73
Donald Trump gets bad news about Kamala Harris
(www.newsweek.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 11 Jul 2024
73 points (84.1% liked)
politics
19080 readers
2507 users here now
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
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
So...
If I link you the poll, I'll get to hear the new reason?
In the interest of speeding this along:
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/biden-age-campaign-poll/story?id=111825221
That links to the pdf.
So first off:
What these polls focus on determines their outcome. People think Biden is more trustworthy than Trump. Which is a good thing I guess.
Second:
They claim she has no statistical lead. So are we just pussy footing around here yelling at each other? She's the VP anyway, at 81 Biden has a high fucken chance of not serving the whole term. Not that I'm advocating for that. But the last time we did this, again I'll reiterate, we fucking lost dude. People dont like swapping candidates this late, it creates uncertainty. Which, could consume Harris's entire nonstatistical lead. I'm down with whatever, I'll vote D. But that doesn't mean I won't say shit when we are repeating history again either way we slice it.
The last time we ran an incumbent like Biden, we fucking list dude.
That's what you're not understanding.
Everything we normally go off of, says Biden will lose.
Barack didn't lose my guy. That was the last incumbent we ran.
not just "an incumbent"...
Biden has a 34% approval rating and the first incumbent since Jimmy Carter to not sweep his party's primary...
That's what you're not getting.
You think if we replace him. It means we'll lose because we replaced a candidate before and lost.
But if you want an incumbent similar to Biden...
Damn near everything lines up with Jimmy Carter.
What can you tell the class about Jimmy Carter's second term in office?
This argument is useless. I'm voting D. If you want to run around and scream until your head falls off that Biden needs to go then so be it. All your doing is sowing division. I'm getting it. I'm getting it completely. Switching the candidate this late will make all the swing voters uncertain, it just will. Because we dont have a shining beacon to align behind no matter how much you want Harris or anybody else. Nobody cares about those people, none of them are inspiring.
You're trying to bring up Jimmy Carter's second term for no reason. It doesn't matter because Carter was not attempting to resist a hostile takeover. The only thing that should be happening right now is the FBI jamming itself all the way up every Republican ass for being demostic terrorists. Then we should both, the Rubepublicans and the Democrats, get new candidates and run it. Thats what we deserve. But its not happening. It won't happen for Trump, and Biden would need the donors to cut the ~~dark~~ campaign funds.
But none of that is happening. What is happening is a fascist wannabe dictator will run. Thats a fact. Sensible people will just vote against him and the tipping point will be whether or not we have enough sense left in us to prevail. Enjoy. This is going nowhere and is not constructive.
Then we won't lose any votes switching the candidate...
And the most important thing is stopping trump.
So we should switch candidates to get as many votes as possible
Bro this is so simple, I think you can get it
But if you're really ready to give up, just dont reply.
You just ignored like everything I said. You clearly aren't interested in having a discussion. You just want people to decry Biden for someone with, from your own sources, not a statistical lead. There's nothing to talk about. You aren't interested in my point of view, you just want me to adopt your's with no convincing evidence.