1249
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 16 Jul 2024
1249 points (99.1% liked)
News
37676 readers
151 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 biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
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. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
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, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. 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 or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
It's very disingenuous to say the Democratic party controlled the Senate while having the House majority. The Senate was 48 Democratic, 2 Independents who caucused with the Democratic Senators, and 50 Republicans with the VP casting tie-breakong votes. Very little legislation could be passed because of the filibuster, which needed 51 votes to reform and both Machines and Lineman stating they absolutely would not go along with that. The Senate could approve most nominees, and pass reconciliation (ie 3 types of budget-related bills) once a year. They had no path the expand the court or codify Roe or anything like that with the "majority" they had. We need either 51 Senators who will amend the filibuster (or get rid of it) or 61 Senators to overcome the filibuster to really have the ability to get anything substantial done.
Then why was Biden saying he could work with a Republican controlled Senate 4 years ago?
Why say that the Georgia runoffs would get the whole platform?
What number do we need for any current campaign promises to come true? And if the deciding factor is House and Senate, shouldn't we do ch Biden for a candidate that would help down allot races?
Probably because he did have a history of bipartisan work as a Senator.
In 2020? We didn't know yet that Sinema would do a 180 after being elected or that Manchin would be such a dick.
I already addressed that.
Anybody who supports the Democratic platform relative to the Republican platform and says they won't vote if Biden is on the ticket is, quite simply, failing our society most egregiously. Protest voting does nothing but lose.
Historically, a contested convention or not running the incumbent is a losing proposition. But I don't care who the Democratic party nominates in this election, I will vote for them up and down the ballot. The presidential nominees are going to be shitty until we can collectively get our heads out of our asses and turn up it overwhelming numbers in the primaries to get progressives in state legislatures to overhaul our election process. It will take a constitutional amendment to unshitify the presidential election.
Oh ok...
So despite Biden spending 8 years in Obama's White House and getting a literal front row seat...
Biden was just too stupid to realize shit changed?
Or you think he knew and intentionally lied about it in that primary so he'd be the candidate even tho he knew the only reason to go with him was bullshit?
Like, you get that's where your logic leads right?
Biden is either:
Neither of those options makes people energized to vote for him again, and this election is too important to risk Joe.
My dude, Biden has had more bipartisan success than Obama did. So I really don't think you have a winning point here.
No, but I get that it's where you insist on taking it.
You have it wrong, this election is too important to risk not voting Democratic regardless if it is Joe. O will vote blue regardless. Will you?
There are 10s of millions of voters Biden needs to convince, and every indication is he's not going to be able to convince enough, especially not the tens of thousands up for grabs in battleground states.
It's easier to switch out Biden while there's still time than to convince all those people.
You're worried about forcing everyone into making a smart decision. We're talking about the American public here. We don't have a good track record with that.
So rather than gamble on the intelligence of the American public, why not give them a better candidate?
What's the benefit of sticking with Biden? How many people already willing to vote for Biden isn't voting D regardless of candidate?
You're right that everyone should vote Biden.
But that doesn't matter. The American public does the wrong thing almost constantly, have you been in public lately?
What you don't seem to be understanding is that I'm not arguing for Biden being the nominee. I'm arguing against not voting Democratic in the event the Biden is the nominee:
I'm not objecting to people asking for a better candidate. I'm concerned that those people will fuck over the rest of the country and not vote Democratic if they don't get one.
To who?
Who are you arguing against?
No one that's here...
I'm arguing with you, because you're out here misplacing blame on Biden for things that are under the purview of Congress and declaring that the Democrats will lose even the down-ballot races if he's the nominee. If you're going to vote Democratic regardless who the nominee is, then please make that statement alongside everything else you're stating. Otherwise you sound like you're going to protest vote if Biden is the nominee.
For something I never said...
This isnt the first you've done it either, I don't think it'll magically become productive. Have a nice life