• Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    530
    arrow-down
    62
    ·
    2 months ago

    Any moment now, the ‘don’t vote for Biden’ group will be in here telling us not to vote for Harris. And if it isn’t Harris, they’ll tell us not to vote for whoever it is.

    Anything but stop the dictator and his plan to commit genocide against Latinos and queer people.

    • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      115
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      2 months ago

      Even if Trump wasn’t going to do awful things, I can’t stand his stupid face or his stupid voice or his stupid stupidity. That’s enough to vote for someone who’ll beat him.

      • Burstar@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        26
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Get out of my head. I only watch late night talk shows on Youtube now just so I can skip past any Trump video. I hate that guy so much it makes my jaw hurt whenever I see his image.

        Edit: I wish I could vote against him.

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

        No. It absolutely isn’t. I was too young to vote in the 2000 election, but Gore had the same stupid face, long drawn out speech paterns, and general unlikability.

        However, his policies, and his message were good. I would have voted for him despite his stupid face, because of him being the better candidate.

        I FULLY understand people hating trump…but I underatand the hate because trump is a piece of shit. I get why trump is hated for his bad policies. I get why people hate having a criminal in the white house.

        But to say that if a candidate were good for the position, but you hate their face and voice, I wouldn’t understand that.

        • aStonedSanta@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Yeah but Gore did win that election. It was stolen from him. Just like Bernie won the DNC nomination and it was stolen from him. Fuck the DNC. But fuck the RNC harder.

          • Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            2 months ago

            This is the kind of comment that makes me angry, while I agree with all of it. It’s a weird feeling to be yelling “YEAH I AGREE WITH THAT!!! RAAAAHHH!!!”

    • dadarobot@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      59
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      2 months ago

      Most of the biden haters i know on the left are upset about his support for israel. Harris has been much more critical of the genocide. We’ll just have to see.

      I didnt want to vote for biden, but was still going to vote blue no matter who. Im glad i dont have to vote for genocide anymore.

      • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Well VPs traditionally will say the things the President can’t say publicly for geopolitical reasons. Harris may have been saying the things the Biden was thinking but couldn’t directly say while actively negotiating with Netanyahu. Can’t be sure but it’s a more likely scenario than her going rogue against someone on the same ticket as her.

        Doesn’t matter now, but more for future reference. If a future President Harris isn’t saying what you want her to say on foreign policy issues but her VP is, you’ll know what’s up.

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

        She’s one of the reasons if someone were to kill you they wouldn’t be able to use ‘i panicked’ as a defense.

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

          Unless they’re a cop. Then it’s the defense they go to and can never be convicted under unless we have them on video calmly shooting the handcuffed guy in the back of the head.

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

            And even then, bootlickers will be like “he was clearly reaching for the cop’s gun!”

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

          She has a really checkered record wrt trans stuff altogether. I’m concerned.

          She’s better than Trump but a significant step down from Biden in terms of most of the things I care about which makes her a concerning pick, combined with the fact that she performs worse in polling (if that was the main concern). I hope I’m wrong but I’m concerned that this basically sealed the Dems’ loss.

          • kandoh@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            Here is the internal polling that was released, this was before Biden resigned

            Through 7/21, Biden trailed Trump 46-44 nationally; Harris was ahead 48-46. Trump is stuck at a ceiling of 46. Harris gains from 3rd party/undecided voters.

            • Young voters (18-34) go from Biden 44-36 (+8) to Harris 57-37 (+20)
            • Independents go from Trump 48-32 (+16) to Trump 49-41 (+8)
            • Harris picks up 7pp among Black voters and 8pp among Hispanic voters, almost all from 3rd party/undecideds

            Source: https://x.com/DrewLinzer/status/1815491120677458288

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

        I’m sure that her stance could have changed from that time as it’s become a more understood issue now from then. It’s the people that the president appoints that are ultimately responsible for policy in their departments.

    • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      46
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      2 months ago

      Until Harris fucks up terribly in public and jeopardizes her campaign, I won’t be advocating for her replacement. I never said “don’t vote Biden.” I said “run somebody better.” Keeping Trump out of office is more important to me than living in this country and I love where I live. I’m hopeful that Harris can win the trust of the people and prevent my having to relocate (and a bunch of other bad shit).

    • PythagreousTitties@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      48
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      2 months ago

      I’m really hoping if Harris still has to be on the ticket that she’ll stay VP. It would be nice to have a decent prez option.

      But I’ll be voting anti trump either way.

      • Hegar@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        27
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        It would be nice to have a decent prez option.

        It would also be nice not to live on a burning planet controlled by decrepit rich psychopaths but I don’t think either of us will be getting what we want.

        I’ll still vote for whatever the democrats decide to run, of course, since minimizing or maximizing fascists’ access to government is the only question on the ballot this election.

        • UltraGiGaGigantic@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          2 months ago

          since minimizing or maximizing fascists’ access to government is the only question on the ballot this election

          Why?

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

      Harris isn’t ideal, but she’s an improvement. She’s less on board with genocide than Bidenyahu, and she can fog a mirror.

      Vote for Harris. Don’t make the party regret listening.

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

      Hi, I think you’ve seen me in enough places saying not to vote for Biden.

      Go vote for Harris.

    • JimSamtanko@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      2 months ago

      Absolutely they will. When the gEnOciDe stopped working/got boring, they switched to- oLd!

      Give it a day, they’ll have their reasons not to vote for her too.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        Someone already replied to me saying that unless the Democrats produce a “non genocide-loving candidate,” don’t vote for them.

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            18
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            And not just genocide overseas. Trump has made his position on immigrants and queer people very clear. And if anyone thinks ‘immigrants’ won’t include brown people that are native-born citizens who don’t happen to have the right ID on them, you’re wrong.

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

          Of course they did. Because MAGA won’t be happy until there are no democratic voters.

          • Captainvaqina@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            No democracy either. They want an authoritarian dictatorship because they don’t believe they’ll be the ones hurt by it.

        • Djtecha@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Bots bots and more bots. I assume all of that garbage is coming from a room full of shoulder to shoulder ruskies

    • UltraGiGaGigantic@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      You wanna know how to shut those people up? Replace First Past The Post voting with something like Ranked Choice voting. Then they would have to make their own party and show us how it’s done. (No spoiler effect to)

    • FlexibleToast@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      15
      ·
      2 months ago

      Cool strawman you’re beating up. I think the majority of us that didn’t want Biden is because he didn’t have a good path to victory. We didn’t want to just stand by and watch the train wreck happen. Harris isn’t much better, but at least she is better, and I will be on board with that of that’s who is chosen. I would rather see Whitmer be on the top of the ticket though.

    • Tryptaminev@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      63
      ·
      2 months ago

      The criterion is very simple: Don’t vote for genocide committers, enablers or planners. That excludes Biden and Trump.

      If the Dems manage to produce a non genocide loving candidate, then vote vote vote and drag everyone who will vote for the non genocide candidate to the polling station.

      • Lyrl@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        20
        ·
        2 months ago

        I don’t get how in the Levant, where both Hamas and the Israelis have significant factions that want to genocide the other people, a situation where Hamas does the genociding (because an Israel without attack capability de facto also loses defense capability) is somehow more moral than a situation where Israel does it.

        • Tryptaminev@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          You are making multiple false assumptions in there. The first being that 2.000 pound bombs are somehow “defensive”. The next being that a 30.000 fighters Hamas would somehow genocide all of the settlers, despite their army having hundreds of thousands of members. Then it goes further with this idea, that they want to eradicate them, when all they want is to get their land back. The settlers always have the options to leave and go back to their home countries. Meanwhile Israel as a settler colonial project has to commit genocide to complete itself because as long as a Palestinian people exists, it will demand to get back to its rightful land. Finally you are wrong about the reasons why people in Palestine support violence. They do so, because it is the only thing protecting them from annihilation. For Israelis it is a mix between believing, they need to commit genocide as being the perpetrator protects them from being the victims, classic imperialist greed and a big portion of racism and fascism.

          But in the end Israel will destroy itself from within as all fascist states do eventually. The question is how many more people the US helps them to murder in the meantime.

  • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    307
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    An aside, I hate that this was posted to twitter before it was posted to Biden’s own website or the White House’s website first.

    • Psythik@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      94
      ·
      2 months ago

      This is why the internet sucks now. Nobody maintains their own websites anymore. These days everybody just posts everything on the same handful of centralized megacorp websites. Social media killed the golden age of the web.

      • elvith@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        28
        ·
        2 months ago

        There are some exceptions that still live by the POSSE*-principle, but they’re rare.

        *Post to Own Site, Syndicate/Share Everywhere

      • yannic@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        E-mail, too. You could have all the latest security features to confirm you’re legitimate, but based on the simple fact that your message volume is low (ironically enough), messages you send with your server will often get filed under junk by default.

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

          This is essentially a very fancy forum. I wouldn’t expect corporations or politicians to be posting here. Maybe they could host their own instance and federate. In principle, that would mean they’re paying for their own hosting and have control over their message being altered.

      • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 months ago

        Well Trump posts stuff to his own website :P

        But yeah, I agree. And there’s no excuse for it really. Sure a regular person only posting to a single social media makes sense, but anyone that has staff should be able post to their own website, issue a press release, post on Twitter, Mastodon, Facebook, Blue Sky, Reddit, etc. I mean once you have the statement finalized it’s just copy & paste to get it on all platforms. It seems bizarre that they don’t do this.

    • jeffw@lemmy.worldM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      2 months ago

      My first reaction was that he was hacked. It wasn’t on official letterhead, there was no other announcement, and the president didn’t immediately make another tweet/x/whatever.

      I don’t think I’m alone. Typically when something big like this happens, I get 5-10 news alerts within minutes of each other from various sources. The alerts were slow to roll in today.

  • TechAnon@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    276
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 months ago

    WHAT AM I GOING TO DO WITH ALL MY BIDEN HATS, FLAGS, T-SHIRTS, AND STICKERS?!

    /Just kidding - not in a cult 😅

    • Altomes@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      64
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      2 months ago

      As a very vocal Biden hater I’ll stomach Kamela far better and would be thrilled for someone else

      • Xhieron@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        129
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Stomach isn’t enough. If you’re not actively campaigning and donating for her–or whomever the candidate is–then you may as well have been a Republican.

        EDIT: Nevermind. Clearly the hivemind wants to stay in our armchairs. Who can blame us, right? We’ll continue this conversation in November. I hope it’s not I-told-you-so.

          • Xhieron@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            35
            ·
            2 months ago

            Squid, I appreciate your contributions to putting content on the platform, honestly, but I couldn’t be any less interested in that take. My history speaks for itself, and anybody can read it who cares to. Everybody must vote. I don’t think I could be any clearer about that. I was a staunch advocate for Biden, and I’ll be a staunch advocate for Harris, Newsom, Whitmer, or anyone else who carries the Democratic party forward.

            But every single one of them polls down from Biden. To the extent any of the whining on social media since the debate hasn’t been astroturfed, advocacy for Biden to drop out resulted in this news, and it means that the party has now voluntarily given up the single biggest proven advantage a candidate historically has in a presidential election: being the sitting president.

            I’m encouraging people to vote, but you know as well as I do that people who were going to vote anything-blue were going to vote for Biden no matter what anybody said on almost-reddit. Harris has to move the needle further than that, and that means that all the armchair it’ll-be-better-if-he-drops-out analysts now need to step the fuck up if they want this news to mean anything other than “The DNC just handed Trump 2024.”

            Everybody knows that the kids screaming “oh if the candidate were just younger, the Dems would have it in a landslide” were full of shit, and now we’re about to see just how big a deficit we’re actually running. I’d love to be wrong! I’d be delighted, ecstatic, beside myself to discover that next weeks polls put all these convention front-runners up 10 points on Trump. But I’ve studied this stuff, and it doesn’t take a veteran pollster to realize it doesn’t work that way. Actual campaigning has to happen.

            If you cared enough to want Biden out, but not quite enough to want Harris to win, then you were going to hold your nose in the ballot box either way and it doesn’t fucking matter: Trump would still win. That’s not discouraging. That’s statistics.

            • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              43
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              2 months ago

              Telling people that if they don’t go out and campaign, they might as well be a Republican is just counterproductive. Insulting people is just never a way to get them to do what you think they should do.

              I don’t know why so many people think that’s the right tack. Have you ever been insulted into doing something?

              • Xhieron@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                22
                ·
                2 months ago

                The few words of hyperbole is what you took away? I expected better, but I guess that’s on me.

        • elbucho@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          19
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          The “hive mind” probably just can’t figure out what the fuck you’re even trying to say. So, what, everybody who doesn’t actively campaign for their preferred candidate just supports fascism by default? I’m guessing your stance isn’t anywhere near that stupid, because that is an extraordinarily stupid stance. So maybe you’d have a better reception if you clarified your point.

        • FlowVoid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          18
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          We win if we get enough votes, and every vote counts.

          Anything beyond voting is just gravy.

        • Tryptaminev@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          16
          arrow-down
          11
          ·
          2 months ago

          With people like you it shows why Trump won culturally even if he doesn’t win the election. He turned a substantial part of the vocal Democrats into Blue-MAGA-hats. It is the same attitude that attacked people who pointed out the mere fact, that Biden is not mentally fit for office anymore. If the Blue-MAGA wasn’t so big, Biden could have left the field to a younger and better candidate half a year ago.

            • Tryptaminev@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              19
              arrow-down
              7
              ·
              2 months ago

              So you think calling everyone that does not campaign and donate to the Democrats a secret Republican is somehow normal?

              To me it is the same cultish bullshit like the blatant denial of Bidens old age and mental decline. It is the same “follow your leader no matter what” insanity that is apologetic for Trump on the other side. So yes, this kind of behaviour is MAGA behaviour and if it is done for the Dems instead of the Reps it is blue MAGA

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

          You couldn’t browbeat us into voting for Biden and you’ve started it right up with Harris? And now it’s not just voting it’s working the phones and door to door campaign? Am I expected to get airfare to PA too? What do I tell them when they ask where I live?

          People should support her campaign to the utmost they can, and for some people that’s right here, with their internet connection.

    • Clinicallydepressedpoochie@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      I was vocally saying biden would never drop out and we just had to swallow the poison pill. I was dead wrong. I will be voting for [insert DNC candidate] and will be excited to do it!

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

      While I don’t think Kamala is the best the Democratic party has to offer (I would have much preferred Biden endorsing Hakeem Jeffries, for example), I’m over the moon that he’s finally decided to step aside. And you know what? Harris is better than Biden in pretty much every metric that matters. I was going to vote for the Dem nominee either way, but him stepping aside in favor of a better candidate has me feeling all kinds of relieved.

      • Kalothar@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        103
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        Senator Mark Kelly, he can do this

        He flipped AZ to blue

        He is an astronaut, all American, former servicemen

        He can get red votes and blue alike

        • alienzx@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          31
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          Isn’t senator Kelly the one that created the mutant registration act?

        • ALQ@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          2 months ago

          Hmm…not bad. Not amazing name recognition, but that could be remedied.

          Having Gabby campaign for/with him, especially after the DJT assassination attempt, could be beneficial, too. (Or could look like a disgusting political plot, but that’s really all our politics.)

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

          Kelly or Mayor Pete seem like the best options.

          Buttigieg and AOC ticket? That would be the youth candidacy. Kelly and Buttigieg or vice versa would be more centrist but probably be the most robust candidacy.

          I hate to say it, but in this political climate and with the threat of Trump, the best shot is probably two young-ish white guys.

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

          I highly doubt Kamala will want to pull a sitting Democratic senator away from the 50/50 Senate given the elections coming up.

          I think there is a greater chance that she picks one of the governors. My pick is J.B. Pritzker.

          • Kalothar@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            That is true, I really was just spitballing, I’ll have to look into JB Pritzker, I’m regrettably unfamiliar with him

        • girlfreddy@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          55
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          If Harris is in, she can use the money already donated. Otherwise they have to start from scratch.

          So it’s almost guaranteed Harris will be in. Who they pick for VP is the question.

          • Tryptaminev@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            I find this so insane. People talk about who gets to keep the money, who has which rich asshole routing for them, which strategy has been successfull in the past, like always setting up the current president for reelection…

            We need to focus on who has actually inspiring policies and ideas. We need to focus on these, because that is what the Reps lack. All they offer is “not the Dems” while the policies they propose are actually unpopular with many of their base. And the whole “Not Trump” strategy of Biden just fell apart.

            Is there noone in the Democratic party who can actually come up with a coherent vision of the future and inspire people to follow it?

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

              On the one hand: “you can’t have her she’s ours!”. On the other, she’s out in 26 regardless, and she’s pretty good so maybe we can share with the rest of the country.

          • SeaJ@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            No, they don’t. The Democratic Party can give the donated money to whoever is the candidate. Not sure where people are getting that.

            Edit: After reading up, I am mistaken kind of. If Harris is still the VP candidate, the money could be used. Otherwise a PAC would have to be setup to funnel money to the candidate…maybe. Bloomberg was simply able to transfer his campaign funds directly to the DNC since it was part of his campaign money…even though the vast majority of it was his own money.

            • mrlavallee@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              12
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              The money Biden has raised directly however can only go to the people that were on his ticket at the time the donation was made

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

                That’s correct, but nearly none of the money is the direct donation stuff - it’s almost in PACs which are (due to a legal fiction) entirely independent of the candidate.

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

                  There are still more restrictions however on spending on other candidates and they would have to act like any other PAC, only helping via donating/running ads in support of (but importantly not directly by) any other candidate.

            • FlowVoid@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              The $100 million warchest belongs to the Biden/Harris campaign, not the Democratic Party. They are separate organizations, and Biden/Harris only answers to Biden and Harris.

              The DNC has its own funds of course, but nowhere near as much. And DNC funds are supposed to be shared with multiple Democrats, not just the one running for president.

              • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                2 months ago

                And notably even if Biden/Harris were supporting the alternative, they’re an outside group. They can spend like a super PAC, but can’t pay bills or do direct advertising.

          • Qkall@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            2 months ago

            I just don’t think she can beat big orange. I’m not saying she shouldn’t … but I don’t know … doubtful

            • mosiacmango@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              8
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              He was a prosecutor for years, so she has plently of oratory chops, and shes 20 years younger than trump to boot.

              Her only liability is the she is a she and there are plently of sexist fucks out there. Thats it.

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

                You forgot that she’s a POC and there are also tons of racists fucks out there.

                Even before getting to her actual credentials (some great, others really not), people will be assholes. I still have hope that she, as a former prosecutor, could mop the floor with the fascists.

            • ᴇᴍᴘᴇʀᴏʀ 帝@feddit.uk
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              2 months ago

              July 11th poll:

              Americans divide 46-47% between Biden and Trump if the election were today, almost identical to a 44-46% ABC/Ipsos poll result in April. Among registered voters (though there’s plenty of time to register) it’s an absolute tie, 46-46%.

              Were Vice President Kamala Harris to replace Biden as the Democratic nominee, vote choices are 49-46%, Harris-Trump, among all adults (and 49-47% among registered voters). Harris’ 49% is slightly better than Biden’s 46%, although she doesn’t have a statistically significant lead over Trump.

              Also possibly key:

              Both candidates [Biden and Trump] face a high degree of scorn. About 4 in 10 Americans say neither has the mental sharpness or the physical health to serve effectively, and as many say neither is honest and trustworthy. Sixty percent say Trump is too old for a second term, also a new high, up from 44% in spring 2023. And in a sign of the nation’s political polarization, 50% say that given his debate performance, Trump should step aside in favor of another nominee – although, in contrast with Biden, very few of Trump’s own supporters say so.

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

                You can expect Harris’s numbers to drop given she’s vulnerable to almost every criticism Biden was except age and the fact that the Trump campaign has already been preparing to attack her.

        • fossilesque@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          I don’t particularly like her, then again I detest nearly all politicians. That being said, I’m more motivated to vote, that’s for certain. I didn’t mind Biden, but it felt like elder abuse lol. He’s been better than anyone in my lifetime. Good God, I’d rather have her than Hilary as the first woman in the spot. Biden was just hard to watch and that position needs someone that will have to live with the consequences of the decisions in office. Will be curious to see who else puts their name in. 4 years ago he said he wouldn’t run again and he seems to be keeping that promise too. If they were clever, they’d put Biden as VP or as an advisor.

        • Montagge@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          11
          ·
          2 months ago

          Half of America lost it’s mind when Obama was elected, and we’re still dealing with the fallout from that lovely dose of racism. There’s no way Kamala could win in this country.

          • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            15
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            Obama won. And then won again. Stop pumping up the reactionaries as some unstoppable force. They’re a minority and have been on a long term losing streak.

          • Qkall@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            13
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            2 months ago

            like all that aside, a lot of folks aren’t appreciative of her background as a cop… but yeah that’s a cherry to what you already mentioned

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

              And a lot of swing voters will probably like that she was a prosecutor, a “law and order” type.

      • nl4real@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        This late in the game, it’s almost certainly Harris. Probably picks a swing state governor like Whitmer or Shapiro.

        • GiddyGap@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          Or Mark Kelly. Regardless, it’s probably going to be a white male from a swing state to appeal to as broad of an electorate as possible.

    • Bye@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      36
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Literally any straight white man center-right democrat born after 1968 would wipe the floor with trump.

      And before anyone jumps down my throat, that’s not what I want. I want president Cortez. But presidents are chosen by money and by about 10,000 generically stupid swing voters in Michigan and Pennsylvania.

      • thisbenzingring@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        I think she’s as fine a candidate as we’re likely to get. The biggest bonus is breaking the glass ceiling, once and for ever. Not just a woman but a woman of a colorful heredity. It will be the best thing to happen in this era of bullshit politics.

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

          No talk of issues or positions here. Just “her sex and skin color.” Maybe that will get some people out to vote, but they did the same thing for Hillary and it did not work. “First woman president, she deserves it”

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

          Gretchen Whitmer would be an interesting choice. She would probably deliver Michigan and free up resources for the other states that matter.

        • systemglitch@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          2 months ago

          I don’t know, that sounds awfully sexist and racist. There are a thousand things more important about a person than their heritage and sex.

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

            There are a thousand things more important, and yet our country managed to have a streak of electing only men for hundreds of years, despite the fact that there have always been just as many women in the country. It shouldn’t matter, but it does.

    • ashok36@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      2 months ago

      I stopped donating after the debate. I sent a donation today for 3x my usual. If they only respond to money, then withholding it is the only way to make them listen.

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

      This means Harris shouldn’t have an advantage. She only had the advantage that she could use the funds that Biden raised.

  • rekabis@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    39
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    2 months ago

    As much as I think that he was too old for the position… JFC. If the Dems don’t nominate Kamala Harris as his replacement, the entire Democratic nomination will be filled with so much infighting that they will lose the faith of their electorate and the next election.

    If only more Dems were left-of-centre such that Bernie was a viable option. Unfortunately almost all of them are right-lite.

  • VanillaBean@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 months ago

    Welp they must have looked at the data and saw Kamala or someone else would do significantly better. Hope they’re right.

    • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      It’s basically 50/50 with either Biden or Harris at the top of the ticket. Everything is in the margin of error, and polling has been notoriously inaccurate with Trump on the ballot.

      So you have to basically ignore the simple Trump vs. Biden or Trump vs. Harris or (Trump vs. anyone else you can think of) numbers because it’s pretty much unknown. But the data says a majority (even an majority of Democrats) want someone other than Biden on the ballot at election. BTW a majority of voters also want someone other than Trump on the ballot too.

      There’s also some data to suggest Trump is making some inroads with young male Black and Hispanic voters. Harris will negate a significant amount of that immediately and potentially even more when the GOP can’t resist blowing their racist dog whistles and show voters who they really are.

      So it’s kinda about looking at the data, but I think a large part of it is simple campaign facts. In times past a Presidential candidate would do two (sometimes three) rallies in two different states per day. And do interviews while traveling between campaign events. Trump isn’t capable of that pace. Biden most certainly isn’t capable of that pace. Harris can do that. We really haven’t seen a 100% balls to the wall presidential campaign in a while because it’s been two old guys in the last election and in this one… until now.

      Remember Biden also had to do the job of being President of the country while also campaigning. That’s a lot of work for even someone young, and Biden is so very old. Sure Harris is VP, but that’s mostly just getting some briefings (too keep up on events in case she might need to take over as Prez) and breaking ties in the Senate (which probably won’t be needed between now and election day). She can devote almost all of her time to campaigning while Biden couldn’t.

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

      I hope so and if true we have to trust the data. My vote is solid blue based on virtues and most policies. There’s probably a lot of others like me.

  • jeffw@lemmy.worldM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/07/21/open-convention-democrats-biden-drop-out/

    “How Democrats would pick a new candidate if Biden drops out, step by step”

    One [possibility] is a virtual vote that would lock in a new nominee in early August, and the other is an “open” convention, a scenario the party hasn’t experienced since 1968.
    A convention is open when no candidate arrives with a clear majority of delegates, so the event turns into a mini-primary in which contenders scramble to persuade delegates to vote for them…
    Some states have August deadlines to get on the ballot for the general election, and early voting begins in some places in September. So party leaders probably would try to settle the nomination before the Democratic National Convention begins Aug. 19.

    There are two types of Democratic delegates. Pledged delegates commit to supporting the candidate state voters chose, although a “good conscience” clause in the party’s rules gives them a bit of wiggle room.

    Automatic delegates, often called superdelegates, are the party’s highest-profile leaders. They have the role because of the offices they hold (or held), and the group includes former presidents and vice presidents, Democratic governors, members of Congress and party officials. They are not pledged to any candidate and are not allowed to vote on the first ballot at the convention.

      • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        Not really. It’ll be Harris. Biden endorsed her and already other potential Dem front-runners are endorsing her. Within in a few days it’ll be like she’s the incumbent and no one will want to run against her for the same reasons they didn’t run against Biden. Plus the additional reason that they don’t want to screw up their chances of being her VP pick.

    • Rayspekt@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 months ago

      Dumb question. Why didn’t they just schedule the convention prior to all deadlines regardless who runs for office? Is there any benefit to meeting so late?

      • jeffw@lemmy.worldM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        It is before the deadlines but just barely. Typically the candidate is known before the convention, so you already have enough signatures to get on the ballot in every state

        • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          It wasn’t when they scheduled it. It was after Ohio’s deadline. And major parties don’t need signatures to put forward candidates.

          • jeffw@lemmy.worldM
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            Not in a general, no. They do in a primary though. In this case, you’re right, the candidate would get on the ballot by the delegates voting

  • taiyang@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    In 2016 it was a “Vote Against Trump Regardless Of Who It Is”. It’s shaping up to be that again, but this gives me hope that maybe we’ll have someone we can vote for that we like… Even if just a little. Harris is no Obama in charm, but it’s a step in the right direction.

    • Baron Von J@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      2 months ago

      The general election will continue to be a strategic vote against the party you don’t want to win until voters come out en masse in the primaries. And those better candidates will have to actually be running in the primaries.

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

        You mean not until the entire voting system is overhauled and the first pass the fence post system is abandoned.

        • Baron Von J@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Yes. I mean the thing that won’t happen until we overwhelmingly vote in the major parties primaries to put in representatives who will legislate those changes at the state level. Because 3rd party candidates aren’t winning with the current system, so we have to change the two major parties from within, through their primaries.

            • Baron Von J@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              No 3rd party has won a single electoral vote since Wallace in '68. He won 46. You have to go to Teddy Roosevelt in 1912 to top that with 88 (the most ever). It’s either taking over the parties from the local level up through their primaries or it will take the full collapse of our government with a new constitutional convention, and that probably won’t go well.

                • Baron Von J@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  Well it can’t if we don’t try. For the 2024 primaries in Texas we had 17.9M registered voters, 3.2M primary ballots cast, and only 900k of them were Democratic. So I get why people think it isn’t going to work. But I think anyone expecting a “don’t vote and let it burn down” situation to result in an immediate improvement rather than things getting insanely worse are deluding themselves to everyone’s detriment.

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

      I could care less about charm. I wish more people would. Personally, I want a fucking autistic that defines real goals, outlines a plan to achieve them, and measures their success on how efficiently the goals are met. I’m exaggerating a bit, but I miss the days where politicians had platforms and were willing to be something more than just a feeling.

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

          Bad bot. I like to leave a little wiggle room. I’ve often suprised myself and found that when I care very little about something, I can sometimes find a little more apathy later on.

    • Wxnzxn@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      At this point, it’s all just about delaying the repression and concentration of power under a Trump presidency, as well as trying to slow down the climate catastrophe as much as possible on top of that. Things won’t get better any time soon, it’s simply not the historical situation and dynamic at the moment, but every year to organise people for radical alternatives for when the global collapse progresses further is valuable.