view the rest of the comments
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
I took a cursory look through his involvement with recent bills, dude doesn't seem terrible on paper based on just that. Apparently he has some ties to big businesses, however he seems pretty pro union. He's also pro marijuana, and has done a good bit to try and expand Medicare coverage and general social securities for older folks.
These are just very quick assessments after going through his website, so there's probably definitely no bias there whatsoever and is totally transparent /s. I'm not saying he's the man, just not an awful choice to go for. Plus, he's not ancient
Honestly, there has never been a successful primary against an incumbent AFAIK, but there could be a first when you consider how the general public views Biden's Mental capability despite there being no evidence for concerns compared to previous Dinosaurs in Chief. That and his handling of Israel is really abhorring.
One thing we have to ask ourselves, though, is if it is worth risking a rift in the party when we have to run against a theocratic patriarchal racist police state anti-democracy plutocrat.
Successful as in getting the nomination rather than the incumbent? First one that comes to mind is Reagan getting the nomination over Ford
Reagan lost the 1976 nomination to incumbent Ford. Reagan wasn't president until 1981.
Regardless of voting history, you don't join the Problem Solvers without being a centrist shithead.
I wouldn't vote for him over Biden but I don't think having a willingness to work with the other party should make someone a "shithead." That's just my opinion though.
The Problem Solvers aren't just "willing to work with the other party", they're happy to derail and sabotage the Democrats and then suddenly impotent whenever Republicans are doing utterly insane things. Fully a third of the Republicans on the caucus wouldn't even vote for a bipartisan investigation of the January 6th attacks, while the Democratic members were quite happy to sabotage the BBB negotiations.
They sprang from No Labels and continue to serve the interests of those rich conservatives with performative enlightened centrism. Shitheads one and all.
You've certainly done your research. I can respect that. I'll have to bone up a little.
Whether we like it or not, whoever the next president is shouldn't be just representing their own party. They're representing all Americans and should act as such. It's unfortunate that a good portion of Americans are sycophantic psychopaths, but they still get representation. I'm honestly just jazzed to see someone under 60. I get that Biden's age hasn't shown to be an issue, but I think seeing what zelynsky has done for Ukraine has made me want a younger president
Me too. I've been following Cory booker's career since I saw the Street Fight documentary (it's on Kanopy or cheapest rental is Amazon). When Biden announced a female ruining make I was disappointed because I was really hoping he'd pick Booker. I'll keep supporting Booker in his national aspersions because I think he's the real deal.
I'll have to look more into booker to form an opinion there, can't really say I know much about him as it stands now
I remember watching this live and thinking to myself how I really hope I'll be able to vote for him someday.