this post was submitted on 17 Dec 2024
115 points (100.0% liked)

Politics

10192 readers
63 users here now

In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it's a political happening, you can post it here.


Guidelines for submissions:

These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.


Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Dear god, no. This is an abjectly terrible idea. Dems aren't going to win until they stop being the other party of billionaires who are centre-right at best yet claiming to be for the working man. Come on, learn something from this election. We want a Sanders or AOC, not this milquetoast rejection of the full scope of the Overton window.

This is going to be a crazy four years, and to suggest we come out on the other side wanting a return to the same bullshit that held wages and lifestyles back for, by then, 50 years, is a failure to read the room. No one wants what the Democratic party currently offers, and I don't see her suddenly becoming progressive. We don't need another president on the cusp of getting Social Security when elected.

We want that for ourselves after paying into the system for so long, but that's not going to happen. Find a new standard-bearer or die. Learn. Adapt. Run on real change, not the incremental shit that was resoundingly rejected and so generously provided us with the shitshow we're about to endure. Voters stay home when you do that, and here we are.

I mean, how many CEOs need to be killed before anyone gets the message that what they're offering has the current panache of liver and onions? Doesn't matter how well it's prepared; the world has moved on, and whoever gets the nomination in '28 needs to as well. Harris is not that candidate.

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[โ€“] [email protected] 3 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I like OP's opinions because we're roughly aligned toward the same political ideals but he's just a touch more invested and less cynical.

[โ€“] [email protected] 4 points 5 days ago

Less cynical? That's my first laugh of the day. ๐Ÿคฃ With apologies to Humperdinck, try running a newsroom sometime.

[โ€“] [email protected] 24 points 5 days ago (1 children)

More CEO's will die until moral improves.

[โ€“] [email protected] 15 points 5 days ago

Morals are inconsistent with capitalism. Morale, on the other hand ... well, it's not high.

[โ€“] [email protected] 23 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I am not from the US but always felt the world would be so different if Bernie was up against Trump instead of Hilary.

Is there a younger member of the Democratic party with a similar vibe to Bernie?

[โ€“] [email protected] 20 points 5 days ago (5 children)
[โ€“] [email protected] 11 points 5 days ago (5 children)

She will run into the same problems as Clinton. The right has spent a decade attacking her at every opportunity so that she is a polarizing figure, whether she deserves it or not.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[โ€“] [email protected] 23 points 5 days ago (2 children)

Didn't learn the first time around, huh?

[โ€“] [email protected] 4 points 5 days ago

Everyone has 4 years to learn, including you. What/who is your viable alternative?

[โ€“] [email protected] 17 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

Apparently the Democratic moto is: "We are shocked and devastated by this turn of events and we will learn absolutely nothing from this."

load more comments (1 replies)
[โ€“] [email protected] 18 points 6 days ago (3 children)

the most plausible explanation I've seen so far - credit to this post (from one of the hosts of the 5-4 podcast) where I saw it first:

my suspicion is that Kamala is floating a CA governor run or 2028 run not because she thinks she has a chance but because it will help convince wealthy donors that it's still worth buying influence with her and thus help her fundraise to pay off her campaign's debts

but also Kamala ending up as the nominee wouldn't surprise me. if it's not her, there'll be a different "establishment" Democratic candidate that the DNC puts their thumb on the scale for. 2028 seems likely to be yet another "this is the most important election of our lives, it's crucial to the future of the country that you vote for whichever Democrat we tell you to vote for, now shut the fuck up and stop complaining".

[โ€“] [email protected] 11 points 5 days ago

Yeah, this is what I'm resigned to. Which is pretty much Trump-lite: No structural change, just nibbles around the edges. Great for cunnilingus, not politics.

load more comments (2 replies)
[โ€“] [email protected] 18 points 6 days ago

And the ratchet clicks like three full rotations

[โ€“] [email protected] 20 points 6 days ago (3 children)

Or you could learn any kind of lesson at all and run a candidate that's actually worth being enthusiastic about instead of a centrist who's still going to be seen as the second coming of Stalin by the right.

[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I'm sure several democrats will run?

load more comments (1 replies)
[โ€“] [email protected] 12 points 6 days ago (1 children)

youre right, but choose a candidate because theyre good, not someone based on how the right will respond. Literally any candidate is going to be portrayed as Stalin by the right.

[โ€“] [email protected] 13 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I said that because they're picking centrist candidates as a fig leaf that's just going to get shit on anyway. It's time to start putting actual leftists in office, not only because they should be there but because this "strategy" of trying to bridge the gap with modern day McCarthiests is stupid.

[โ€“] [email protected] 3 points 5 days ago

I agree completely

load more comments (1 replies)
[โ€“] [email protected] 9 points 6 days ago

Yeah, I think they just want to lose at this point. Maybe that was always the point.

[โ€“] [email protected] 14 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I don't care who is in the primary but we need to get rid of the superdelegates

[โ€“] [email protected] 4 points 5 days ago (1 children)

After 2016, the DNC already halved their influence. I'd argue they are a necessary evil to prevent various scenarios where bad actors try to hijack a primary.

But more generally, the entire point of a political party is to express political preferences via a platform, and to back candidates which support that platform. I don't really understand this idea otherwise... if a dozen Republicans decided to run as democrats to "troll" the primary, you'd want the party to step in, right?

In 2008 Obama was the outsider candidate but he was actually popular enough that the party had no choice but to back him in the end. That's how the process is supposed to work.

[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 5 days ago (2 children)

its always going to be an issue though because its not as democratic. If the trolling thing were so easy the democrats have more ability to do that and it does not happen. What would be great is if the party went to an auto runoff / ranked choice for primaries.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: โ€น prev next โ€บ