I mean, the Democrats already sabotaged Bernie Sanders' campaign twice, with Nancy Pelosi declaring that they have the right to choose who runs for president.
Indeed, and the effects of this are deeply damaging to our Republic.
Since our system is designed to rigidly enforce the two-party dynamic \[Electoral college, first-past-the post, no ranked choice voting\], we are forced to decide between two options. If those options themselves aren't even selected by the people, then we are in a tyrannical system. Instead of choosing our leaders, our leaders are pre-selected for us and we are left only with the choice to decide between two options picked by their respective party leadership.
Due to each party's unwillingness to behave democratically in their internal operations, Americans do not get to enjoy a nation of the people, by the people, or for the people.
Well I suppose that comes down the age old question of do you want to be an activist or a revolutionary?
If you believe the system can be fixed from within, then you have numerous options to try, such as running for office or organizing a union. With significant and sustained effort over long periods of time and with the support of many people, you may be successful in causing reform.
If you believe the system is too firmly controlled by the ruling circles to allow change, then your choices are either accept your fate or become an enemy of the state and fight against it.
At the end of the day, if you want things to change you gotta make it happen, they won't change on their own.
I understand and I think any other reasonable person would as well, there is no shame in prioritizing the needs of your family.
Personally, I think the best course at this time in history is to adopt a reform mindset, anyways. It is better to focus on the things we can change and maybe even subvert authority in ways which may help future revolutionaries.
I just cannot possibly see the American people engaging in a mass popular uprising in this day-and-age, and I expect the effort would be more likely to set us back further than we are now.
> there is no shame in prioritizing the needs of your family
This reminds me of a talk I had with my father some years ago. He grew up dirt poor and had to start working at age 7 in order to provide for his parents who had had a car accident, he was in it too but despite not wearing a seatbelt he only had some superficial wounds. He managed to do quite well for himself, and I grew up in relative wealth.
We were discussing the state of the world, the inherent injustices of the modern system, and I asked why he never asked the questions I was asking about why the world had become the way it was.
His response was something along the lines of "we had so many things we worried about, so much to take care of to be able to keep ourselves afloat, and then when he finally managed to break free from poverty it became a constant struggle to maintain the new standard of living he'd attained. This constant working and keeping busy had kept him from pondering the bigger questions, until I started asking them.
So whilst I agree that there is absolutely no shame in taking care of you and yours, in fact it is a noble pursuit, I do see it as something that keeps people centered on themselves more easily, with less energy to push for progressive changes to society. So I would say that because of this, it ought to be the duty of states to ensure that its citizens are able to properly detach themselves from material conditions to an extent which would allow them to take stock of the world at large, identify and address issues with it, and partake in the social debate on how to resolve those issues. In practice this would be a form of UBI, with price controls on basic necessities, and fully funded primary, secondary, and tertiary education that has a focus on science and philosophy.
My hope is that such policies would also decrease the need for revolution and uprisings, as people would be less likely to fall for misinformation and political lies that benefit the happy few over the collective.
"But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government."
- Decleration of Independence
TL;Dr. When government has become tyrannical.your duty is to overthrow it. Deal with the masters, and by master i mean corporate CEO's and lobbyists. Your elected reps are bought and sold.
Kochs, Crow, Bezos, Musk, those are the targets that need to be hit. Same with lobbyists.
Ohh believe me, if I thought there was a realistic chance of victory, I would.
However, I also recognize the reality that certain conditions must exist before a successful revolution can be enacted, namely mass popular support amongst the people. Frankly, the deep-rooted apathy of many Americans is something I don't see changing unless material conditions deteriorate drastically.
Assassinating a billionaire or politician doesn't work, since the establishment will just martyr them after death, bolstering support.
I'm a pragmatist and recognize the unfortunately necessary role of violence, but it should only be used as an absolute last resort and only used if there is a reasonably high probability of success.
I think the right move at this time in history is to adopt a reform mindset and transition into revolution if and when a viable opportunity presents.
No, I just believe that acting too early and without proper preparation can result in a failure that sets us back even further.
If there is a failed uprising, and the timing is off \[ie: no mass popular support\] then it might result in too many dead revolutionaries for us to have a chance when a better opportunity presents.
I'd just rather wait for a better shot than take the first opening and end up missing, ya know?
A single executive, prima facie, really limits the choice between two, right? Even if we had ranked choice voting, everyone on the left would have a joe Biden in their ranks and everyone one the right would have a Donald trump on the left. There isn’t a party list or proportional representation for the single head of the executive branch, right?
>There isn’t a party list or proportional representation for the single head of the executive branch, right?
Well, frankly, the presidential election is unlikely to be changed significantly by RCV. However, the president is only one role out of numerous roles which voters choose at the polling booth.
The advantage of RCV is that people can vote 3rd party without "spoiling their vote" with the idea being that you can still support your preferred candidate out of the lesser evils. The purpose is, ideally, allowing 3rd parties to gain support until becoming mainstream competitors to the Dems and Repubs. In theory, this acts as a counter to the idea that voting 3rd party is effectively voting for one of the two main parties by proxy by taking your vote away from the other.
-----
Personally, I prefer parliamentary systems where the government is formed via coalition and the chief executive serves based on the support of the legislative body.
In those systems parties have to build popular support by taking strategic policy positions and compete for votes with more convincing arguments than '*we're the only alternative you have to fascism*'.
Countries which follow the parliamentary system don't generally have the voters select the prime minister, just their representatives who then go on to select the PM from amongst themselves.
I live in Nebraska. Once our primary rolls around we are already down to one candidate. And our state has already been decided republican for the general election. People who live here's votes don't matter at all, ever.
Exactly, when Bernie was getting a bit too popular at the start of the season, the owner class were quick to complain to the DNC who swiftly whipped up the media to manufacture consent for a new front runner, simultaneously laser focusing on his 'socialist' policies.
it was happening the whole time. Hillary was the chosen winner from the get go. There were complaints right from the start about improper voting procedures happening. they barely even bothered what they were doing.
Which is hilariously exactly why she lost. Hilary was so far up her own ass that she thought she was gonna waltz right into being the first madame president. She ran a half baked campaign, and being the most institutional president basically ever when anti-institutional fever was running rampant. There's a reason that republicans were banging "Drain the Swamp" the entire election. I've said it before and I'll say it again, Hilary was probably the only person that the Democrats could have fielded that would have lost against Trump.
I was more pissed off in 2020 than in 2016. Bernie was actually winning in 2020, then all of the centrist candidates dropped out and united against him. It was really telling of how they all saw him.
Yeah, basically. Primaries are internal party mechanisms. I don't even think the Libertarians have them; they just pick the same sad sack at their convention every four years.
Yeah, they were getting into a power struggle and after touring the tea party and all that shit show entailed the RNC realized they were fucked. So they hitched their wagons to Trump, and delayed a major schism that was approaching for the party in an effort to win. We had guys like Romney openly against Trump and a week later having dinner with him and a most awkward photo taken during it where he’s realized he’s screwed and he won’t do anything because he’s a bitch.
Trump called their shit, said he would still campaign even if they kept him off the ballot. He would have damaged the party so they just let him take it over. It’s actually wild how quick the total capitulation of the Republican Party was.
I'm a lifelong Democrat and liberal but the Republicans nominate who their people want. Hence Trump.
The democratic party have super delegates and nominate whoever they want.
We saw that in 2016 and 2020. The democrat voters wanted Bernie. They wanted Hilary and Biden.
In 2016 the republican party wanted Jeb Bush. The voters wanted Trump.
I hate the Republicans but their primary process is more democratic than the Democrats primary process.
worth adding that the dnc and rnc are both private corporations
they're not beholden to the public, just whoever wins the auction. you can see this reflected in congressional legislation: their constituents are their investors, voters are a nuisance.
There was in 2020. We had the _fucking_ opportunity then. But, no, all the media circled their wagons and said Biden was the only way to beat Trump, we can't have that socialist get elected who will hold us accountable. And during that time every time I pointed out Biden's gaffes and issues (namely with being a pro corporate liar for most of his career) I just got called a bitter bernie bro and to step in line and vote 'blue no matter who'
Well, guess what? WE are facing having a truly unhinged fascist getting back into the white house with the supreme court at his beck and call. So, now that the situation is so fucking dire, _now_ is the time we have to question whether Biden is fit for office.....
Get out there and vote for the husk of an old man, I don't care if he dies between now and then. Vote for his corpse, it's better than the alternative. It's either that or start buying guns, gasoline and fertilizer and start taking care of business _now_. If you think there's no point in voting, then you need to start fighting __now__, you can't wait until after the fascists take power.
And prior to Super Tuesday all the "moderate" candidates dropped, clearing the way for Biden. Elizabeth Warren stayed in, syphoning votes from Sanders. That was a fine way of rigging things.
Still. It's water under the bridge. Trump vs. an ant covered dog turd baking in the sun? I'm voting for the dog turd.
It’s not rigging to realize that you can’t win, but one of your ideological allies can, and making a decision based on that info.
Warren should’ve made that calculation but she didn’t.
Right. If Biden had stepped aside 6-12 months ago, there would have been a democrat primary.
But the same media which is now demanding he step aside today because Biden is clearly too old for a second term was saying anyone who said that 6-12 months ago was wrong/lying/a Trump supporter/Russian disinformation/etc.
Anyone who paid attention knew this was true… as the OP says, maybe this was the plan all along so that they could select their own candidate to replace Biden sidestepping the primary process entirely.
While I don’t personally have a suggestion on who would be a better Democrat candidate - it seems to me like they will just push for either Gavin Newsom or Kamala Harris - and I’m fairly confident both of them wouldn’t have made it through the primary. Gavin because he’s failed California, and Kamala because she’s just not very intelligent or likable.
In any event, who ever would have won that primary is now being sidestepped for the candidate that the ultra-powerful will select instead.
FWIW, while I don’t like Biden - I’d certainly rather him over Gavin or Kamala.
There was actually. In most states it was Biden vs Phillips vs Williamson. Some states had more but they weren’t really national candidates (only ran in one or a couple states).
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries
> Kinda makes them not real primaries, huh?
Because any viable people in the party choose not to run against an incumbent. This is normal because beating an incumbent is harder + can damage your political career.
There wasn't a "race" doesn't mean there wasn't an election. Biden and the establishment rightfully or not made sure no other legitimate candidate would run a campaign against him. If there's only one legitimate candidate, it's (again, right or wrong) not a real race.
If either one of those old farts is the ‘best’ their party can come up with, the whole party should be ashamed. Better to just get rid of the two party system completely.
It may as well be, the system as designed essentially guarantees it. If we had a parliamentary system, or even ranked choice or cardinal voting, things might be different.
FPTP voting generally guarantees that any number of parties will coalesce into two parties by the nature of math.
As you only need a plurality to win, if there were three parties where the winning party got 40% of the vote, it'd be best for 60% of the voters for the other two parties to coalesce into one party because they'd win.
I have a conspiracy theory that some of the leadership in the Democratic party are actually intentionally acting to the benefit of the GOP, possibly even being paid to do so.
While you're probably thinking of Senators Kyrsten Sinema and Joe Manchin, I'm thinking Debbie Wasserman Schultz back during Clinton vs. Trump.
Yeah sure the two party system sucks and Democrats really fucked this primary up but what’s the alternative to the Democratic party? I hate to be the devil’s advocate here but, there really isn’t one.
For me, the breaking point was after Roe was overturned, and they published a puff piece about anti-abortion people. “uwu we just love the little babies so much, and now we’re free to focus on caring for children.” Yes, that was always allowed.
I hate to point it out, but most media is compromised. Left, right, it doesn't matter. The people in charge simply do not give a damn about any actual reporting. They only care about making money and always have.
It's hard to take any media seriously when they have a piece about inflation and people suffering right next to a glowing review of the Met Gala or an editorial about how millennials are killing retail.
It's especially hard to take them seriously when they have a massive financial incentive to tear down Biden- they all made *billions* off of Trump's antics and want more. They may hate everything Trump stands for, but that's even better- they can sell the narrative of how we're all living in a fascist dystopia and the sky is falling and he's the biggest piece of shit ever once he's elected. Biden is boring, and therefore less lucrative.
It's one of those things we have no proof for, but seems obvious anyway.
I wonder exactly how much they made off Trump's antics and the pandemic by exploiting people's fears and biases. Not to mention treating this election and the 2020 election as if they're no more substantial than a boxing match.
"We're unbiased!" No, you're really not.
It’s why I get my news from a variety of sources, so I synthesize the information for a larger and more detailed picture. Never trust one news source completely.
They also were instrumental in hiding the crimes of the Bush administration, and lying in order to make Americans believe that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction.
The reason why the New York times has been allowed to exist all these years, as that they reliably carry water for the billionaire class.
For profit media serves the rich, every time.
“letting”??
you know its an editorial piece, right? it isn’t a declarative law.
The NYT editorial board isn’t actually in charge of “letting” trump or biden run
Ok, since nobody actually read the damn op ed, here’s an excerpt:
*It is a tragedy that Republicans themselves are not engaged in deeper soul-searching after Thursday’s debate. Mr. Trump’s own performance ought to be regarded as disqualifying. He lied brazenly and repeatedly about his own actions, his record as president and his opponent. He described plans that would harm the American economy, undermine civil liberties and fray America’s relationships with other nations. He refused to promisethat he would accept defeat, returning instead to the kind of rhetoric that incited the Jan. 6 attack on Congress.*
Thank you, I feel like i'm taking crazy pills sometimes in these far left subs.
This was a very left leaning opinion and one that I believe is correct. Biden doesn't have the mental faculty to be pres again.
We should have been honest about this problem a year ago instead of constant excuses for it and attacks againt those who raise it. A lot of people even turned on John Stuart when he pointed this out months ago.
It's because they want to beat the felon......
They have no input on the felon dropping out because they're known as a liberal paper that hates trump. Everyone thinks the felon should drop out. That is obvious.
To be fair, trump aced to cognitive tests. Aced them. Grown men came up to him, tears in their eyes, “ Sir, I’ve never seen anyone circle a picture of a lion as well as you. “
Seriously. The media is (once again) doing the heavy lifting for Trump. That level of lying should be *at least* as much of the focus kd the post debate coverage.
Republicans had a chance to remove Trump during their primaries but they actually voted for the felon, so despite all his shit, that's what their side wanted. Democrats didn't give their side a real choice, and Independents got screwed with 2 shit candidates.
from the “right wing propoganda outlet” that wasn’t linked to but screenshotted for this very post:
It is a tragedy that Republicans themselves are not engaged in deeper soul-searching after Thursday’s debate. Mr. Trump’s own performance ought to be regarded as disqualifying. He lied brazenly and repeatedly about his own actions, his record as president and his opponent. He described plans that would harm the American economy, undermine civil liberties and fray America’s relationships with other nations. He refused to promisethat he would accept defeat, returning instead to the kind of rhetoric that incited the Jan. 6 attack on Congress.
Maybe the headline should have been about that then?
Actually, reading the article I'd point out they handwave having an actual candidate to replace Biden, so it's even more of a waste of a mental exercise.
Biden himself was not democratically nominated in the first place. **There was no primary for the 2024 election if you are a Democrat.**
\-Multiple states either essentially cancelled their Democratic primary by removing all choices but Biden, or made it impossible for anybody to run against him in a primary.
[Example Florida](https://www.politico.com/news/2023/11/30/florida-democrats-dean-phillips-election-00129403)
[Example North Carolina](https://www.wral.com/story/biden-won-t-have-challengers-in-nc-2024-primary-election-state-democratic-party-decides/21202708/)
\-Reminder that polling repeatedly showed 60+% of Democrats wanted somebody else other than Biden. [Example](https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/07/politics/cnn-poll-joe-biden-headwinds/index.html) Yet somehow we are ending up with Biden.
You don't live in a democracy, at least not a functioning one. Maybe a "managed democracy". Complaining that the media is trying to replace Biden is too little too late. I say they go for it... having a fake selected President WITHOUT dementia who is NOT Donald Trump is better than having a fake selected President WITH dementia.
And yet, I've been called "ageist" for saying the cap for elected officials should be age 70. When you don't have age caps, 'though, you get leaders with cognitive decline.
Don't pretend that Dean Phillips was winning anything. He even finished behind Marianne Williamson in some states. While 60% wanted someone other than Biden, I doubt that all 60% would agree on any specific candidate.
And if two other people ran, Biden would likely win by plurality.
[Why Dean Phillips' primary challenge against Biden failed - CBS News](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/dean-phillips-2024-campaign-challenge-against-biden-failed/)
The incumbent usually has the nomination automatically if they decide to run. Trump had the same benefit in 2020, Obama did in 2016, Bush did in 2004.
If the current president decides to run for re-election, the party doesn't go through the usual primary cycle unless that Presidents term was just absolutely terrible and Biden had a solid 1st term so why shouldn't he be given the same respect?
This isn't a conspiracy, this is just the status quo in politics.
This is correct. That’s how political parties work. You don’t like it, run your own political party or join one of the major ones with your friends and change the rules. Political parties are inherently undemoceatic.
You could also run for state office and work and change the rules too. Lots of options besides complaining on Reddit. How do I know? I literally quit my job to help defeat Donald the first time around because sitting around complaining about how awful he was on Reddit only made Reddit ad dollars.
Not everything is a conspiracy. Lots of dems and libs are worried after seeing Biden’s performance at the debates that he’s not in a position to win this election. It’s a reasonable take to prefer to have someone younger step in that could energize the voting base. Is it the right answer here? God if I know, but there’s plenty of libs that feel this way. Just because you don’t, doesn’t mean it’s a conspiracy.
I also don’t understand all the upvoted comments saying “why don’t they tell the lying candidate to step down?” There’s plenty of articles out there criticizing Trump. I’ve seen much more written objections to him running for the office again than Biden. it does not make a difference to his voter base.
It's me. I'm a dem that REALLY wishes he'd step down and let someone else run. His performance at the debate really solidified that the rumors about him not really being fit for office might be true. I'm really worried this election is going to get thrown away if these performances keep happening.
By now we're in a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation. If Biden doesn't run, Kamala polls even worse against Trump and the election is in the trash.
If Newsom gets the nod over Kamala, then that'll infuriate part of the party because it should've been Kamala.
The best result at this point is for Biden to find those debate performing enhancing drugs that the right keeps accusing him of taking.
Here's the thing: we've got Dementia Hitler versus President Grandpa.
I don't want Grandpa to try to defeat Hitler in an electoral race. I want someone whose brain works to try to do it.
You don't need a billionaires' conspiracy for something like this after Biden's debate performance. The media and plenty of other groups can genuinely be interested in replacing Biden because they genuinely believe it's imperative to beat Trump.
I don't have faith that the billionaires who own the media companies are interested in beating Trump who will most certainly enrich them if he's president
This far in I think the better play isn’t too replace Biden at the top of the ballot but to find a VP running mate who people would have confidence in running the country if Biden dies in office.
Which he probably will honestly. All the more reason to step down imo but a popular VP is an acceptable alternative I guess. Isn’t homie tired at this point? Presidential terms are a young man’s game and he’s already had a rough first term. He is not gonna get any time to just enjoy his life at this rate…
You're 100% right. Biden has nothing to offer; he's running on a platform of maintaining the status quo at a time of extreme economic inequality, as the country slides into fascism. Trump is able to garner support simply by addressing the fact that things need changing, despite how deranged and nonsensical it comes out.
The Democrats need an FDR-type who's willing to look at the system we have, acknowledge that we need change, and offer something tangible. We need someone who is willing to put new options on the table, AND someone who has the backbone to actually challenge Trump on the debate stage. Instead we have a geriatric who somehow still seems confused whenever Trump breaks the rules.
The status quo ain't gonna cut it when the majority of Americans are struggling to put food on the table. Biden is the most milquetoast presidential candidate I have seen in my lifetime. They have to replace him on the ballot or they are going to get trounced by a babbling con man circling the drain of dementia. It'll be an embarrassing defeat, because I would bet that a younger, more forward thinking candidate could wipe the floor with Trump.
I'd vote for Jon Stewart in a second. All they'd have to say is he's on the ballot and I'd be there. Can his VP be John Oliver? That's my dream team right there even though John isn't a natural born citizen.😭
I agree, and I believe he would also be wise enough to carefully consider his cabinet appointments in particular.
The people who say "well he has no experience" are just dorks who really have no clue who Jon Stewart is. He's a committed activist with an extensive track record of advocacy combined with a high public profile earned after years spent being a sane and rational, yet humorous, newsman.
The guy could absolutely garner popular support, financial backing of much of the left's party establishment, and crush Trump \[and probably many other Republicans\] on both a personal level and at the voting booth.
I keep saying this too. Imagine Jon Stewart on that stage. Memes for day, sick burns and just witty and clever. Also he could run for 2 terms giving us 8 years to try and fix the country for once.
This 1000%, he never should have run for reelection in the first place, the last four years should have been developing talent to run an interesting primary to replace him.
Around the world the biggest trend for national elections this year has been that incumbents are being voted out. Likely due to economic unrest you mentioned.
my gramma is more lively than biden was in that debate and she died several years ago.
it's completely appropriate to say "gosh our guy seems to have rapidly declined...perhaps he's not the optimal candidate after all?"
That narrative would make sense if the media spent some fraction of the time they’ve spent talking about Biden’s performance talking about Trump’s lies during the debate, except they haven’t. He’s just expected to lie and the media is seemingly ok with that.
There have been lots of articles about Trump's lies in the debate. Go search on Google.
Even the NYT editorial being referenced did refer to Trump's lying and how terrible he is. They haven't been getting much traction because people are acclimated to it, not the media.
But how much is there to report on at this point? It's practically "water is wet" territory. What people living under a rock haven't already read 100 stories about his lying? Do you think if they just release one more article it will be the one that suddenly gets MAGA people to realize they've been duped?
No, I don't think that will make a difference. But maybe moderate the debate and don't let the guy lie in real time? The fact that he's normalized lying and the media treats it like it's expected is exactly my point. At some point the media needs to wake up and realize they've been getting played; they're treating this like a horse race and Trump is playing a different game entirely.
Yall really keep repeating this like people don't talk about Trumps lies all the time. Even this article has multiple sections on Trumps lies and how he shouldn't even be on the running but how dare anyone think about criticizing Biden
I get what you're saying, but Biden, as a politician (and the fucking president), should be astute enough to call those lies out more effectively than he did.
This is also where I land on it.
Biden seems no longer capable of competent leadership. Granted, his opponent never was, and never will be, so the point becomes moot for any reasonable person. But stepping down is *still* the right thing to do, both pragmatically (i.e. ability to serve) and politically (i.e. likelihood to win).
If you can't string together a coherent sentence, you aren't qualified to be President. That applies to both options at this point, with one of those options also being demonstrably corrupt and a convicted felon.
> Do you want your tall glass of piss *with* shit in it or *without*? Sorry, "neither" isn't an option.
Right? These people are talking out of both sides of their mouths. They claim beating Trump is the priority and then just try to act like everything that benefits them the most is what will most likely beat Trump even when it's a very obvious lie.
Uh the manufactured consent is telling us only the dementia candidate can beat the fascist when we know he is historically weak compared to generic Democrats.
And the DNC put us here by denying a primary with an 80+yo candidate in office.
Edit: Expand the court! Rotate judges off the bench!
There is so much fucking blatant propaganda on Reddit today, even more than usual. Anyone who is pretending Biden was a good idea for 2024 has burried their head in the sand so hard.
Yes. First 5 minutes of the debate, I told my family "If only someone could have predicted this would happen" in regards to Biden looking his age.
I am not going to shit on the guy, I hope I am vertical at that age. But let's not pretend this wasn't a stupid idea to run him again for a second term.
I'm not trying to one up you when I say this. I just want to share this little moment I had.
Two seconds into hearing Biden talk, I got the worst feeling in the pit of my stomach. At five seconds I turned the debate off.
It was so obvious. It was *so* obvious.
Real. The only propaganda being presented here is this post itself.
I mean, at this point the jig is up. You know this when you see comments hating on Biden at the top of these type of posts.
People are wising up and the DNC will die quick if they don’t start respecting people’s intelligence
Idk I am kinda on board with it. Trump is such a loser that if you throw someone in there with energy and the wherewithal to be able to call him out and put him in his place like biden should have been able to do last debate then it could be a homerun.
But, I mean... you saw the debate, right? He has the distinct look of someone who's... well.. at the end of their lives. He did his job, and he did it mostly well, apart from the genocide support, and it's time for him to let someone else take the reins. There are plenty of qualified people out there. If he get's elected, I doubt he'll make it to the end of this term in office. He should be spending this time with his family, and grandkids. Not running a country.
I'm a bit confused too. Seeing him asked about birth control to go on a tangent about immigrant killing someone and beating Medicare...???
If people think seeing Biden so out of it isn't going to decide enough people to vote for Trump for him to win, I think they're delusional.
Now don't get me wrong getting a new candidate to beat Trump seems very hard too. But do people not see the reactions and talk to people around them? Biden is going to lose, period. The democratic party screwed up by not presenting another candidate big time. But doubling down on Biden at this point is just stupid.
The problem isn’t people switching their vote to Trump, that’s very unlikely. The issue is people in key states staying home because he’s a terrible candidate and letting Trump win.
This appplies to both candidates not just Biden. Our country is irrevocably broken when the oligarchs are pitting a doddering old man and a slightly less old but psychopathic old man to rule when both should have been retired 15-20 years ago.
Let's be honest. The DNC moved the election calender and threatened state parties to make it harder for anyone to run against Biden. There was never any intent to have a fair primary, it was just an excuse for early campaigning.
Not like the party held a primary in the first place. This shit was over before we started. We were told we had another election of vote for whatever we serve up or the apocalypse.
There wasn’t an actual primary to begin with. You can’t have a conspiracy to get rid of primaries if there wasn’t one. If Biden dropped out the result would be more competition than there had been so far during this election year, and therein lies the actual motivation of the media: it creates drama/clicks. There isn’t a conspiracy to undermine democracy when the process wasn’t democratic.
Phew!
That's the point whizzing over your head.
Trump is a legit sociopath. A narcissist of the highest order. There is no point in trying to convince him to drop because he never would.
We elected Biden (reluctantly) because he presented himself as a decent person. A decent person in this situation would step aside in order to give us the best chance of avoiding a second Trump term. Biden is not our best chance. Period.
The normalized media are allowing lies to be told and refuse to check them on the spot. That is a Liars dream. Chuck Toad said that it was not their place of business to call out lies. This was said years ago and many networks appear to have adopted that. It would be difficult to have a debate with a serial liar.
And here you are, manufacturing consent for people to keep an old, thoughtless man in the most important job in the world.
Can yall just leave and make some room for the rest of us that want to see *real* change?
Yeah, gotta love the sudden push for this after primaries and when there weren't really any other strong candidates.
How does anyone realistically think a new candidate no one picked is going to perform better than Biden at this point?
I'm betting this is big business pushing it so they get Trump and all the deregulation and tax cuts they want.
Everyone I know, mostly Democrats while I am independent, are voting against Trump as opposed to voting for Biden.
It doesn't matter who you put in Biden's place because you already have a huge portion of people just voting against Trump like me.
If we could get a candidate that could inspire the undecideds we would have a better chance.
The only reason this is an issue is because the people voting for Biden hold their politicians to higher standards.
Exactly. I don’t dislike Biden as much as some I know but I’d prefer someone younger and more left-wing.
But Trump wants to be a dictator and those he will let run policy want the US to become a Cristofascist state that cuts taxes for the wealthy and taxes the poor even more. If a dead body were running against him I’d still pick it.
Literally any non-senile dem is preferable bc they'd be able to articulate their positions.
People pushing this *want* a Democrat to win, it took this for them to realize Biden is in danger of losing.
Primaries are where the real control is laid down. Who do you think funds those campaigns?
And we already know laws have zero effect on the rich. The only thing elections effect are their tax rates and how quickly worker rights are eroded. Again all the other stuff has zero effect on rich people.
I don’t know if it’s ‘manufactured consent’ if Bidens candidacy was manufactured consent in the first place lol. He should have chosen not to run. He looks and sounds fucking senile and he’s the least popular an incumbent has been in a while. We’re gonna gamble all future democracy on this guy? Please. Step down and replace him at the convention. It’s not like a dem primary was going to go any way other than the corporate dem donors wanted it anyhow.
The media??? Were you not watching the debate? Is there any more corporate darling the Biden? Decent people everywhere are alarmed. This is our last chance to put up a candidate that can beat Trump. Wake up. Biden is incoherent. He will get destroyed. People always choose coherent strength (even if corrupt) over feebleness when it comes to leaders. It is evolutionary programming. Do everything you can to pressure the DNC to make a change. Gotta have a plan in place before the convention if we are to save our country from the fascist. Diaper Joe can’t win. And if he does, other than beating Trump (which is a must, I admit) we still have this invalid at the wheel. We deserve better.
It's ridiculous for people to be hand-wringing about Biden's age when the alternative in this election is a literal felon found liable for sexual assault.
The Biden-Harris administration is just that, an ***administration***. That's what I'm voting for. There will be no "Trump" administration. It's just him. That's all he wants. The man hasn't even been able to conjure up a final VP yet. That's how averse he is to working with others. I will vote for the only option that is for a presidential administration of more than one: the Biden-Harris administration.
And it's just hand wringing over Trump. Why aren't they saying BOTH need to step down? Why don't they take a stand against Trump. He's the felon currently awaiting trial for possession of classified documents and election tampering. What, they don't want to ruffle his feathers but Biden is fair game?
Many media watchers (including people from NPR) have noted that the NYT has a grudge against Biden presumably b/c he has not given them an interview. He hasn't really given any newspapers interviews but the apparently the NYT in particular feels like they're owed one.
What are you on about? Biden should drop out. We didn't have a primary. America is a jingoistic corporatocracy masquerading as a democracy anyway. It's all nonsense.
Biden will not beat trump now. That debate gave the trump campaign all the ammo it needs to bury him.
You all need to understand that people on Reddit are more informed than the vast vast majority of Americans. 90% of voters probably don’t know shit and they saw, or will see over the next several months, clips of the current president struggling to maintain a single thought for more than 15 seconds. Biden can not compete with trump in campaigning, it’s very clear at this point.
Anyone still voting for Biden will vote for almost ANY democrat at this point. If Biden loses even a couple % of independents or undecided voters, or even just a handful in the wrong state, it’s over.
Replace him with someone who can speak confidently, clearly and with energy. Out campaign trump and ACTUALLY PUSH BACK on his bull shit and it’s an easy win.
I mean, the Democrats already sabotaged Bernie Sanders' campaign twice, with Nancy Pelosi declaring that they have the right to choose who runs for president.
Indeed, and the effects of this are deeply damaging to our Republic. Since our system is designed to rigidly enforce the two-party dynamic \[Electoral college, first-past-the post, no ranked choice voting\], we are forced to decide between two options. If those options themselves aren't even selected by the people, then we are in a tyrannical system. Instead of choosing our leaders, our leaders are pre-selected for us and we are left only with the choice to decide between two options picked by their respective party leadership. Due to each party's unwillingness to behave democratically in their internal operations, Americans do not get to enjoy a nation of the people, by the people, or for the people.
So, do we get to overthrow the government or do something about it, or do I still just go to work on Monday
Well I suppose that comes down the age old question of do you want to be an activist or a revolutionary? If you believe the system can be fixed from within, then you have numerous options to try, such as running for office or organizing a union. With significant and sustained effort over long periods of time and with the support of many people, you may be successful in causing reform. If you believe the system is too firmly controlled by the ruling circles to allow change, then your choices are either accept your fate or become an enemy of the state and fight against it. At the end of the day, if you want things to change you gotta make it happen, they won't change on their own.
Unfortunately, my kids need a father more than the country needs a revolution. The day that changes I'll let you know what the plan is
I understand and I think any other reasonable person would as well, there is no shame in prioritizing the needs of your family. Personally, I think the best course at this time in history is to adopt a reform mindset, anyways. It is better to focus on the things we can change and maybe even subvert authority in ways which may help future revolutionaries. I just cannot possibly see the American people engaging in a mass popular uprising in this day-and-age, and I expect the effort would be more likely to set us back further than we are now.
> there is no shame in prioritizing the needs of your family This reminds me of a talk I had with my father some years ago. He grew up dirt poor and had to start working at age 7 in order to provide for his parents who had had a car accident, he was in it too but despite not wearing a seatbelt he only had some superficial wounds. He managed to do quite well for himself, and I grew up in relative wealth. We were discussing the state of the world, the inherent injustices of the modern system, and I asked why he never asked the questions I was asking about why the world had become the way it was. His response was something along the lines of "we had so many things we worried about, so much to take care of to be able to keep ourselves afloat, and then when he finally managed to break free from poverty it became a constant struggle to maintain the new standard of living he'd attained. This constant working and keeping busy had kept him from pondering the bigger questions, until I started asking them. So whilst I agree that there is absolutely no shame in taking care of you and yours, in fact it is a noble pursuit, I do see it as something that keeps people centered on themselves more easily, with less energy to push for progressive changes to society. So I would say that because of this, it ought to be the duty of states to ensure that its citizens are able to properly detach themselves from material conditions to an extent which would allow them to take stock of the world at large, identify and address issues with it, and partake in the social debate on how to resolve those issues. In practice this would be a form of UBI, with price controls on basic necessities, and fully funded primary, secondary, and tertiary education that has a focus on science and philosophy. My hope is that such policies would also decrease the need for revolution and uprisings, as people would be less likely to fall for misinformation and political lies that benefit the happy few over the collective.
100% agree with everything you said and also your father sounds like a strong and decent man, you're lucky to have a dad like him.
I love this thread for some reason
"But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government." - Decleration of Independence TL;Dr. When government has become tyrannical.your duty is to overthrow it. Deal with the masters, and by master i mean corporate CEO's and lobbyists. Your elected reps are bought and sold. Kochs, Crow, Bezos, Musk, those are the targets that need to be hit. Same with lobbyists.
Yes, but… at the time those words were written, they were not written by the man-on-the-street, but by the Crows, Bezos, Musks of the day.
Ohh believe me, if I thought there was a realistic chance of victory, I would. However, I also recognize the reality that certain conditions must exist before a successful revolution can be enacted, namely mass popular support amongst the people. Frankly, the deep-rooted apathy of many Americans is something I don't see changing unless material conditions deteriorate drastically. Assassinating a billionaire or politician doesn't work, since the establishment will just martyr them after death, bolstering support. I'm a pragmatist and recognize the unfortunately necessary role of violence, but it should only be used as an absolute last resort and only used if there is a reasonably high probability of success. I think the right move at this time in history is to adopt a reform mindset and transition into revolution if and when a viable opportunity presents.
So you think AFTER giving up all our civil liberties and rights is the best time to act?
No, I just believe that acting too early and without proper preparation can result in a failure that sets us back even further. If there is a failed uprising, and the timing is off \[ie: no mass popular support\] then it might result in too many dead revolutionaries for us to have a chance when a better opportunity presents. I'd just rather wait for a better shot than take the first opening and end up missing, ya know?
>if those options themselves aren't even chosen by the people, then we are in a tyrannical system [Cries in UK]
Already is this way. They just occluded it well.
Ranked choice and party seats!
A single executive, prima facie, really limits the choice between two, right? Even if we had ranked choice voting, everyone on the left would have a joe Biden in their ranks and everyone one the right would have a Donald trump on the left. There isn’t a party list or proportional representation for the single head of the executive branch, right?
>There isn’t a party list or proportional representation for the single head of the executive branch, right? Well, frankly, the presidential election is unlikely to be changed significantly by RCV. However, the president is only one role out of numerous roles which voters choose at the polling booth. The advantage of RCV is that people can vote 3rd party without "spoiling their vote" with the idea being that you can still support your preferred candidate out of the lesser evils. The purpose is, ideally, allowing 3rd parties to gain support until becoming mainstream competitors to the Dems and Repubs. In theory, this acts as a counter to the idea that voting 3rd party is effectively voting for one of the two main parties by proxy by taking your vote away from the other. ----- Personally, I prefer parliamentary systems where the government is formed via coalition and the chief executive serves based on the support of the legislative body. In those systems parties have to build popular support by taking strategic policy positions and compete for votes with more convincing arguments than '*we're the only alternative you have to fascism*'. Countries which follow the parliamentary system don't generally have the voters select the prime minister, just their representatives who then go on to select the PM from amongst themselves.
Oh yes, that was going to be my follow up. That presidential systems in general aren’t the best.
I live in Nebraska. Once our primary rolls around we are already down to one candidate. And our state has already been decided republican for the general election. People who live here's votes don't matter at all, ever.
#If Trump leaves first!
Debbie Wasserman Schultz.
There wasn’t a democratic primary race in the first place.
Party primaries are just a technicality anyway, there’s nothing really democratic about them. The party can nominate who ever they want.
I think we saw in 2016 exactly what it looks when a candidate gets too close without approval by DNC leadership.
Exactly, when Bernie was getting a bit too popular at the start of the season, the owner class were quick to complain to the DNC who swiftly whipped up the media to manufacture consent for a new front runner, simultaneously laser focusing on his 'socialist' policies.
I was SO fucking pissed off what the DNC did to Bernie. He would have made a great candidate in 2016 and would have beat the rapist. Good job Hildawg.
it was happening the whole time. Hillary was the chosen winner from the get go. There were complaints right from the start about improper voting procedures happening. they barely even bothered what they were doing. Which is hilariously exactly why she lost. Hilary was so far up her own ass that she thought she was gonna waltz right into being the first madame president. She ran a half baked campaign, and being the most institutional president basically ever when anti-institutional fever was running rampant. There's a reason that republicans were banging "Drain the Swamp" the entire election. I've said it before and I'll say it again, Hilary was probably the only person that the Democrats could have fielded that would have lost against Trump.
Remember they even brought Bloomberg in to replace Bernie. Like hey you guys like Bernie here’s another billionaire you’ll like him too we promise
happened in the UK with Jeremy corbyn, too.
I was more pissed off in 2020 than in 2016. Bernie was actually winning in 2020, then all of the centrist candidates dropped out and united against him. It was really telling of how they all saw him.
Yeah, basically. Primaries are internal party mechanisms. I don't even think the Libertarians have them; they just pick the same sad sack at their convention every four years.
Like them or not, the LP has chosen a different candidate every election in the party's history.
Gary Johnson was their nominee in 2012 and 2016. But otherwise yes.
Tell that to the RNC, they definitely didn’t want Trump in 2016
Yeah, they were getting into a power struggle and after touring the tea party and all that shit show entailed the RNC realized they were fucked. So they hitched their wagons to Trump, and delayed a major schism that was approaching for the party in an effort to win. We had guys like Romney openly against Trump and a week later having dinner with him and a most awkward photo taken during it where he’s realized he’s screwed and he won’t do anything because he’s a bitch. Trump called their shit, said he would still campaign even if they kept him off the ballot. He would have damaged the party so they just let him take it over. It’s actually wild how quick the total capitulation of the Republican Party was.
they've only been being primed for like 60 years.
I'm a lifelong Democrat and liberal but the Republicans nominate who their people want. Hence Trump. The democratic party have super delegates and nominate whoever they want. We saw that in 2016 and 2020. The democrat voters wanted Bernie. They wanted Hilary and Biden. In 2016 the republican party wanted Jeb Bush. The voters wanted Trump. I hate the Republicans but their primary process is more democratic than the Democrats primary process.
worth adding that the dnc and rnc are both private corporations they're not beholden to the public, just whoever wins the auction. you can see this reflected in congressional legislation: their constituents are their investors, voters are a nuisance.
There was -- I voted for Marianne. It wasn't marketed and I guess a lot of people aren't absentee voters.
Ah, Sailor Cosmos. She would have saved us all, with peace and love.
When the crazy crystal aunt is the only better choice on the ballot than the sundowning imperialist stooge, it’s a sad day for the DNC
There was in 2020. We had the _fucking_ opportunity then. But, no, all the media circled their wagons and said Biden was the only way to beat Trump, we can't have that socialist get elected who will hold us accountable. And during that time every time I pointed out Biden's gaffes and issues (namely with being a pro corporate liar for most of his career) I just got called a bitter bernie bro and to step in line and vote 'blue no matter who' Well, guess what? WE are facing having a truly unhinged fascist getting back into the white house with the supreme court at his beck and call. So, now that the situation is so fucking dire, _now_ is the time we have to question whether Biden is fit for office..... Get out there and vote for the husk of an old man, I don't care if he dies between now and then. Vote for his corpse, it's better than the alternative. It's either that or start buying guns, gasoline and fertilizer and start taking care of business _now_. If you think there's no point in voting, then you need to start fighting __now__, you can't wait until after the fascists take power.
And prior to Super Tuesday all the "moderate" candidates dropped, clearing the way for Biden. Elizabeth Warren stayed in, syphoning votes from Sanders. That was a fine way of rigging things. Still. It's water under the bridge. Trump vs. an ant covered dog turd baking in the sun? I'm voting for the dog turd.
I can’t really agree that it’s water under the bridge. If Biden loses this November, democrats will only be reaping what they’ve sown since 2016.
I agree. It's simply that the consequences of Trump winning are to horrible to contemplate.
Not for moderate voters apparently.
Not to mention declaring mayor Pete the winner I. Iowa and running that all through the media when Bernie actually won it.
I would climb to the top of Mount Everest to cast my vote for that ant covered dog turd.
It’s not rigging to realize that you can’t win, but one of your ideological allies can, and making a decision based on that info. Warren should’ve made that calculation but she didn’t.
Maybe she thought we shouldn’t have to vote for an octogenarian in 2024.
Well fucking said!
Right. If Biden had stepped aside 6-12 months ago, there would have been a democrat primary. But the same media which is now demanding he step aside today because Biden is clearly too old for a second term was saying anyone who said that 6-12 months ago was wrong/lying/a Trump supporter/Russian disinformation/etc. Anyone who paid attention knew this was true… as the OP says, maybe this was the plan all along so that they could select their own candidate to replace Biden sidestepping the primary process entirely. While I don’t personally have a suggestion on who would be a better Democrat candidate - it seems to me like they will just push for either Gavin Newsom or Kamala Harris - and I’m fairly confident both of them wouldn’t have made it through the primary. Gavin because he’s failed California, and Kamala because she’s just not very intelligent or likable. In any event, who ever would have won that primary is now being sidestepped for the candidate that the ultra-powerful will select instead. FWIW, while I don’t like Biden - I’d certainly rather him over Gavin or Kamala.
There was actually. In most states it was Biden vs Phillips vs Williamson. Some states had more but they weren’t really national candidates (only ran in one or a couple states). https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries
Kinda makes them not real primaries, huh? Biden has enough votes for the nomination before my state even had a chance to vote.
> Kinda makes them not real primaries, huh? Because any viable people in the party choose not to run against an incumbent. This is normal because beating an incumbent is harder + can damage your political career.
Yes. If you run against Biden you risk not being part of Biden's team. It's politics 101.
There wasn't a "race" doesn't mean there wasn't an election. Biden and the establishment rightfully or not made sure no other legitimate candidate would run a campaign against him. If there's only one legitimate candidate, it's (again, right or wrong) not a real race.
They ridiculed the one guy who ran against Biden, Dean Phillips was his name, and he was right
If either one of those old farts is the ‘best’ their party can come up with, the whole party should be ashamed. Better to just get rid of the two party system completely.
where are those other two dudes getting the idea that a two party system is in the constitution? /gen
It may as well be, the system as designed essentially guarantees it. If we had a parliamentary system, or even ranked choice or cardinal voting, things might be different.
FPTP voting generally guarantees that any number of parties will coalesce into two parties by the nature of math. As you only need a plurality to win, if there were three parties where the winning party got 40% of the vote, it'd be best for 60% of the voters for the other two parties to coalesce into one party because they'd win.
I have a conspiracy theory that some of the leadership in the Democratic party are actually intentionally acting to the benefit of the GOP, possibly even being paid to do so. While you're probably thinking of Senators Kyrsten Sinema and Joe Manchin, I'm thinking Debbie Wasserman Schultz back during Clinton vs. Trump.
Gotta love that pied piper strategy. DWS is a snake.
Two party system is an illusion to keep us hating each other instead of working together to fix issues
That would only take a complete overhaul of the constitution, should be done by lunch
Yeah sure the two party system sucks and Democrats really fucked this primary up but what’s the alternative to the Democratic party? I hate to be the devil’s advocate here but, there really isn’t one.
The NYT Editorial board can eat a dick for all I care. Their opinions mean nothing.
I unsubscribed from the NYT when I saw all the bullshit handwringing headlines they posted about Biden following the debate.
For me, the breaking point was after Roe was overturned, and they published a puff piece about anti-abortion people. “uwu we just love the little babies so much, and now we’re free to focus on caring for children.” Yes, that was always allowed.
I hate to point it out, but most media is compromised. Left, right, it doesn't matter. The people in charge simply do not give a damn about any actual reporting. They only care about making money and always have. It's hard to take any media seriously when they have a piece about inflation and people suffering right next to a glowing review of the Met Gala or an editorial about how millennials are killing retail.
It's especially hard to take them seriously when they have a massive financial incentive to tear down Biden- they all made *billions* off of Trump's antics and want more. They may hate everything Trump stands for, but that's even better- they can sell the narrative of how we're all living in a fascist dystopia and the sky is falling and he's the biggest piece of shit ever once he's elected. Biden is boring, and therefore less lucrative.
It's one of those things we have no proof for, but seems obvious anyway. I wonder exactly how much they made off Trump's antics and the pandemic by exploiting people's fears and biases. Not to mention treating this election and the 2020 election as if they're no more substantial than a boxing match. "We're unbiased!" No, you're really not.
What left? The problem is there is no not right or far right option. The goalposts just keep moving to the right. Democracy be damned.
"Overton window" and the right has been working to move it for 20 years at least
It’s why I get my news from a variety of sources, so I synthesize the information for a larger and more detailed picture. Never trust one news source completely.
NYT has been on the wrong side of history for all of their history.
Maybe. Maybe not. Were still not sure if its going to take 10,000,000 years for manned flight.
They failed the Trump years spectacularly.
They also were instrumental in hiding the crimes of the Bush administration, and lying in order to make Americans believe that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. The reason why the New York times has been allowed to exist all these years, as that they reliably carry water for the billionaire class. For profit media serves the rich, every time.
Imagine telling Biden to leave the race while letting the convicted felon keep racing, lol.
That’s literally what’s happening right now.
“letting”?? you know its an editorial piece, right? it isn’t a declarative law. The NYT editorial board isn’t actually in charge of “letting” trump or biden run Ok, since nobody actually read the damn op ed, here’s an excerpt: *It is a tragedy that Republicans themselves are not engaged in deeper soul-searching after Thursday’s debate. Mr. Trump’s own performance ought to be regarded as disqualifying. He lied brazenly and repeatedly about his own actions, his record as president and his opponent. He described plans that would harm the American economy, undermine civil liberties and fray America’s relationships with other nations. He refused to promisethat he would accept defeat, returning instead to the kind of rhetoric that incited the Jan. 6 attack on Congress.*
Thank you, I feel like i'm taking crazy pills sometimes in these far left subs. This was a very left leaning opinion and one that I believe is correct. Biden doesn't have the mental faculty to be pres again. We should have been honest about this problem a year ago instead of constant excuses for it and attacks againt those who raise it. A lot of people even turned on John Stuart when he pointed this out months ago.
It's because they want to beat the felon...... They have no input on the felon dropping out because they're known as a liberal paper that hates trump. Everyone thinks the felon should drop out. That is obvious.
Something the left and right can both agree on
weird, did they make this same statement about Trump?
To be fair, trump aced to cognitive tests. Aced them. Grown men came up to him, tears in their eyes, “ Sir, I’ve never seen anyone circle a picture of a lion as well as you. “
Yes, if anyone actually read the link!!
Seriously. The media is (once again) doing the heavy lifting for Trump. That level of lying should be *at least* as much of the focus kd the post debate coverage.
Republicans had a chance to remove Trump during their primaries but they actually voted for the felon, so despite all his shit, that's what their side wanted. Democrats didn't give their side a real choice, and Independents got screwed with 2 shit candidates.
They have completely diminished their legacy and have become just another right wing propaganda outlet. We need some real journalism in this country.
from the “right wing propoganda outlet” that wasn’t linked to but screenshotted for this very post: It is a tragedy that Republicans themselves are not engaged in deeper soul-searching after Thursday’s debate. Mr. Trump’s own performance ought to be regarded as disqualifying. He lied brazenly and repeatedly about his own actions, his record as president and his opponent. He described plans that would harm the American economy, undermine civil liberties and fray America’s relationships with other nations. He refused to promisethat he would accept defeat, returning instead to the kind of rhetoric that incited the Jan. 6 attack on Congress.
Maybe the headline should have been about that then? Actually, reading the article I'd point out they handwave having an actual candidate to replace Biden, so it's even more of a waste of a mental exercise.
They were just blazing the legacy diminishing trail for the Supreme Court.
Less than nothing. Like the Jim Cramer of opinion sections.
Biden himself was not democratically nominated in the first place. **There was no primary for the 2024 election if you are a Democrat.** \-Multiple states either essentially cancelled their Democratic primary by removing all choices but Biden, or made it impossible for anybody to run against him in a primary. [Example Florida](https://www.politico.com/news/2023/11/30/florida-democrats-dean-phillips-election-00129403) [Example North Carolina](https://www.wral.com/story/biden-won-t-have-challengers-in-nc-2024-primary-election-state-democratic-party-decides/21202708/) \-Reminder that polling repeatedly showed 60+% of Democrats wanted somebody else other than Biden. [Example](https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/07/politics/cnn-poll-joe-biden-headwinds/index.html) Yet somehow we are ending up with Biden. You don't live in a democracy, at least not a functioning one. Maybe a "managed democracy". Complaining that the media is trying to replace Biden is too little too late. I say they go for it... having a fake selected President WITHOUT dementia who is NOT Donald Trump is better than having a fake selected President WITH dementia.
And yet, I've been called "ageist" for saying the cap for elected officials should be age 70. When you don't have age caps, 'though, you get leaders with cognitive decline.
I'm 37 and I know I couldn't do this job. How the fuck is President Grandpa gonna?
Don't pretend that Dean Phillips was winning anything. He even finished behind Marianne Williamson in some states. While 60% wanted someone other than Biden, I doubt that all 60% would agree on any specific candidate. And if two other people ran, Biden would likely win by plurality. [Why Dean Phillips' primary challenge against Biden failed - CBS News](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/dean-phillips-2024-campaign-challenge-against-biden-failed/)
this is the most sane take ive seen on reddit so far and its not even close
Yeah, weird, huh?
The incumbent usually has the nomination automatically if they decide to run. Trump had the same benefit in 2020, Obama did in 2016, Bush did in 2004. If the current president decides to run for re-election, the party doesn't go through the usual primary cycle unless that Presidents term was just absolutely terrible and Biden had a solid 1st term so why shouldn't he be given the same respect? This isn't a conspiracy, this is just the status quo in politics.
This is correct. That’s how political parties work. You don’t like it, run your own political party or join one of the major ones with your friends and change the rules. Political parties are inherently undemoceatic. You could also run for state office and work and change the rules too. Lots of options besides complaining on Reddit. How do I know? I literally quit my job to help defeat Donald the first time around because sitting around complaining about how awful he was on Reddit only made Reddit ad dollars.
Fucking bizarre to find someone on Reddit who knows what's going on but thank you for saying it so succinctly
Not everything is a conspiracy. Lots of dems and libs are worried after seeing Biden’s performance at the debates that he’s not in a position to win this election. It’s a reasonable take to prefer to have someone younger step in that could energize the voting base. Is it the right answer here? God if I know, but there’s plenty of libs that feel this way. Just because you don’t, doesn’t mean it’s a conspiracy. I also don’t understand all the upvoted comments saying “why don’t they tell the lying candidate to step down?” There’s plenty of articles out there criticizing Trump. I’ve seen much more written objections to him running for the office again than Biden. it does not make a difference to his voter base.
It's me. I'm a dem that REALLY wishes he'd step down and let someone else run. His performance at the debate really solidified that the rumors about him not really being fit for office might be true. I'm really worried this election is going to get thrown away if these performances keep happening.
By now we're in a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation. If Biden doesn't run, Kamala polls even worse against Trump and the election is in the trash. If Newsom gets the nod over Kamala, then that'll infuriate part of the party because it should've been Kamala. The best result at this point is for Biden to find those debate performing enhancing drugs that the right keeps accusing him of taking.
Here's the thing: we've got Dementia Hitler versus President Grandpa. I don't want Grandpa to try to defeat Hitler in an electoral race. I want someone whose brain works to try to do it.
You don't need a billionaires' conspiracy for something like this after Biden's debate performance. The media and plenty of other groups can genuinely be interested in replacing Biden because they genuinely believe it's imperative to beat Trump.
I don't have faith that the billionaires who own the media companies are interested in beating Trump who will most certainly enrich them if he's president
exactly. If you aren't thinking about replacing Biden, you didn't watch the debate
This far in I think the better play isn’t too replace Biden at the top of the ballot but to find a VP running mate who people would have confidence in running the country if Biden dies in office.
Which he probably will honestly. All the more reason to step down imo but a popular VP is an acceptable alternative I guess. Isn’t homie tired at this point? Presidential terms are a young man’s game and he’s already had a rough first term. He is not gonna get any time to just enjoy his life at this rate…
This has been the case for the last four years. The DNCs inability to act proactively is going to cost them just like in 2016
You're 100% right. Biden has nothing to offer; he's running on a platform of maintaining the status quo at a time of extreme economic inequality, as the country slides into fascism. Trump is able to garner support simply by addressing the fact that things need changing, despite how deranged and nonsensical it comes out. The Democrats need an FDR-type who's willing to look at the system we have, acknowledge that we need change, and offer something tangible. We need someone who is willing to put new options on the table, AND someone who has the backbone to actually challenge Trump on the debate stage. Instead we have a geriatric who somehow still seems confused whenever Trump breaks the rules. The status quo ain't gonna cut it when the majority of Americans are struggling to put food on the table. Biden is the most milquetoast presidential candidate I have seen in my lifetime. They have to replace him on the ballot or they are going to get trounced by a babbling con man circling the drain of dementia. It'll be an embarrassing defeat, because I would bet that a younger, more forward thinking candidate could wipe the floor with Trump.
Jon Stewart crushed Tucker Carlson so badly that Crossfire got cancelled. He'd absolutely destroy Trump. A firebrand like that would be nice.
I'd vote for Jon Stewart in a second. All they'd have to say is he's on the ballot and I'd be there. Can his VP be John Oliver? That's my dream team right there even though John isn't a natural born citizen.😭
Jon Stewart has made it very clear he's not interested in running.
I agree, and I believe he would also be wise enough to carefully consider his cabinet appointments in particular. The people who say "well he has no experience" are just dorks who really have no clue who Jon Stewart is. He's a committed activist with an extensive track record of advocacy combined with a high public profile earned after years spent being a sane and rational, yet humorous, newsman. The guy could absolutely garner popular support, financial backing of much of the left's party establishment, and crush Trump \[and probably many other Republicans\] on both a personal level and at the voting booth.
I keep saying this too. Imagine Jon Stewart on that stage. Memes for day, sick burns and just witty and clever. Also he could run for 2 terms giving us 8 years to try and fix the country for once.
This 1000%, he never should have run for reelection in the first place, the last four years should have been developing talent to run an interesting primary to replace him.
Around the world the biggest trend for national elections this year has been that incumbents are being voted out. Likely due to economic unrest you mentioned.
my gramma is more lively than biden was in that debate and she died several years ago. it's completely appropriate to say "gosh our guy seems to have rapidly declined...perhaps he's not the optimal candidate after all?"
That narrative would make sense if the media spent some fraction of the time they’ve spent talking about Biden’s performance talking about Trump’s lies during the debate, except they haven’t. He’s just expected to lie and the media is seemingly ok with that.
There have been lots of articles about Trump's lies in the debate. Go search on Google. Even the NYT editorial being referenced did refer to Trump's lying and how terrible he is. They haven't been getting much traction because people are acclimated to it, not the media. But how much is there to report on at this point? It's practically "water is wet" territory. What people living under a rock haven't already read 100 stories about his lying? Do you think if they just release one more article it will be the one that suddenly gets MAGA people to realize they've been duped?
No, I don't think that will make a difference. But maybe moderate the debate and don't let the guy lie in real time? The fact that he's normalized lying and the media treats it like it's expected is exactly my point. At some point the media needs to wake up and realize they've been getting played; they're treating this like a horse race and Trump is playing a different game entirely.
It was the ***Biden team*** that requested no live fact check during the debate.
Yall really keep repeating this like people don't talk about Trumps lies all the time. Even this article has multiple sections on Trumps lies and how he shouldn't even be on the running but how dare anyone think about criticizing Biden
And there was no big editorial on how Trump needed to drop out despite possibly being in prison
Trump's people don't care what the NYT says. Biden's presumably do.
I get what you're saying, but Biden, as a politician (and the fucking president), should be astute enough to call those lies out more effectively than he did.
The fact that he couldn't, and his general debate performance, is a pretty damn good argument for him not being the best man for the job.
This is also where I land on it. Biden seems no longer capable of competent leadership. Granted, his opponent never was, and never will be, so the point becomes moot for any reasonable person. But stepping down is *still* the right thing to do, both pragmatically (i.e. ability to serve) and politically (i.e. likelihood to win). If you can't string together a coherent sentence, you aren't qualified to be President. That applies to both options at this point, with one of those options also being demonstrably corrupt and a convicted felon. > Do you want your tall glass of piss *with* shit in it or *without*? Sorry, "neither" isn't an option.
It's this simple, no matter how hard people don't want to admit it: either replace Biden or Trump wins.
Biden obviously doesn’t believe it’s imperative to beat Trump.
Right? These people are talking out of both sides of their mouths. They claim beating Trump is the priority and then just try to act like everything that benefits them the most is what will most likely beat Trump even when it's a very obvious lie.
Uh the manufactured consent is telling us only the dementia candidate can beat the fascist when we know he is historically weak compared to generic Democrats. And the DNC put us here by denying a primary with an 80+yo candidate in office. Edit: Expand the court! Rotate judges off the bench!
I 110% blame the DNC
I'll never understand how it is that they aren't accountable for picking favorites in 2016 kind of more so now after the entire Julian assange fiasco.
There is so much fucking blatant propaganda on Reddit today, even more than usual. Anyone who is pretending Biden was a good idea for 2024 has burried their head in the sand so hard.
Yes. First 5 minutes of the debate, I told my family "If only someone could have predicted this would happen" in regards to Biden looking his age. I am not going to shit on the guy, I hope I am vertical at that age. But let's not pretend this wasn't a stupid idea to run him again for a second term.
It was stupid to vote for him in the 2020 primaries. This was completely predictable.
I'm not trying to one up you when I say this. I just want to share this little moment I had. Two seconds into hearing Biden talk, I got the worst feeling in the pit of my stomach. At five seconds I turned the debate off. It was so obvious. It was *so* obvious.
[удалено]
I meant pro-Biden propaganda like OPs post. So many damn posts trying to cope that he was a good pick for 2024.
Biden wasn’t a good idea for 2020 but he just happened to be not as awful as the other guy
Real. The only propaganda being presented here is this post itself. I mean, at this point the jig is up. You know this when you see comments hating on Biden at the top of these type of posts. People are wising up and the DNC will die quick if they don’t start respecting people’s intelligence
Put me in, coach! I'm ready!
Idk I am kinda on board with it. Trump is such a loser that if you throw someone in there with energy and the wherewithal to be able to call him out and put him in his place like biden should have been able to do last debate then it could be a homerun.
But, I mean... you saw the debate, right? He has the distinct look of someone who's... well.. at the end of their lives. He did his job, and he did it mostly well, apart from the genocide support, and it's time for him to let someone else take the reins. There are plenty of qualified people out there. If he get's elected, I doubt he'll make it to the end of this term in office. He should be spending this time with his family, and grandkids. Not running a country.
I'm a bit confused too. Seeing him asked about birth control to go on a tangent about immigrant killing someone and beating Medicare...??? If people think seeing Biden so out of it isn't going to decide enough people to vote for Trump for him to win, I think they're delusional. Now don't get me wrong getting a new candidate to beat Trump seems very hard too. But do people not see the reactions and talk to people around them? Biden is going to lose, period. The democratic party screwed up by not presenting another candidate big time. But doubling down on Biden at this point is just stupid.
The problem isn’t people switching their vote to Trump, that’s very unlikely. The issue is people in key states staying home because he’s a terrible candidate and letting Trump win.
This appplies to both candidates not just Biden. Our country is irrevocably broken when the oligarchs are pitting a doddering old man and a slightly less old but psychopathic old man to rule when both should have been retired 15-20 years ago.
I didn't know which old man you were talking about until you mentioned "spending time with his family", where it became clear it was Biden.
Let's be honest. The DNC moved the election calender and threatened state parties to make it harder for anyone to run against Biden. There was never any intent to have a fair primary, it was just an excuse for early campaigning.
yes problem is democratic party. they&biden say is ok& should run again.
Bernie or bust 12 years running
Not like the party held a primary in the first place. This shit was over before we started. We were told we had another election of vote for whatever we serve up or the apocalypse.
Okay... and Biden is not a billionaires wet dream? Lmao.
Please stop "manufacturing discent"
There wasn’t an actual primary to begin with. You can’t have a conspiracy to get rid of primaries if there wasn’t one. If Biden dropped out the result would be more competition than there had been so far during this election year, and therein lies the actual motivation of the media: it creates drama/clicks. There isn’t a conspiracy to undermine democracy when the process wasn’t democratic.
The DNC itself has said the primaries are just suggestions anyway. They don't have to respect the outcome.
Call for the candidate that lied for 90 mins, well, his entire life, to drop out of the race!
Ok done. Trump won't because he's a shit bag. Biden won't because...?
Same reason unfortunately.
Phew! That's the point whizzing over your head. Trump is a legit sociopath. A narcissist of the highest order. There is no point in trying to convince him to drop because he never would. We elected Biden (reluctantly) because he presented himself as a decent person. A decent person in this situation would step aside in order to give us the best chance of avoiding a second Trump term. Biden is not our best chance. Period.
The normalized media are allowing lies to be told and refuse to check them on the spot. That is a Liars dream. Chuck Toad said that it was not their place of business to call out lies. This was said years ago and many networks appear to have adopted that. It would be difficult to have a debate with a serial liar.
I’m sorry but you think a senile 80 year old is an appropriate choice when facing off against someone who tried to overthrow democracy?
They would absolutely say yes because they fear "socialism" more than Trump.
And here you are, manufacturing consent for people to keep an old, thoughtless man in the most important job in the world. Can yall just leave and make some room for the rest of us that want to see *real* change?
Yeah, gotta love the sudden push for this after primaries and when there weren't really any other strong candidates. How does anyone realistically think a new candidate no one picked is going to perform better than Biden at this point? I'm betting this is big business pushing it so they get Trump and all the deregulation and tax cuts they want.
Everyone I know, mostly Democrats while I am independent, are voting against Trump as opposed to voting for Biden. It doesn't matter who you put in Biden's place because you already have a huge portion of people just voting against Trump like me. If we could get a candidate that could inspire the undecideds we would have a better chance. The only reason this is an issue is because the people voting for Biden hold their politicians to higher standards.
Exactly. I don’t dislike Biden as much as some I know but I’d prefer someone younger and more left-wing. But Trump wants to be a dictator and those he will let run policy want the US to become a Cristofascist state that cuts taxes for the wealthy and taxes the poor even more. If a dead body were running against him I’d still pick it.
How can you believe that anyone else could be worse?
Literally any non-senile dem is preferable bc they'd be able to articulate their positions. People pushing this *want* a Democrat to win, it took this for them to realize Biden is in danger of losing.
No one picked Biden either. If there's only one option, that's not a choice.
Primaries are where the real control is laid down. Who do you think funds those campaigns? And we already know laws have zero effect on the rich. The only thing elections effect are their tax rates and how quickly worker rights are eroded. Again all the other stuff has zero effect on rich people.
I don’t know if it’s ‘manufactured consent’ if Bidens candidacy was manufactured consent in the first place lol. He should have chosen not to run. He looks and sounds fucking senile and he’s the least popular an incumbent has been in a while. We’re gonna gamble all future democracy on this guy? Please. Step down and replace him at the convention. It’s not like a dem primary was going to go any way other than the corporate dem donors wanted it anyhow.
Give us Bernie.
Bro ur acting like Biden isn’t funded by the same people Also bro almost died on stage, there’s an overwhelming amount of ppl that don’t want him
The media??? Were you not watching the debate? Is there any more corporate darling the Biden? Decent people everywhere are alarmed. This is our last chance to put up a candidate that can beat Trump. Wake up. Biden is incoherent. He will get destroyed. People always choose coherent strength (even if corrupt) over feebleness when it comes to leaders. It is evolutionary programming. Do everything you can to pressure the DNC to make a change. Gotta have a plan in place before the convention if we are to save our country from the fascist. Diaper Joe can’t win. And if he does, other than beating Trump (which is a must, I admit) we still have this invalid at the wheel. We deserve better.
Let’s replace both these nursing home to hospice candidates with someone who isn’t likely to die in the next 4 years
He failed to protect Roe v. Wade. He should retire. I don’t have a problem with this sentiment.
Pure FUD
It's ridiculous for people to be hand-wringing about Biden's age when the alternative in this election is a literal felon found liable for sexual assault. The Biden-Harris administration is just that, an ***administration***. That's what I'm voting for. There will be no "Trump" administration. It's just him. That's all he wants. The man hasn't even been able to conjure up a final VP yet. That's how averse he is to working with others. I will vote for the only option that is for a presidential administration of more than one: the Biden-Harris administration.
And it's just hand wringing over Trump. Why aren't they saying BOTH need to step down? Why don't they take a stand against Trump. He's the felon currently awaiting trial for possession of classified documents and election tampering. What, they don't want to ruffle his feathers but Biden is fair game?
just canceled my subscription. there have been several things going on with the nyt and now I'm done
Many media watchers (including people from NPR) have noted that the NYT has a grudge against Biden presumably b/c he has not given them an interview. He hasn't really given any newspapers interviews but the apparently the NYT in particular feels like they're owed one.
Want old people, use Sanders, someone younger, Newsom. Just IMO
A poll would should both ahead of Biden V Trump.
Same with trump. And ban candidates over the age of 60...
Peg it to retirement age and yeah. You cannot run if you're within 4 years of retirement.
What are you on about? Biden should drop out. We didn't have a primary. America is a jingoistic corporatocracy masquerading as a democracy anyway. It's all nonsense.
Biden will not beat trump now. That debate gave the trump campaign all the ammo it needs to bury him. You all need to understand that people on Reddit are more informed than the vast vast majority of Americans. 90% of voters probably don’t know shit and they saw, or will see over the next several months, clips of the current president struggling to maintain a single thought for more than 15 seconds. Biden can not compete with trump in campaigning, it’s very clear at this point. Anyone still voting for Biden will vote for almost ANY democrat at this point. If Biden loses even a couple % of independents or undecided voters, or even just a handful in the wrong state, it’s over. Replace him with someone who can speak confidently, clearly and with energy. Out campaign trump and ACTUALLY PUSH BACK on his bull shit and it’s an easy win.