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
I mean we've been saying they are both too old. That hasn't changed.
Unless the democrats fuck up and pick someone over 70, it's a good win for them on this point.
Bernie would have been an excellent contender in 2016.
Contender? He should've been the president in 2016. Democrats had to fuck that up. Trump won mostly because people hated Hilary.
Hilary won the popular vote by almost 3 million because most people liked her.
She lost the electoral college vote because of a few really close states.
Yeah, against a playboy who didn't have any political experience or acumen whatsoever. This should've been a landslide victory for dems. I stand by what I said, Trump won because it was Hilary he was up against. If it were Bernie, Trump wouldn't have had a chance.
Even my dad, a blue collar welder in his late 60s, was totally on the Bernie train in 2016. If that doesn't tell you anything about how Bernie could have done, I don't know what will.
I have talked to several Trump voters that love Bernie. I mean it shows that they don't pay any attention to policy or reality even, but I think it shows that Bernie would have won.
The funny part is he wasn't even a Trump voter, he's really liberal for his upbringing and occupation; he was happy with Obama in 2008 too.
Just because she won the popular vote, doesn't mean everyone was happy to vote for her either
Same for Trump...
A few states that were really close because her campaign was up against a social-media heavy campaign that weaponized misinformation, and didn’t know how to respond.
Indeed! That's why I said excellent contender. Because he would have beaten Trump easily.
I'm not so sure of that. Rich people from both parties might have thrown their money and power against the threat of even weak tea socialism.
I know what you're saying, and you're painfully right.
Hilary was beating the rapist with 34 felonies ass in the polls. The shit stain won because people thought it was a landslide and didn't need to vote. That won't happen again. She still won popular vote, something a republikkklown hasn't done in a hot minute.
Edit: Looks like facts hurt some snowflakes feelings.
The reasons Hillary lost in 2016 are varied.
Even with all that going on, she did end up as the Winningest Losing Candidate in American history. I HOPE that they are going 50 State Strategy this time around. Trolls look for weak points that they can attack.
Unfortunately Bernie’s leftist policies posed a slight risk to a small percentage of capital. So an all-out bipartisan effort to torpedo him ensued, and from the ashes emerged Planet Hillary.
Lol I'd say Trump was the one who emerged like an all-out villain, but yeah, pretty much!
Don't underestimate the DNC's ability to pick the worst possible option
Much as I like Bernie, but yeah, the same goes for him as for Biden.
I think Bernie is a pretty smart guy. he knows where he can be most effective - no trajectory change needed.
Sure. But he's getting up there in years too. Eight years ago I really wanted him to win.
I think everyone who had their name pushed and could have a chance at the convention has already endorsed Kamala Harris. They're pretty obviously trying to avoid a contentious convention.
That seems to be the goal. I think it's a good idea to not go too hard on Harris until the convention, but the excitement seems there.
Yeah it's a point they're allowed to make now, don't know how well it's really going to stick though. However so far the best republicans have against Kamala is that she... Laughs? That's a good sign. Like a lot of the stuff people like me on the left have against Kamala is stuff republicans wouldn't want to at her for.
I still really want AOC but with Whitmer bowing out I think Buttigiege is probably it.
Harris is a black woman. No way they're picking a gay man as her running mate. They're worried she has too much for the (X)phobic crowd on her own. I would be absolutely shocked if whoever they pick as her VP isn't a straight white man. You can say what you like about it but that's the reality of where we are as a nation.
The kind of people who would not vote for Harris because she's a Black woman were already going to vote for Trump.
There are absolutely people who are not concerned enough with race or gender to vote for a black woman but are still homophobic. Who knows how many people that is but I would bet a lot of money that the DNC has no intention of finding out.