you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 4 points 2 years ago* (16 children)

I would be willing to believe JB could do it. don't know enough about Whitmer, think that Newsom has a chance but could just as easily be a Mitt Romney, and personally think you're a little out to lunch if you actually think Kamala would win when Hilary didn't.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    Kamala has been polling better then Biden. the problem isn't her popularity, it's Biden looking like he's died but doctors have refused to call it so they keep dragging him around. he even tried to salvage his debate performance with an interview with Stephanopoulos and still looked dead.

    idk if anyone believes he can take another 4 years without the doctors finally calling it and Kamala replacing him anyway. like, people who think Kamala can't be a better president than TFG would probably vote TFG anyway.

    also it's not like Biden won last time because everybody loves him. no one does. I've never seen an actual fan. he won mostly through negative partisanship against TFG.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    I actually think he's a pretty good president, who got a lot done quietly, including getting through some bipartisan stuff (when he didn't have a majority across both houses) that I don't think many other people would have managed because he's gently spoken and not a tub thumping shouter. I think he has a good heart even if his politics are noticeably further to the right than mine.

    AOC would be great. She gets it. She understands ordinary people, which is rare in US politics. Biden is pretty good. Not great at all, just pretty good.

    I like that he's not in the news every day (saying something stupid or nasty showing that he doesn't understand how stuff works or can't take criticism like Toddler-brained Trump), but the downside of quietly getting on with the job is that people aren't as aware of what he's done.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    exactly. i don't think he has a good heart but he definitely did some good things, more so than a lot of presidents, and some of it were things that i thought were impossible in the corporate states of america, like the union stuff.

    however, these things are not very exciting to talk about so they don't get much consistent coverage like the age-related gaffs do, and people don't have a long memory. and optics matter, especially if you're a democrat.

    sure, a republican can be a racist, traitor, pedo rapist who openly talks about how much he would love to fuck his own daughter, but a democrat can be disqualified for saying "yeah" a bit too loudly (I'm exaggerating Dean's situation here but there are other ridiculous examples).

    and the debate performance... i said this before but he didn't look old. Bernie looks old. Biden looked dead.

    it's not about the number of years with this guy. he doesn't look like he's all there. he also massively fucked up by answering a question about his strongest issue, abortion, and tied it into his weakest, immigration. that's not just a fumble, that's throwing.

    he also did an interview to assure voters that was a one time thing... and it didn't look good. he fucked up there too. he was asked what would happen if he stayed in the race and lost and he said "as long as i gave it my all..." -- yeah, joe? what? it doesn't matter? the question is what if your all isn't enough, joe... and your answer is basically "well i just wanna do it anyway and if it doesn't work out, i'll still be satisfied.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago

    I don't think the lack of coverage of Biden's accomplishments can be totally blamed on the media. Biden's team should be communicating more effectively and they just aren't imo. That's unfortunately a requirement of the office that Biden is not able to fulfill, especially not in his current state, not to mention both his press secretary and his vice president somehow managing to be just as equally terrible communicators as the demented 80 year old that's apparently steering the ship.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -4 points 2 years ago (8 children)

    don't know enough about Whitmer

    Then you aren't informed enough to even be talking about this

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] -5 points 2 years ago (7 children)

    And yet you want to put Whitmer on a national stage??

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (6 children)

    The child above me and their lack of knowledge has no relation to prudent political decision making, and their opinions are not reflective or representative of anything

    A random ignoramus on the internet does not determine anything, much less what is wise for the country or the Democratic Party.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 2 years ago (5 children)

    and their opinions are not reflective or representative of anything

    Are you serious? The vast majority of the voting age citizenry are ignoramuses.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    I am serious that anecdotal evidence is not statistically significant and that, therefore, one random child is not representative of anything

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    If you only look at each individual tree as a tree, you'll fail to realize you're in a forest.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    So if the above person was familiar with Whitmer then I should presume that most people also are?

    Your points aren't making sense. Anecdotal evidence gathered from a non-American child's comments on a random post on a fringe STEM-lord website is not representative of anything.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Jesus you people are insufferable. Not knowing about Whitmer is a single anecdote that is consistent with a trend that is quite obvious and so help me god if you do that sealioning bullshit demanding a peer reviewed study about Whitmers name recognition

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago

    consistent with a trend that is quite obvious

    What trend?

    sealioning

    Using terms like this makes one sound socially maladjusted. Which makes sense given the site we're on. Which reinforces my point that a random comment has no representative value - people on here are STEM-brained weirdos or are bots. Either way, not exactly representative of the median adult US voter

  • source
  • parent