this post was submitted on 02 Jul 2024
707 points (97.3% liked)

politics

19144 readers
2577 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
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] CheeseNoodle@lemmy.world 79 points 4 months ago (5 children)

Honestly you guys are fucked, Even if Biden scrapes a win these are going to be the stakes every 4 years until the US turns into a dictatorship. Fuck knows how that's going to affect the rest of us around the world in the long run.

[–] samus12345@lemmy.world 24 points 4 months ago (7 children)

One thing that might save us is if Trump dies without managing to get elected. A sizable chunk of the GOP's base are people who worship him specifically, and if he were gone it might splinter them. But it's hard to know how that would play out for sure. The situation is definitely very, very grim.

[–] Adalast@lemmy.world 9 points 4 months ago (2 children)

They will just turn to DeSantis or whomever. If you can be sure of anything, be sure that Project 2025 has a list of contingency candidates.

[–] frezik@midwest.social 16 points 4 months ago (3 children)

Cults of personality don't work that way. They don't get replacements. They can try, but they're not likely to reach a critical threshold of votes. They may not even reach a House or Senate majority, and Project 2025 can't go ahead at the federal level without all three.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] samus12345@lemmy.world 9 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

DeSantis flopped miserably the last time he tried. The ones that are diehard GOP supporters will indeed flock to whoever is thrown at them, but the GOP has tied themselves to Trump because he has a cult that they rely on to get enough votes to win. It's been 20 years since they've managed to get someone other than Trump elected.

[–] Crikeste@lemm.ee 9 points 4 months ago (4 children)

Trump is just the face of the problem. The real threats are the organs; much deeper inside and far more protected than the face.

[–] samus12345@lemmy.world 7 points 4 months ago (3 children)

He is indeed a symptom, but he's also something more, a cult leader. You're right that the rot will be there regardless, but the GOP needs every single person willing to support them to vote to stay in power. There are a lot of people who specifically worship Trump, not the GOP.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Fades@lemmy.world 14 points 4 months ago (2 children)

It ain't just us pal, open your eyes and notice all of EU is falling to these same goddamn fascists.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Asifall@lemmy.world 8 points 4 months ago (2 children)

I disagree with this, I think the Republican Party is waning and they’re now in the sweet spot where they have a large enough base to enact a fascist takeover but not enough to win by appealing to the electorate. If they aren’t able to change the rules in their favor in the next couple cycles I think they become further marginalized and lose their chance.

That’s not to say we won’t face a similar problem again after we have a party realignment, but I do think the GOP specifically has a limited window in which to seize power.

[–] Pilferjinx@lemmy.world 8 points 4 months ago (1 children)

As long as corporate capture isn't addressed fascism is only going to get worse. We're angry that our politicians have sold us out. The dim ones will listen to the guy that blames their inability to have a decent life on immigrants, gays, trans,, taxes, regulations, ect.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Anamnesis@lemmy.world 77 points 4 months ago (3 children)

If he's such an existential threat (and he is), why the fuck are they not forcing the geriatric incompetent running on their ticket to drop out? They're sleepwalking into fascism and it's terrifying.

[–] StupidBrotherInLaw@lemmy.world 82 points 4 months ago (1 children)

My semi-secret conspiracy theory adjacent theory is it's intentional. That not all, but many, of the Democratic national party is in bed with the same big businesses paying off Republicans, and they're prepared to pull a Hindenburg and install the very fascists they claim to resist once they can no longer hide their betrayal.

[–] ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world 13 points 4 months ago

I also do think it's primarily a money issue. Some of it might be those donors wanting the two parties to do different things, by basically leading the democrats into their graves.

[–] makeasnek@lemmy.ml 14 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (2 children)

If he’s such an existential threat (and he is), why the fuck are they not forcing the geriatric incompetent running on their ticket to drop out?

Because their rank-and-file voters who voted in the primary voted for him. This primary and last primary. And if you want people to leave your party in a big exodus, invalidating their primary vote is how you do that. They learned that in Bernie's race. I voted for Biden, he wasn't the only person to run in the primary, I'll be damned if the "party elite" select some other candidate anyways, why even vote in the primaries at that point? May as well register for the R primary since they at least had more candidates and (so far) appear to respect their primary process so my vote would actually mean something.

One thing you'll notice is that the venn diagram for people who complain about only having "two choices" and the people who don't participate in primaries is nearly a perfect circle. You get an overwhelming amount of choices if you vote in every primary and every election.If you only vote once every 2 or 4 years and skip the primaries, yeah, you get two choices.

[–] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 15 points 4 months ago (1 children)

No one considers this primary a real vote, or that a vote from four years ago indicates current preferences. If it did, 50% of Democrats who watched the debate wouldn't want him to step aside.

[–] makeasnek@lemmy.ml 7 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (4 children)

50% of people who watched the debate didn't participate in the primaries. Most people don't vote, and of those who do vote, most don't participate in primaries. Nobody of consequence ran. Literally anybody could have run. They didn't. It's not the fault of "DNC leadership" that nobody stepped up to the plate to run.

FWIW some people did run, Biden wasn't literally the only candidate. I had more than one candidate on my primary ballot and I voted for Biden because he had the best chance of winning the general. In fact, Biden lost the primary in American Samoa. If you swap Biden for somebody else, you've invalidated my primary vote. That's just as much a threat to democracy as anything else.

[–] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 11 points 4 months ago (5 children)

Nobody of consequence ran. Literally anybody could have run. They didn’t.

Yes, exactly. That's why no one considers their vote in the 2024 primary to be a real indication of preference. If you think your vote for a forgone conclusion was some solemn compact, that's a you issue. Votes without meaningful choice aren't meaningful votes.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 8 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

I've voted in every primary and local election since the year 2000 and had a Kucinich for President bumper sticker and I still complain about the choices because my preferred candidate has never won. Ever.

[–] FlowVoid@lemmy.world 7 points 4 months ago (3 children)

Because the most popular alternative is Kamala Harris, but there is no evidence she would do better against Trump.

[–] dragontamer@lemmy.world 17 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (2 children)

I stand that Kamala's best chance is to hold the ship steady as is, and then ask Biden to resign in December or January.

There's a lot of racists out there. I feel like if she's at the top of the ticket, she's gonna get dragged down. Biden truly is serving as an effective shield for her. Either way, Kamala is the implicit vote if anything wrong happens to Biden (which I admit is increasingly likely given his age).

It makes no sense for Kamala to rush to the top of the ticket given her position.

[–] EnderMB@lemmy.world 9 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Wasn't this always the angle, even when people called his age out last election? The argument was that Kamala Harris would step up, and that Biden didn't want a second term.

Given Harris' recent comments in the press regarding stuff she'd fix "if given power", I wonder if she's even on the VP card this time around? IMO, AOC might be a smarter choice for VP, since the left love her and the right loathe her. She'd bring a lot of younger disenfranchised people back around, and that might be enough.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] MNByChoice@midwest.social 57 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Given the number of existential threats we have and are facing, the reaction tracks.

What do you personally do the the face of existential threats? Get ice cream and watch a movie.

[–] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 27 points 4 months ago (29 children)

There’s nothing that can be done about SCOTUS at the moment. Republicans have House majority, so impeachment and resizing votes will fail.

Something could be done if everyone voted blue in the fall and we had Democratic majority in Congress.

[–] Guy_Fieris_Hair@lemmy.world 14 points 4 months ago (6 children)

The odds of anything turning blue in November other than maybe the Whitehouse seems slim. I have no numbers or proof and I am completely stating my opinion, but it seems the dems have targeted defective Republicans and centrists and not people on the left. I'd imagine Republicans that can't stomach Trump are still going to vote red everywhere but the Whitehouse. While the voters further to the left than both our conservative parties will just stay home.

[–] FlowVoid@lemmy.world 14 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Democrats only need 4 more seats to retake the House. If they win the presidency, there will likely be more than that riding on the coattails.

[–] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 7 points 4 months ago

Agreed. The entire House is up for election in November, along with 33 Senate seats.

My biggest concern is the down ballot effects of sizable Democratic abstentions. If Trump wins, he’ll likely have a Republican Congress supporting him.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (28 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 41 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Treating an existential threat as existential requires the one thing that the Democratic coalition has increasingly struggled to do: prioritization. It means putting aside personal feelings, individual ambition, and subjective preferences in favor of a single goal: success. Otherwise, it’s just empty rhetoric.

As New York Timescolumnist Ezra Klein, who has been pushing the possibility of an open convention to replace Biden, said on his podcast after Thursday’s debate: “If the fate of American democracy is hinging on this election — as Democrats are always telling me it is and as I think there is a chance that it is — then you should do everything you can to win it.” That a strategy, any strategy, might make people or groups uncomfortable cannot be a reason not to pursue it in the face of an existential threat. Not if you believe what you’re saying.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] bquintb@midwest.social 33 points 4 months ago (4 children)

They sure aren't. IMO, If Biden doesn't attempt to exercise his new presidential powers, the Dems will be partially responsible for the fascism that follows.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 29 points 4 months ago

The never do. Despite the system constantly being corrupted in the opposition’s favor, they just roll over and talke it. IMO it’s a money problem. The big donors want the ROI, and big businesses are dictatorships. Those dictatorships align more with fascist/conservative policies more than they do liberal so democrats don’t want to upset the big business donors by inconveniencing their profit stream.

[–] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 28 points 4 months ago (1 children)

He's only a threat in so much as they can turn it into political donations. The rest of us, on the other hand, see an absolute menace ready to implement fascism. But Dems are ok with just having scary news articles and no real action.

[–] retrospectology@lemmy.world 11 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (4 children)

Biden's speech was infuriating. Just came out and basically said "This is bad. I'm not going to do anything about it. This is just the way it is now so I hope we always have good presidents from here unto eternity. Good bye." and then doddered off stage.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] eran_morad@lemmy.world 26 points 4 months ago
[–] shikitohno@lemm.ee 24 points 4 months ago (1 children)

When it comes to the Democrats and* the left* — from the Biden campaign on down to the activists

What's with calling out the left on this, when the closest they get to a leftist organization they take issue with is a climate advocacy group. The left has been pretty clear that Biden is not the man for the moment since the go, and for our troubles, we've been called everything from stupid and naïve, to privileged white people who don't care about insert minority group here (and ignore that not all leftists are rich, white people, there are plenty of POC active in leftist politics, though critics, often privileged white people themselves, do love to erase their existence in the same breath they claim to be looking out for them), to either useful idiots or fully cognizant agitators working on behalf of enemy states. Centrist Democrats and liberals have been the ones trying to tell anyone who will listen that the same old play will not just be good enough, but is actually our only option to win, and they're trying to leave the left to take the fall for their mistake, yet again.

Some of it is political calculation. If the president steps aside, the logical candidate is Vice-President Kamala Harris, but Harris has struggled in office and her poor poll ratings mirror those of Biden. If the Democratic Party tries to sideline Harris and open the door to other candidates through an open convention, they risk alienating her and her supporters and opening up further wounds in the Democratic coalition.

What, risk all four of her supporters? Oh, darn, there go the chances of winning ever again.

Democrats are not going to win with a staid campaign by the usual corporate boot-licking line of candidates they've relied on up until now. The sooner they accept that and get behind a candidate who is pushing for systemic changes on issues that actually resonate with your average Americans and the problems they face in their daily lives, as opposed what matters only to their donors, the better for them this time around. Heck, if they actually follow through and make some of those changes, even better.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] zbyte64@awful.systems 19 points 4 months ago

Not a fan of the article throwing leftists and activists under the same bus with the Democratic party. Also rich how the author claims activists aren't acting like it is an existential threat but they are dumb for not endorsing Biden.

[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 11 points 4 months ago (2 children)

A reminder that Trumpy candidates to run against is what some Democrats wanted:

https://www.axios.com/2022/06/28/democrats-colorado-primary-ron-hanks-joe-odea

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Corvidae@lemmy.world 10 points 4 months ago

I think the immunity ruling of yesterday ended the U.S.'s checks and balances against a King, Monarch, or in more modern terms, the Unitary Executive. Overturning Roe Vs. Wade was the Judicial Branch warning shot.

I predict that in the future the U.S. will have a new revolution, but it'll probably be at least a century away. "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."

[–] pyre@lemmy.world 8 points 4 months ago

just imagine this with other existential threats. "a meteor the size of the moon will crash into the earth in 5 months if we don't do anything. so please vote for the meteor kindly changing course. btw current polls show that the meteor has higher approval rating than I do so please stop that too"

load more comments
view more: next ›