurt a lot.

I mean it's speculation. I don't know what the risk or damage would actually be. Maybe I'm overly concerned, but I am concerned.

[–] Revan343@lemmy.ca 0 points 4 months ago

It's definitely worth being concerned about, but the entire democratic shitshow has been worth being concerned about for a good while now.

I think it would depend heavily on who they skipped over her in favour of. Unfortunately I can't really think of an obvious replacement that won't ruffle feathers one way or another, it's just a matter of minimizing it. A pretty middle-age-or-older white guy is right out, bad plan, so that's probably the plan the DNC would go with

[–] ShinkanTrain@lemmy.ml 4 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (2 children)

Black voters are going to be upset if they skip the person who disproportionately prossecuted black people?

Well, then do what they should have done 5 months ago find a likable person as a replacement.

[–] MutilationWave@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

Black voters, the same as all voters, barely look into stuff like this. They don't know her history.

[–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

Let me know when you get a time machine