What is this bizzaro world? Who is being paid to write these crap articles?
Nominating Kamala is the best way to guarantee a Trump presidency. It's like ya'll learned nothing from hillary clinton.
this post was submitted on 22 Jul 2024
513 points (97.9% liked)
politics
23036 readers
3140 users here now
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
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I still find it strange that this is considered "late in the election cycle". We need legislation limiting campaign length to something reasonable.
Free speech pretty much means you can't stop someone from advertising for themselves or a cause just because it isn't close to election season. I don't disagree with you at all, but this is going to be a constitutional no go, I think.
Free speech can be limited if you have a good reason. For example, if you don't want people to see how their food is raised, you can just ignore key constitutional freedoms..
What are you referencing?
Yup. The ag-gag laws seem to be a huge carve-out - if that can be managed, I don't see why we don't start limiting the election cycle, too.
I don’t see why we don’t start limiting the election cycle, too.
Totally.
We have freedom here, and yet our elections are like 2 months long, start to finish (including hand-counting ballots from that one day of voting). My polling place is a mason's hall about a block away that they convert to a polling station with some cardboard boxes and folding tables.
load more comments
(14 replies)
load more comments
(6 replies)
I laughed a lot when the international news on TV around here claimed that "in a move that took politicians and campaign mangers by surprise, Biden left the race"... But the more I look around, the more it looks like people were surprised by it.
How come?
I don't think too many realists were surprised. I think a lot of people that buy into a lot of bothsiderist bullshit might have been surprised, I dunno. Or the types that some call "blue maga", but honestly, unless someone's paycheck relies on believing in this, I don't know who qualifies as "blue maga".
I don’t know who qualifies as “blue maga”.
No one. Outside of a MAGA talking point and an attempt to 'both sides' MAGA, it's no one.
Because it hasn't happened a lot. If you are the incumbent, you are running for a second term unless you are beat or dead. Leaving for whatever reasons is very rare.
Leaving for whatever reasons is very rare.
And, again, disastrous every time. Landslide losses when you switch out the incumbent.
Cal comes to mind... and that's the only one that I can immediately think of.
Edit: looked it up: LBJ, Harry S Truman, Cal, Rutherford B. Hayes, James Buchanan, and James K. Polk. So yeah, really short list.
Everytime someone mentions Harry Truman, I have Linda from Bob's Burgers song that she apparently sings while braiding her daughter's hair come to mind:
Here goes the hair and / There goes the hair and / Where is Harry Truman? / He's dead in the ground. / He's dead in the ground. / He's dead, dead, dead!
People saying that Biden should have dropped out two weeks ago have never, in their entire life, had to make a life-changing decision. Whatever the result, I personally applaud his ability to put aside his pride and his ego for the sake of a cause larger than himself.
The timing was excellent in my opinion. The RNC spent an entire week focused on the messaging against Biden during their convention. Now Biden's gone, and they're not going to have another week of undivided attention from the press between now and the election.
Well played, from my perspective.
I'm not saying it isn't well played. The DNC always does small little tactic shit like this well. Their issue has always been the longer strategy. That grand reveal. Whatever the Right has, they have played the same game for decades. What's saved us is their infighting once they get any sort of foothold. For the first time in our history, so far as I am aware, we must focus on the Presidency as they have gambled everything on securing it. Stop that and we stop them. Don't stop them and we'll have a long and terrible fight on our hands.
That is unless some of their party is only playing ball and grow a pair when the proverbial shit meets mythical fan of shit flinging. I will say that we've seen moments where some of the party isn't comfortable with the way things have gone. Problem is, as fucking classics, they refuse to stand because they know they'll be pushed out of the club. Better to lay with the herd than be displaced and replaced, possibly by a non-Right.