politics
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
view the rest of the comments
While I understand what you mean, we also have to recognize that doing that would 100% give trump the election. Splitting the votes is not what we want to do.
We are 100% giving Trump the election now on our present course. Biden is Hillary with worse numbers.
With all due respect if we're speaking in terms of certainty, I am 100% certain that Biden will give Trump the election—and I guarantee I have more evidence to support that statement than anyone does to the opposite conclusion. Staying this course is a disaster in slow-motion. The Titanic already hit the iceberg and now we're just sinking for 4 months straight. We either jump ship now, or we are going to lose, or we start gearing up for 2028 now.
I completely disagree. While the debate felt disastrous, there is ample evidence that a not insignificant amount of swing voters either saw past the old man voice to what he was actually saying and standing for, as well as recognized how badly Trump did, even though literally everyone only focuses on Biden, just like always.
The worst possible thing we can do right now is just jump ship this close to an election. Biden has one bad debate, and is fine the day after(another thing people conveniently love to ignore) and we're just supposed to restart. What if the new candidate does poorly at the second debate? We just pick another person again?
Biden beat Trump last time. Trump has only grown weaker and lost support, while Biden has been extremely successful. Everyone is upset about the debate performance, but it will not be even close to as impactful as people are convincing themselves it will be.
You understand that is so far removed from reality it might as well be a Fox headline.
Before going forward, let me be clear: I want to be convinced that we're not fucked. I really do. The past three days I've gone into detail about how I think we're fucked and looking for anyone to make a sound, data-driven argument that shows we are not. I've yet to be convinced by one, and bear in mind I voted for Biden once and would vote for a corpse if it meant preventing the convicted felon getting keys to the WH again.
Please show me these! Because these are all the surveys I've so far seen:
Post-Debate: "72 Percent Say Biden Unfit Mentally, Cognitively."
Post-Debate: "64% of Independents want Biden replaced on the ballot"; that's more than they want Trump replaced on the ballot by 1%, by the way.
Post-Debate: "Voters think Harris is more fit than Biden to run the country"
Post-Debate: "Swing state voters react to presidential debate, Biden’s weak performance"
Post-Debate Focus Group: "Undecided voter focus group leans toward Trump after debate"
Post-Debate Focus Group 2/Reuters: "'I am absolutely voting for Donald Trump': Undecided voters react to Biden's debate performance"
Post-Debate USAToday/Suffolk Poll: "Republican Donald Trump has edged ahead of Democrat Joe Biden, 41% to 38%, in the aftermath of the candidates' rancorous debate last week"
Nate Silver of 538's Model: "Biden’s win probability has dropped to 28 percent from 35 percent on debate night."
Let's face reality:
To me I view it as a known loss versus a known risky chance. At this point, personally and given all the data I've thus far presented, I am that convinced that we will lose. Polling shows people deeply unsatisfied with the current candidate. I think critical swing-state voters would just be happy to vote for a fresh face that is younger. Like Mehdi Hasan said, "Americans like new shit."
So I don't know how how you can say with a straight face that Biden is more successful while simultaneously dodging the obvious fact that there is a significant decline in physical and cognitive performance. So let's recap:
We can downplay all we want, but this wasn't "one bad debate," for it wasn't even about the debat eitself but the revelation of Biden's senility piercing through echo-chambers. For the exact same reason Biden ASKED for this debate to reach important voters and show he's mentally fit (akin to the SOTU) and show Trump is not, it backfired 100% and there will not be another chance to reach 50 million voters at prime-tme. Trump has no obligation to take another debate; ending on that note is all that is needed.
If I was a Republican strategist, I'd be doing everything in my power to keep Biden in the race because I know he'd be the weakest opponent compared to a fresh, younger face. Nate Silver, Ezra Klein, even former Obama/Biden staffers from PSA clearly agree.
Now if you agree with this and you say, "okay I see your points, but how can anyone else do better?" then we'll move on to that.
TBF, It’s difficult to copy-paste MSNBC talking points about why Biden should stay in the race.