96
submitted 3 months ago by return2ozma@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] HogsTooth@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Nobody begins to tackle the constitutionality of Biden leaving after some of the primaries have closed. Every primary that has closed will not have had the opportunity to vote for whoever replaces Biden. The right will rip us a new one for installing a candidate without voting for them and for once they'd be right. With democracy on the line we cannot forgo democracy.

[-] woodytrombone@lemmy.world 20 points 3 months ago

A contested convention, while rare, would be legal.

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

I've never heard of this. If Biden does win the primary would this still be an option or is it dependent on him coming up short?

[-] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 10 points 3 months ago

It's still an option.

America doesn't have legal constructs around political parties so whatever the fuck the democrats do won't go against US law - its all just "tradition".

[-] Telodzrum@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago

Parties are beholden to their internal rules, candidates can sue to enforce them as needed.

[-] Spiralvortexisalie@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago
[-] Telodzrum@lemmy.world -1 points 3 months ago

That’s not what the article says. Bernie got his ass kicked. It was time to move on right years ago.

[-] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 1 points 3 months ago

Democratic delegate voting rules require the delegates to "in good conscience" vote for who they were sent there to vote for unless they're released by that candidate. Realistically, an open convention will only happen if Biden releases his delegates.

[-] Tramort@programming.dev 1 points 3 months ago

I disagree. A delegate could vote for someone else in good conscience due to health reasons of the nominee they represent.

[-] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 1 points 3 months ago

Maybe? But they also might get sued and/or blacklisted from party politics. There was an interview with various delegates and even those who thought someone else should be the candidate they believed they were obligated to vote for Biden.

[-] sgibson5150@slrpnk.net 6 points 3 months ago

It's not entirely democratic at the convention, even in a typical election cycle. Recall that 15% of the delegates are "unpledged party leaders and elected officials" (superdelegates).

That aside, I don't think there's a constitutional issue here with respect to replacing Biden. If Dems decided to select the candidate via musical chairs or Parcheesi, to my knowledge that's a party matter (though voters would undoubtedly take a dim view of such antics).

[-] Telodzrum@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago

They changed the superdelegate rules years ago. They don't get to vote on the first ballot.

[-] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 3 points 3 months ago

It depends on how things are run, but unless there's a pre-decided consensus choice, multiple ballots would be likely.

And for this choice I'm not entirely sure it's wrong for party leaders and elected officials to have a vote. It's not like the Biden delegates were selected at random from the public to represent it in a momentous decision. No one thought the delegates would be anything other than a formality. They were likely selected as a reward for service to Biden or as a favor to some local official.

[-] Telodzrum@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

Same, I actually prefer a party-leadership and elected officials decide process to the primary system we have now. FiveThirtyEight did a series of podcasts about the history of the US primary system and it really brought me around to disliking the way we do it. There's a reason that almost no other country votes on candidates for party nominations the way we do. Here's the link: https://fivethirtyeight.com/tag/the-primaries-project/ I recommend listening to all four episodes, but the third in particular was excellent.

[-] sgibson5150@slrpnk.net 1 points 3 months ago

2018, right? But there hasn't been a contested convention since the rule change. Could be quite the circus, for good or ill. Multiple ballots more likely? Guess we'll see.

[-] Telodzrum@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago

There hasn't been a brokered convention in the modern era of the primary system (post-1968). It would 100% be a circus. Good for TV, probably exciting, almost certainly bad for the party and its candidate. My guess would be that everything would be handled by the prospective nominees before the convention itself to avoid looking like a hot mess in front of the nation.

The West Wing had a brokered convention that went like seven ballots. Was a good episode IIRC.

[-] sgibson5150@slrpnk.net 2 points 3 months ago

Agreed. Also, about the West Wing episode. Used to really love that show.

[-] Telodzrum@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago

There are no constitutional implications to a party's nomination process so long as it doesn't violate the law with regard to discrimination and the like. If Biden withdrew you get a brokered convention. If he withdrew after being nominated, the party's rules would place his VP nominee at the top of the ticket (although ballots would likely still have his name due to state laws and logistics).

[-] Deceptichum@quokk.au 0 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Uhh like how the people of New Hampshire had the opportunity to vote?

You’re a bit late to the party if you think there is any democracy in the DNC. Bernie showed that already.

this post was submitted on 10 Jul 2024
96 points (72.9% liked)

News

23282 readers
3845 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