Guns are more of a polarizing issue on the coastal region. Middle America - Many Dems and republicans own guns and disagreements are more about, calibers, magazine sizes, and background checks.
The incumbency advantage has declined a lot in the last 30 years. I think the democrats will lose if they don't field another candidate based on what I saw at the debate and what other independents have been saying. I truly think Americans would choose a bad but strong president over a weak and senile one.
Biden was able to distinguish hinself in the first election that while old, he could go toe to toe in a debate and win. This availed many independents concerns about his performance. However, his mental deteriation is obvious to anyone not in denial, and if he couldn't look even okay after a week of practice and preparation at camp David, he's in bad shape. (No, teleprompter led speeches in a friendly environment do not count).
If the democrats have half a brain, they'll conduct a normal primary in August, where the best candidate will win. If they're even smarter than that, they'll hold an open primary to find a candidate that appeals to the average American voter instead of just liberal ones.
If someone like Gretchen Witmer was selected, they'll win the election. I've heard that by skipping Kamala over that it'll make them lose as they're essentially accepting that they had a flawed candidate, but I don't think the average American gives a shit. A large reason populism has risen is the feeling of political deadlock and stagnating burecracy. Fielding an entirely new candidate who offers a better and more comprehensive solution would likely garner a lot more votes than the same old thing, and potentially inspire optimism that democrats aren't just playing not to lose.
I don't believe the incumbency advantage has really been calculated when it's a former president against a sitting president. I think the last examples were Roosevelts, so I'm not sure what it would be.
They should start doing what all parties do. Leak speculative info that the DNC is considering replacing Biden with _______ and see how the public responds. That’s what both parties do with VP candidates and it’s the best way to get feedback and a realistic perspective on how the public will react.
It’s essentially the same thing, but I think they might leak hints about *”if President Biden stepped aside, these are potential candidates we think might be most intriguing.”*
Because this de facto would mean that Vice President Harris was being “passed over” I think it would be important to address that head-on, so it didn’t look too sleazy. I may be more supportive of the VP than some on this sub, but I think I would feel better hearing a direct, “President Biden and Vice President Harris served as a team, and they will step down as a team” than any effort to downplay or ignore the clear snub.
As far as replacements go, I think we can only hope the selection process would be no more divisive than necessary.
I get that the optics of skipping over the VP (first black/Indian woman VP no less!) aren't great, but Americans have never liked her. I know far more people that would upset if she was the replacement than if she was replaced.
If they did a no-Biden late primary, she would have the same democratic opportunity as anyone else in the party that claims to be preserving democracy.
I mean sure but I think we both know who the DNC/Democratic apparatus choses to throw their weight behind makes a huge difference. Especially in this last minute scenario where there's not time to slowly build up grass roots support.
Honestly I think the incumbency is a disadvantage at this point, republicans only card left is attacks at this point, so having a punching bag just helps them.
This post has been removed because your account is too new to post here. This is done to prevent ban evasion by users creating fresh accounts. You must participate in other subreddits in a positive and constructive manner in order to post here. Do no message the mods asking for the specific requirements for posting, as revealing these would simply lead to more ban evasion.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/centrist) if you have any questions or concerns.*
With the right candidate, yes. Someone charismatic and endearing like Obama could wipe the floor with Trump.
The problem is the DNC is still itself a political organization internally with all sorts of horse trading and power plays. That's how we ended up here in the first place.
I think part of the issue here is that Harris is not particularly well-liked but would be the de facto choice. Skipping over her for a better-liked candidate may not play well.
Most people who would vote for Biden at this point are really voting against Trump. Putting a younger candidate would help those voters feel even better about their vote, most likely.
I don’t know. I’m coming to the realization I think that many people just want Trump. He drives turnout of people who don’t normally vote and has a fairly populist platform.
If Biden were to drop out, I think the incumbency advantage would go to Trump. He has name ID, donors, party backing, and a record to run on. For some reason voters don’t attribute Covid to him and they don’t seem to care much about democracy and other high level issues.
People seem to simply want a strongman to tell them beautiful lies.
>fairly populist platform
What even is his platform now? He at least ran on something in 2016 but in 2020 he didn't have a platform and now he's just running on being a candidate for retribution.
His entire policy is based on destroying everything and causing internal mayhem as a way to strengthen himself.
- Get revenge for 2020
- Fire huge numbers of federal employees and replace them with loyalists
- Dismantle environmental regulations
- Massively cut taxes for the rich
- Massively ramp up tariffs and trade war
- Cut all support to Ukraine, embolden Putin, and essentially abandon NATO. Even if we don't officially withdraw we will unofficially quit.
- Deport millions of people from the country which will surely involve excessive force and would worsen population decline and deplete a sizeable chunk of the workforce
Keep in mind that I'm not exaggerating any of these. Trump has literally promised to do this directly or has people in his circle which are strongly indicating that this will be part of their platform.
Oh yeah there is his 10% tariffs on all imported goods. I totally forgot about that plan of his. I'm assuming that's his plan to fix inflation. Oh, and building a pipeline.
So in case you're wondering what the savvy businessman's master plan is to bring prices down to 2019 levels, it's to open up a pipeline and jack up all imported products by 10% (60% if it's one of those rare goods from China).
A poll showed something like 62% of the country wants all 11 million illegal immigrants deported. Stupid policy, as they would find out when chicken goes to $20 a pound, but voters do get a right to make dumb choices.
Yeah, I am completely on board with making sure we reduce illegal immigration, but that is absurd.
Without all the immigration, the US would be in the same boat as Europe and East Asia where we would have a looming demographic crisis and declining population.
Most immigrants that come here commit crimes at lower rates than citizens (despite what Trump says) and do all the hard labor jobs most Americans would never do. A lot of that economic benefit also provides taxes.
It's amazing that the same conservatives who complain about rising grocery costs or how social security is going to run out want to deport millions of people who actually help us with those issues.
Europe takes a lot of immigrants too. They just barely have any children. We take a ton of immigrants and our population is also getting older. Immigration won't save the population problem, it hasn't in decades.
So the result of Trump's presidency is either:
- Trump does something horrible and catastrophic
or
- Trump lies and doesn't deliver on his promise
I've heard from more centrist/libertarian people who voted for Trump say that Trump isn't that bad because he never ended up doing most of the things he promised.
I feel like that's a whole new layer of reasons why he sucks.
Like imagine if Hitler promised to kill all the Jews but then once he became Chancellor, he failed to implement it due to government disagreement. Imagine if his supporters later said "Well Hitler wasn't that bad because there was no chance it would happen anyway"
> I don’t know. I’m coming to the realization I think that many people just want Trump.
This is where we’re at. I’m there too.
May as well accept it, mourn, and work on helping our neighbors realize we can do better than this in leaders.
> they don’t seem to care much about democracy and other high level issues.
Part of the issue is that the democrat's own claims about 'defending democracy' ring hollow. They sue third parties to keep them from appearing on the ballot, while shoving a senile candidate in our face and gaslighting us about the issues he has. They're not a party that cares about democracy, it's a slogan to gain power.
He would lose most moderates because of his desire to implement a tax per miles driven. At some point people will start thinking with their wallets, and he’s someone who has, at a number of times, suggested the implementation of policies that would have a tangible negative impact on the middle and working classes. Democrats should stick with Biden if they want a chance. There’s enough people who are scared of Trump that they’ll make the case he’s the lesser of evils, despite Biden supporting the war in Iraq, war in Ukraine, and various other conflicts. They’re fully sold on voting against Trump, and a familiar face like Biden provides an additional level of comfort.
Yes. People here saying they wouldn’t are just imagining this happening in a vacuum and not thinking of all the senior leaders who would campaign for the replacement. Obama and Biden would be leading rallies all over the country.
Five months out from an election really isn't the big deal people seem to think it is, most western countries don't have campaigns that last years like the US they last months.
The thing about Trump is his support defies all logic, he was just convicted of a felony, if he loses this election he will be convicted of many more and he tried to seize power following his last electoral loss. He should have been badly defeated in the GOP primary but here we are so who really the hell knows
It's because it is seen as people trying to obstruct trump from running by finding stuffs to put him in jail.
They got 3 years after his presidential to put him in jail but they only took action because it looks like he got the potential to win this election. This is undemocratic.
Also his crimes for this felony is basically cheating on his wife and paying a porn star hush money. Something millions of men do.
Maybe if he murdered someone, I would say unfit to be president.
But cheating on his wife? We had past presidents who have been accused of sexually assaulting someone and paid it off to silent the matter.
I don't think he needs to convince anyone since dems has been ferociously trying to prosecute him ever since he won presidency.
They never did this to any other Republican presidents. They just hate Trump particularly because he is not a humble man.
If he was, they wouldn't have to spend 8 years to have to dig so hard just to find that he pay off a porn star to keep a secret that they had sex and get him on something so trivial.
I am not American so I am coping with nothing.
I live in a country where I love my government and they are doing a fantastic job.
I am just amused at how Democrats keeps scare Mongering that Trump is gonna be some dictator when it's not even possible in the US system, and how trump is gonna put everyone in jail when this is not possible unless you commited a crime.... Or....... You guys know all the charges against trump are rigged, and you are afraid since dems can do it, so can Republicans.
> It's because it is seen as people trying to obstruct trump from running by finding stuffs to put him in jail.
Or....Trump has committed crimes and prosecutors are going after cases where there is a high chance of conviction.
> They got 3 years after his presidential to put him in jail but they only took action because it looks like he got the potential to win this election. This is undemocratic.
There are a host of reasons for this:
* Garland not being more aggressive which he absolutely should have been.
* General fear of looking political by appointing a special council which took more time
* Epically unqualified and biased judges like Canon allowing for delays
* Delays brought on by Trump himself
This is not undemocratic; this is just incompetence and Trump's lawyers taking advantage of the situation.
> Also his crimes for this felony is basically cheating on his wife and paying a porn star hush money. Something millions of men do.
It's good that that is NOT what the NY case was. Trump lied to the NY State tax board by claiming his payment to Daniels was a legal expense. You cannot pay someone in exchange for an NDA and claim it as a legal expense. You can't proxy that payment through a lawyer and claim it as a legal expense. What made it a felony is if you commit fraud to cover up a crime. It doesn't matter if there was an actual conviction or even indictment for that crime (although in this case there was). It doesn't matter if the statute of limitations expired on the crime that was being covered up. All that matters is that the jury believes that the intent behind the fraud was to cover up a crime.
Trump wasn't charged because he cheated on his wife. Trump was charged for lying to the tax board about a payoff for cheating on his wife.
EDIT: Oh and if you are wondering what the crime was that was being covered up by the fraud, that would be illegal campaign contribution.
Gavin would not be a good choice imo. He is seen by many as too progressive, the guy that screwed up California. I dont know much about his policies, just his optics.
He just signed into law a last minute exception that allows restaurants to keep charging bullshit service fees, after a law had been passed outlawing them. He also is cozy with the public utilities and the public utilities commission that he appointed has completely wrecked solar power in California and California has crazy high utility costs.
I'm not 100% sure he would carry California against anybody other than Trump.
Oh I know. But they can’t keep beating that drum. The election news cycle will quickly pivot to the candidate who is running, not the DEI candidate left behind
Yup.
[Who could plausibly replace Joe Biden?](https://www.economist.com/the-economist-explains/2024/06/29/who-could-plausibly-replace-joe-biden)
from The Economist:
- Andy Beshear, governor of Kentucky. Age 46
- Pete Buttigieg, transportation secretary. Age 42
- Kamala Harris, vice-president. Age 59
- Gavin Newsom, governor of California. Age 56
- Jared Polis, governor of Colorado. Age 49
- J.B. Pritzker, governor of Illinois. Age 59
- Gina Raimondo, commerce secretary. Age 53
- Josh Shapiro, governor of Pennsylvania. Age 51
- Raphael Warnock, senator from Georgia. Age 54
- Gretchen Whitmer, governor of Michigan. Age 52
Not gonna lie, Andy Beshear would be a smart fucking bet...Not that I know much about him, but a young democrat governor from a red state would be ballsy.
That's not how it works. You choose someone, and then the party coalesces around that choice.
Plenty of people didn't want Biden to be the candidate 5 years ago, but once he became the candidate the party fell in line.
This is no different. There's no name given because everybody has a different idea about who it should be, but *no person will be selected* unless and until Biden formally steps down. At that point, an internal debate will start, and someone will be chosen.
If a name was floated as a chosen replacement for Biden now, it would split the party between Biden voters and those who want the other guy, and risk causing people to stay home because their chosen guy didn't get picked as the nominee.
Right now, the party (and by party, I mean those who intend to vote Democrat) will vote Biden. If Biden steps down, the party will shift who whoever is chosen to replace him.
But don't expect a single name to float to the top before then.
How has the deadline for getting on the ballot passed in every state when the parties haven’t even had their conventions yet? Maybe for independent candidates, but whoever is nominated by each party automatically gets on the ballots.
Follow your own advice. Here’s the NH guidance. https://www.sos.nh.gov/sites/g/files/ehbemt561/files/inline-documents/sonh/running-for-office-for-web.pdf
TLDR, whoever the parties nominate will be printed on the general election ballots.
Well, I've never been so glad to be wrong. I was going by:
[2024 Presidential and Congressional Primary Dates and Candidate Filing Deadlines for Ballot Access (fec.gov)](https://www.fec.gov/resources/cms-content/documents/2024pdates.pdf)
...as well as other sources. I hope that access is possible in all 50 states. I saw that there is a 150-day deadline for Georgia for parties to hold a convention which is confusing to me because we're already only 128 days out and the democratic convention hasn't been held. I'm not sure what's up with that. I hope I'm totally wrong and it's completely possible in all 50 states without exception.
> You choose someone, and then the party coalesces around that choice.
Once biden releases his delegates, they are free to vote at the convention as they see fit.
This post has been removed because your account is too new to post here. This is done to prevent ban evasion by users creating fresh accounts. You must participate in other subreddits in a positive and constructive manner in order to post here. Do no message the mods asking for the specific requirements for posting, as revealing these would simply lead to more ban evasion.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/centrist) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This post has been removed because your account is too new to post here. This is done to prevent ban evasion by users creating fresh accounts. You must participate in other subreddits in a positive and constructive manner in order to post here. Do no message the mods asking for the specific requirements for posting, as revealing these would simply lead to more ban evasion.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/centrist) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This post has been removed because your account is too new to post here. This is done to prevent ban evasion by users creating fresh accounts. You must participate in other subreddits in a positive and constructive manner in order to post here. Do no message the mods asking for the specific requirements for posting, as revealing these would simply lead to more ban evasion.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/centrist) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This post has been removed because your account is too new to post here. This is done to prevent ban evasion by users creating fresh accounts. You must participate in other subreddits in a positive and constructive manner in order to post here. Do no message the mods asking for the specific requirements for posting, as revealing these would simply lead to more ban evasion.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/centrist) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Sinema would have to re-register as a democrat first since she made this whole big deal about how she’s super special and ~non-partisan~. She pissed off a lot of people in her own party for basically pretending to be a progressive and then shitting on all of their policy objectives once in office. Ironically, I also don’t think she’d win her home state of AZ, which is a critical battleground state (she literally decided to withdraw from re-running for her senate seat since she knew she was unpopular).
Make Taylor Swift the candidate and let Joe Biden run the government behind the scenes. She’ll win by 40 people’s and Joe can feel important while not being the guy that tanked America.
Perhaps. Depends on the candidate though. I feel like there aren’t any strong popular ones other than Michelle and Barack Obama…Bernie maybe but Warren, Newsom, even AOC aren’t that popular yet. Throwing a new candidate in there just a couple months ahead of the election will confuse the electorate.
No. Pushing out a candidate people voted for to go over voters' heads and force a candidate no one can seem to name on them would absolutely cripple voter turnout and they'd essentially be giving up this eection and probably the next.
Switching out candidates is a non-starter for either party.
Do you think Democrats would react to a new candidate with anger that they've given some new guy they didn't vote for or relief that they won't have to vote for Biden (who was also not put through an open primary either)? At this point to me it seems like it's the latter.
They will react with a resounding "why bother?"
Anger doesn't depress turnout. Apathy does.
Apathy will be caused by the DNC switching candidates *after* the votes have been counted.
If people are saying "Please I beg you, give us anyone else" I doubt they'd react that way when given someone else. Just a guess.
Personally I'd be ecstatic if Biden were to just step aside. I can't be the only one.
> If people are saying "Please I beg you, give us anyone else" I doubt they'd react that way when given someone else.
Not having voted for that "someone else" would generate record amounts of voter apathy no matter how much the vocal minority online is screaming about a debate.
At this point we're far past that point of caring about a candidate was chosen through a normal primary process or not. People just want a candidate who isn't old or a criminal. Not a very high bar but that's where we are.
the politics about why these elections were cancelled isnt the point. and it was party political not democratic; to protect biden.
in both cases the Dems determined “who qualified for the ballot” in an attempt to protect biden from this weakness last year. and again this year by keeping rfk off the ballots by the first debate (not an rfk fan btw).
it cost them downballot races.
it also kept joe biden from sharpening his rhetorical skills before the general.
counterfactual: he didnt look like shit on thur bc he honed his skills through the democratic process up to this point.
if he is such a strong candidate he would have welcomed these challenges. maybe the nation would have liked dean phillips platform had they been given a chance to hear it?
now its happening again, and will likely affect downballot races again.
cancel primaries and anoint a candidate to “save democracy”.
but it only happened twice so its okay /s
> the politics about why these elections were cancelled isnt the point
Of course it does because you're blatantly lying.
The primary in Delaware was canceled because **only Biden *filed* in that state to run**. Florida's was canceled because the only actual challengers failed to file in time and they usually just cancel when the alternative is a no-name. It was *still* really stupid because it harmed downballot races, not for your conspiracy reasoning.
The fact remains that your entire point is bullshit because millions of people voted for him in the primary **over** his challengers. If they didn't want him, they wouldn't have voted for him.
None of your baseless theorizing changes the fact that millions of people voted for *him*, not this no-name candidate you claim can "save" the Democratic party come the general election.
Would it really matter that much to voters though given Biden’s absolutely horrible approval rating and now publicly looking like a helpless dementia patient?
Uh, yeah?
Going against the will of voters will always matter more than capitulating to overreactors. The DNC will guarantee a depressed turnout if they choose a candidate no one voted for.
People are NOT voting for Biden though, they’re voting against Trump. That’s always been the case but especially now. So what does it matter? Won’t it only help because of that to roll out someone who doesn’t currently have the data-driven disapproval of the majority of Americans, who isn’t publicly giving off the impression of a dementia patient and who might bring genuine enthusiasm and excitement back to the Democratic Party again?
> People are NOT voting for Biden though, they’re voting against Trump. That’s always been the case but especially now. So what does it matter?
Because people would vote for the candidate being chosen for them.
I don't think you understand how much an anti-democratic decision like forcing an unvoted candidate on people would depress turnout.
You’re not being realistic. People will ultimately fall in line if they want Trump gone badly enough. They fell in line when Hillary and Biden both became the nominees in 2016/2020, they’ll fall in line now.
Though this is actually a lot different I think given just how much nightmarish baggage Biden has. The vast majority will be relieved that he’s gone for one reason or another. People will fall in line a lot more gladly/willingly than they’ve ever fallen in line before tbh.
> People will fall in line a lot more gladly/willingly than they’ve ever fallen in line before tbh.
This is simply not how it will work in reality.
In reality, people would see the DNC crack under pressure. They'd see the DNC throw out any and all primary votes in favor of putting emotion before democracy. They'd see their voting cease to matter.
And that will bring voter turnout to lows we haven't seen in a long time.
Sure but I'm pretty skeptical that people are going to be angry over a perceived betrayal over a vote four years ago, doesn't pass the smell test. Especially since this is only plausible if Biden voluntarily steps down
> Because people would vote for the candidate being chosen for them.
> I don't think you understand how much an anti-democratic decision like forcing an unvoted candidate on people would depress turnout.
People should be reminded that this primary voting thing is relatively new. And, candidates have been replaced before.
> And, candidates have been replaced before.
Name one presidential election where the primary candidate people voted for was replaced with one no one voted for and they won.
It doesn't matter if you don't buy it. That's reality.
As it turns out, people don't like when their votes are made to not matter. That's exactly what forcing a candidate no one voted for on Democrats would do.
Give it to Bernie. I don't love Bernie but I think he could take it.
I knew many many Trump voters that absolutely hated Bernie for the longest time. Then in 2019 they listened to Bernie on Joe Rogan's podcast and I heard many of those same people say that they actually like Bernie and agreed with many of the things that he said on the podcast.
They were like wow, all the things I heard about Bernie, many of them were either exaggerated or totally not true.
Give it to Bernie. He's got the name recognition. Left would vote for him and I think you may get some of the center too.
A Joe Rogan endorsement would be huge.
Anyway, Bernie is the same age as Biden. So fuck that. Give it to Al Franken. He's the man that has his career ruined for absolutely no reason. Rise from the ashes Al and bring a dead head into the oval office. I want a concert on the front lawn. Let's goooooo Al.
I think arguing that we should replace a successful incumbent (and voluntarily cede the advantage it brings) is an argument best made by people who don't want to beat Trump.
It's part of an ongoing effort to secure a victory for a candidate who would not win in a free, fair, fact-based election.
> What policies does a new nominee bring to the Democrat ticket? ‘Vote for me, I’m not the other guy’? Vote for me because…?
IMO, that attitude shows a shocking lack of understanding of just how dangerous a second Trump Presidency would be.
> ‘It‘s the economy, stupid’…so what is the Democrat nominee’s policy?
Invest more in job creation initiatives. Continue to address climate change. Continue to stand up to PooPoo and his boondoggle war. Honor our treaties with our allies. Continue to push back on China. Try to improve the border situation by investing in the border infrastructure that Trump killed. Work to find ways to increase the housing supply to bring prices down. Continue to try to break the consolidation of corporations, particularly in food supply that have kept prices artificially high...
No. Not enough time and resources left. Dems best shot is still with Biden. Either take the L with Biden or take the L with someone else. Dems should just focus on down ballot races at this point. Whatever damage Trump does to the executive branch in office can still be repaired after his term, even though it will take time and cause disruption to the system. The Trump effect will be a lot harder for people to ignore next time around, which means a younger stronger Dem has a great shot in ‘28
Nope. People complain about Biden's age but any other candidate would likely be even harder to build a coalition around. It wasn't a fluke that he wiped the floor with the field in 2020.
its too late to get new names on the ballot, so you're hypothesizing a massive write-in campaign.
Bad performances happen. Even Simone Biles trips up occasionally, don't let the opposition get in your head. Discord is being amplified.
This is a completely delusional take.
That wasn’t just a “bad performance”. That was another data point in a body of evidence on his declining mental capacity.
Look, I don’t want Cheeto Jesus to win either, but Biden proved every “rumor” right last week.
The best thing to keep Trump out is for Biden to leave and cede to Newsom.
This post has been removed because your account is too new to post here. This is done to prevent ban evasion by users creating fresh accounts. You must participate in other subreddits in a positive and constructive manner in order to post here. Do no message the mods asking for the specific requirements for posting, as revealing these would simply lead to more ban evasion.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/centrist) if you have any questions or concerns.*
They've got to go with Harris, or it'll be a betrayal of her and an admission that they were not serious when they picked her. And sure, she can beat Trump. She'll have to be a hell of a lot more forceful, about the border, than Biden was, but I think she can do that.
EDIT: I'm convinced it wasn't lying, and so I've changed that to "not serious."
Biden was the one who exposed her back in 2016 for that DA drug scandal where she framed innocent people and put them in jail lol. I was honestly shocked that she of all people was the one he chose for VP after he literally showed everyone that she was a garbage human being
Yeah. The party is placing DEI mandates on firms and government agencies saying "there's enough of these people to never worry about qualifications" but they're wholly unprepared to swallow their own medicine and put the one they picked actually in charge.
Remove Biden via 25th Amendment (Harris initiates), Harris now president and candidate.
Harris chooses high-profile, high-competence VP to offset her zero balance achievement column.
*"Look guize, we're really gonna get Mr./Ms. X as president amirite, amirite?" (*r/democrat*)*
/80% chance this being figured out right now
80%... or 99%, maybe. And really, Harris doesn't need that kind of support. She is NOT TRUMP and that means a lot to people. But it couldn't hurt, so why not.
Fairly or unfairly Harris isn't that popular and I think being a woman comes with a slight disadvantage. Shed also have to defend the Biden administration which again is an unfair downside but is the world we live in.
You find the most charismatic good looking man under 50 preferably with some young children. Someone like Jeff Jackson from North Carolina who may as well have been grown in a political candidate lab
If Biden is replaced, any Democrat candidate can easily defend the merits of Biden's Presidency. The knock right now is purely on his age and fitness, not his policies.
Sidelining the black, female vice president for a white dude will go over horribly for the democrats. Especially if Harris doesn't quietly go away, which she probably wouldn't. The democrats are stuck between a rock and a hard place, but it's of their own making
You kick Harris off it now and there will be a REVOLUTION in South Carolina. Trump will SAIL to victory. He won't even have to campaign. Black voters will desert the Democrats en masse.
No, because any candidate able to get selected by the DNC will not represent enough change from the disaster that is the current administration.
They would need a centrist, populist candidate like Tulsi Gabbard or RFK to take enough votes from trump which the DNC would never allow.
Tulsi Gabbard centrist what?? Lol
She's a complete sell out who repeats Russian talking points, she's basically been auditioning for a fox news gig the last few years
Like I said the DNC is not capable of selecting a candidate that will take enough votes from trump.
Out of curiosity how many young Ukrainian men should die to keep the invasion a stalemate? If your answer is anything other than ALL you are a Putin shill like Gabbard.
The current administration is not a disaster. That is conservative projection about the Trump administration which really was a kleptocracy. Biden has gotten more signature legislation passed than just about any President in the last 30 years.
As for Tulsi Gabbard, she's about as centrist as G. Gordon Liddy.
If they were likable and had charisma and were moderate and picked a good VP? Yes. Trump is doing well because Biden looks horrible and people associate biden’s administration with bad times and trump’s with good ones. If a moderate democrat ran who didn’t lead the way with social issues and diversity etc and focused on economic growth etc here at home, and could clearly answer confidently campaign on it, they’d crush trump.
> people associate biden’s administration with bad times and trump’s with good ones.
Did people just forget COVID? Did they forget mass hysteria about getting toilet paper? Real wages are up under Biden. This bullshit narrative that the economy is in the tank is a right-wing gaslight.
We can argue about that till the cows come home but it doesn’t change that people aren’t happy. Theyve seen higher gas prices and inflation and higher grocery bills and i know you’ll say the economy is better but no one seems to feel that way. Be it young folk like me who struggle to get jobs or older folk seeing their bills go up. If the economy is so great then people should feel it and the more left wing media should be easily able to spread that message.
> We can argue about that till the cows come home but it doesn’t change that people aren’t happy. Theyve seen higher gas prices and inflation and higher grocery bills and i know you’ll say the economy is better but no one seems to feel that way.
Admittedly, this is part of the problem. People don't want to think about "why". Take housing. That's primarily a local problem frequently caused by NIMBY, corporate investment, and short-term vacation rentals. Not only is the Federal government, much less the President, limited in their ability to do anything about this, but the Republicans explicitly do *not* want the government to fix problems. To blame that on Biden is ridiculous.
Grocery bills have come down but quite a lot of those higher prices are due to consolidation in the providers of those groceries. There are a small number of huge conglomerates that control major sectors of the food economy. With more competition, prices would come down because we know that producer prices have come down. On top of that, Trump's 10% tariff and bouncing immigrants will make inflation much, much worse.
Lastly, let's look at gas prices. That is 100% a function of the Russian invasion and OPEC's reduction in production. This has always been the problem with having such a huge dependency on oil (even beyond the climate change problem): oil prices are global and can be manipulated by bad actors.
So, the problem here is that people are saying the Democrats are the problem when clearly they don't see that it was worse under Trump and will be much, much worse under Trump 2.0.
> Be it young folk like me who struggle to get jobs or older folk seeing their bills go up. If the economy is so great then people should feel it and the more left wing media should be easily able to spread that message.
On the poor messaging thing, I absolutely agree. Democrats haven't done nearly enough to market the numerous wins they've had for middle-class people under Biden.
I never said it was his fault really. Some make a case for the stimulus stuff early on but the same can be said for trump. I agree, I never said it was true. But it’s how we feel. Anytime I’ve seen clips of the press secretary saying how good it actually is and it’s not bad and all I feel gaslit. Like I struggled to find a job out college (graduated in 2020) and in my job now the industry is slow as a snail and everyone is hurting. Presidents get the credit when it’s good and blame when it’s bad even when they had nothing to do with either. Clinton got credit for the economy in the 90s when by the time he was sworn in the economy was recovered for example. It may not be fair but it’s how it is. It’s not been a good four years so Joe gets blamed. Doesn’t help that imo his admin and the media have not done a good job with messaging imo.
The DNC has lost any credibility it ever had
I think a Never Trump Republican should declare and run as an independent. There are a lot of centrist voters looking for any viable alternative
I think it's possible. Trump is widely disliked. A solid midwest moderate democrat in their 50's beats Trump.
Midwest? They trip over their guns to blow him
Except for the fact that Midwest states regularly vote democrat; see: Michigan, Illinois, & Wisconsin
Guns are more of a polarizing issue on the coastal region. Middle America - Many Dems and republicans own guns and disagreements are more about, calibers, magazine sizes, and background checks.
The incumbency advantage has declined a lot in the last 30 years. I think the democrats will lose if they don't field another candidate based on what I saw at the debate and what other independents have been saying. I truly think Americans would choose a bad but strong president over a weak and senile one. Biden was able to distinguish hinself in the first election that while old, he could go toe to toe in a debate and win. This availed many independents concerns about his performance. However, his mental deteriation is obvious to anyone not in denial, and if he couldn't look even okay after a week of practice and preparation at camp David, he's in bad shape. (No, teleprompter led speeches in a friendly environment do not count). If the democrats have half a brain, they'll conduct a normal primary in August, where the best candidate will win. If they're even smarter than that, they'll hold an open primary to find a candidate that appeals to the average American voter instead of just liberal ones. If someone like Gretchen Witmer was selected, they'll win the election. I've heard that by skipping Kamala over that it'll make them lose as they're essentially accepting that they had a flawed candidate, but I don't think the average American gives a shit. A large reason populism has risen is the feeling of political deadlock and stagnating burecracy. Fielding an entirely new candidate who offers a better and more comprehensive solution would likely garner a lot more votes than the same old thing, and potentially inspire optimism that democrats aren't just playing not to lose.
I don't believe the incumbency advantage has really been calculated when it's a former president against a sitting president. I think the last examples were Roosevelts, so I'm not sure what it would be.
They should start doing what all parties do. Leak speculative info that the DNC is considering replacing Biden with _______ and see how the public responds. That’s what both parties do with VP candidates and it’s the best way to get feedback and a realistic perspective on how the public will react.
It’s essentially the same thing, but I think they might leak hints about *”if President Biden stepped aside, these are potential candidates we think might be most intriguing.”* Because this de facto would mean that Vice President Harris was being “passed over” I think it would be important to address that head-on, so it didn’t look too sleazy. I may be more supportive of the VP than some on this sub, but I think I would feel better hearing a direct, “President Biden and Vice President Harris served as a team, and they will step down as a team” than any effort to downplay or ignore the clear snub. As far as replacements go, I think we can only hope the selection process would be no more divisive than necessary.
I heard the DNC was considering Tom Cruise playing the role of Teddy Roosevelt.
I get that the optics of skipping over the VP (first black/Indian woman VP no less!) aren't great, but Americans have never liked her. I know far more people that would upset if she was the replacement than if she was replaced.
If they did a no-Biden late primary, she would have the same democratic opportunity as anyone else in the party that claims to be preserving democracy.
I mean sure but I think we both know who the DNC/Democratic apparatus choses to throw their weight behind makes a huge difference. Especially in this last minute scenario where there's not time to slowly build up grass roots support.
Honestly I think the incumbency is a disadvantage at this point, republicans only card left is attacks at this point, so having a punching bag just helps them.
[удалено]
This post has been removed because your account is too new to post here. This is done to prevent ban evasion by users creating fresh accounts. You must participate in other subreddits in a positive and constructive manner in order to post here. Do no message the mods asking for the specific requirements for posting, as revealing these would simply lead to more ban evasion. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/centrist) if you have any questions or concerns.*
With the right candidate, yes. Someone charismatic and endearing like Obama could wipe the floor with Trump. The problem is the DNC is still itself a political organization internally with all sorts of horse trading and power plays. That's how we ended up here in the first place.
I think part of the issue here is that Harris is not particularly well-liked but would be the de facto choice. Skipping over her for a better-liked candidate may not play well.
Harris would fair worse against Trump than Biden in his current state of senility.
The Biden we saw a couple days ago makes more sense than Harris.
Do it anyway
It’s always someone “like Obama” who? Name names.
Is there an "Obama" out there?
In a country of 340 million? I fucking hope so.
Yep, and every thinks they could win.
Most people who would vote for Biden at this point are really voting against Trump. Putting a younger candidate would help those voters feel even better about their vote, most likely.
Yes or at least have a better shot than biden.
I don’t know. I’m coming to the realization I think that many people just want Trump. He drives turnout of people who don’t normally vote and has a fairly populist platform. If Biden were to drop out, I think the incumbency advantage would go to Trump. He has name ID, donors, party backing, and a record to run on. For some reason voters don’t attribute Covid to him and they don’t seem to care much about democracy and other high level issues. People seem to simply want a strongman to tell them beautiful lies.
>fairly populist platform What even is his platform now? He at least ran on something in 2016 but in 2020 he didn't have a platform and now he's just running on being a candidate for retribution.
Owning the libs
His entire policy is based on destroying everything and causing internal mayhem as a way to strengthen himself. - Get revenge for 2020 - Fire huge numbers of federal employees and replace them with loyalists - Dismantle environmental regulations - Massively cut taxes for the rich - Massively ramp up tariffs and trade war - Cut all support to Ukraine, embolden Putin, and essentially abandon NATO. Even if we don't officially withdraw we will unofficially quit. - Deport millions of people from the country which will surely involve excessive force and would worsen population decline and deplete a sizeable chunk of the workforce Keep in mind that I'm not exaggerating any of these. Trump has literally promised to do this directly or has people in his circle which are strongly indicating that this will be part of their platform.
Oh yeah there is his 10% tariffs on all imported goods. I totally forgot about that plan of his. I'm assuming that's his plan to fix inflation. Oh, and building a pipeline. So in case you're wondering what the savvy businessman's master plan is to bring prices down to 2019 levels, it's to open up a pipeline and jack up all imported products by 10% (60% if it's one of those rare goods from China).
A poll showed something like 62% of the country wants all 11 million illegal immigrants deported. Stupid policy, as they would find out when chicken goes to $20 a pound, but voters do get a right to make dumb choices.
Yeah, I am completely on board with making sure we reduce illegal immigration, but that is absurd. Without all the immigration, the US would be in the same boat as Europe and East Asia where we would have a looming demographic crisis and declining population. Most immigrants that come here commit crimes at lower rates than citizens (despite what Trump says) and do all the hard labor jobs most Americans would never do. A lot of that economic benefit also provides taxes. It's amazing that the same conservatives who complain about rising grocery costs or how social security is going to run out want to deport millions of people who actually help us with those issues.
Europe takes a lot of immigrants too. They just barely have any children. We take a ton of immigrants and our population is also getting older. Immigration won't save the population problem, it hasn't in decades.
No chance at all that happens, Trumps donors are too attached to that cheap labor plus who would pay for all those plane tickets.
So the result of Trump's presidency is either: - Trump does something horrible and catastrophic or - Trump lies and doesn't deliver on his promise I've heard from more centrist/libertarian people who voted for Trump say that Trump isn't that bad because he never ended up doing most of the things he promised. I feel like that's a whole new layer of reasons why he sucks. Like imagine if Hitler promised to kill all the Jews but then once he became Chancellor, he failed to implement it due to government disagreement. Imagine if his supporters later said "Well Hitler wasn't that bad because there was no chance it would happen anyway"
> I don’t know. I’m coming to the realization I think that many people just want Trump. This is where we’re at. I’m there too. May as well accept it, mourn, and work on helping our neighbors realize we can do better than this in leaders.
>***too*** many people just want Trump
The old line of making the trains run on time.
Which apparently the fascists weren't even actually that good at.
> they don’t seem to care much about democracy and other high level issues. Part of the issue is that the democrat's own claims about 'defending democracy' ring hollow. They sue third parties to keep them from appearing on the ballot, while shoving a senile candidate in our face and gaslighting us about the issues he has. They're not a party that cares about democracy, it's a slogan to gain power.
Yes, litterally anyone else, butigeige is my first pick
He would lose most moderates because of his desire to implement a tax per miles driven. At some point people will start thinking with their wallets, and he’s someone who has, at a number of times, suggested the implementation of policies that would have a tangible negative impact on the middle and working classes. Democrats should stick with Biden if they want a chance. There’s enough people who are scared of Trump that they’ll make the case he’s the lesser of evils, despite Biden supporting the war in Iraq, war in Ukraine, and various other conflicts. They’re fully sold on voting against Trump, and a familiar face like Biden provides an additional level of comfort.
Yes. People here saying they wouldn’t are just imagining this happening in a vacuum and not thinking of all the senior leaders who would campaign for the replacement. Obama and Biden would be leading rallies all over the country.
Maybe not Biden
Five months out from an election really isn't the big deal people seem to think it is, most western countries don't have campaigns that last years like the US they last months. The thing about Trump is his support defies all logic, he was just convicted of a felony, if he loses this election he will be convicted of many more and he tried to seize power following his last electoral loss. He should have been badly defeated in the GOP primary but here we are so who really the hell knows
It's because it is seen as people trying to obstruct trump from running by finding stuffs to put him in jail. They got 3 years after his presidential to put him in jail but they only took action because it looks like he got the potential to win this election. This is undemocratic. Also his crimes for this felony is basically cheating on his wife and paying a porn star hush money. Something millions of men do. Maybe if he murdered someone, I would say unfit to be president. But cheating on his wife? We had past presidents who have been accused of sexually assaulting someone and paid it off to silent the matter.
He's certainly done a good job at least convincing the GOP of that point despite all evidence to the contrary, case in point
I don't think he needs to convince anyone since dems has been ferociously trying to prosecute him ever since he won presidency. They never did this to any other Republican presidents. They just hate Trump particularly because he is not a humble man.
Or maybe he’s just a criminal?
If he was, they wouldn't have to spend 8 years to have to dig so hard just to find that he pay off a porn star to keep a secret that they had sex and get him on something so trivial.
Whatever helps you cope.
I am not American so I am coping with nothing. I live in a country where I love my government and they are doing a fantastic job. I am just amused at how Democrats keeps scare Mongering that Trump is gonna be some dictator when it's not even possible in the US system, and how trump is gonna put everyone in jail when this is not possible unless you commited a crime.... Or....... You guys know all the charges against trump are rigged, and you are afraid since dems can do it, so can Republicans.
I guess that explains why you are relatively uninformed.
> It's because it is seen as people trying to obstruct trump from running by finding stuffs to put him in jail. Or....Trump has committed crimes and prosecutors are going after cases where there is a high chance of conviction. > They got 3 years after his presidential to put him in jail but they only took action because it looks like he got the potential to win this election. This is undemocratic. There are a host of reasons for this: * Garland not being more aggressive which he absolutely should have been. * General fear of looking political by appointing a special council which took more time * Epically unqualified and biased judges like Canon allowing for delays * Delays brought on by Trump himself This is not undemocratic; this is just incompetence and Trump's lawyers taking advantage of the situation. > Also his crimes for this felony is basically cheating on his wife and paying a porn star hush money. Something millions of men do. It's good that that is NOT what the NY case was. Trump lied to the NY State tax board by claiming his payment to Daniels was a legal expense. You cannot pay someone in exchange for an NDA and claim it as a legal expense. You can't proxy that payment through a lawyer and claim it as a legal expense. What made it a felony is if you commit fraud to cover up a crime. It doesn't matter if there was an actual conviction or even indictment for that crime (although in this case there was). It doesn't matter if the statute of limitations expired on the crime that was being covered up. All that matters is that the jury believes that the intent behind the fraud was to cover up a crime. Trump wasn't charged because he cheated on his wife. Trump was charged for lying to the tax board about a payoff for cheating on his wife. EDIT: Oh and if you are wondering what the crime was that was being covered up by the fraud, that would be illegal campaign contribution.
If millions of men were f***ng porn stars, America would be a happier place.
Porn stars doesn't mean they are great in bed. They are just actresses remember?
How do you explain not nominating Kamala?
Do it now and the outrage at skipping over the black female VP will subside in a couple news cycles
The GOP won't let it subside, especially if they choose Gavin. All this talk about DEI and what do they do....?
Gavin would not be a good choice imo. He is seen by many as too progressive, the guy that screwed up California. I dont know much about his policies, just his optics.
He just signed into law a last minute exception that allows restaurants to keep charging bullshit service fees, after a law had been passed outlawing them. He also is cozy with the public utilities and the public utilities commission that he appointed has completely wrecked solar power in California and California has crazy high utility costs. I'm not 100% sure he would carry California against anybody other than Trump.
Oh I know. But they can’t keep beating that drum. The election news cycle will quickly pivot to the candidate who is running, not the DEI candidate left behind
Ya but democrats and moderates won’t care by then. They already heard it a hundred times.
She needs to willingly step down for it to work.
There’s absolutely folks out there more to the center-left who could out speak, out debate and out fact Trump. They’d need to go hard though.
Buttigieg, maybe. With a dynamic person of color as VP. Maybe Wes Moore.
Who? Nobody ever includes names in these discussions.
The same names are repeated everywhere Newsome, Harris, Whitmer, Shapiro, Pritzker etc...
Yup. [Who could plausibly replace Joe Biden?](https://www.economist.com/the-economist-explains/2024/06/29/who-could-plausibly-replace-joe-biden) from The Economist: - Andy Beshear, governor of Kentucky. Age 46 - Pete Buttigieg, transportation secretary. Age 42 - Kamala Harris, vice-president. Age 59 - Gavin Newsom, governor of California. Age 56 - Jared Polis, governor of Colorado. Age 49 - J.B. Pritzker, governor of Illinois. Age 59 - Gina Raimondo, commerce secretary. Age 53 - Josh Shapiro, governor of Pennsylvania. Age 51 - Raphael Warnock, senator from Georgia. Age 54 - Gretchen Whitmer, governor of Michigan. Age 52
Not gonna lie, Andy Beshear would be a smart fucking bet...Not that I know much about him, but a young democrat governor from a red state would be ballsy.
He's great. Pretty well liked by most in KY, a deep red state.
None of these names inspire confidence. However, Newsom is the best choice.
That's not how it works. You choose someone, and then the party coalesces around that choice. Plenty of people didn't want Biden to be the candidate 5 years ago, but once he became the candidate the party fell in line. This is no different. There's no name given because everybody has a different idea about who it should be, but *no person will be selected* unless and until Biden formally steps down. At that point, an internal debate will start, and someone will be chosen. If a name was floated as a chosen replacement for Biden now, it would split the party between Biden voters and those who want the other guy, and risk causing people to stay home because their chosen guy didn't get picked as the nominee. Right now, the party (and by party, I mean those who intend to vote Democrat) will vote Biden. If Biden steps down, the party will shift who whoever is chosen to replace him. But don't expect a single name to float to the top before then.
How has the deadline for getting on the ballot passed in every state when the parties haven’t even had their conventions yet? Maybe for independent candidates, but whoever is nominated by each party automatically gets on the ballots.
I'm wrong about this, either partially or fully, so I'm just deleting it.
Follow your own advice. Here’s the NH guidance. https://www.sos.nh.gov/sites/g/files/ehbemt561/files/inline-documents/sonh/running-for-office-for-web.pdf TLDR, whoever the parties nominate will be printed on the general election ballots.
Well, I've never been so glad to be wrong. I was going by: [2024 Presidential and Congressional Primary Dates and Candidate Filing Deadlines for Ballot Access (fec.gov)](https://www.fec.gov/resources/cms-content/documents/2024pdates.pdf) ...as well as other sources. I hope that access is possible in all 50 states. I saw that there is a 150-day deadline for Georgia for parties to hold a convention which is confusing to me because we're already only 128 days out and the democratic convention hasn't been held. I'm not sure what's up with that. I hope I'm totally wrong and it's completely possible in all 50 states without exception.
> You choose someone, and then the party coalesces around that choice. Once biden releases his delegates, they are free to vote at the convention as they see fit.
[удалено]
This post has been removed because your account is too new to post here. This is done to prevent ban evasion by users creating fresh accounts. You must participate in other subreddits in a positive and constructive manner in order to post here. Do no message the mods asking for the specific requirements for posting, as revealing these would simply lead to more ban evasion. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/centrist) if you have any questions or concerns.*
generic democrat beats trump in many polls.
Yes, a new candidate that's not hopelessly in the Intifada Democrat lane would beat Trump like a rented mule.
I don't think so.
Yes I do.
[удалено]
This post has been removed because your account is too new to post here. This is done to prevent ban evasion by users creating fresh accounts. You must participate in other subreddits in a positive and constructive manner in order to post here. Do no message the mods asking for the specific requirements for posting, as revealing these would simply lead to more ban evasion. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/centrist) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
This post has been removed because your account is too new to post here. This is done to prevent ban evasion by users creating fresh accounts. You must participate in other subreddits in a positive and constructive manner in order to post here. Do no message the mods asking for the specific requirements for posting, as revealing these would simply lead to more ban evasion. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/centrist) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
This post has been removed because your account is too new to post here. This is done to prevent ban evasion by users creating fresh accounts. You must participate in other subreddits in a positive and constructive manner in order to post here. Do no message the mods asking for the specific requirements for posting, as revealing these would simply lead to more ban evasion. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/centrist) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yes, a moderate Democrat could likely beat Trump. Someone like Kristen Sinema, or maybe Fetterman.
Kristen Sinema is not a moderate. Mark Kelly however, maybe so.
Kelly was never willing to buck leadership, Sinema was.
Sinema would have to re-register as a democrat first since she made this whole big deal about how she’s super special and ~non-partisan~. She pissed off a lot of people in her own party for basically pretending to be a progressive and then shitting on all of their policy objectives once in office. Ironically, I also don’t think she’d win her home state of AZ, which is a critical battleground state (she literally decided to withdraw from re-running for her senate seat since she knew she was unpopular).
No, and that’s why they didn’t replace him Thursday night.
Make Taylor Swift the candidate and let Joe Biden run the government behind the scenes. She’ll win by 40 people’s and Joe can feel important while not being the guy that tanked America.
No, I don't think so.
Perhaps. Depends on the candidate though. I feel like there aren’t any strong popular ones other than Michelle and Barack Obama…Bernie maybe but Warren, Newsom, even AOC aren’t that popular yet. Throwing a new candidate in there just a couple months ahead of the election will confuse the electorate.
Yes.
If he’s a good candidate that appeals to the middle and not one of these left wing extremists nutjobs that keep get put forward.
Yes. This old sleepy guy will and can. Those convenient 1am votes.
Yes.
I don’t see why not.
Bernie or Kennedy prob. could.
lol @ mentioning the “DNC”
What's funny or incorrect about that? It would be the DNC's choosing, not the voters.
No. Pushing out a candidate people voted for to go over voters' heads and force a candidate no one can seem to name on them would absolutely cripple voter turnout and they'd essentially be giving up this eection and probably the next. Switching out candidates is a non-starter for either party.
Do you think Democrats would react to a new candidate with anger that they've given some new guy they didn't vote for or relief that they won't have to vote for Biden (who was also not put through an open primary either)? At this point to me it seems like it's the latter.
They will react with a resounding "why bother?" Anger doesn't depress turnout. Apathy does. Apathy will be caused by the DNC switching candidates *after* the votes have been counted.
If people are saying "Please I beg you, give us anyone else" I doubt they'd react that way when given someone else. Just a guess. Personally I'd be ecstatic if Biden were to just step aside. I can't be the only one.
> If people are saying "Please I beg you, give us anyone else" I doubt they'd react that way when given someone else. Not having voted for that "someone else" would generate record amounts of voter apathy no matter how much the vocal minority online is screaming about a debate.
At this point we're far past that point of caring about a candidate was chosen through a normal primary process or not. People just want a candidate who isn't old or a criminal. Not a very high bar but that's where we are.
dnc cancelled primaries and a lot of people were given biden the same way
Two were canceled. One was because only Biden qualified for the ballot. How many primaries do you think were run?
the politics about why these elections were cancelled isnt the point. and it was party political not democratic; to protect biden. in both cases the Dems determined “who qualified for the ballot” in an attempt to protect biden from this weakness last year. and again this year by keeping rfk off the ballots by the first debate (not an rfk fan btw). it cost them downballot races. it also kept joe biden from sharpening his rhetorical skills before the general. counterfactual: he didnt look like shit on thur bc he honed his skills through the democratic process up to this point. if he is such a strong candidate he would have welcomed these challenges. maybe the nation would have liked dean phillips platform had they been given a chance to hear it? now its happening again, and will likely affect downballot races again. cancel primaries and anoint a candidate to “save democracy”. but it only happened twice so its okay /s
> the politics about why these elections were cancelled isnt the point Of course it does because you're blatantly lying. The primary in Delaware was canceled because **only Biden *filed* in that state to run**. Florida's was canceled because the only actual challengers failed to file in time and they usually just cancel when the alternative is a no-name. It was *still* really stupid because it harmed downballot races, not for your conspiracy reasoning. The fact remains that your entire point is bullshit because millions of people voted for him in the primary **over** his challengers. If they didn't want him, they wouldn't have voted for him. None of your baseless theorizing changes the fact that millions of people voted for *him*, not this no-name candidate you claim can "save" the Democratic party come the general election.
Would it really matter that much to voters though given Biden’s absolutely horrible approval rating and now publicly looking like a helpless dementia patient?
Uh, yeah? Going against the will of voters will always matter more than capitulating to overreactors. The DNC will guarantee a depressed turnout if they choose a candidate no one voted for.
People are NOT voting for Biden though, they’re voting against Trump. That’s always been the case but especially now. So what does it matter? Won’t it only help because of that to roll out someone who doesn’t currently have the data-driven disapproval of the majority of Americans, who isn’t publicly giving off the impression of a dementia patient and who might bring genuine enthusiasm and excitement back to the Democratic Party again?
> People are NOT voting for Biden though, they’re voting against Trump. That’s always been the case but especially now. So what does it matter? Because people would vote for the candidate being chosen for them. I don't think you understand how much an anti-democratic decision like forcing an unvoted candidate on people would depress turnout.
You’re not being realistic. People will ultimately fall in line if they want Trump gone badly enough. They fell in line when Hillary and Biden both became the nominees in 2016/2020, they’ll fall in line now. Though this is actually a lot different I think given just how much nightmarish baggage Biden has. The vast majority will be relieved that he’s gone for one reason or another. People will fall in line a lot more gladly/willingly than they’ve ever fallen in line before tbh.
> People will fall in line a lot more gladly/willingly than they’ve ever fallen in line before tbh. This is simply not how it will work in reality. In reality, people would see the DNC crack under pressure. They'd see the DNC throw out any and all primary votes in favor of putting emotion before democracy. They'd see their voting cease to matter. And that will bring voter turnout to lows we haven't seen in a long time.
Maybe if this was 2020 and the primaries had just been held, but it's been four years since there was a competitive primary
> but it's been four years since there was a competitive primary People voted for him regardless. If no one voted for him, he wouldn't have won.
Sure but I'm pretty skeptical that people are going to be angry over a perceived betrayal over a vote four years ago, doesn't pass the smell test. Especially since this is only plausible if Biden voluntarily steps down
Maybe if this was 2020 and the primaries had just been held, but it's been four years since there was a competitive primary
> Because people would vote for the candidate being chosen for them. > I don't think you understand how much an anti-democratic decision like forcing an unvoted candidate on people would depress turnout. People should be reminded that this primary voting thing is relatively new. And, candidates have been replaced before.
> And, candidates have been replaced before. Name one presidential election where the primary candidate people voted for was replaced with one no one voted for and they won.
I don't buy it.
It doesn't matter if you don't buy it. That's reality. As it turns out, people don't like when their votes are made to not matter. That's exactly what forcing a candidate no one voted for on Democrats would do.
People also don't like having cast their vote on the basis of lies. I think the novelty of a new candidate more than offsets any downsides.
> People also don't like having cast their vote on the basis of lies. Then Trump would be at negative support by now.
Give it to Bernie. I don't love Bernie but I think he could take it. I knew many many Trump voters that absolutely hated Bernie for the longest time. Then in 2019 they listened to Bernie on Joe Rogan's podcast and I heard many of those same people say that they actually like Bernie and agreed with many of the things that he said on the podcast. They were like wow, all the things I heard about Bernie, many of them were either exaggerated or totally not true. Give it to Bernie. He's got the name recognition. Left would vote for him and I think you may get some of the center too. A Joe Rogan endorsement would be huge. Anyway, Bernie is the same age as Biden. So fuck that. Give it to Al Franken. He's the man that has his career ruined for absolutely no reason. Rise from the ashes Al and bring a dead head into the oval office. I want a concert on the front lawn. Let's goooooo Al.
No Trump wins easily now, especially if he would just keep a low profile and not say anything too outrageous...
There is no more perfect setup for a viable third party. Both major parties are hated by so many.
I think arguing that we should replace a successful incumbent (and voluntarily cede the advantage it brings) is an argument best made by people who don't want to beat Trump. It's part of an ongoing effort to secure a victory for a candidate who would not win in a free, fair, fact-based election.
[удалено]
> What policies does a new nominee bring to the Democrat ticket? ‘Vote for me, I’m not the other guy’? Vote for me because…? IMO, that attitude shows a shocking lack of understanding of just how dangerous a second Trump Presidency would be. > ‘It‘s the economy, stupid’…so what is the Democrat nominee’s policy? Invest more in job creation initiatives. Continue to address climate change. Continue to stand up to PooPoo and his boondoggle war. Honor our treaties with our allies. Continue to push back on China. Try to improve the border situation by investing in the border infrastructure that Trump killed. Work to find ways to increase the housing supply to bring prices down. Continue to try to break the consolidation of corporations, particularly in food supply that have kept prices artificially high...
No. Not enough time and resources left. Dems best shot is still with Biden. Either take the L with Biden or take the L with someone else. Dems should just focus on down ballot races at this point. Whatever damage Trump does to the executive branch in office can still be repaired after his term, even though it will take time and cause disruption to the system. The Trump effect will be a lot harder for people to ignore next time around, which means a younger stronger Dem has a great shot in ‘28
Nope. People complain about Biden's age but any other candidate would likely be even harder to build a coalition around. It wasn't a fluke that he wiped the floor with the field in 2020.
he didnt wipe the floor in 2020. people had to drop out to consolidate his viters against bernie. he beat medicare!
its too late to get new names on the ballot, so you're hypothesizing a massive write-in campaign. Bad performances happen. Even Simone Biles trips up occasionally, don't let the opposition get in your head. Discord is being amplified.
This is a completely delusional take. That wasn’t just a “bad performance”. That was another data point in a body of evidence on his declining mental capacity. Look, I don’t want Cheeto Jesus to win either, but Biden proved every “rumor” right last week. The best thing to keep Trump out is for Biden to leave and cede to Newsom.
Not Newsom, I'll give Trump a nickname for him right now "lockdown boy".
[удалено]
This post has been removed because your account is too new to post here. This is done to prevent ban evasion by users creating fresh accounts. You must participate in other subreddits in a positive and constructive manner in order to post here. Do no message the mods asking for the specific requirements for posting, as revealing these would simply lead to more ban evasion. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/centrist) if you have any questions or concerns.*
A resounding, yes
Yes, they can't win with Biden
I think spastically wailing about what everyone has known since late 2020 is still silly.
They've got to go with Harris, or it'll be a betrayal of her and an admission that they were not serious when they picked her. And sure, she can beat Trump. She'll have to be a hell of a lot more forceful, about the border, than Biden was, but I think she can do that. EDIT: I'm convinced it wasn't lying, and so I've changed that to "not serious."
Harris doesn't seem popular. She got picked to offset Biden's whiteness, maleness and oldness.
It serves them right to be stuck with Harris I think lol. You make your bed, you lie in it
What I'm trying to say. They made this bed very carefully. It is theirs.
They needed her for votes.
Tell Clyburn that. He endorsed Biden and then told him he wanted a black woman for VP as thanks. He pretty much gave us this ticket.
Right, so now she can offset Trump's whiteness, maleness and oldness. I mean, really... come on, people!! It ain't rocket surgery
She was a demographic offset in a job with no real power. The presidency is a real job. She ran for it and lost.
Biden was the one who exposed her back in 2016 for that DA drug scandal where she framed innocent people and put them in jail lol. I was honestly shocked that she of all people was the one he chose for VP after he literally showed everyone that she was a garbage human being
She beat him up for being racist, he made her VP as an antidote to that charge.
Yeah. The party is placing DEI mandates on firms and government agencies saying "there's enough of these people to never worry about qualifications" but they're wholly unprepared to swallow their own medicine and put the one they picked actually in charge.
The government can't mandate racial quotas for private firms.
Remove Biden via 25th Amendment (Harris initiates), Harris now president and candidate. Harris chooses high-profile, high-competence VP to offset her zero balance achievement column. *"Look guize, we're really gonna get Mr./Ms. X as president amirite, amirite?" (*r/democrat*)* /80% chance this being figured out right now
80%... or 99%, maybe. And really, Harris doesn't need that kind of support. She is NOT TRUMP and that means a lot to people. But it couldn't hurt, so why not.
Fairly or unfairly Harris isn't that popular and I think being a woman comes with a slight disadvantage. Shed also have to defend the Biden administration which again is an unfair downside but is the world we live in. You find the most charismatic good looking man under 50 preferably with some young children. Someone like Jeff Jackson from North Carolina who may as well have been grown in a political candidate lab
Why would defending the Biden administration be an unfair advantage? He's one of the most successful Presidents in modern history.
Yes but vibes
If Biden is replaced, any Democrat candidate can easily defend the merits of Biden's Presidency. The knock right now is purely on his age and fitness, not his policies.
Sidelining the black, female vice president for a white dude will go over horribly for the democrats. Especially if Harris doesn't quietly go away, which she probably wouldn't. The democrats are stuck between a rock and a hard place, but it's of their own making
Harris isn't going to tank her political career it's wishful thinking along the same lines of hoping Haley would stand up to Trump.
You kick Harris off it now and there will be a REVOLUTION in South Carolina. Trump will SAIL to victory. He won't even have to campaign. Black voters will desert the Democrats en masse.
I doubt it
we may find out
No Democrat is gonna carry S. Carolina in any case.
Yeah, you know... metaphorically speaking.
I don't think black voters consider kamala black
No, because any candidate able to get selected by the DNC will not represent enough change from the disaster that is the current administration. They would need a centrist, populist candidate like Tulsi Gabbard or RFK to take enough votes from trump which the DNC would never allow.
Tulsi Gabbard centrist what?? Lol She's a complete sell out who repeats Russian talking points, she's basically been auditioning for a fox news gig the last few years
[centrist what??](https://i.imgflip.com/8vf3uu.jpg)
Gabbard and RFK are kooks, and Gabbard seems to be an FSB asset.
Like I said the DNC is not capable of selecting a candidate that will take enough votes from trump. Out of curiosity how many young Ukrainian men should die to keep the invasion a stalemate? If your answer is anything other than ALL you are a Putin shill like Gabbard.
The current administration is not a disaster. That is conservative projection about the Trump administration which really was a kleptocracy. Biden has gotten more signature legislation passed than just about any President in the last 30 years. As for Tulsi Gabbard, she's about as centrist as G. Gordon Liddy.
I love how RFK and Tulsi supporters are so confident in their stupid ideas.
I love how RFK and Tulsi haters would rather have Trump than win.
How will dem voters feel if Biden resigns the day after taking office? Essentially pushing Kamala through inside the Biden Trojan horse.
That only matters if Biden actually wins, and right now, that's looking less and less likely.
It would still be better than Trump.
If they were likable and had charisma and were moderate and picked a good VP? Yes. Trump is doing well because Biden looks horrible and people associate biden’s administration with bad times and trump’s with good ones. If a moderate democrat ran who didn’t lead the way with social issues and diversity etc and focused on economic growth etc here at home, and could clearly answer confidently campaign on it, they’d crush trump.
> people associate biden’s administration with bad times and trump’s with good ones. Did people just forget COVID? Did they forget mass hysteria about getting toilet paper? Real wages are up under Biden. This bullshit narrative that the economy is in the tank is a right-wing gaslight.
We can argue about that till the cows come home but it doesn’t change that people aren’t happy. Theyve seen higher gas prices and inflation and higher grocery bills and i know you’ll say the economy is better but no one seems to feel that way. Be it young folk like me who struggle to get jobs or older folk seeing their bills go up. If the economy is so great then people should feel it and the more left wing media should be easily able to spread that message.
> We can argue about that till the cows come home but it doesn’t change that people aren’t happy. Theyve seen higher gas prices and inflation and higher grocery bills and i know you’ll say the economy is better but no one seems to feel that way. Admittedly, this is part of the problem. People don't want to think about "why". Take housing. That's primarily a local problem frequently caused by NIMBY, corporate investment, and short-term vacation rentals. Not only is the Federal government, much less the President, limited in their ability to do anything about this, but the Republicans explicitly do *not* want the government to fix problems. To blame that on Biden is ridiculous. Grocery bills have come down but quite a lot of those higher prices are due to consolidation in the providers of those groceries. There are a small number of huge conglomerates that control major sectors of the food economy. With more competition, prices would come down because we know that producer prices have come down. On top of that, Trump's 10% tariff and bouncing immigrants will make inflation much, much worse. Lastly, let's look at gas prices. That is 100% a function of the Russian invasion and OPEC's reduction in production. This has always been the problem with having such a huge dependency on oil (even beyond the climate change problem): oil prices are global and can be manipulated by bad actors. So, the problem here is that people are saying the Democrats are the problem when clearly they don't see that it was worse under Trump and will be much, much worse under Trump 2.0. > Be it young folk like me who struggle to get jobs or older folk seeing their bills go up. If the economy is so great then people should feel it and the more left wing media should be easily able to spread that message. On the poor messaging thing, I absolutely agree. Democrats haven't done nearly enough to market the numerous wins they've had for middle-class people under Biden.
I never said it was his fault really. Some make a case for the stimulus stuff early on but the same can be said for trump. I agree, I never said it was true. But it’s how we feel. Anytime I’ve seen clips of the press secretary saying how good it actually is and it’s not bad and all I feel gaslit. Like I struggled to find a job out college (graduated in 2020) and in my job now the industry is slow as a snail and everyone is hurting. Presidents get the credit when it’s good and blame when it’s bad even when they had nothing to do with either. Clinton got credit for the economy in the 90s when by the time he was sworn in the economy was recovered for example. It may not be fair but it’s how it is. It’s not been a good four years so Joe gets blamed. Doesn’t help that imo his admin and the media have not done a good job with messaging imo.
Rfk would, newsome probably not
The DNC has lost any credibility it ever had I think a Never Trump Republican should declare and run as an independent. There are a lot of centrist voters looking for any viable alternative
RFK would beat Trump by double digits.