Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
I just hope they don't think Harris lost because she didn't have enough time and then run her again in 2028, either without a primary or with a heavily one-sided primary like in 2016.
I would say "wow, the dementia is even farther along than we realized" but it's likely the entire neoliberal faction that will be determined to come to this erroneous conclusion. They will grasp at any straw, even racist/sexist ones, in order to avoid admitting that the electorate is crying out for anti-corporate change.
no. any idiots that did not vote for kamala to avoid a second trump term would likely not have voted for him. win for gaza or something.
on no fucking planet is this the case. Also, him hanging on as long as he did, didn't help things. It's not like the Harris campaign did themselves any favors, but was clear not one person the the management caste of the DNC really gave a fuck about winning.
Not a chance in hell.
It does highlight how out of touch those in the gerontocracy are, however.
Jfc, these people.
No, all the problems left of fascists have with Kamala were even moreso with him. The only way Democrats could have won was to hold a fair primary which they haven't done in a long time. They needed to get people voting for a candidate and not against the other guy which has been the strategy of both parties for ages, but doesn't work well when one side has people voting for him and your side actually wanted to vote against you, but were never given an alternate.
Yeah except he disappeared ages ago.
His own staff had data that showed he would have lost even more electoral votes, giving Trump 400 instead of the 312. Biden is not aware of this data though. Kind of makes you think his staff is still heavily censoring what he sees.
How do you call something a "mistake" when you allowed it to continue for four fucking years?
Anyone who figured out messaging beyond "Look how bad Trump is, even Bush republicans won't vote for him" probably wins that election. No one had a broad vision to latch for sale, and no one did anything inspiring.
Might've, might not've. It's irrelevant now, of course.
What Biden and Harris will be remembered most for, is their peaceful transition of power to a mentally unbalanced fascist tyrant, knowingly, compliantly, without even any public statements of caution.
Biden and Harris are ready to quietly shake hands with Trump and Pence, hand them control of everything, after then retire to a quiet life of luxury and highly-paid speaking engagements, where they'll continue the Democratic Party's proud tradition of speaking without really saying anything.
And so the toilet flushes.
their peaceful transition of power to a mentally unbalanced fascist tyrant
They can either hand over control to someone who might destroy American democracy, or they can destroy American democracy themselves.
Just a small correction ... Trump's VP is JD Vance this time, not Pence.
Mr. I’m only gonna be a one term President seems to have a short memory, yet again.
Him and his staff misled and dragged their feet about his intentions early in then he went full out with ‘no I’m gonna run fuck you all’ and it turned into a disaster.
This is just one of the problems with the current Democratic Party. No one will work with and groom the upcoming young members to take control. The older party members literally do not have a clue what it means to step aside for the good of the party and the good of the country.
I wish this comment was higher. Biden betrayed the party and its chances of defeating Trump the moment he won the 2020 election and chose to not start preparing the nation on Jan 20th 2021 for a younger generation to lead. Merrick fucking Garland was the other, related, and just as large mistake. That one is totally on him.
And Kamala has just never been a great candidate, but he could have taken actions to try to boost her prominence. Instead he saddled her with no-win issues throughout and jealously guarded any successes for himself. And the one big bad issue I remember that he didn't dump on her (the rail strike), he farmed out to Pete Buttigieg to be the face of the administration (even though it wasn't a DOT issue). It was almost like the goal was to sabotage any potential locus of political power that wasn't Biden and his inner circle.
I don't think a better grooming would have helped Harris when she wasn't willing to be not-Biden in any way other than being coherent, but it certainly didn't help and seems indicative of their lack of intention to ever transfer power.
I have a fun test for you, it will inform you if your information ecosystem is informing you or misinforming you
Mr. I’m only gonna be a one term President seems to have a short memory, yet again.
You clearly remember this as a big promise during Biden's 2020 campaign - but can you actually find evidence of him saying this, ever?
Can you find anything official - with a name attached to it - of the Biden campaign saying anything about only serving for one term?
Google gives a bunch of examples. Did he actually say it to the press? Perhaps not. Was it discussed and was his age recognized as a liability within his campaign in 2020? Absolutely yes.
They all, all reference the exact same quote each article.
“If Biden is elected,” a prominent adviser to the campaign said, “he’s going to be 82 years old in four years and he won’t be running for reelection.”
The adviser argued that public acknowledgment of that reality could help Biden mollify younger voters, especially on the left, who are unexcited by his candidacy and fear that his nomination would serve as an eight-year roadblock to the next generation of Democrats.
By signaling that he will serve just one term and choosing a running mate and Cabinet that is young and diverse, Biden could offer himself to the Democratic primary electorate as the candidate best suited to defeat Trump as well as the candidate who can usher into power the party’s fresh faces.
None of that was official, it was all just the campaign's attempt to shore up an issue they had without an actual commitment and you fell for it.
Well, then they should've repudiated it a lot sooner (i.e. during the 2020 campaign), because to allow the misconception to exist is tantamount to confirming it.
The older party members literally do not have a clue what it means to step aside for the good of the party and the good of the country.
"They young care too much about disrupting our economy (making it more fair which means less for my ~~owners~~ donors) we can't have that."