this post was submitted on 10 Jul 2024
148 points (81.6% liked)

politics

19097 readers
4220 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 80 points 4 months ago (2 children)

You want the actual answer? Because the Democratic Party has spent the last decade torpedoing non-establishment candidates. They killed off other candidates even running in this primary, and shut down several primaries entirely. Why would we waste our time?

And let’s be honest, let’s say that now the DNC appoints a new candidate, like they legally can do, it’s not going to be an AOC or someone even slightly to the left like Warren. It’s going to be another neoliberal like Buttigeig who will continue to Biden’s legacy of absolute mediocrity and screwing over the American people in the name of “freedom”.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 4 months ago

This is 100% correct.

Small thing to add - we’re also in the midst of a devastating heat wave across most of the US at this moment. Taking to the streets isn’t exactly an accessible option right now, but anyone who has been remotely engaged in online discourse should be well aware of voters’ discontent with Biden and the status quo. They certainly won’t be discussing it on MSNBC however.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (2 children)

Your comment illustrates how our broken news system is the reason why four months is an insufficient runway for candidate policy clarity.

How do you consider Buttigieg a neoliberal? He wants to remove financial lobbying and stock trading permissions from Congress, create a nine Justice SCOTUS with three Democrat nominated Justices, three Republican, and three voted in by the previous six, his campaign raised $80M from small donations, and he endorsed the Green New Deal.

Just because he’s not as progressive as AOC or Bernie, doesn’t mean he’s not a big step in the right direction.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Thinking back to 2019 iircc the only Democrat candidate of the ±15 that was more conservative than Biden/Harris was Bloomberg. -I guess you could also argue Gabbard but she opted to go a different direction altogether. Regardless, a lot of Democrat voters seem to be projecting their values onto Biden without evaluating him as he is and always has been. He's never been particularly progressive.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

People forget that Biden was paired with Obama because Obama was seen as “too liberal” for “mainstream Democrats”. Biden was supposed to be a “correction” for Obama’s crazy ideas like the ACA (that was actually originally pushed for by, wait for it, Ronald fucking Reagan. The only difference was that Reagan didn’t propose any kind of public option, but that was the first thing Democrats killed in the name of “compromise”)

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Yet Biden has been way more liberal than Obama.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Are you joking or not? I can’t tell.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

He has. By literally every measure.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Ok. I’ll let you believe what you want to I guess. Evidently Obama actively supported multiple genocides instead of passively supporting one.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

Yes, that is also true. Glad you're catching up.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

They didn't call him Wall Street Pete and Wine Cave Pete for nothing...

https://x.com/niktaylorde/status/1145703743842922499