Which Democrats? All 50 of them? Yeah, they’re not all progressive. But that doesn’t mean that progressives aren’t part of the party. Being a progressive pushing for more progressive ideas than the entirety of the caucus would support doesn’t mean you’re not a Democrat.

They just want to clarify that he’s not selective, he’d also rape adult women if given the opportunity.

I think Shapiro’s Israel stance would be poison. Kelly would probably blunt momentum, but maybe the cool factor of being an astronaut could get him through it without bringing the ticket down.

From a progressive standpoint, I actually kind of like Buttigieg. Like Harris, he started out as vaguely progressive but turned toward the moderate lane after realizing the progressive one was stuffed full, but he hasn’t done some of the performative centrism of the purple state elected officials and he’s got some dynamism in both his policy (his supreme court reform was good) and conveys a different feel from trying to pick someone to signal that the Democratic party is also the home for conservatives. Plus you can put him in front of a camera anywhere and expect him to do a good job.

I wouldn’t vote for him or Harris in a primary, but I can feel positive about them on a ticket.

Your kids aren’t an important component to your continued employment.

You’re not going to win by saying “the actual election is your obligation, if you had policies you were interested in you should have tried to get a different person in the primary”. The whole reason candidates change after the primary (often diving to the center) is to get votes from people that didn’t vote for them. That applies to primary voters for other candidates and people who don’t make politics a priority in their lives.

I understand what he gets out of it, I don’t understand why someone at Newsweek decided to be his megaphone. There are plenty of functional stories about Vance’s bad positions, hypocrisy, or poor favorability that do the same thing based on information rather than being a stenographer for someone without any real importance or special knowledge. If that’s the story they wanted to write, they very easily could do it, instead they just summarized an already worthless interview.

These insider ghouls just can’t die.

Well, if an ex-Clinton advisor says it, it must be true. Oh the statement is “may”, so there’s really no story here because you can never be wrong with a “may”.

Assuming this is just another mistake (likely), it seems like since Russian arms sometimes end up hitting NATO soil, that the reasonable course of self-defense is to extend their air defenses and shoot down arms that come near their territory. You can’t know that the drone will go off target until it does, so you just have to shoot down anything heading in the general direction, even if it’s likely targeting Ukraine.

Her bad stints as VP are mostly thing Democrats might complain about but pretty much knew were impossible. She got saddled with voting rights and the border, but without any power to even try to do anything. It was just to keep Biden away from the no-win issues.

I’d vote 3 or 4 times for that ticket.

Seriously. What more could Trump possibly do to inspire someone with racism as one of their primary issues to vote for him. If you’re that dedicated to it, you already had your candidate.

Put a woke commie pacifist on the ticket? Hah! Now, Supply-Side Jesus, that’s a candidate.

She’s great on attack, she just gets tongue tied on defense sometimes. Before the primary (where she had some good attacks), she was most known for questioning people in the senate.

It’d fuck up their stupid 45-47 hats.

And now Trump is the dangerously old one. Hammer it home. He’s incoherent and a hamburger away from death.

If you think things are that off the rails then it doesn’t matter whether this is the inciting event or something else because they’re completely disconnected from even the premise of law.

Lemmy posters are not a monolith. They are many monoliths interacting with the internet via psychic emanations from atop lonely hillocks in places where mankind fears to tread.

Especially with how calcified the voting population is. Each candidate has something like a 44% floor of people who already know they’re going to vote for “the Democratic candidate” and the only question is how many of them actually go to the polls and what the remaining randos decide. And only in a handful of swing states. Most of the system is already predetermined.

Yes, and now we don’t have to choose between genocide hard and genocide light. Harris (or whoever) can come in with a generic pro-peace two-state message rather than defending the decision to send Israel big bombs for months. He’s off the ticket, you don’t need to argue that he’s bad but better than Trump anymore. The new candidate can just be not a genocide supporter.

The Democrats officially choose their nominee at the convention (or maybe a virtual vote this year). There will be only one ticket running for the Democrats, but someone other than Harris could try to get selected. It’s really unlikely though, as rejecting Harris would be very damaging to the party and two major competitors already said they wouldn’t try to run against her.