241
submitted 4 months ago by girlfreddy@lemmy.ca to c/news@lemmy.world

One House Democrat said he spoke for others in the wake of the president’s stunningly feeble debate performance on Thursday: “The movement to convince Biden to not run is real.”

The House member, an outspoken defender of the president, said that House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer should consider “a combined effort” to nudge President Joe Biden out of the race.

Crestfallen by the president’s weak voice, pallid appearance and meandering answers, numerous Democratic officials said Biden’s bet on an early debate to rebut unceasing questions about his age had not only backfired but done damage that may prove irreversible. The president had, in the first 30 minutes of the debate, fully affirmed doubts about his fitness.

A second House Democrat said “reflection is needed” from Biden about the way ahead and indicated the private text threads among lawmakers were even more dire, with some saying outright that the president needed to drop out of the race.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] KevonLooney@lemm.ee 31 points 4 months ago

Biden's big problem in the debate was that, for a few moments, he mumbled a confused answer that sounded like Donald Trump.

[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 28 points 4 months ago

It was a no-win situation. The DNC gave in - once again - to their republican-lite mindset of ‘capturing undecided voters’ and agreed to get socked in the face , twice, for absolutely no gain and everything to lose.

DNC consultants have always been morons, but now they’re morons-from-the-90s who still don’t understand what’s changed.

[-] kromem@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago

Having a presidential election without debates would have been a big step back and loss for American democracy.

We shouldn't champion erosion of democratic institutions when it helps our side of the ticket.

And generally, if eroding democratic institutions helps your ticket, it's a red flag about your ticket.

[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 6 points 4 months ago

Having “debates” be this ridiculous mud-wrestling that only benefits trump or another conman is the big step back and the loss to democracy.

They are apparently unable to create a forum in which a position can be taken and defended with facts and reason. UNABLE. Because the republiQans are fielding a demented sociopath and a compulsive liar.

The format is beyond broken, and there isn’t a way to fix it when one party has no intention - never had any intention to follow the rules, or decorum, or common decent behavior.

We found that out eight years ago. I can’t believe they walked right into it again.

[-] kromem@lemmy.world 13 points 4 months ago

Literally any half competent debater could have torn Trump apart up there.

The failure wasn't the moderators but the opposition candidate to Trump letting him run hog wild.

If Trump claims he's going to end the war in Ukraine before even taking office, you point out how absurd that claim is and that Trump makes impossible claims without any substance or knowledge of diplomacy. That the images of him photoshopped as Rambo must have gone to his head if he thinks Putin will be so scared of him to give up.

If he says hostages will be released as soon as he's nominated, you point out it sounds like maybe there's been a backroom tit-for-tat deal for a hostage release with a hostile foreign nation, and ask if maybe the intelligence agencies should look into that and what he might have been willing to trade for it.

The moderators have to try to keep the appearance of neutrality, but the candidates do not. And the only reason Trump was so successful in spouting BS and getting away with it was because his opposition had the strength of a wet paper towel.

[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

Literally any half competent debater could have torn Trump apart up there.

He’s “debated” a large number of half-competent people in primaries and post-convention. Which one tore him apart? Examples please.

The failure wasn't the moderators but the opposition candidate to Trump letting him run hog wild.

While the visual of hog-tying trump by a cowboy-hatted Biden is fun, it’s simply not his job to chase the gish. That’s why trumps insane rambling works; it’s not possible to practically address each batshit claim or outright lie. It’s just not. Biden’s already got the job of presenting and defending his own platform.

It is absolutely the moderators’ job to check him and a failure to do so means not only that it’s wide open Crime Time for trump but that the proceedings themselves lend authority to his lies.

The moderators have to try to keep the appearance of neutrality, but the candidates do not.

The appearance of neutrality? As opposed to just neutrality? Okay, well either way, again - no. The moderators have to acknowlege reality and remind the shit-talkers that they can’t say what they just said because it’s bullshit. And once again, they can’t do that with trump because he’s a compulsive liar who is incapable of acknowledging anything but his own reality.

And the only reason Trump was so successful in spouting BS and getting away with it was because his opposition had the strength of a wet paper towel.

Spouting BS and getting away with it is the entirety of what trump does. He’s not an authority on anything, he can’t function as any sort of manager without a stadium’s worth of assistance, and - really, hear me now - he is utterly. incapable. of not lying.

Nothing will stop him from trying to babble nonsense and if the moderators, effectively the referees, the arbitrators, refuse to hold him to any standard, there’s no other outcome than to watch helplessly at his idiot spewhole as it disgorges lie after lie after lie.

Biden blew it, yes, but if you think there was something to be gained by engaging with trump, i encourage you to consider the simple fact that trump is not able to acknowledge truth if it does not directly benefit him, and any attempt to do so will be met with more lies, more vitriol, and no one will succeed.

It’s unconscionable that anyone at this late date would even consider that even a remote possibility.

[-] Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 1 points 4 months ago

Seriously, they are so far behind their conservative counterparts is not even funny. They need to hire better PR specialists, and marketing teams.

[-] Not_mikey@slrpnk.net 10 points 4 months ago

That's a pretty fatal mistake when your average person is only gonna watch a 10 second clip of the debate.

[-] KevonLooney@lemm.ee -1 points 4 months ago

That's it for me. I'm not voting for anyone who sounds confused for 10 seconds. Unless maybe they ran against someone who sounds confused for 10 years, but only in that circumstance.

[-] WanderingVentra@lemm.ee 6 points 4 months ago

The problem is that there was no live fact checking. Wtf can you do against a constant Gish Gallop of blatant lies? Even if they drugged him, I'm not sure what he could've done with that debate format.

[-] PsychedSy@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 4 months ago

He does this shit consistently and has been for a couple years. It wasn't one fucking answer in the debate. Christ. We are so fucked.

this post was submitted on 28 Jun 2024
241 points (83.6% liked)

News

23360 readers
1615 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS