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
[-] LordCrom@lemmy.world 24 points 4 months ago

Isn't it too late to get a new democrat as candidate anyway, right? I mean you need to register in all states before a deadline no?

[-] girlfreddy@lemmy.ca 20 points 4 months ago

There, a candidate must win support from the majority of "delegates" - party officials who formally choose the nominee. Delegates are assigned to candidates proportionally based on the results of each state's primary election. This year, Mr Biden won almost 99% of the nearly 4,000 delegates.

According to the DNC rules, those delegates are "pledged" to him, and are bound to support his nomination.

But if Mr Biden were to drop out, it would be a free-for-all. There is no official mechanism for him or anyone else in the party to choose his successor, meaning Democrats would be left with an open convention.

Presumably, Mr Biden would have some sway over his pledged delegates, but they would ultimately be free to do as they please.

That could lead to a frantic contest erupting among Democrats who want a shot at the nomination. Source

[-] jlh@lemmy.jlh.name 12 points 4 months ago

2024 is going to be the year of frenzied elections with no preparation

[-] LaunchesKayaks@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

People out here just winging shit like the future of the country doesn't matter

[-] nutsack@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

why wouldnt it go down the chain of succession? kamala harris

[-] todd_bonzalez@lemm.ee 10 points 4 months ago

I'm pretty sure he could step down and hand it to Kamala. Maybe he could even run as VP. That might rock the boat the least, and while I don't like Kamala, I have more faith in her to actually do the job.

[-] towerful@programming.dev 27 points 4 months ago

I always figured the role of president was more of a figure head.
I get the buck stops with them, they can do their veto and special powers thing, and I'm sure there are other "ultimately this is your decision" type things.
But it's the administration you are voting on.

I'm sure it feels amazing to have "that one guy" steering your country. But, I'm sure they mostly do what their advisors tell them to

[-] Asafum@feddit.nl 8 points 4 months ago

I want a president who has a vision and some form of understanding, but who knows what he doesn't know and knows how to get that information. I want someone who I know has the best team guiding them and has sound judgment.

I can't fucking believe this is an impossible ask. :(

[-] lightnsfw@reddthat.com 3 points 4 months ago

Also being young enough that they'll actually have to live with any fuckups they create would be a nice bonus. Our current options don't have any skin in the game.

[-] Shardikprime@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago

Did you open a case for that

[-] CleoTheWizard@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

I mean, that’s partly true. From my keeping up with politics, some of the candidates actions are their own but about 80% of the job is what you described. Your party recommends actions to you and congress sets you up for most of your actions. Vetoing things is only common when the opposition holds congress.

I’ll highlight though that lately the presidents have seized more and more power and continue to do so. It started with Bush basically declaring war without congress and lately it’s been Biden doing things like canceling student loans and blocking the border up. Which I get that’s all power they’ve always had, but they’ve been reluctant to use it improperly because it’s so abusable. Now those robes are off and so trump will come into office and immediately write laws by himself basically

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

The US has been on a governance crisis for some time now. It is slow and gradual, but they already had a coup attempt. It is the sort of things that is surreal and only possible to see when you look at it from a multi decades POV. Like Asimov's foundation, it will take centuries and lots of things can happen in the mean time, but you can already see the empire imploding, rotting from within. Rome took almost 3 centuries to fall, and it was more like an erosion rather than crumble. I can see something similar.

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