This stupid topic again

But sure

  • spikkedd@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    Just remember that during the 2016 election, the “If not Bernie, then Trump” bros turned out to be Russian interference.

    I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s just Russia trying to split the Dem base.

  • PunnyName@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    I’m voting for the administration that will keep democracy alive in our country.

    And it’s 🔵🔵🔵

  • mozz@mbin.grits.devOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    The courts are bad now people think, wait till more seats are replaced.

    People don’t understand what a big deal this is. Corrupting the trusted-by-tradition institutions like the courts is one way fascists can get the whole country in a chokehold.

    Gunned down a bunch of BLM protestors? Eh, they were asking for it. Probation.

    Climate change demonstration? 10 years

    We’re already about 60% of the way there. It’s already happening that people are committing really major crimes and it’s okay if they’re on the right team.

    VOTE

  • TheReturnOfPEB@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    I’m going to vote Democrat.

    Straight ticket.

    Just like every freaking year because i’m too scared to vote Fully Automated Luxury Gay Space Communist Party.

  • sunshine@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    This summary from the Independent necessarily cuts out a lot of the nuance of AOC’s points - I say “necessarily” because she spoke on Instagram for a full hour - and one thing that she seemed to emphasize - more than the “They don’t 100% support Harris either” point - is there there is very little time remaining in the election year to make any changes to the ticket. There are just weeks until the Democratic convention, and Ohio requires the names to be finalized even before that. She also emphasized that any change to the ticket, especially any late change, increases the chance that the presidency will ultimately be decided - if not by the bureaucracy of a swing state, many of which, like Ohio, are Republican-controlled - then by a legal case that goes before the (corrupt, she didn’t need to explain, although there were arch eyebrows at this point) Supreme Court, which is just not an ideal situation for democracy.

  • BertramDitore@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    Ugh. I agree that Kamala sucks, but I think it’d be a mistake to try to go with anyone else at this point. She has a pulse, a functional brain, lots of political experience, a long life ahead of her, and yeah, she’s made some terrible decisions and gaffs in her career, just like Joe Biden.

    I don’t like that she was a cop, but Joe Biden chaired the Senate Judiciary committee for like 100 years, and got us Clarence Thomas, so…nobody has the moral high ground here.

    We just need to win, and frankly I think if we try to go with someone new and untested, we’ll lose. We’ve been in a “lesser of two evils” situation for some time now.

      • BertramDitore@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Ideally, yeah, but think about the logistics of pulling something like that off. And would it be a full primary redo? Like fresh ballots sent out to all dems? Or do you mean a mini primary just with the existing delegates? Because we already voted in the Democratic primary election…

        I’m just really trying to be pragmatic about this, I can’t imagine a scenario where we pull this off and come out stronger. I would love to be wrong.

        • half_fiction@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          Saying a month is “plenty” of time to plan and run any kind of election on a national level is so ridiculously out-of-touch I read it back like five times thinking maybe it was sarcastic. Off the top of my head there’s booking polling places, securing & training staff, voting machines, ballots that need to make their way through the entire supply chain starting all the way back at pre-production. Mail in ballots alone usually go out like a month ahead of time to compensate for issues with the mail.

          At this point in time, there’s a higher probability of Superman flying around the world backwards to rewind time and correct the gunman’s aim to actually hit Trump at that rally than there is of the Democrats being able to successfully pull off a second primary in a month. And that’s not even to touch the “coming out stronger” piece of it, which again, no chance in hell that happens with the kind of chaos a second primary would cause.

          • Fecundpossum@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            People live in their fantasies, where national primary elections are just a cut and paste affair that takes two days to set up.

          • knightly the Sneptaur@pawb.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            The idea that elections take years is an artifact of our broken news cycle. England can call for snap elections and install a new government just 25 days later, and that’s England.

            • half_fiction@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              Um OK but surely they already have policy, processes, and infrastructure in place to successfully execute it within that time frame. There’s a big difference between being already set up for it and the Dems randomly deciding that they’re going to run another primary next week.

      • mozz@mbin.grits.devOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        plenty of time to run an actual primary

        Look at what a practical idea this is

        As with other things e.g. Bernie Sanders as the nominee, there actually is a sensible option here, which is running a contested convention… it is highly notable to me that a lot of the people offering such constructive criticism on this topic are so studiously avoiding those sensible strategies when they are trying to “help”

        • BertramDitore@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          I dunno, there are actually quite a few sensible and practical ideas in this thread, your thread, btw. Your post has elicited a good discussion, why throw shade on the people earnestly participating? If you actually want a contested convention, this thread is nothing compared to some of the wild shit that would go down in that scenario.

          • mozz@mbin.grits.devOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            Because redoing the primary is an absurd idea

            And I am, probably to an excessive and embittered degree, made cynical by the amount of open propaganda in and out of the media which is attempting to put out bad ideas on purpose to hurt the Democrats and help the fascists

            And you’re not wrong. A contested convention would be a massive shit show which might doom the Democrats in the election irrevocably. But it might also produce a nominee with some kind of mandate, which would be nice. It would also be feasible to do, whereas holding another primary election would not.

  • sunbrrnslapper@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    As damning as it is to the US, the best bet for winning is a good-looking, smooth-talking white guy who will look presidential when compared with Trump.

    • sudo@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Jon Stewart. He adamantly opposes the suggestion he run, which is exactly what we need. He’s got decades of experience in global politics, he’s likeable, got name recognition. And to your suggestion he’s a smooth talking attractive white man

        • mozz@mbin.grits.devOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          He made the right call on a whole bunch of foreign policy issues that the Very Experienced Professionals were assuring us they had a handle on. Just because he doesn’t have the relevant real skills, doesn’t mean the establishment candidates have any of it, either.

          • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            He made the right call on a whole bunch of foreign policy issues

            You’re confusing setting actual foreign policy with heckling from the sidelines. Stewart wasn’t overseeing any US Departments or writing big policy whitepapers adopted by either of the parties. He was spitting jokes from a news desk in a 30 minute segment four days a week.

            Just because he doesn’t have the relevant real skills, doesn’t mean the establishment candidates have any of it, either.

            Whatever you might say about Biden’s policies (re: bellicose, economically ruinous, genocidal), he definitely has the skills to implement them. That’s a big part of the problem. If he was properly incompetent, a bunch of these nightmare programs wouldn’t be put into effect.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      the best bet for winning is a good-looking, smooth-talking white guy

      Oh no, they’re trying to run Beto O’Rourke again, aren’t they? Dude’s going to come out on a skateboard playing the guitar and lose by double digits.

      • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        He turned out to be a decent president, except for the massive, glaring failure to build any sort of meaningful bulwark against fascism. He had, like, the absolute best justification and mandate to aggressively crack down on the neofascists with Jan 6, but he pussyfooted around and dragged his feet on fucking everything so much that basically nothing has been dealt with or constructively changed since the coup attempt occurred.

    • audiomodder@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      I don’t want AOC to run yet. She’s got a long political career ahead of her and folks tend to bow out of politics after they’re president.

      • paf0@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        She would be an amazing elder statesperson after her time in office. I hope to some day see it.

        • Ferrous@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          Bruh, why are you getting excited about the idea of crusty old genocidal American beaurocrats who inevitably sell out? No US senator is a friend of mine.

      • stoly@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        VPs have no job except to succeed the president and break ties in the Senate, along with presiding for a few ritualistic things. That’s really it. What do expect want her to do?

  • kingshrubb@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    I’d prefer Buttigieg simply because he is such an effective communicator. Other than that I’d prefer someone much more leftist than him.