In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it's a political happening, you can post it here.
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.
We get it, he's old. But we should 100% be putting the effort of talking about how he's old into raising the alarm about Trump.
Concern about Biden should pale in comparison to the concern people should have about a potential Trump term.
Biden might run, he might get replaced. Either way him or really ANY potential Democratic replacement are a thousand times better than Trump.
Bruh we been raising the alarm about Trump for the past 8 years. It doesn't move the needle. You know what does? A compelling alternative. The problem is, the way the primary is set up, only Joe Biden himself can make the choice to replace Biden on the ticket. He has the votes (thanks to running mostly unopposed), so the party can't actually do anything without Joe's consent. Many (including me) are still concerned that Biden should not be trailing Trump at all in the polls, given how many forces are running against Trump. This is why you continue to hear calls to replace Biden. Yes, you and me are going to vote Blue not matter who. But my moderate uncle in Wisconsin will not, and he's the kind of voter that is going to decide this election. And you can say all you want about Project 2025 or felony convictions or whatever. These moderates are stuck on the idea that this election is simply "the old guy vs. the rude guy, again", and raising the alarm about Trump just sounds like more liberal-whinging to these people.
I mean, you are correct also. These are all good points.
But it's just becoming the only thing people are talking about, at a time where pretty major trump news (Epstein papers) should be the major talking point. It's overshadowing everything.
i'm not saying that that isn't big news, i'm just saying that Trump's pedophilic tendencies have already been known to all of the people that might read a news article about the new details from the Epstein papers. Trump has also done 10x more things that are equally ugly and disgusting. I just don't think there's a point to reporting "Trump is gross and evil" anymore. Everyone knows and has made up their mind about him.
Id argue a lot of the same undecided voters might not have heard this before, and might be swayed. (Also might be swayed learning about project 2025 etc.)
But the more we belabour Biden being old and needing to be replaced, the same undecided (not paying as much attention) voters might think there's something wrong with him and sit out, or vote for Trump. I think that's the danger of focusing on this too much
To woo voters, I think we should all write the White House and ask for a new candidate with a, "No Kings allowed" message -- probably our VP, Kamala Harris. I think it would get the undecided to pay attention for a minute. I want her (or anyone) out there saying things like, "Dictator? We founded our nation because we knew Monarchs -- and autocrats in general -- were a bad idea!" and, "Nazis? White Nationalism? How many of you have family members who were killed or injured fighting that war? We know we don't want that here. We know how that turns out if unopposed!"
Lastly, the new message should be about government serving the PUBLIC instead of itself.
"The US President might be in cognitive decline" is a massive news story, as is "The only opponent to a fascist is one more bad night away from his campaign completely imploding," and also "the President's own party says behind closed doors that he's in massive trouble, but is sticking with him in public."
If he's unopposed, who exactly is this great new candidate who is going to magically appear?
There are multiple people that could probably outperform Biden in this election. He ran unopposed because it is generally frowned upon to run against your party's incumbent, and no one that had a chance wanted to get on the Dem party's bad side.
Article summary, Dems are worried they may lose the election. As a solution the subtly hint at maybe their only viable candidate should consider that.
It isn't even a story at this point, why keep it alive? Clicks? Do better media.
https://infosec.exchange/@rayckeith@techhub.social/112764288543910527
i mean, i'm still deeply alarmed about the inadequacy of Joe Biden as a candidate. And I don't work in media. I just spent the weekend with moderate relatives that are ready to stay home instead of voting in November because they don't like either choice, and the debate solidified that position. Why keep it alive? Because this is maybe the only chance Dems have to actually win this election, and we're watching them slowly piss it away.
I would like a jelly bean tree, in the mean time I'll stick with what I can get.
Ok, I'll bite. Name his inadequacies. I will not accept his debate performance as an answer. Because, while it was horrible, he has had plenty of excellent speeches before and after. For example one of the best SOTUs I have heard in my lifetime (I'm old) and his NATO address.
For reference. Listen to the content.
NATO https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NQTY7nDi10I
SOTU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=al7ont2noYA
And to contrast and if you don't mind losing brain cells. Trump Miami. Showed up an hour late. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1cg-oo27ny4
Ok, I'll bite back. The election is going to swing on low-information voters in a handful of states. Coyotino just told you about people who could sway the vote to keep Trump out, but are planning to STAY HOME. They're going to swing us into fascism.
Biden's inadequacies:
\
We need all eligible voters to show up and stop Trump. We need a Congress that will outlaw fascist actions rather than further enabling them.
We need something to spark the apathetic potential voters to act to save Democracy because the risk is too great and right now the low-info folks aren't hearing anything new.
So your comment about moderates not voting because.... they do not like either and fascism and Project 2025 are not compelling augments? Reminds me of a friend who told me that he was not voting because it doesn't matter to him. And them Trump tariffs hurt his business.
Ok your list
#1 You do not think he is winning #2 You do not believe he is capable of responding to Project 2025 because of his debate performance. #3 You've got an ageist argument and then connect that to his policy position on escalation management. #4 After a great speech you come away with not feeling good about superficial characteristics #5 You do not think he is winning
"We need something to spark the apathetic potential voters to act to save Democracy because the risk is too great and right now the low-info folks aren’t hearing anything new."
I am here arguing for the most viable option. Let's all do our best to help.
I do not agree with everything he has done but his actions have proven to me that he has been an excellent president and is a good person. I also believe he is the only viable candidate we have. Is he old and does he seem old, yes. Will he be able to lead a good and effective administration, he has and he will.
Do you think the Biden administration has been a good one and do you think a future Biden administration will be a good one?
I don't think you read what I wrote.
Look: The polls and pundits tell me a future Biden administration will only exist in our dreams, so the only choice is to find someone else or let Trump win.
I was thinking we were in a thread that started with:
I just spent the weekend with moderate relatives that are ready to stay home instead of voting in November because they don’t like either choice, and the debate solidified that position.
I didn’t say “moderates not voting” I said “low-information voters.”
I don't want to argue, I mean I admit I did but that's not really want I was intending. I think you have a valid point of view but I do not see it the way you do.
I see what you are saying and I appreciate that we are both stating our positions. I;m grateful we have a place where we can express ourselves.
You are correct that the thread started that way. I was just saying that I then reframed that as low-info voters who may or may not be moderate. Someone in another thread had talked about some leftists in California who were going t skip voting as a protest to the war in Israel -- which won't matter because California is not up for grabs.
FWIW, I watched Biden's press conference and was once again amazed as Biden reminded us of all the things he's done. He's been a great statesman and exactly the kind of world leader I want our President to be, and it baffles me that so much of the population want to pick a petty know-nothing bully like Trump.
I will not accept his debate performance as an answer. Because, while it was horrible, he has had plenty of excellent speeches before and after.
That's not how mental decline works, my dude. It's not some steady progression, it happens in fits and episodes. But it only gets worse. Like forgetting that someone you wrote a statement of condolence for is dead, and calling for her at an event (Rep. Wolarski), or thinking that you just had conversations with people who have been dead for years (Mitterrand, Kohl)
If you legitimately have not seen someone go through this kind of mental decline, I am happy for you, because it sucks. My grandmother is getting really bad at this point, and it hurts to watch. But denying it and pretending these are just moments of normal forgetfulness rather than living in the past that is common for people in mental decline, is cruel and irresponsible.
Is he in a really terrible place right now? Doesn't seem like it. But neither was my grandmother just 2 years ago, and we're not choosing him for how is is today, we're choosing him based on how he might be the next 4 years.
I have seen it. More than once.
Biden is one man and it is the Biden administration. We can't predict the future and if there was a younger stellar dem candidate who could viable take on, ok then. But this is what we have. I'd take a President Harris no problem if it came to it. If Biden can stay the front man and have the right people behind him, which he will, it will be fine.
People had no problem with a straight up psyco like Reagan in dementia as president.
And really let's say you are right about Biden. Then we get to chose between two people in the same boat. One's a dangerous narcissist and one is a good man.
Your argument is literally to give up and sit on your hands and just hope and pray that no one notices we're putting a senile individual into the most powerful job position in the world. Oh, and whatabout Reagan.
Biden is one man and it is the Biden administration.
The cabinet and administration are not there to Weekend at Bernie's the President.
And really let’s say you are right about Biden. Then we get to chose between two people in the same boat. One’s a dangerous narcissist and one is a good man.
Who is no longer in full control of his faculties. Which is a horrible choice. You're arguing against trying to make that choice something else.
if there was a younger stellar dem candidate who could viable take on, ok then
There are, but no matter who anyone says, you'll write them off for one reason or another.
This is not strategy or sound reasoning, it's fecklessness. It's fear of making the wrong choice, so you'd rather walk away from the trolley switch and wash your hands of it. When Biden loses, all the people arguing for him to stay in won't actually have to take any responsibility for their part in Trump being back in office. I'm sure they'll just find a way to blame everyone else- probably for "not being on-board" enough (which is exactly why Biden shouldn't still be running- candidates are supposed to be who people want running).
You don't know me so do not tell me what I think or would say.
What your viable alternative and how will it be achieved?
Harris - if Biden steps aside right now, Harris would be the presumptive replacement without actually needing to wait until the convention.
Buttigieg - already has national recognition and is a proven effective and persuasive speaker- he literally gets sent on Fox News to debate them because he's so cogent and fast that none of their talking heads can beat him, and if Biden exits and it does go to an open, televised, convention, he would be well-positioned to invigorate the base
Whitmer - less name recognition for her policies, she is a strong speaker, and doesn't have the baggage that e.g. Newsom does (although to be fair it's not Democratic baggage, it's anti-California Republican rhetoric)
I would 100% support all 3 with no issue what so ever - they are all superb options. If I could just pick between Biden and those 3, I think I'd take Harris or Whitmer not to slight Buttigieg but I'd rather see a women in the role. I'm not sure who would be best, so let's make the US proud and elect a woman. I'd vote for Newsom but he'd be my 5th choice on this list I'm not his biggest fan but he's ok. That's a great list btw I don't know who else I'd consider.
But how could we realistically get to them? Biden says he is running and how's that going to change? That's the issue. Biden is the candidate so he has my support and I do believe in him. If he steps aside, I'll take what I can get that isn't the felon.
But how could we realistically get to them? Biden says he is running and how’s that going to change?
By making the larger conversation about "Biden needs to step aside", rather than being half split between "we need to all align behind Biden". There's still 4 months, and the convention hasn't happened.
And man, how fucking sad would it be (even if it would be very American) for our first woman president to get there by an old white guy dying and she being the default replacement?
Question: Could Biden get elected, then at some point decide he's no longer fit for duty? Would that still make Harris president?
Yes, if the president stops being president, for any reason, the VP becomes president. That's what I'm saying would be incredibly sad.
If he voluntarily stepped down, I don't think it would be that sad. Kind of sad that Americans are not yet ready to vote a woman into presidency, if that's what you mean, but otherwise it looks fine?
That's exactly what I mean.
Because at the end of the day nothing... and i mean nothing will please me more than Trump losing for a second time to an old motherfucker because Americans hate him more than we like an alternative
Slowly? I hear nothing else.
I find it baffling how much criticism/this stuff goes around and gets published. Which may not be surprising, it's central to the current politics, people are invested, and press is always interested in stuff like this. Hysteria and social media trends were a thing before too. Press always rides on about the same thing until it's over or something better comes along.
But with Russias huge investments in destabilizing the western nations with stuff like this, I have to wonder how much of it is caused or extrapolated by its involvement. Especially when I hear/read "on social media" in press, where Russias primary focus lies.
There's no simple or single answer in a complex world. But Russia is certainly looking at this in a very satisfied way. It and what follows with the election may very well be the culmination of many years of destabilization efforts.
This is almost certainly a Russian talking point. It's completely unstrategic, it's spreading largely through broadcast media, and it's easy to regurgitate with zero thought. Literally 10 articles per day about this, and none of them seem aware that the primary even existed.
Bullshit. Propagandistic bullshit.
the primary, where Biden ran mostly unopposed? that primary? i'm no russian, and i've been part of sharing these articles, because it's a concern that I have as a fascist-fearing leftist.
Right. The one where this magical replacement for Biden that doesn't have a name or a face could have jumped on a primary ticket if they had wanted to.
Do you really think that's not a possibility? Did you forget 2016 already? Sanders certainly wasn't wanted by the DNC establishment, and they even found ways to put their foot on the scale, but he was still on the ballot in a high-profile democratic primary.
If someone had wanted to replace Biden, as in like, actually thought they had a good chance of winning and wanted to do the job, there was plenty of time for that before the Russian propaganda machine started wiggling its way into center-left media outlets.
🤖 I'm a bot that provides automatic summaries for articles:
Click here to see the summary
Lawmakers have said both publicly and privately that the party is badly fractured on the issue, giving heightened power to drips of information from individual members who choose to voice their opinions.
It is a high stakes battle within the party as most members agree there is little time to change course if Biden chooses to step aside.
Oregon Democratic Senator Jeff Merkley, asked about Sen. Bennet's comments told NPR, "I do share those concerns and so do many of my colleagues."
On Wednesday, New York Rep. Pat Ryan joined Rep. Mikie Sherrill of New Jersey as the latest at-risk Democrats calling on Biden to step aside.
Even some close allies like former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., have carefully avoided speaking directly to questions about whether Biden should drop out.
Speaking in an interview on MSNBC's Morning Joe, Pelosi reiterated that she believes Biden has a great president but she took a careful approach to questions about his future.
Saved 70% of original text.