This stupid topic again

But sure

    • hddsx@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      I would vote for any viable candidate not Trump. I would prefer not Biden and not Harris. In fact I’d prefer a sane Republican… but there seems to be a distinct lack of them.

      I’d vote for AOC though. She reminds me of the principled republicans of yore, albeit with different views

        • hddsx@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          The thing I really admired about Republicans was that they had principles and held to them. AOC fits that bill. Plus, I believe that you have a right to your viewpoint even if I disagree with you.

  • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Harris has done so little I had to think for a second to remember what her name was. Other VP have really gotten coverage, like Pence or Gore. But Harris has really stayed mostly on the sidelines.

      • abracaDavid@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        I think it was, because people really don’t like her. She’s got that same super condescending energy that Hilary has.

  • spikkedd@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    Just remember that during the 2016 election, the “If not Bernie, then Trump” bros turned out to be Russian interference.

    I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s just Russia trying to split the Dem base.

    • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Ever wonder why it’s rich media companies who are screeching from the rooftops that Biden is old and needs to step down, while AOC, Bernie, and all the actual progressives are standing behind him?

      This is a revolt of the ownership class against Biden’s proposed tax hikes. Nothing more. And Leftists are falling for it hook line and sinker.

  • kingshrubb@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    I’d prefer Buttigieg simply because he is such an effective communicator. Other than that I’d prefer someone much more leftist than him.

    • abracaDavid@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      I don’t love Buttigieg, but he is at least much more progressive than Biden or Harris.

      I think he would be a better candidate than either of them.

  • Seraph@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Ask anyone that wants to remove people off the ticket: Who should they be replaced with?

    I haven’t heard a good answer yet.

      • Seraph@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        You legitimately think the Democratic party will get behind any of these nominations enough to defeat Trump? I’d say most are considered more controversial than fuckin Hillary was.

        • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          I legitimately think that this was what you intended to reply with regardless of what I said, and I very much doubt you actually bothered to read it.

          • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            Seriously. This is a pretty mild list of semi-proven politicians with national recognition. Warren (or maybe Franken) are the only ones I can see being potentially controversial and even they’re both still broadly liked within the party.

            Also, how does someone who’s not familiar with Kelly or Duckworth have a strong opinion about who’s controversial in the Democratic party? They’re not superstars, but you weren’t exactly digging up no-names.

            • mozz@mbin.grits.devOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 months ago

              It is extremely notable to me that the “get rid of Biden” is so HUGELY emphasized over “let’s figure out who instead”

              It makes me look suspiciously at what would initially be the pretty sensible idea of subbing in someone younger

  • BertramDitore@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Ugh. I agree that Kamala sucks, but I think it’d be a mistake to try to go with anyone else at this point. She has a pulse, a functional brain, lots of political experience, a long life ahead of her, and yeah, she’s made some terrible decisions and gaffs in her career, just like Joe Biden.

    I don’t like that she was a cop, but Joe Biden chaired the Senate Judiciary committee for like 100 years, and got us Clarence Thomas, so…nobody has the moral high ground here.

    We just need to win, and frankly I think if we try to go with someone new and untested, we’ll lose. We’ve been in a “lesser of two evils” situation for some time now.

      • BertramDitore@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Ideally, yeah, but think about the logistics of pulling something like that off. And would it be a full primary redo? Like fresh ballots sent out to all dems? Or do you mean a mini primary just with the existing delegates? Because we already voted in the Democratic primary election…

        I’m just really trying to be pragmatic about this, I can’t imagine a scenario where we pull this off and come out stronger. I would love to be wrong.

        • WraithGear@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          Probly just the superdelegates choosing in secret, like they threaten too if they don’t like the public vote. If their going to only be Democratic when it’s convenient, they might as well as course correct. I am for replacing Biden, but if they are even talking about it now they best get a move on. Apathy is gaining ground every second they are not at the wheel.

          • UltraGiGaGigantic@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            Probly just the superdelegates choosing in secret, like they threaten too if they don’t like the public vote.

            Feeling free yet?

        • half_fiction@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          Saying a month is “plenty” of time to plan and run any kind of election on a national level is so ridiculously out-of-touch I read it back like five times thinking maybe it was sarcastic. Off the top of my head there’s booking polling places, securing & training staff, voting machines, ballots that need to make their way through the entire supply chain starting all the way back at pre-production. Mail in ballots alone usually go out like a month ahead of time to compensate for issues with the mail.

          At this point in time, there’s a higher probability of Superman flying around the world backwards to rewind time and correct the gunman’s aim to actually hit Trump at that rally than there is of the Democrats being able to successfully pull off a second primary in a month. And that’s not even to touch the “coming out stronger” piece of it, which again, no chance in hell that happens with the kind of chaos a second primary would cause.

          • knightly the Sneptaur@pawb.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            The idea that elections take years is an artifact of our broken news cycle. England can call for snap elections and install a new government just 25 days later, and that’s England.

            • half_fiction@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 months ago

              Um OK but surely they already have policy, processes, and infrastructure in place to successfully execute it within that time frame. There’s a big difference between being already set up for it and the Dems randomly deciding that they’re going to run another primary next week.

      • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        But only Harris can keep the funds accumulated for Biden’s campaign, right? Wouldn’t make much sense to go for another candidate I think…

          • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            “The only candidate I like is the one who has no chance of winning!”

            Fucking leftists getting played like a fiddle by purity testing.

              • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                4 months ago

                You fuckers call everyone center-right. By your insane definition, the Democratic party is center right so you should stop demanding they put up a candidate that statistically no one in the country wants.