this post was submitted on 19 Jul 2024
54 points (75.5% liked)

politics

18894 readers
3346 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
all 20 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] nondescripthandle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 50 points 2 months ago (1 children)

If only people had forseen this possibly and argued we should have vibrant competitive primaries instead of having the strong contenders not run in the name of unity. Oh well, instead we let Trump dominate the news cycles like he always does and kicked the can down the road until the can started falling apart.

[–] AIhasUse@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Even on here 2 months ago, hinting towards biden not being a good option would get you destroyed and downvoted to oblivion by the "BoTh SiDeS" brigade. It's amazing how quickly they shriveled up and blew away.

[–] doctordevice@lemmy.ca -1 points 2 months ago (2 children)

They pretty quickly pivoted to their new MSNBC talking points.

  • "But why is no one talking about Trump?"
  • "No one else would have the incumbent advantage."
  • "4 months is simply not enough time to get a new nominee ready."
  • "You should have told us before the primaries that you didn't want Biden."
  • "Suck it progressives. This, like everything else that is my fault, is all your fault."

I may have embellished one of those.

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

Lol they didn't like you pointing it out. They rammed Biden past the normal process for making sure we have a good candidate and now want to say it's too late to change.

That's behavior im used to seeing from the Republicans on climate change. And I'm really disappointed to see it in the Democrats now.

[–] ryathal@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I think you forgot one.

  • stop supporting Trump with talj like that.
[–] retrospectology@lemmy.world 12 points 2 months ago

Thank christ.

[–] unitymatters@lemmy.world 11 points 2 months ago (1 children)

If Biden decides to exit the race, he could release all the delegates bound to him, which would allow a new vote for new candidates at the convention in late August.

https://ace-usa.org/blog/research/research-votingrights/could-joe-biden-be-replaced-as-the-democratic-party-presidential-nominee/

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

And the campaign money can be given to the DNC.

[–] Asifall@lemmy.world 10 points 2 months ago

I guess this mostly means figuring out how to do it with the minimum amount of chaos, but the clock is ticking and I’m not sure what he can really do beyond deciding on an endorsement and writing a speech.

[–] Nastybutler@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago

Joe, the best time to have announced you wouldn't be running was a year ago. The second best time is right fucking now. The longer you delay this the worse it will be

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago

Could he hurry this hell up and GTFO as soon as possible? Instead of talking about what he might do for us, we are all talking about his cognitive decline, etc. We need a energetic, upbeat candidate making the case to normies as to why they should vote FOR the Democratic Party, not trying to constantly show what a monster donnie really is - especially now that donnie is making himself out to be some martyr that Jehovah saved from a bullet (FFS).

[–] Myxomatosis@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Thank God. Biden had a great term and now it’s time for him to pass the torch to someone else, like he said he was going to do in the beginning.

[–] MegaUltraChicken@lemmy.world -2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

like he said he was going to do in the beginning.

Biden never said he would only seek 1 term. Some unidentified staffer told a reporter that during the campaign. I don't think it's fair to hold him to a commitment he never made.

Agreed that he's done a great job and now is the time to pass the baton.

[–] FlexibleToast@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Part of his campaign was that he was going to be a bridge candidate.

[–] MegaUltraChicken@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (2 children)

I don't see how that conflicts. He says he wants to be a bridge to a new generation or whatever, and specifically declined to state whether or not he would seek a second term when asked. That's not commiting to being a 1 term president at all. No candidate is ever going to close that door so early.

[–] FlexibleToast@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

You're technically correct. It's just his campaign heavily implied it. And now he's acting surprised when people are bringing it up.

[–] MegaUltraChicken@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Because he directly refuted what you're saying...

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/joe-biden-denies-mulling-term-pledge-elected-president/story?id=67662497

“No, I never have,” Biden said when asked by a reporter on Wednesday if those discussions were taking place. “I don’t have any plans on one term.”

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

He says he wants to be a bridge to a new generation or whatever

And then desperately clings to the nomination in a race he can't win by the atoms at the tips of his fingernails.

[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 2 points 2 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


The overall tone of the conversations has been that any exit plan — should Biden decide to take that step, as some of his closest allies increasingly believe he will — should put the party in the best position to beat former President Donald Trump while also being worthy of the more than five decades he has served the country in elected office, these people said.

The prospect of Biden’s considering stepping aside, much less that his family is gaming out a possible exit plan, is an extraordinary development that comes after he has repeatedly said he would not relinquish his position as the presumptive nominee of the party.

But concerns have mounted among party leaders, donors and even officials who are part of his re-election effort with every day that has passed since a devastating debate three weeks ago.

Discussions about how to game out a fitting plan for Biden to step aside have also played out among senior staff members, not just the president’s family, according to a person close to the re-election effort.

The conversations about Biden’s political future have raged while he remains at his home in Rehoboth Beach, Delaware, sidelined after he tested positive for Covid on Wednesday.

Wolff said Democratic incumbents and challengers in tough races cannot risk splintering their own voter coalitions by publicly taking one side or the other as Biden considers his options.


The original article contains 1,271 words, the summary contains 232 words. Saved 82%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!