147
If Biden 'Must Step Aside,' Why Aren't Democrats Filling the Streets to Demand It?
(www.commondreams.org)
this post was submitted on 10 Jul 2024
147 points (81.5% liked)
politics
19338 readers
2132 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Theres a whole country of people, how hard is it to find one qualified candidate?!
Apparently, rather hard.
I doubt it is the qualification for the actual job that is the issue. Being willing to put one's family through that shit it tough.
Indeed. A wise wizard once said: "It is a curious thing, Harry, but perhaps those who are best suited to power are those who have never sought it."
There's also a very consistent and common shortlist that these people just pretend doesn't exist because the narrative line they're now following demands they pretend it doesn't.
What is this list?
Just fucking Google it man. It's been a repeated news story. If you're not aware of it you're not trying to know it.
OK, so you don't have an answer either, got it.
No, I just think you're being disingenuous so I have no interest in whatever name by name critique you're going to give for a list you already know 80%+ of the names for but are pretending doesn't exist.
I don't think a single person on your theoretical list is electable, if that's what you mean. But I would need you to be specific about who you think might be a viable alternative in order to have any useful discussion about them. I have no need to be disingenuous. You need to actually support your point of view with more than vague suggestions and hand-waving.
This is why people laugh at the Biden replacers. You literally just told someone that the list exists, then told them to Google it.
Just fucking tell them to Do YoUr OwN rEsEaRcH and not hide behind 'the extensive list that totally exists, just Google it man it's everywhere ', that will really show them how extensive and credible the list of candidates really are, and how it's totally not full of people who already said they won't run or support Biden.
This only further reinforces the thought that it's all people who aren't planning on running. You don't want to talk about why your names aren't viable, you just want to talk about how it's so easy to do.
Wonder why.
Look at the 2020 candidates, I'm sure a good number of them would run a campaign if Biden stepped down. The democratic establishment just needs to put their weight behind a candidate that people are willing to vote for like they did with Biden.
Which would be who?
Also, that just is doing a lot of heavy lifting in this sentence, as if it were that simple.
Buttigieg. Whitmer. Beshear. Pritzker. Newsome. Fucking Klobuchar or Warren. Literally anyone else that would announce their candidacy as soon as Biden got out of the way. It's the fucking democratic nomination, somebody out there wants it and given the chance to campaign would be able to beat Trump by miles. Half of them are starting at more or less equal odds with Trump even with NO campaigning whatsoever.
I'm not claiming to be clairvoyant but jesus have some imagination, a sense of object permanence. You're not hearing about them because they aren't challenging the incumbent president, not because they don't exist.
Edit: and yes, given a real primary, it is that simple.
It is not that simple, when we're talking about the national vote. Yes, another candidate could win the primary, but none of them have the kind of national presence to compete with Trump this close to the election. If they had been the candidate 2 years ago, maybe. Switching candidates this late will damage voter confidence, and will result in lower turnout, regardless of who the candidate is.
Imagination has nothing to do with it, this isn't a Disney movie.
That's bullshit. 4 months is an eternity in election year time. Also, like I said, on account of them all clearing the bar of not being Trump, half of them are starting at more or less equal odds with Trump (and Biden) with NO campaigning whatsoever. Aside from that, Biden himself staying in the race is doing everything you're saying about the other candidates, all on his own.
The complication here; for any candidate; is that you have to offer something more than "not trump", campaign on that, and project confidence in defending your ideology and its allies. That is where voter confidence is fostered, not bowing down to some sunk cost fallacy. Biden is unable to perform on this in his current state. That is why his base comes down only to voters who both 1) don't have serious objections against Biden, which are dwindling, and 2) are informed on what trump may be capable of in a second term, of which the effort to increase this demographic is either completely absent or ineffectual.
Right! Nobody's stepped up because Biden hasn't stepped down, I thought that was well established by now??
Why would Biden step down without an effective replacement ready and waiting? Waiting for someone to step down before you step up shows you don't have what it takes to lead, especially during tumultuous times like this.
You're asking for a power vacuum that will lead to trump winning in November.
I'm just saying it's pretty convenient to your point that the DNC has been making it abundantly clear that they would take down anyone who challenges their incumbent.
via Matt Taibbi yesterday on substack,
Trump is winning either way with the way things are going right now, might as well throw out a hail mary
The oligarchy does not want an effective Democratic candidate