• Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    68
    arrow-down
    16
    ·
    2 months ago

    Most people engaged in politics have likely made up their mind, and anyone sufficiently disengaged will vote for the incumbent and be done with it. Biden is the incumbent, and they’re not going to put forth a progressive.

    • mozz@mbin.grits.devOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      61
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Yeah

      The race is not people deciding between Biden and Trump, but people on both sides who have made up their minds deciding whether or not to vote

      Coincidentally, there is an enormous effort to paint voting as not worthwhile, and Biden as not good enough to be worthwhile bothering to vote for, aimed at left wing voters

      • knightly the Sneptaur@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        33
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Actual left-winger here. We’ve been saying the USA deserves better than Biden since before the 2020 election. Don’t lump us in with the centrists, liberals, and moderates who’ve only just pulled their heads out of the sand long enough to notice that the incumbent is expected to lose.

        There’s no point in starting to panic now, all this has been inevitable since the DNC won the right to rig their own primary after the disaster that was the “Her Turn” campaign in 2016. Either y’all start calling your reps and demanding a better option on the ballot, or start making preparations for the fascism and civil unrest in our future.

        • rayyy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          2 months ago

          Highly infuriated with the Dems over Biden in 2020 BUT he has turned out remarkably better than I ever thought. He now has a decent track record that makes him a good choice for another 4 years. On the other hand, we could go all dictator/fascist and lose all democracy. It comes down to Joe Biden who is now the one hope to save democracy.
          Take the bus that gets you closest to your destination folks. In the meantime, get progressives into offices at local and state levels so they can move up to congressional levels.

        • Plastic_Ramses@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          22
          ·
          2 months ago

          Its good to know progressives will hold our country hostage rather than take baby steps to a progressive country.

          • knightly the Sneptaur@pawb.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            20
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago
            1. I’m not a “Progressive”. American Progressives are called “Moderates” in most other countries, and their Progressives would probably call me a Communist or an Anarchist without bothering to distinguish between the two.

            2. The people holding this country hostage are the ones who ran the only primary challenger out of the party rather than admit that the incumbent is expected to lose re-election.

            3. America has to excise the fascist rot at its core before it can become a “Progressive” country. Voting alone cannot accomplish this, it would require a massive perspective shift across the general public on the scale of China’s cultural revolution. After Covid failed to induce anything but a shift to more work-from-home, I don’t see that happening.

            4. The first baby step I’m focused on accomplishing is trying to convince liberals that if democracy is really at stake, then they can’t run the risk of trying to play it safe like they did in 2016.

          • mozz@mbin.grits.devOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            10
            ·
            2 months ago

            My man he is not a progressive

            Zero progressives I know IRL have any kind of idea like that Biden is mediocre implies it’s okay if Trump comes to power and takes a flamethrower to all progressive causes with impacts that will last as long as you or I are alive. It’s purely a thing I see online from self described leftists.

            I wonder if I look back in their history, I will see lots of advocacy for marijuana reform or criminal justice or better foreign policy in Central / South America… or anything other than left wing causes that can be tied directly in immediate and lazy fashion back to Biden (economy, immigration, Gaza)

            • knightly the Sneptaur@pawb.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              13
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              My man he is not a progressive

              Correct. Your idea of a “progressive” is my idea of a “moderate centrist”.

              Zero progressives I know IRL have any kind of idea like that Biden is mediocre implies it’s okay if Trump comes to power

              I don’t think it’s “okay”, I think it’s inevitable. The DNC would rather lose to the Republicans than lose their campaign financiers (who also sponsor Republicans).

              I wonder if I look back in their history, I will see lots of advocacy for marijuana reform or criminal justice or better foreign policy in Central / South America… or anything other than left wing causes that can be tied directly in immediate and lazy fashion back to Biden (economy, immigration, Gaza)

              Not sure what kind of point youre trying to make here, all of the above are important issues and I’ve talked about them extensively on this and prior social media accounts. I’d have to dig into my dead Twitter account for receipts but I predicted the lack of enthusiasm for the “safe” incumbent Democrat causing Trump to win this year’s election all the way back in 2015 when the DNC decided that knocking Bernie off the ballot was more important than holding a democratic primary that was actually democratic. That the Dems would have to switch if they wanted to win has been as obvious as the fact that the incumbent won’t stand down unless forced to, an extremely unlikely proposition.

      • 2484345508@lemy.lol
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        34
        arrow-down
        16
        ·
        2 months ago

        Yes. Enormous efforts. “Genocide Joe” (the name) is part of that effort.

      • rayyy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        Most people are just now waking up and paying attention while Biden’s numbers are beginning to climb, in spite of his own party trying to sabotage him.

    • gatorgato@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      39
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      2 months ago

      Anyone sufficiently disengaged with Biden might just NOT vote. And then Trump wins. Heres a better framing of the question. Could anyone generate more voter disengagement than Biden?

      • Yawweee877h444@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        This is my worry too. They’re not going to switch to trump, they’ll either skip it or vote 3rd party.

      • meowMix2525@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Those people are still voting blue. The issue is getting everyone else on board. “Vote blue no matter who” can’t carry the election entirely on its own and never could. 2020 was won on razor margins.

        • phdepressed@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          2 months ago

          We need to get rid of the electoral college.

          Biden beat Trump by 7 million votes. That it was “razor thin” is because of the electoral college.

          Hillary lost to Trump despite winning the popular vote by 3 million because of the electoral college.

          Gore lost because of Florida’s electoral college (and all the fuckery there) despite winning the popular vote by 0.5million.

          • crusa187@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            2 months ago

            Small correction: after numerous recounts, it was proven decidedly that Gore had won in FL. However, the corrupt Supreme Court decided that since the media (Fox News) had already called the election for Dubya, that it would pose too much risk to our democratic process to overturn the results to the correct outcome.

            This is most amusing given the context of Jan 6 and the corrupt court’s opinions on that matter, but here we are.

          • meowMix2525@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            I strongly agree with you but that’s not going to change the fact that we still have to contend with the EC this election cycle.

            Edit: also gore didn’t lose by either metric he just didn’t stick it out for the recount

          • Cosmicomical@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            It would be enough to make an amendment so that the shape of electoral districts must be convex. This would make gerrymandering impossible.

    • rayyy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      they’re not going to put forth a progressive.

      The corporate media would shred a real progressive but Biden is a lot more progressive leaning than I ever thought he would be.

      • Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Yeah, that’s part of why I’m so suspicious of this massive “Biden needs to be replaced” push. We’re not getting better policy out of it, and I seriously doubt it’ll hurt Trump’s odds at re-election, so why is everyone so keen on it at this stage? The time to replace him was months ago.

    • crusa187@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      A travesty then, considering polling consistently shows progressives would wallop Trump, and the Dems claim that democracy is on the line this election. We could do so much better, but absolutely will not at the peril of capital.

      • TheAlbatross@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        2 months ago

        Who are these undecided voters? I haven’t met one single undecided voter in the past 8 or more years. Maybe that’s geography, but, jeez…

        I feel that turnout is a far bigger factor.

        • eldavi@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          some of them are people like me who was forced to accept inescapable student loan debt (created by biden in 2005) due to don’t ask don’t tell blocking gays from getting the gi bill (supported by biden in 1993); couldn’t sponsor their life partner to allow them to stay in this country because biden et al. voted for doma in 1996; denied jobs because because biden advocated for the same thing executive order 10450 did until 2012; will lose a new job because of biden’s support for banning tiktok in january of 2025; and can’t get a new gig job because biden is blocking truly affordable EV’s from this country for the foreseeable future.

          it’s got nothing to do with project 2025 nor trump being a giant douchebag; it’s about trying to convince myself to vote for someone with a conservative history that has and will fuck up my life and then pretending that he’s the most progressive president ever just to get votes while simultaneously enabling genocide’s, apartheid’s and segregationists as biden has done several times over in the last 51 years.

          i need a reason to vote for him because; no matter how shitty trump or how badly he wants to steamroll over minorities (which biden has already done), he’s never fucked with my life to anywhere near the extent that biden has and i survived most of those 51 years at a time when both parties, plus moderates, plus family wanted to lock people like me up and throw away the key, so project 2025 doesn’t scare me and trump doesn’t have enough time to screw with my life to the same extent that biden did to people like me in one more term.

    • criitz@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      2 months ago

      It’s pretty likely that a lot of those disengaged will not vote for Biden because they know he’s too old

  • eestileib@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 months ago

    Biden is cooked. But there is so much fear/exhaustion/disgust with Trump we are still in the margin of error.

    Imagine if the Democrats ran somebody that anybody was actually positively excited about.

    But that is not how the DNC works.

  • Zeke@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    2 months ago

    Honestly, we’re basically just voting for Kamala when we vote for Biden.

      • APassenger@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        2 months ago

        This is what I’ve been thinking too. Cognitive decline isn’t necessarily fatal. Nancy Reagan used astrologers because she was lost and trying to keep up appearances.

        Dunno what Jill/Joe will do. But if he was inclined to step down, I don’t see home doing it for a few years.

        • Madison420@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          2 months ago

          If it’s Parkinson’s as alleged then there’s no real reason to freak out, moreso because the cabinet does a substantial amount of the leg work anyway. Realistically so long as other leaders respect and understand him everything is fine and this is just more media doom fabrication.

          • mozz@mbin.grits.devOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            2 months ago

            The Parkinson’s thing was made up.

            Yes, a Parkinson’s team visited the White House medical center, but not for Biden - the New York Post just published that out of all the people who work in the White House, it must have been Biden they were there to see, and the New York Times then republished the story because they are equivalent to the Post now apparently.

            • I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              Who, other than Biden, would a Parkinson’s team go to the White House to see, rather than the affected person going to see them?

              ESPECIALLY given what they had to know was suspicious optics of the team going there. What sort of emergency would a random person at the white house have to have for a team to show up there despite the questions it would bring?

              There’s only a handful of people who would be at the white house, unfeasible to leave, and has their movements in public tracked at all times. Biden is on that short list.

              • mozz@mbin.grits.devOP
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 months ago

                Yeah, makes sense. Just aiming to correct the record that yes, the claim is not just incorrect but New York Post-level propaganda, as far as I’m aware (which is an informative thing to keep in mind whenever you see someone repeating it).

    • eldavi@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      i wish that was a guarantee; i would vote for biden in that case and i wouldn’t have to hold my nose as tightly to do so.

  • LEDZeppelin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    2 months ago

    Readily available for repubes to start yelling “democrats in disarray” “both sides are the same”. Hell, repubes don’t even have to do it. The mainstream media is already doing their bidding.

    • FrostyTheDoo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      33
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      It’s crazy to see the difference in tone CNN and other major new outlets have adopted when talking about Biden, vs. how they talk about Trump.

      With Biden it’s “What a national embarrassment, no way this man can lead in his current state, voting for him is nearly elder abuse and you should be ashamed of yourself.”

      With Trump it’s “jeez get a load of this guy lol. He’s just so silly with the things he says, who would take him seriously about the crazy stuff? Might be worth a vote?”

      • mozz@mbin.grits.devOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        23
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        The press is stupid

        Political people, mostly on the conservative side, figured out long ago that if you just pushed hard a particular framing and narrative, the majority of the American political press would just kind of go with it as opposed to upset the herd by presenting a different framing. Once you’ve set the boulder rolling in one direction, you can just kind of let it go and it’ll follow the same path on its own. And they practiced the technique until they got really good at it.

        A fun exercise to see it is to read an article, but flip the party and subject of the article to the opposite side. Like some gaffe that Biden made, say that Trump made it, or vice versa. The tone will seem wildly off kilter in this really unusual way.

        • snooggums@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          They are pushing hard with a heavy sprinkling of whataboutism and fearmongering 24 hours a day, which they learned from the successful fascists. It is an approach that works well with for profit news, even the ones they don’t own.

          Trying to push just as hard for something positive wouldn’t be as successful.

        • audiomodder@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          It’s because if they challenge the narrative at all, they get cut out of coverage in the future. Then the other for-profit media outlets have coverage they won’t have access to and they’ll lose viewership.

          It’s why something like the BBC can push candidates like they can, because if you cut out the BBC then you’ve cut out any televised national coverage in the UK. Here if ABC decides to really go after a narrative then Republicans still have Fox, NBC, CBS, etc

      • mozz@mbin.grits.devOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 months ago

        I thought it was Major? Does he have 2 dogs that bite people?

        And yes. It’s not totally logical, but I kind of liked that Biden’s dog was biting people. I tend to assume that a lot of people who work in the White House are bad people, and if someone’s dog is going in and biting them then I’m gonna assume without evidence that it had a good reason.

        • Five@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          Yeah, it’s Major. From Biden worries the Secret Service may be loyal to Trump, according to a new book:

          According to a new book offering an inside look at President Joe Biden’s White House, Biden actively distrusts the Secret Service to the point that he does not speak freely in front of his agents and he believed that the agency lied about an incident where Biden’s German shepherd Major bit an agent.

          In The Fight of His Life, out January 17, author Chris Whipple details how Biden was showing a friend around the White House and pointed to the spot where Major allegedly bit a member of Biden’s security team. “Look, the Secret Service are never up here. It didn’t happen,” said Biden.

          Cops framing people, cops killing dogs. I’m surprised they’re not part of the official screening process along with the “you must score under this IQ level to be good at this job” filter.

    • InternetUser2012@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      2 months ago

      This shit is just because they’re scared. They know Biden is going to curbstomp him come November. The racist rapist with 34 felonies is further up the ladder on mental decline anyways. I would vote for a steaming pile of Bidens dogs shit before I’d vote for anyone from the GOP.

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        That’s not what we’re seeing. Every time Biden tries to prove he can still think and shift the focus to Trump it fails and his polls get worse. He’s behind by 6 points in PA now. The single state we really need to win.

        • mozz@mbin.grits.devOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          his polls get worse

          Citation needed

          Like a primary source, not just a news story claiming that this is happening or you doubling down about how it’s definitely happening

  • Melatonin@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    2 months ago

    Biden has the best chance of NOT beating Trump (I fear). He cannot change and as a known commodity will not generate new enthusiasm. Trump has generated all the outrage and rejection he is going to get. No new information is going to change that.

    Someone else is an unknown. What happens if we switch is unknown. It may lose. But we are losing now.

    But it could grab a LOT of press attention, generate enthusiasm, and break up the logjam of conservatism that runs national politics.

    The whole point is that this is not a “dicey” or desperate thing to do when we are fighting for democracy and freedom. It is the ONLY thing to do when you are sure your current course loses.

    We have to win.

    • mozz@mbin.grits.devOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      2 months ago

      enthusiasm

      It’s an interesting day when you get to identify a new talking point

      • AWistfulNihilist@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 months ago

        Enthusiasm in this case would be turn out, actually getting butts out of seats to vote.

        The existential threat that Trump poses no longer seems enough to motivate people to vote specfically against him. Correct me if I’m wrong, but the reduction in turn out by people who are not energized by Biden and aren’t afraid of Trump has been a thing this whole time, it’s not new.

        Like literally the campaigns are targeting people to tell them not to vote at all, right? The fact that Biden is visibly spiralling gives those campaigns a lot of very effective ammunition imo.

        Then again you got that x-ray shill vision.

        • mozz@mbin.grits.devOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          the reduction in turn out by people who are not energized by Biden and aren’t afraid of Trump has been a thing this whole time, it’s not new.

          Do you have numbers for this?

          Like voter turnout numbers for Biden vs Trump or vs Democrats in earlier elections? All the numbers I have seen are in the opposite direction, which is understandable, because the voters unlike the media understand how catastrophically high the stakes are.

          • AWistfulNihilist@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            You see it referenced all the time as a bit of democratic dogma. There was even a meme about it that hit the top of all/active like a few days ago on Lemmy. I like how this article from April puts it:

            https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/2024-turnout-apathy-biden-trump.html

            It’s not necessarily true, let me be clear, but it’s an active assumption. Higher turnout benefits Democrats. A reduction in turnout due to voter apathy will directly effect the Democrats more than the Republicans. The current propoganda campaign are targeting Democratic voters apathy rather than trying to switch a “swing voter.”

            This election will probably be at least as high as 2016, and like I think you are referencing, every election since 2016 had basically had record turnout over the last.

            Imo this election comes down to the number of voters who are motivated by abortion and worries about the supreme Court, which is middle aged to older people, high percentage women, reliable voters.

            He’s an interesting one that talks about the enthusiasm vs apathy of voters but doesn’t specifically turnout, which is against my interpretation. I struggle to understand the relevance of it in this context:

            https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2024/07/02/biden-trump-poll-post-debate/74263315007/

            • mozz@mbin.grits.devOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              You see it referenced all the time as a bit of democratic dogma. There was even a meme about it that hit the top of all/active like a few days ago on Lemmy. I like how this article

              Imma stop you right there

              Yes, I am aware that it is a popular narrative in the media and on Lemmy. My question was, do you have numbers for it?

              Because my assertion that it isn’t actually true, and people are saying it anyway, and that the discrepancy and the reasons for the discrepancy is an important fact.

              • AWistfulNihilist@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                Yeah I referenced two articles talking about it in multiple ways.

                You acting like it’s a new thing that’s never been discussed was what I was referring too. It’s absolutely a thing! That’s a bit of goal post moving on your part to go from “wow I’ve never heard of this before!” To “I don’t think that’s status statically true.”

  • tomkatt@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    2 months ago

    I’m so sick of these articles and headlines about how Biden should step down.

    DNC had years to figure this shit out and back another candidate, but instead we had seemingly rushed primaries with no real challengers. At this point with less than four months until the actual election, who the hell do they expect will be a better choice? Because nobody has stepped up to the plate, and for all the talk of how Biden should step down, there’s been no discussion of who should step up in his place.

    Just fucking back the man, unify, and rally to convince people to get out and vote. Best case scenario, we get a functional Biden, who is known for his work ethic and general attitude of doing the job without platitudes or bullshit. Alternative not so good cases are we get a diminished Biden who isn’t effective at the job, but also isn’t a fucking fascist, or Biden dies of natural causes at some point and we get a partial term of Harris as president.

      • tomkatt@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        2 months ago

        I did read it. But I’m not referring to just this article, but the dozens I’ve seen in just the past week. If the dems are convinced there’s a better candidate, actually convinced, we’d have a name by now. Literally anyone. But there’s been nothing. Just the step down discussion, with no discourse on who should be taking his place.

        • mozz@mbin.grits.devOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          100% agree

          The idea that some other strategy besides Biden might be better, as nutty as that sounds this late in the campaign, has quite a bit of merit. The idea that him resigning should come first, and figuring out and solidifying that strategy should come second, is clinically insane. Which is why outlets hostile to the Democrats are pushing it, which is why Democrats who have gotten confused into starting to back it themselves should be ashamed of themselves. Pretty sure that is the exact thesis of the article that dude is rudely insisting that you need to be reading.

        • Maggoty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          There’s been no names because they were giving Biden a chance to clear the scandal and watching to see the polls. This was never something that would resolve right away and now it’s around the time we’d expect to see someone being put forward.

          Also, this is very clearly a party leader putting Harris’ name forward.

      • corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        The.article.doesn’t.matter since it’s always been a losing strategy to pivot to a new candidate. I’m thinking less Bernie/Clinton, and more Johnson/Humphries.

        It’s still a binary choice: Biden or fascism. Frilly articles about what-if and “but his stammer” mean nothing when it removes down to the same binary choice.

  • LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 months ago

    So how do we answer this question in an analytical way that can be agreed upon by most or all factions in the party? Because right now I just see lots of people angrily shouting their totally unfounded opinions and assuming everyone who disagrees with them is insane or a shill. This type of dialogue is extremely unhelpful.

    I will say that I do not know if Biden is the best person to beat Trump or if Harris is or if it’s someone else. But I think having the most unpopular incumbent in history who is struggling to mount a campaign makes it a reasonable question to ask.

    If anyone has well-reasoned thoughts on this I welcome them but I really haven’t seen any serious attempt to answer this question yet. Perhaps it is unanswerable.

    • eldavi@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      american culture frowns down upon talking about politics publicly so americans generally lack the necessary practice in engaging in meaningful political discourse; you’ll have to wait for a generations long culture shift to get your answer.

      • Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        Of recent time. I remember decades ago sitting around and having polite, but argumentative discussions with people accross the political spectrum. It was really engaging when people still talked and thought about policy… instead of just people.

    • very_well_lost@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      43
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      There have been plenty of presidential elections where the candidate wasn’t known until the nominating convention in August. This whole “12 month election cycle” bullshit is a pretty new phenomenon.

      Anyway, the absolute media shitstorm that will ensue if Biden is dropped from the ticket will more than make up for the late start to a new candidate’s campaign — the new DNC nominee will dominate the news cycle for weeks without having to spend a dime.

      • Cosmonauticus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        13
        ·
        2 months ago

        This whole “12 month election cycle” bullshit is a pretty new phenomenon.

        That exactly the point. We’re in the age of the 24 hour news cycle were attentions spans have been grounded into dust. For a campaign to win there needs to be nonstop engagement. Half of lemmy forgot all the actual good stuff Biden has done in his 4 years. Even the stuff they wanted and legitimately benefitted from. The fuck is a new candidate going to do in 3 or 4 months?

        • criitz@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          16
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Because attention spans are short, we should need even less time to position a candidate. Voters aren’t going to remember 4 months ago in November, right?

        • very_well_lost@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          16
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Considering that Biden has done fuck-all to evangelize the good things his administration has done, anything a new candidate does to campaign in the next few months would be an improvement.

          • mozz@mbin.grits.devOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            2 months ago

            It’s not the president’s job to evangelize his accomplishments. It’s his job to run the fucking country, and at that he did great.

            It’s the media’s job to report the reality of what’s going on in government so people can make good decisions, by connecting the job performance to the public perception. At that, they have done an openly corrupt, dishonest, lazy, etc etc you get the idea they shit the bed way worse than Biden did at the debate, and they do it every day.

            There is a reality of campaigning, and a legitimate sense in which the DNC and Democratic consultant driven campaign apparatus is awful and the GOP’s is pretty skilled. Honestly, their masterful corruption of the media is how we got to the state we’re in.

            But hitting the fastest runner in the competition in the legs with a bat, and then saying it’s his job to win the race, after all, is kind of missing the point. Like yes you are right but there is an additional factor you are neglecting.

    • aseriesoftubes@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      Normally I’d agree, but this ain’t your average election. A Dem candidate younger than Biden could be out there pounding the campaign trail day after day, generating enthusiasm in a way that Biden now seems physically incapable of doing.

      Plus, a large number of voters hate both candidates. A shiny new candidate would be exciting and unprecedented, and would get boatloads of attention. They could easily close the gap with Trump, despite what the polls say.

      • Socsa@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        This only works if Kamala declines the nomination at the convention. Otherwise leapfrogging her to get someone shiny and new would anger too many voters.

      • Habahnow@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        2 months ago

        A new candidate will be mince meat from Republican attacks. Right now, there’s limits on what they can say that Biden will do during his term. “He will take away all guns!” But Biden was already president and didn’t do that, “he’s going to force everyone to buy EV cars!” Again, he’s already president and didn’t do that already, etc. A new candidate will get accused of wanting to do all these things, and Republicans/independents will be more likely to believe them than those attacks being attributed to Biden.

    • Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      4 months is a massive amount of time. Other counties have their entire election cycle in half the time. America’s 1-2 year long presidential election cycle is so weird.

    • Guy_Fieris_Hair@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Isn’t super Tuesday when it usually becomes pretty clear in March, but the convention is where it’s known. So best case scenario a few months ago. Worst case the convention. 12 months is absurd and not possible, unless, your party has decided who will win the primaries before anyone even votes… and they totally don’t do that… ever…

      People that are loud about it now are loud because they have been screaming about it for the last 5 years and suddenly the DNC is all surprised like they didn’t already know. We know we’re fucked. But they fucked it. A sentient human will talk a lot of people that are disgusted with the two options to maybe show up and vote. A lot of people just want to watch it burn.

      We can’t change candidates because no one has voted on shit. It would split the party (which I am ok with other than the Trump/end of democracy problem). The DNC did this.

      • Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        All because they were afraid that we would actually get Bernie. They basically begged Biden to run, because no one else would have beaten Bernie in the primary.

    • eldavi@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      nearly all elections were like this until 2016; nobody was sure who the candidate was until the convention.

  • TheFrirish@jlai.lu
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    2 months ago

    I’m not at all American and I honestly don’t understand the American voting system but I will say this: basically anyone would do the job instead of Biden, it’s shocking that someone in his state is allowed to run for presidency again.

      • AbidanYre@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        That may be a factor, but most of the old farts in office have been there for decades. They weren’t 70+ years old when they first got elected.

        • nondescripthandle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          In the boomers case and older, even when they were young, they were easier to manipulate than the young people of the present. We not only know more now, everything we’ve learned is information literally at our fingertips on the internet.

        • nondescripthandle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          The fear of Trump has cause many to overlook and burry all negative stories in general because people assume acknowledging faults is going to lead to Trump and overlooking it will somehow help Biden.

  • katy ✨@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    2 months ago

    right wingers and the corporate media absolute hate that Biden is one of the most pro worker, pro union, and pro labor presidents in recent history and will do anything to try and get back trump

    • mozz@mbin.grits.devOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      I think that’s a lot of the underlying reason

      Like yes, we may get an open fascist who literally will destroy the country, and that won’t be good for our profits either. But fuck you, that’s why. You raise corporate tax, we’re gonna start some shit with you; that’s where it begins and ends.

      • mriguy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        And since no laws actually apply to the billionaire class, they have no existential fear of a Trump administration. Anti immigrant fervor? LGBTQ persecution? Oppression of women? Violent racism? “They won’t affect ME, or anybody I care about, but higher taxes and labor laws might mean I can only buy a thousand foot yacht every month, rather than the 1100 foot one I deserve.”

        • mozz@mbin.grits.devOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Yeah. And that is a foolish delusion, because it will, of course, affect them. They may get lucky and be able to turn the chaos into becoming absurdly wealthy (more so than they are) some way. But more likely is that they’ll have to scramble to stay safe and profitable, and they are already soft and slow to react after years and years of soft living in this safe society, so they might find it pretty hard. The fall and privatization of the U.S.S.R. might not be a bad example to look at for a similar example to how things might play out in a Trump unleashed chaos world.

  • blazera@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    2 months ago

    The optics are shot, people have already heard dem leaders having meetings about his capabilities. The situations only going to deteriorate in the coming months as things are.

    • Birdie@thelemmy.club
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      2 months ago

      And yet, I and many others will vote for him. We cannot let Trump anywhere near the presidency. I honestly would vote for a dead frog over Trump. The staff that’s in place is competent, have done well for us, and I believe they’ll hold things together until Kamala takes over.

      Of course we would all rather a much younger, charismatic candidate, but it is what it is.

      At this point, I truly believe most Democratic voters understand the assignment.

      • knightly the Sneptaur@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        2 months ago

        We know you’ll vote for anyone with a “D” next to their name. Being a “safe” voter means the party doesn’t have to try and earn your vote. Thus, you can be safely ignored, because appealing to you won’t raise enthusiasm among undecided voters.

        What’s amusing to me is how the DNC always fails to apply this logic strategically. If they’ve got such huge masses ready to vote blue no matter who, then what’s the harm in switching to another candidate?

      • blazera@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 months ago

        Wasnt really a statement of what you should do, just a prediction. If biden stays in the race i think Trump becomes president

      • zarkanian@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        At this point, I truly believe most Democratic voters understand the assignment.

        What about independents? I think you need their votes to win, too.

        • Birdie@thelemmy.club
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          I think independents understand the great danger Trump poses and are going to hopefully vote for the person most likely to defeat him, and at this point that is Biden.

  • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Earlier, in the day, when introducing Vladimir Zelensky, he called him “President Putin.”

    Say what you will about whether he’s able to beat the Mango Mussolini or not, but THAT has to be the biggest faux pas I’ve ever seen!

    Had me laughing so hard I startled my cat 😂

    • Cuberoot@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 months ago

      This might have been 20 years ago. Some civic organization, probably on Martin Luther King weekend, held a tribute honoring some famous black men. One of the most prominent famous black men they invited was actor James Earl Jones – reasonable enough so far. So they called him up to the stage to present him with his honorary plaque made out to James Earl … Ray.

    • eldavi@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      i remember being incensed as a young man from seeing & hearing his fiery & well spoken anti-gay, anti-feminist, pro-segregationist views and seeing him morph into a doddering old man at the debate and plus this somehow make feel sorry for him now.

    • Wes4Humanity@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 months ago

      Bernie would still win. Just has to publicly recognize his old age while also showing that he’s not senile like the other 2, agree to one term, pick a good young progressive VP, and start hammering away at progressive messaging. Probably outright tell the center Dems it’s THEIR turn to hold their noses… Unless they want Trump to win.

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Harris is actually polling better than Biden against Trump. I know the Internet never forgets but the people do.