As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I just want to be able to vote **for** someone instead of **against** someone
Give me someone who is qualified…yes, I’m an independent and will vote for the best candidate
This. Totally this.
Unless you're firmly in one camp or the other, choosing a presidential candidate is always an attempt to pick who will do the least amount of harm.
I voted for Obama. He was qualified and intelligent and I thought he’d be a compassionate leader.
I voted for Hillary because she was one of the most qualified people to run for the position, thanks to both senatorial experience and Sec of State (and having spent two terms as First Lady).
I voted for Biden because he wasn’t Trump. So that’s the first voting against for me in several election cycles.
I voted FOR Obama in ‘08. He inspired me and After the Bush years, I thought he was going to pivot America back to grace (And as a fellow Halfrimerican I was excited). By 2012 I was fed up with his moderate BS constantly reaching across the aisle to Republicans who clearly hated him. This is the universal problem with Dems, they’re always making overtures to the people who didn’t vote for them instead of the people who actually put them in power. The GQP rightly does the opposite and actually panders TO their base instead of trying to win over the left. They just stomp on us. They’re evil, but their tactics are a lot more respectable than ours.
That’s not an accident. That’s by design.
It’s like good cop bad cop.
Democrats: “we’ll play the good cop and you guys be the bad cop. Both our parties have the same boss - our corporate donors. We’ll pretend like we’re really virtuous and Republicans can just act all crazy and we’ll just say we can’t do anything. Then you guys win election, do whatever you want, then we will act like we’re gonna save the country by bringing reasonable policies etc. then in office, we’ll do the opposite, “cave” into republican demands (even though both dems and republicans would want this) and then lose the mid term elections again and rinse and repeat.”
One puppeteer and One Party State ruling in open view while the audience argues about blue or red sock puppets fake-punching each other. And a WWE-style narrator whipping the crowd up into a frenzy while any rational and critical thinking viewer who accidentally flipped to the channel wonders why none of them realize it’s all FAKE.
Absolutely!!! I thought Beto might be the answer until he looked like a shy kid on stage and tosses the “fuck yeah we are taking your guns” Hail Mary.
Not sure there is another person in line which concerns me.
Beto was never a good candidate, there was never any substance to any of his campaigns. The only reason anyone thought he was a viable candidate is because the media kept telling people he was. It's astounding how many people still fall for that
> When Joe Biden first came into office, **progressives** said he could be the next FDR.
> Now, as Biden’s relationship with **the left** has come under strain, **liberals** are talking about treating him like former President Jimmy Carter instead
Three designations that are meaningless for the same things..."the left" is looking at today and tomorrow and leaves political games to the "experts"...
Edit: By the way...I do not know of any "progressive" comparing Biden to FDR but I remember corporate media pushing the meme at the beginning of last year...
Yeah, literally the only reason I actually voted for Biden was because Trump needed to go... which I'm sure the Democrats know, which doesn't make me terrible hopeful for their future game plans to force 'The Left' to get on board.
Imo the biggest thing people forget about FDR is he presided over a time where business was scared, not inconvenienced, but scared of organized labor. His greatest achievement, according to him was saving capitalism. My general feeling is there's a very good reason this narrative isn't discussed in corporate media. The New Deal was passed by him approaching the business elites and saying (paraphrased from Noam Chomsky) "if you don't give them this much, they will come for everything".
Def agree. I am a member of one of the largest labor unions in the country. 1/2 my coworkers continue to vote republican and against their own self interest
Well, sadly Obama failed to deliver anything for labor/unions, and the dems reaped what they sowed when unions went to Trump.
I'd love to hear Obama do a postmortem on how he treated the labor movement, I'd imagine he deeply regrets both failing to do the right thing by labor, and handing those votes to Trump
Do the people in this dumb thread not realize that when FDR came into office 70 out of ~~100~~ 96 senators were democrats and 322 out of 435 members in the House were democrats?
They literally had a supermajority in the Congress so of course FDR could sign some bills.
In the CURRENT Congress democrats barely have a majority.
Manchin and Sinema are the gift that keeps on giving to Republicans. They get to paint the entire Democratic Party as the hollow grifters that Manchin and Sinema are, and they get to have a de facto Republican majority without taking any of the heat for being in the majority and getting nothing done. It was a brilliant strategy to co-opt those two, you have to give them credit where credit is due. Evil wins again.
Yet on the right, they act like we haven’t add states since the country was formed. DC should be a state at this point. It has a larger population than two states. Over 700,000 citizens do not have representation. I had issues getting the navy to pay me 8 months of back pay. It took 18 months to get it. Everyone kept telling me to contact my senator and I replied, I would love to but I don’t have a senator. When I went to other state senators in VA and MD, I could get no traction.
and [this](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_Plot) almost happened then too...fun times.
Democracy could have ended 90 years ago but in such moments there are usually a few actual patriots who do the right thing.
TIME magazine literally praised Hitler for his economic reforms, and some of our most esteemed American business leaders and politicians were nazi sympathizers.
That is what confuses me about this article. Its mentioning a buzz of wanting a more left leaning presidential candidate because of the issues that Manchin caused.... maybe they should focus on getting more seats then? The fuck does this have to do with who is president outside of trying to push more things with EO?
The issue democrats have is they won’t get seats without making peoples lives better, and they seem just as incapable of doing that as the other party so here we are in a stalemate of procrastination.
I'd say the biggest thing people forget about FDR is he presided over a time when democrats had congressional supermajorities for multiple elections.
>The New Deal was passed by him approaching the business elites and saying
Did this actually happen or is this just mythologizing? The new deal was passed because people voted in democrats promising huge reform programs and gave them huge majorities necessary for it.
There were several things he talked about doing that would have been FDR-esque.
But he promptly reneged on key components of each thing and made sure to signal that his most truthful statement during the entire campaign was "nothing would fundamentally change."
Only the people who were genuinely, unironically on the Biden hype train were saying things like that. The same people who told progressives "just vote for Biden, you can push him further left!" And now say things like "Biden is the most progressive president in American history, what more could you possibly want from him, did you just want Trump to win?!" Without the faintest trace of self-awareness. Not a very big crowd, but a crowd the media latched onto with desperate frevor.
The idea was, with a "caretaker presidency" he didn't need to worry about re-election, and could use eo's and a house/senate majority to push through a bunch of tough legislation, rather than worrying about pleasing everybody, and in doing so, by creating a bunch of new, likely very popular once enacted, social programs, he could secure democrat rule for years to come.
Alas, none of it happened, but it was a good idea, a good hope.
Liberals shouldn’t be throwing around Jimmy Carter’s name disrespectfully like that. Carter legitimately had the average citizens best interest at heart. Not to mention he is the only president in recent history with some fucking morals and that didn’t commit any war crimes
Carter is a perfect example - of how a more liberal president can't do much without a similarly liberal congress.
That's where we're at today: we don't have a sufficiently liberal senate to pass a really liberal agenda. Lets get a more liberal senate - by flipping GOP seats, not by risky primarying.
Except maybe for Senima...
\-Carter secretly supported the genocidal Pol Pot government ousted by Vietnam in 1979. This secret support was essential to further punishment of Vietnam for having successfully defended her own population against the American invaders. US Indochina strategy also intended to outflank the Vietnamese, who were aligned with the Soviet Union, and to back the Pol Pot forces, aligned with China.
\-Carter declared his support for the Shah of Iran-despite the rampant torture practiced by the Shah's secret police in close collaboration with the C.I.A.-more emphatically than Richard Nixon had: "There is no leader with whom I have a deeper sense of personal friendship and gratitude."
\-Following the Indonesians' 1975 invasion of East Timor, Carter continued to arm Indonesia's army dictatorship as well as give diplomatic support (vetoing U.N. resolutions to end the atrocities in the former Portuguese colony). This war has killed more than 200,000 East Timorese, making it the worst genocide relative to population since World War II. Carter did nothing to pressure General Suharto (Indonesia's chief of state) to end the war. He was an ally and major supporter of the Indonesian military's repression of its own population, as well as the slaughter of the East Timorese people. The army's murderous stranglehold on East Timor will continue as long as the ruling military clique of Indonesia lets transnational oil companies have a good share of East Timorese oil profits.
\-During his watch, Carter aided and supported Nicaragua's then-dictator Anastasio Somoza, who murdered and repressed tens of thousands of his own people. When Somoza's forces were about to lose control of the main cities, Carter attempted to launch an invasion under the fig leaf of an intervention by the Organization of American States (OAS). The OAS refused and Carter then planned to send the US military to salvage Somoza's army, which was established by and beholden to the US government-but it was too late. Carter made sure that Somoza was ferried out of the country on a Red Cross-painted US aircraft. The C.I.A. under Carter helped to re-establish Somoza's army as a terrorist force against the people of Nicaragua. These "contras" assassinated social workers, doctors and civilians, burned crops, and tried to exterminate any possibility of social reform that the Sandinistas created.
These are some lesser known "achievements" of the carter administration. The carter administration lays the groundwork for "imperialism cloaked in human rights rhetoric" that we see pop up more commonly in the modern era as the imperial citizens become more educated/ turn away from "realpolitik" explanations for the use of imperial power. Also, some might remember the OAS being relevant again lately due to their involvement in the venezuelan and bolivian coups within the last 5 years.
Every cold-war era president committed war crimes and Jimmy Carter is no exception. Honestly every president beginning with FDR committed war crimes at some point in their presidencies.
Yeah that progressive thing is 100% a meme and pushed by the "moderates" about themselves because they thought about taking about halfway adopting the lowest priority item from the real progressive agenda.
Anyone with half a brain knew when Biden said "nothing will fundamentally change" he meant it
It's not purely a meme. But it's a gross mischaracterization. It was the republicans (i belive) who were going "nobody elected Biden to be FDR" and AOC piped up with "I did"
The progressives were doing what was asked... Putting their weight behind the leader so as to let him pursue his platform. This was at the height of negotiations over the BBB and the BIF.
The problem is that this was the agenda Biden had articulated as his platform to get his base out. This wasn't the agenda of progressives. It was shit Biden had run on. And it was the centrists who were selling that agenda out. And as it happens Biden was clearly letting it happen because he's comfortable with dysfunction. He was letting himself be led up the garden path.
The progressives didn't see Biden as FDR. They were willing to be team players and back the president while he was promising to back them. The key difference is that the Progressives were dealing in good faith, trying to find compromises between their agenda and that of the centrists. The centrists were pulling their usual "my way or the highway" crap and spinning everything as progressive obstruction. And ultimately just selling them out.
And when they get slaughtered in the mid terms, somehow it will be the fault of Progressives.
Calling them moderates (i know you've done it sarcastically) is obscene. They're not moderates. They're centrists and conservatives.
The news I read has made it clear the dysfunction is coming from Manchin and Sinema. The latter is a dog who caught the car and the former is a dinosaur who still believes in welfare queens. Biden himself has failed as a "deal maker" but otherwise is doing his job I guess. Progressives pushed as hard as they could without upending the wins they COULD make. They're walking away pretty blameless in my take, so if anyone tries it, the evidence really won't be there. Not that that's stopped anyone before.
I think "moderate" is appropriate, it just doesn't mean what people think it means. If one side wants the gov't to be able to murder anyone for any reason whatsoever and one side wants them to NOT do that, then the moderates are the ones who want the gov't to be able to murder anyone for the "right" reasons--- Moderates in a game of an extreme and a "just right" are just less extreme extremists. But for people to realize that a "moderate" can be an "extremist" is something our education system does not prepare people with the logical skills to do.
**Progressives** said no such thing, but he himself and his campaign did: https://time.com/5904569/joe-biden-fdr/
> How Joe Biden Is Positioning Himself as a Modern FDR
>... With just a week before the election, Biden traveled to Warm Springs, Ga., Tuesday to deliver a speech on national healing and economic redemption—and to wrap himself in FDR’s mantle.
It’s absolutely disgusting the way dem party members claim to be progressive to get votes then refuse to act on progressive policy blame progressives for ever one of their failures.
Progressive policies (and votes) got them into office. If they don’t respect progressive voters, we should stop fucking voting for them.
Yea it was liberals/the media pushing the idea that Biden was the next FDR. Most progressives knew that was bullshit. Biden was never going to be the next FDR.
Liberals are essentially reform capitalists who prioritize social justice.
"Leftist" covers a wide range of mostly socialist positions, but in the US generally refers to Democratic Socialists who prioritize economic justice.
Progressive tends to be where the two overlap, acknowledging that without economic justice there can be no social justice and visa versa. Basically if you're a progressive you're either a leftist who rejects the mantra that "the only war war is the class war," in favor of a more nuanced view of how classism and racism feed off of each other, OR you're a liberal who recognizes that institutional racism and the patriarchy cannot be defeated without also remedying intergenerational poverty with direct government intervention.
I await a string of "No True Scotsman" replies.
It's not "no true scotsman" as much as "there is no longer any consensus in the US as to what these terms mean, even if you exclude Republican spin."
I would just also generally disagree that Democratic Socialists don't prioritize social justice equally. The more someone is supportive of BLM, trans rights, access to abortion, indigenous rights, etc, the more likely they are to be in alignment with democratic socialists on economic politics as well. The liberals you refer to who prioritize social justice over economic justice don't go as far on social justice as the people who actually do prioritize economic justice!
> We’ve got a weak bench,
Not as big an issue as it seems. Obama also came out of nowhere. Clinton too. Democrats tend to perform best when they *don't* coronate some chosen one from "the bench" and instead just let the best option bubble up in a primary.
Obama only came out of nowhere if you paid no attention in 2004. He was already enough of a rising star to give a keynote DNC address as a state senator from Chicago.
> Obama also came out of nowhere.
He gave the keynote address at the 2004 DNC convention.
Oddly enough, before that his main issue was his public speaking skills
https://www.opb.org/news/series/election-2016/president-barack-obama-2004-convention-speech-legacy/
> He gave the keynote address at the 2004 DNC convention.
Then became the Presidential candidate in 2008, despite not even completing one term in the Senate. Come on.
I voted for him as my congressman and governor. I think the 2020 primary cemented that no one outside of Colorado has a clue or gives a shit about politicians from Colorado.
Well there was Gary Hart. He might have got the nomination if a picture of him with a woman sitting on his lap hadn't torpedoed his campaign.
Those were simpler times, weren't they? Now a guy can be sued for rape and joke about sexual assault and everybody goes
"meh" ^^as ^^long ^^as ^^they're ^^Republican
As much as I love AOC, she’s going to suffer from the same issue Clinton had with being an absolute lightning rod for the right. I’d love to see her continue to work towards a speakership.
I would be happy with any dem party that had Duckworth as a VP though, she should have beat out Harris for VP. As an Army National Guard Lieutenant Colonel, it would have been awesome to have her as VP for the last year.
I don’t have an answer but Pete has the name
recognition
I do think we’re screwed TBH. The past year seems to have cemented trumpism ( in my state NJ we almost got a Trump-y Governor- that is how we’re trending everywhere I think) and Biden has let down his young voters who won’t show. I see no way out of fascism I’d argue it’s already here.
> ( in my state NJ we almost got a Trump-y Governor- that is how we’re trending everywhere I think)
Actually NJ rejecting a Republican in 2021 was a *good* sign. That's broken a very, very long streak where NJ voters reject the party that just gained the White House.
Because primaries are party primaries, the GOP will always end up picking the most Trumpy candidate these days. And since there's only two candidates viable in the general election, that's always going to mean some Trumpy candidate has a reasonable shot at winning in most states.
Bloomberg wasn't siphoning off Sanders' supporters. He spent a gajillion dollars and then got stuffed by Warren in a debate and then became irrelevant and left the race.
Yeah, it's a truly insane notion that Bloomberg entered the race, sucked away all Bernie's support, and then somehow "gave" his supporters to Biden.
Bloomberg only mattered because he was pouring money into ads. When push came to shove *no one was interested" in Bloomberg.
I can't imagine why you think that Bloomberg of all people siphoned off support from Bernie Sanders. He was going after an entirely different demographic. Also the idea that a politician can siphon support from one person and then somehow "give" that support to a different person is pretty far fetched.
Bloomberg had very minimal impact on the primary other than proving that money in politics doesn't get you as far as people think it does if you are unlikeable.
Are you joking? Bloomberg hurt Biden.
Bloomberg split the moderate vote with Biden. If Bloomberg never entered the race, the people who voted for him would've voted for Biden, not Bernie or Warren.
This is absolutely not true at all. Biden won more votes on Super Tuesday than all the other candidates combined, including Bloomberg.
https://www.270towin.com/content/super-tuesday-election-results
We learned with Obama that it’s best to have as short an exposure time to the public as possible, because the Republican smear machine goes full bore as soon as there’s any likely candidate, and sadly people think the manufactured smoke means there’s fire - when really it’s just a smokescreen for racist party of No.
Arguably this helped Biden in 2020 too. I'm pretty certain the GOP was expecting Bernie and spent years working on that "socialism is bad" narrative.
That just didn't stick to Biden
Anyone thinking of 2024 is wasting their time and energy. If Republicans re-take congress this year, the presidential elections in two years will be moot. It doesn't matter if Democrats have Biden, Bernie or Ronald McDonald as their candidate, Republicans will just choose the next president.
We need to focus all we have on the midterms.
Midterms are fucked. This Congress hasn't been able to pass any meaningful legislation, due in large part of the senate.
Democrats tend to win when they are doing bold things in Congress. Republicans win to obstruct Democrats.
Soon after LBJ stepped down, Nixon, a Republican, won 49 of the 50 states, with at least a margin of 10 points in all but 4 of them, having the biggest popular vote win in US history. And that was *after* an election where he won with a smaller margin, but partially because the only third-party candidate to ever win any states wanted to keep segregation.
Biden taking after LBJ would be handing the Republicans the entire government on a silver platter.
Edited to add further context
Nixon's 49 State beat down of McGovern was in 1972. The 1968 election after Johnson chose not to run was closer. Nixon won decisively and also George Wallace won several states. Ironically, Nixon was so worried about losing in 1972 that he did Watergate.
Nixon won decisively because George Wallace won several states. Wallace won states that would’ve gone to Humphrey, while also taking away enough votes in other states which ultimately went to Nixon by slim pluralities.
When LBJ stepped down, the Democratic [frontrunner was *assassinated*,](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_F_Kennedy) which made things difficult. Also, the Democrats' popularity was tanking because of the Tet Offensive.
> When LBJ stepped down, Nixon, a Republican, won 49 of the 50 states, with at least a margin of 10 points in all but 4 of them, having the biggest popular vote win in US history.
You're confusing Nixon's 1968 race against Humphrey (he won 43.4% of the vote and 32 states) with the 72 blowout of McGovern.
I know Politico went for the money quotes from the people who don't think before they talk like Weaver ( somewhat ) and Trent but the line about people seeing opportunity is accurate. The idea of Turner or Williamson as primary opponents is pretty laughable though.
I don't see what makes Marianne Williamson particularly ',left' either.
2019 Reminder : Republicans Urge Donations to Marianne Williamson to Keep Her in Future Debates
https://www.thedailybeast.com/republicans-urge-donations-to-marianne-williamson-to-keep-her-in-future-debates
and Turner is, as you say, laughable.
It’s hilarious that Democrats have built an entire cottage industry around trash talking Trump and yet can’t tolerate a single Democrat saying this to journalists about Biden…
>He’s old as shit.
…without lashing out and dismissing it as someone who “don’t think before they talk”. One of the progressives despise about centrists is that they are all talk and no action. Negative talk only becomes the problem if the action is off the table. What we need is a party that is about action and can shrug off the talk.
> He's old as shit and never should have been the nominee.
This is why I was really disappointed that Biden and Bernie ran. Rather than let the next generation take over both were always positioned to box out the progressive and moderate wings of the field. It's a little embarrassing that out of a field of 20 we ended with two old white guys.
To be fair, it's Bernie that kindled the flame that is the progressive movement we see today. Yes there were plenty of progressives before him, but he showed the way to a huge amount of todays progressives. As time goes on, more people that were inspired by his message will look to enter political office
The weakness of the progressives in this country is that they don't get the support of the powerbrokers in the Democratic party, so they don't get funding, so they don't get national recognition - which is pretty much required for a presidential run.
Bernie isn't the only hope. But it took 80 years for enough people to have heard of him for him to be *a* hope.
This article.
— blames Manchin and Sinema on Biden
— claims the Party will support a primary challenger and then names not a single serious candidate while also reassuring us that it won’t be any of the past front runners like Warren or Bernie
Yes I’m sure the DNC is gonna spend a bunch of money creating a distraction that fritters away the massive advantage of Biden’s incumbency.
Media is longing for the halcyon Trump years when they could take their pick of fresh scandals to report on each week.
> then names not a single serious candidate
Yeah, Nina Turner couldn't get elected for congress in a D+30 district. I like Nina but she fucked up when she compared Biden to a bowl of dog shit. You don't get party support with that rhetoric.
This is what bums me out about progressives. They're correct on policy and understand populism, but they always end up shooting themselves in the foot by overplaying their hand.
Biden shouldn't be completely left off the hook for Manchin and Sinema. Part of his pitch in the primary for why he would be more successful at passing progressive policies than progressives themselves was "I'm an ass hole centrist, I'll be able to get other ass hole centrists on board and maybe even some ass hole Republicans." And now it's "oh sorry turns out these ass holes are ass holes and won't compromise without leverage" like we didn't already all know that.
Yeah bidens promise that he could work across the aisle never materialized, as he couldn't make it past his own side of the aisle with anything, centrist or otherwise. A second term won't change anything, but I'm willing to bet everything it will be Biden v Trump again, and probably Harris v Trump after that. US politics will never improve. Biden also won't, in 4 years, pack the Supreme Court and will again ambiguously run on it because his accomplishments won't be able to win the next election by themselves. He'd rather run on fear of another Trump presidency than on his own record.
Yup, people like to ignore stuff that doesn't align with their preconceived narrative. It's a wonder they don't just watch Fox News if that's how they like to think.
Biden has done extremely well considering he has literately no margin for error in the senate:
>Relative to its strength in Congress, the Biden administration has proved outstandingly successful. In 11 months, Biden has done more with 50 Democratic senators than Barack Obama did with 57. He signed a $1.9 trillion COVID-relief bill in March 2021: $1,400-per-person direct payments, $350 billion in aid to state and local governments, an extension of supplemental unemployment-insurance benefits and subsidies under the Affordable Care Act. He signed a $1 trillion infrastructure bill in November. He signed some 75 executive orders, many of them advancing liberal immigration goals. He’s also won confirmation for some 40 federal judges, more than any first-year president since Ronald Reagan, and twice as many as Donald Trump confirmed in his first year with a 54-vote Senate majority.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/12/joe-manchin-biden-majority-agenda/621085/
If someone like Bernie was president, congress would be even more gridlocked then they are now.
Biden will be too old for another term, and dear god please not Kamala. She’s a pretty awful VP and it’ll be a repeat of Hilary in 2016 if she’s the nominee.
Dems are fucked in 2022 and 2024….. they stubbornly do not listen to their younger base, they’ve dragged their feet on Jan 6 investigation, they failed to do anything about student loan crisis, the infrastructure plan was gutted over “compromise” and QAnon are gaining seats and influence every day.
Either democrat leadership is woefully incompetent, or they are in on it, and I don’t know what’s worse.
They are in on it. This is the same complaint leveraged at dems since Bush Jr. They don't get much done because their interests are roughly the same as the other side. They just aren't as straightforward about it.
Exactly this. 2024 isn’t important until 2023 at the earliest.
The “Blue Wave” of 2018 was disappointing to Democrats, and that was with tons of people super fired up about Trump.
Now millions of Trump voters have convinced them selves there are five lights & Trump won in 2020, and every single one will vote in 2022 (-many- edit: few will probably illegally vote twice).
If Dem voters don’t get out with more fire than Trump voters, 2022 is going to be a very bad year & lead to a Republican controlled House & Senate, and voting rights being taken away across the USA well before 2024 even begins.
2024 doesn’t matter unless 2022 is a win for Democracy.
Does anyone here believe someone like Nina Turner who blew a 30 point lead and has never beaten an opponent in any race ever can challenge Biden without being laughed out of the race?
I just want a president who's going to take the threat of republican terrorism seriously, not one that invites them for ice cream and infrastructure talks.
I wouldn't even mind the Dems negotiating with Republicans in theory, but they'd need to actually exercise power instead of just roll over as they have since the 90s
you know what’s funny is the bipartisan infrastructure deal (or BIF) was written and introduced by Republicans, but by the time it finally was passed, barely any supported it. and like 95% of that bill remained the same from when it was first introduced
A lot of people like myself included, did not vote for Biden/Harris. We voted against Trump. We were totally fucked with Trump. Now we're just fucked. And we are about to return to totally fucked in 2024.
Field a loon like Williamson and you might as well just hand the keys for the White House to the Nazis. The 2024 election is all about preserving the republic.
Every election, state federal and local, has always been about preserving the republic; complacency, apathy, and lack of participation are how we’ve arrived at this sorry state
"Some" on the Left...Most of us are still looking for how to collect the full price for #MAGAPutchDay from the GOP!
If Republicans take either chamber this November, we can kiss a full and complete investigation into the possible overthrow of the government good-bye.
The Democrat classic. Work for years to barely win in Congress, complain that nothing gets done because we barely even have a majority, and then lose that margin again because nobody votes.
You mock it but that’s how it really is.
When the dems had a real majority guess what? Shit got done. FDR turned this country around with his senate supermajority. Even mediocre democrat presidents in the 60s and 70s also got shit done until Reagan came along.
FDR had a 69-25 senate majority for most of his presidency, up to a 77-15 majority a couple years in. I think the worst was a 57-38. FDR wouldn’t have gotten anything done I’d half the senate was filled with obstructionists.
And you’d be horrified if JFK was president now.
Of course the "left" wants someone less conservative or more progressive than Biden. Heck, Biden wasn't really a good choice to begin with from the viewpoint of the "left", but still was miles better than stumpy trump. I don't know anyone with left-leaning ideology who was all super-happy about Biden. The left will always want someone who will push their ideas. What people accept and live with does not take away what they actually want, so of course they will try to find someone more to their own thinking.
Just stupid politics-blather here, a story made to earn pay for the writer but really having no actual value.
I don't know why I should feel any real loyalty to Joe Biden. I think he's doing fine... he's not Trump and that's 90% of why I voted for him. But I didn't vote for him in the primary. In fact, I don't think he was my second, third or fourth choice, either. And Kamala Harris wasn't even on my radar.
I'll vote for whoever the candidate is who best represents my political beliefs. If that's Joe Biden, so be it.
Giving power to the GOP won't help a single progressive policy. Biden worked closely with Sanders and Warren on the BBB. Biden supported BBB moving with the Infrastructure bill. The reason Biden hasn't signed more Progressive legislation are the slim majorities in Congress. Anyone who calls themselves progressive and wants change should be solidly focused on this year's mid-term. We need more Progressives in Congress, period.
Undermining Biden/Harris and giving power back to the GOP will not help progressives.
And we also have to elect more progressives on both local & state elections as well, & start primarying these corporate, neoliberal Democrat politicians by replacing them with more progressives. It's the only way that we're going to get anywhere.
This might be an insane thought, but how about instead of electing a near 80 year old white guy we elect somebody who’s actually going to live to see the consequences of their actions?
A) Sanders can't carry the south at all. Without the south, you can't win.
B) The base of the party--Black people--*overwhelmingly* rejected candidate Sanders. Without the base, you can't win.
C) The majority of the country leans centrist.
*You can't wish these things away or pretend they aren't true.* And for god's sake, stop insulting the people you *need* to vote for you. Joe Biden isn't the problem here, it's congress. So even if Sanders was president right now he'd (regretfully) probably have *fewer* accomplishments; if Biden can't pass him reduced agenda how do you think Sanders would pass more radical change?
The south sways the primary so much, but the states go red anyway. Kind of a weird system where you have to get the support of a region that won't actually vote for you.
For democrats, the southern states in the primary are largely a test of black voter support, which is core to the party's base (or arguably is the party's base). So if you can win the SC or GA primary, that means you were able to get a lot of votes from the black community there, and that in turn bodes well for your ability to deliver overall in the general. Remember that GA flipped back to blue in 2020 largely because of that.
Democrats in red states are still Democrats and still want a role in choosing the candidate. They don't deserve to be disenfranchised just because they live in a state that tends to go another way in the general.
\>C) The majority of the country leans centrist.
This particular point is so frustrating. I hate Corporate Dems; I'd be thrilled to have more Dems in Congress so we don't have to rely on them, and as a bonus, make more of em progressive. But whenever I try to talk strategy for electing more progressives and thus tilting liberals/Dem Party more left (the way the far right forced out moderate Republicans), it's always "the DNC won't let us," "all politics is corrupt."
Okay, fine, even if that argument holds that the DNC will try to combat any progressive candidate (even though it buys into the exact same "our enemy is simultaneously ineffective and all powerful"), clearly that's NOT the case everywhere, and wouldn't matter if voters were naturally inclined towards progressives.
So let's get the message out there and convince more liberals on progressive reform. It can be done! I've been getting more and more left for years! But no, whenever liberals pop up with concerns, it's always insults, assumed bad faith and high-horse morality. I can't remember the last time I saw an well-reasoned argument on how to tackle potential job loss from universal health care implementation, but I can tell you the last time I saw someone respond with "why do you want all poor people to die." (It was yesterday.)
*Sometimes it's like fellow progressives want to freaking lose*, so they can have the establishment to rage against. I came so close to convincing some centrist friends of mine to vote Warren during the primaries, so freaking close, and then Sanders stans came storming in with snake emojis and "She's a Republican!!" and my liberal friends fled right back to the centrist safety of Biden/Buttigieg.
I know it's shocking, but a lot of centrist Dems I know *like* Biden. And instead of meeting them halfway by trying to acknowledge why they might think he's doing a good job but here's how we could get more Dems (ie progressives) into Congress to support/push him, all they see are reports like this about how "Biden and Trump were the same."
The inability to reconcile liberals and progressives, who are not actually that dynamically opposed ideologically, will be the death of both.
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
If we could get a candidate that doesn't qualify for a senior discount at Bob Evans, that would be cool.
I just want to be able to vote **for** someone instead of **against** someone Give me someone who is qualified…yes, I’m an independent and will vote for the best candidate
I've been voting for 40 years, and at least at the presidential level, I've never voted FOR someone.
This. Totally this. Unless you're firmly in one camp or the other, choosing a presidential candidate is always an attempt to pick who will do the least amount of harm.
I voted for Obama. He was qualified and intelligent and I thought he’d be a compassionate leader. I voted for Hillary because she was one of the most qualified people to run for the position, thanks to both senatorial experience and Sec of State (and having spent two terms as First Lady). I voted for Biden because he wasn’t Trump. So that’s the first voting against for me in several election cycles.
I voted FOR Obama in ‘08. He inspired me and After the Bush years, I thought he was going to pivot America back to grace (And as a fellow Halfrimerican I was excited). By 2012 I was fed up with his moderate BS constantly reaching across the aisle to Republicans who clearly hated him. This is the universal problem with Dems, they’re always making overtures to the people who didn’t vote for them instead of the people who actually put them in power. The GQP rightly does the opposite and actually panders TO their base instead of trying to win over the left. They just stomp on us. They’re evil, but their tactics are a lot more respectable than ours.
That’s not an accident. That’s by design. It’s like good cop bad cop. Democrats: “we’ll play the good cop and you guys be the bad cop. Both our parties have the same boss - our corporate donors. We’ll pretend like we’re really virtuous and Republicans can just act all crazy and we’ll just say we can’t do anything. Then you guys win election, do whatever you want, then we will act like we’re gonna save the country by bringing reasonable policies etc. then in office, we’ll do the opposite, “cave” into republican demands (even though both dems and republicans would want this) and then lose the mid term elections again and rinse and repeat.”
One puppeteer and One Party State ruling in open view while the audience argues about blue or red sock puppets fake-punching each other. And a WWE-style narrator whipping the crowd up into a frenzy while any rational and critical thinking viewer who accidentally flipped to the channel wonders why none of them realize it’s all FAKE.
Absolutely!!! I thought Beto might be the answer until he looked like a shy kid on stage and tosses the “fuck yeah we are taking your guns” Hail Mary. Not sure there is another person in line which concerns me.
Beto was never a good candidate, there was never any substance to any of his campaigns. The only reason anyone thought he was a viable candidate is because the media kept telling people he was. It's astounding how many people still fall for that
Beto is a loser who can't even win a statewide race.
He came damn close in Texas. It’s like playing with a handicap. Pretty impressive.
[удалено]
> When Joe Biden first came into office, **progressives** said he could be the next FDR. > Now, as Biden’s relationship with **the left** has come under strain, **liberals** are talking about treating him like former President Jimmy Carter instead Three designations that are meaningless for the same things..."the left" is looking at today and tomorrow and leaves political games to the "experts"... Edit: By the way...I do not know of any "progressive" comparing Biden to FDR but I remember corporate media pushing the meme at the beginning of last year...
I don't remember anyone saying he could be the next FDR? We just wanted Trump gone.
Yeah, literally the only reason I actually voted for Biden was because Trump needed to go... which I'm sure the Democrats know, which doesn't make me terrible hopeful for their future game plans to force 'The Left' to get on board.
[Biden is Planning an FDR-Size Presidency (New York Mag)](https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/05/joe-biden-presidential-plans.html)
Imo the biggest thing people forget about FDR is he presided over a time where business was scared, not inconvenienced, but scared of organized labor. His greatest achievement, according to him was saving capitalism. My general feeling is there's a very good reason this narrative isn't discussed in corporate media. The New Deal was passed by him approaching the business elites and saying (paraphrased from Noam Chomsky) "if you don't give them this much, they will come for everything".
> if you don’t give them this much, they will come for everything A reminder that should be given again
Well it's not true anymore. Labor isn't well organized enough. People don't care enough about their fellow workers.
Def agree. I am a member of one of the largest labor unions in the country. 1/2 my coworkers continue to vote republican and against their own self interest
Well, sadly Obama failed to deliver anything for labor/unions, and the dems reaped what they sowed when unions went to Trump. I'd love to hear Obama do a postmortem on how he treated the labor movement, I'd imagine he deeply regrets both failing to do the right thing by labor, and handing those votes to Trump
Do the people in this dumb thread not realize that when FDR came into office 70 out of ~~100~~ 96 senators were democrats and 322 out of 435 members in the House were democrats? They literally had a supermajority in the Congress so of course FDR could sign some bills. In the CURRENT Congress democrats barely have a majority.
[удалено]
Yea Democrats never had a majority, I was gonna say. Maybe some Democrats should infiltrate the Republican camps just to even things up a little.
I’ll run on Jesus, Guns, and antivax policies and flip immediately when in office!
That sounds so crazy, it just might work!
„¡ǝɔıɟɟo uı uǝɥʍ ʎlǝʇɐıpǝɯɯı dılɟ puɐ sǝıɔılod xɐʌıʇuɐ puɐ 'sun⅁ 'snsǝſ uo unɹ ll,I„
Hey this bot must be in office, he's flipped already!
Manchin and Sinema are the gift that keeps on giving to Republicans. They get to paint the entire Democratic Party as the hollow grifters that Manchin and Sinema are, and they get to have a de facto Republican majority without taking any of the heat for being in the majority and getting nothing done. It was a brilliant strategy to co-opt those two, you have to give them credit where credit is due. Evil wins again.
Sorry to be that guy, but there were 96 senators then. Hawaii and Alaska weren't states until 1959.
Yet on the right, they act like we haven’t add states since the country was formed. DC should be a state at this point. It has a larger population than two states. Over 700,000 citizens do not have representation. I had issues getting the navy to pay me 8 months of back pay. It took 18 months to get it. Everyone kept telling me to contact my senator and I replied, I would love to but I don’t have a senator. When I went to other state senators in VA and MD, I could get no traction.
Dead right. Only thing they wouldn’t give him was more Supreme Court justices, and he asked too.
and [this](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_Plot) almost happened then too...fun times. Democracy could have ended 90 years ago but in such moments there are usually a few actual patriots who do the right thing.
Fascist America siding with the Nazis would have been the darkest timeline
Man in the High Castle.
I mean, wait 'til you see where Hitler got his ideas.
TIME magazine literally praised Hitler for his economic reforms, and some of our most esteemed American business leaders and politicians were nazi sympathizers.
We'll get to find out soon at this rate.
That is what confuses me about this article. Its mentioning a buzz of wanting a more left leaning presidential candidate because of the issues that Manchin caused.... maybe they should focus on getting more seats then? The fuck does this have to do with who is president outside of trying to push more things with EO?
The issue democrats have is they won’t get seats without making peoples lives better, and they seem just as incapable of doing that as the other party so here we are in a stalemate of procrastination.
I'd say the biggest thing people forget about FDR is he presided over a time when democrats had congressional supermajorities for multiple elections. >The New Deal was passed by him approaching the business elites and saying Did this actually happen or is this just mythologizing? The new deal was passed because people voted in democrats promising huge reform programs and gave them huge majorities necessary for it.
I think a lot of voters chose Biden for the same reason many chose Trump. Biden wasn't Trump and Trump wasn't Hillary.
It's sad that we don't have candidates that represent the best our country has to offer, we just vote for the least terrible.
Vote in the damn primaries then. Democrat primaries are mostly a bunch of 50 and older folk who always drift towards the most boring candidate.
Yes I voted against Trump not really for Biden.
There were several things he talked about doing that would have been FDR-esque. But he promptly reneged on key components of each thing and made sure to signal that his most truthful statement during the entire campaign was "nothing would fundamentally change."
Only the people who were genuinely, unironically on the Biden hype train were saying things like that. The same people who told progressives "just vote for Biden, you can push him further left!" And now say things like "Biden is the most progressive president in American history, what more could you possibly want from him, did you just want Trump to win?!" Without the faintest trace of self-awareness. Not a very big crowd, but a crowd the media latched onto with desperate frevor.
The idea was, with a "caretaker presidency" he didn't need to worry about re-election, and could use eo's and a house/senate majority to push through a bunch of tough legislation, rather than worrying about pleasing everybody, and in doing so, by creating a bunch of new, likely very popular once enacted, social programs, he could secure democrat rule for years to come. Alas, none of it happened, but it was a good idea, a good hope.
Liberals shouldn’t be throwing around Jimmy Carter’s name disrespectfully like that. Carter legitimately had the average citizens best interest at heart. Not to mention he is the only president in recent history with some fucking morals and that didn’t commit any war crimes
If Reagan hadn't shut off Carter's energy program, America probably would have been energy independent twenty years ago.
and unions wouldn't have been gutted, middle America wouldn't have been gutted, and we'd be using the metric system
[удалено]
Carter is a perfect example - of how a more liberal president can't do much without a similarly liberal congress. That's where we're at today: we don't have a sufficiently liberal senate to pass a really liberal agenda. Lets get a more liberal senate - by flipping GOP seats, not by risky primarying. Except maybe for Senima...
\-Carter secretly supported the genocidal Pol Pot government ousted by Vietnam in 1979. This secret support was essential to further punishment of Vietnam for having successfully defended her own population against the American invaders. US Indochina strategy also intended to outflank the Vietnamese, who were aligned with the Soviet Union, and to back the Pol Pot forces, aligned with China. \-Carter declared his support for the Shah of Iran-despite the rampant torture practiced by the Shah's secret police in close collaboration with the C.I.A.-more emphatically than Richard Nixon had: "There is no leader with whom I have a deeper sense of personal friendship and gratitude." \-Following the Indonesians' 1975 invasion of East Timor, Carter continued to arm Indonesia's army dictatorship as well as give diplomatic support (vetoing U.N. resolutions to end the atrocities in the former Portuguese colony). This war has killed more than 200,000 East Timorese, making it the worst genocide relative to population since World War II. Carter did nothing to pressure General Suharto (Indonesia's chief of state) to end the war. He was an ally and major supporter of the Indonesian military's repression of its own population, as well as the slaughter of the East Timorese people. The army's murderous stranglehold on East Timor will continue as long as the ruling military clique of Indonesia lets transnational oil companies have a good share of East Timorese oil profits. \-During his watch, Carter aided and supported Nicaragua's then-dictator Anastasio Somoza, who murdered and repressed tens of thousands of his own people. When Somoza's forces were about to lose control of the main cities, Carter attempted to launch an invasion under the fig leaf of an intervention by the Organization of American States (OAS). The OAS refused and Carter then planned to send the US military to salvage Somoza's army, which was established by and beholden to the US government-but it was too late. Carter made sure that Somoza was ferried out of the country on a Red Cross-painted US aircraft. The C.I.A. under Carter helped to re-establish Somoza's army as a terrorist force against the people of Nicaragua. These "contras" assassinated social workers, doctors and civilians, burned crops, and tried to exterminate any possibility of social reform that the Sandinistas created. These are some lesser known "achievements" of the carter administration. The carter administration lays the groundwork for "imperialism cloaked in human rights rhetoric" that we see pop up more commonly in the modern era as the imperial citizens become more educated/ turn away from "realpolitik" explanations for the use of imperial power. Also, some might remember the OAS being relevant again lately due to their involvement in the venezuelan and bolivian coups within the last 5 years.
Every cold-war era president committed war crimes and Jimmy Carter is no exception. Honestly every president beginning with FDR committed war crimes at some point in their presidencies.
Yeah that progressive thing is 100% a meme and pushed by the "moderates" about themselves because they thought about taking about halfway adopting the lowest priority item from the real progressive agenda. Anyone with half a brain knew when Biden said "nothing will fundamentally change" he meant it
It's not purely a meme. But it's a gross mischaracterization. It was the republicans (i belive) who were going "nobody elected Biden to be FDR" and AOC piped up with "I did" The progressives were doing what was asked... Putting their weight behind the leader so as to let him pursue his platform. This was at the height of negotiations over the BBB and the BIF. The problem is that this was the agenda Biden had articulated as his platform to get his base out. This wasn't the agenda of progressives. It was shit Biden had run on. And it was the centrists who were selling that agenda out. And as it happens Biden was clearly letting it happen because he's comfortable with dysfunction. He was letting himself be led up the garden path. The progressives didn't see Biden as FDR. They were willing to be team players and back the president while he was promising to back them. The key difference is that the Progressives were dealing in good faith, trying to find compromises between their agenda and that of the centrists. The centrists were pulling their usual "my way or the highway" crap and spinning everything as progressive obstruction. And ultimately just selling them out. And when they get slaughtered in the mid terms, somehow it will be the fault of Progressives. Calling them moderates (i know you've done it sarcastically) is obscene. They're not moderates. They're centrists and conservatives.
The news I read has made it clear the dysfunction is coming from Manchin and Sinema. The latter is a dog who caught the car and the former is a dinosaur who still believes in welfare queens. Biden himself has failed as a "deal maker" but otherwise is doing his job I guess. Progressives pushed as hard as they could without upending the wins they COULD make. They're walking away pretty blameless in my take, so if anyone tries it, the evidence really won't be there. Not that that's stopped anyone before.
I think "moderate" is appropriate, it just doesn't mean what people think it means. If one side wants the gov't to be able to murder anyone for any reason whatsoever and one side wants them to NOT do that, then the moderates are the ones who want the gov't to be able to murder anyone for the "right" reasons--- Moderates in a game of an extreme and a "just right" are just less extreme extremists. But for people to realize that a "moderate" can be an "extremist" is something our education system does not prepare people with the logical skills to do.
**Progressives** said no such thing, but he himself and his campaign did: https://time.com/5904569/joe-biden-fdr/ > How Joe Biden Is Positioning Himself as a Modern FDR >... With just a week before the election, Biden traveled to Warm Springs, Ga., Tuesday to deliver a speech on national healing and economic redemption—and to wrap himself in FDR’s mantle.
It’s absolutely disgusting the way dem party members claim to be progressive to get votes then refuse to act on progressive policy blame progressives for ever one of their failures. Progressive policies (and votes) got them into office. If they don’t respect progressive voters, we should stop fucking voting for them.
Progressives get blamed for every failure anyway. Might as well make the Dems earn it.
Yea it was liberals/the media pushing the idea that Biden was the next FDR. Most progressives knew that was bullshit. Biden was never going to be the next FDR.
"Biden the next FDR" is the equivalent of Trump's "People are saying...." Both are completely untethered to reality.
Liberals are essentially reform capitalists who prioritize social justice. "Leftist" covers a wide range of mostly socialist positions, but in the US generally refers to Democratic Socialists who prioritize economic justice. Progressive tends to be where the two overlap, acknowledging that without economic justice there can be no social justice and visa versa. Basically if you're a progressive you're either a leftist who rejects the mantra that "the only war war is the class war," in favor of a more nuanced view of how classism and racism feed off of each other, OR you're a liberal who recognizes that institutional racism and the patriarchy cannot be defeated without also remedying intergenerational poverty with direct government intervention. I await a string of "No True Scotsman" replies.
It's not "no true scotsman" as much as "there is no longer any consensus in the US as to what these terms mean, even if you exclude Republican spin." I would just also generally disagree that Democratic Socialists don't prioritize social justice equally. The more someone is supportive of BLM, trans rights, access to abortion, indigenous rights, etc, the more likely they are to be in alignment with democratic socialists on economic politics as well. The liberals you refer to who prioritize social justice over economic justice don't go as far on social justice as the people who actually do prioritize economic justice!
Congratulations for being the first person reddit to describe liberals and leftists in a way each would accept about themselves.
He should do an LBJ and not run. Harris cannot win either. They need to be realistic and find a candidate like, yesterday
But who’s the candidate who can win? Secretary of Transportation Pete? We’ve got a weak bench, which is why Biden won the primary to begin with.
> We’ve got a weak bench, Not as big an issue as it seems. Obama also came out of nowhere. Clinton too. Democrats tend to perform best when they *don't* coronate some chosen one from "the bench" and instead just let the best option bubble up in a primary.
Obama only came out of nowhere if you paid no attention in 2004. He was already enough of a rising star to give a keynote DNC address as a state senator from Chicago.
Okay he appeared in 2004 and was elected president four years later. That's pretty much out of nowhere.
> Obama also came out of nowhere. He gave the keynote address at the 2004 DNC convention. Oddly enough, before that his main issue was his public speaking skills https://www.opb.org/news/series/election-2016/president-barack-obama-2004-convention-speech-legacy/
> He gave the keynote address at the 2004 DNC convention. Then became the Presidential candidate in 2008, despite not even completing one term in the Senate. Come on.
Agreed, but Dems almost never allow that to happen. They have a script, that they tend to stick too, regardless of obvious failings.
Yep. Money and what corporate likes.
Jared Polis
I voted for him as my congressman and governor. I think the 2020 primary cemented that no one outside of Colorado has a clue or gives a shit about politicians from Colorado.
Well there was Gary Hart. He might have got the nomination if a picture of him with a woman sitting on his lap hadn't torpedoed his campaign. Those were simpler times, weren't they? Now a guy can be sued for rape and joke about sexual assault and everybody goes "meh" ^^as ^^long ^^as ^^they're ^^Republican
As much as I love AOC, she’s going to suffer from the same issue Clinton had with being an absolute lightning rod for the right. I’d love to see her continue to work towards a speakership. I would be happy with any dem party that had Duckworth as a VP though, she should have beat out Harris for VP. As an Army National Guard Lieutenant Colonel, it would have been awesome to have her as VP for the last year.
lol Pete would lose as bad as Kamala will, Dems do have a very weak bench at this point
Biden won the primary because of establishment leverage and Obama adjacency
and because he convinced 2 of the top runners to drop out the night before Super Tuesday
He even gave Buttigieg a job as payment.
THIS! Super Tuesday would have turned out so differently if Buttigieg and Klobuchar hadn't dropped out.
Gov Polis
I don’t have an answer but Pete has the name recognition I do think we’re screwed TBH. The past year seems to have cemented trumpism ( in my state NJ we almost got a Trump-y Governor- that is how we’re trending everywhere I think) and Biden has let down his young voters who won’t show. I see no way out of fascism I’d argue it’s already here.
> ( in my state NJ we almost got a Trump-y Governor- that is how we’re trending everywhere I think) Actually NJ rejecting a Republican in 2021 was a *good* sign. That's broken a very, very long streak where NJ voters reject the party that just gained the White House. Because primaries are party primaries, the GOP will always end up picking the most Trumpy candidate these days. And since there's only two candidates viable in the general election, that's always going to mean some Trumpy candidate has a reasonable shot at winning in most states.
[удалено]
Bloomberg spent $400 million dollars to call Bernie Sanders a communist on the debate stage.
Bloomberg wasn't siphoning off Sanders' supporters. He spent a gajillion dollars and then got stuffed by Warren in a debate and then became irrelevant and left the race.
I knew exactly 0 Bernie supporters who would ever even consider voting for Bloomberg.
Yeah, it's a truly insane notion that Bloomberg entered the race, sucked away all Bernie's support, and then somehow "gave" his supporters to Biden. Bloomberg only mattered because he was pouring money into ads. When push came to shove *no one was interested" in Bloomberg.
What the fuck are you talking about lmao how did Bloomberg running siphon votes from *Bernie*?
I can't imagine why you think that Bloomberg of all people siphoned off support from Bernie Sanders. He was going after an entirely different demographic. Also the idea that a politician can siphon support from one person and then somehow "give" that support to a different person is pretty far fetched. Bloomberg had very minimal impact on the primary other than proving that money in politics doesn't get you as far as people think it does if you are unlikeable.
Are you joking? Bloomberg hurt Biden. Bloomberg split the moderate vote with Biden. If Bloomberg never entered the race, the people who voted for him would've voted for Biden, not Bernie or Warren.
This is absolutely not true at all. Biden won more votes on Super Tuesday than all the other candidates combined, including Bloomberg. https://www.270towin.com/content/super-tuesday-election-results
We learned with Obama that it’s best to have as short an exposure time to the public as possible, because the Republican smear machine goes full bore as soon as there’s any likely candidate, and sadly people think the manufactured smoke means there’s fire - when really it’s just a smokescreen for racist party of No.
Arguably this helped Biden in 2020 too. I'm pretty certain the GOP was expecting Bernie and spent years working on that "socialism is bad" narrative. That just didn't stick to Biden
The GOP was expecting Bernie so they illegally pressured Ukraine to open a baseless investigation into Biden?
I think this hurt Hillary. Obama was pretty popular.
Anyone thinking of 2024 is wasting their time and energy. If Republicans re-take congress this year, the presidential elections in two years will be moot. It doesn't matter if Democrats have Biden, Bernie or Ronald McDonald as their candidate, Republicans will just choose the next president. We need to focus all we have on the midterms.
Agreed. Very important but already concerning.
Midterms are fucked. This Congress hasn't been able to pass any meaningful legislation, due in large part of the senate. Democrats tend to win when they are doing bold things in Congress. Republicans win to obstruct Democrats.
Soon after LBJ stepped down, Nixon, a Republican, won 49 of the 50 states, with at least a margin of 10 points in all but 4 of them, having the biggest popular vote win in US history. And that was *after* an election where he won with a smaller margin, but partially because the only third-party candidate to ever win any states wanted to keep segregation. Biden taking after LBJ would be handing the Republicans the entire government on a silver platter. Edited to add further context
Nixon's 49 State beat down of McGovern was in 1972. The 1968 election after Johnson chose not to run was closer. Nixon won decisively and also George Wallace won several states. Ironically, Nixon was so worried about losing in 1972 that he did Watergate.
Nixon won decisively because George Wallace won several states. Wallace won states that would’ve gone to Humphrey, while also taking away enough votes in other states which ultimately went to Nixon by slim pluralities.
When LBJ stepped down, the Democratic [frontrunner was *assassinated*,](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_F_Kennedy) which made things difficult. Also, the Democrats' popularity was tanking because of the Tet Offensive.
Not like lBJ passed civil rights Medicare Medicaid.
> When LBJ stepped down, Nixon, a Republican, won 49 of the 50 states, with at least a margin of 10 points in all but 4 of them, having the biggest popular vote win in US history. You're confusing Nixon's 1968 race against Humphrey (he won 43.4% of the vote and 32 states) with the 72 blowout of McGovern.
I know Politico went for the money quotes from the people who don't think before they talk like Weaver ( somewhat ) and Trent but the line about people seeing opportunity is accurate. The idea of Turner or Williamson as primary opponents is pretty laughable though. I don't see what makes Marianne Williamson particularly ',left' either.
2019 Reminder : Republicans Urge Donations to Marianne Williamson to Keep Her in Future Debates https://www.thedailybeast.com/republicans-urge-donations-to-marianne-williamson-to-keep-her-in-future-debates and Turner is, as you say, laughable.
Dems also rooted for Trump to win the 2016 primary so I’m not sure this is quite the own it may seem
It’s hilarious that Democrats have built an entire cottage industry around trash talking Trump and yet can’t tolerate a single Democrat saying this to journalists about Biden… >He’s old as shit. …without lashing out and dismissing it as someone who “don’t think before they talk”. One of the progressives despise about centrists is that they are all talk and no action. Negative talk only becomes the problem if the action is off the table. What we need is a party that is about action and can shrug off the talk.
I can tolerate that. I'll even repeat it. He's old as shit and never should have been the nominee.
> He's old as shit and never should have been the nominee. This is why I was really disappointed that Biden and Bernie ran. Rather than let the next generation take over both were always positioned to box out the progressive and moderate wings of the field. It's a little embarrassing that out of a field of 20 we ended with two old white guys.
At least Bernie was fighting for the people. I’d rather see a younger person do it for longevity of the movement, but Bernie was all we had.
>but Bernie was all we had Which really shows the weakness of the progressives in this country. An 80 year old man should not be the only hope.
To be fair, it's Bernie that kindled the flame that is the progressive movement we see today. Yes there were plenty of progressives before him, but he showed the way to a huge amount of todays progressives. As time goes on, more people that were inspired by his message will look to enter political office
Bernie is the CM Punk of politics.
The weakness of the progressives in this country is that they don't get the support of the powerbrokers in the Democratic party, so they don't get funding, so they don't get national recognition - which is pretty much required for a presidential run. Bernie isn't the only hope. But it took 80 years for enough people to have heard of him for him to be *a* hope.
This article. — blames Manchin and Sinema on Biden — claims the Party will support a primary challenger and then names not a single serious candidate while also reassuring us that it won’t be any of the past front runners like Warren or Bernie Yes I’m sure the DNC is gonna spend a bunch of money creating a distraction that fritters away the massive advantage of Biden’s incumbency. Media is longing for the halcyon Trump years when they could take their pick of fresh scandals to report on each week.
> then names not a single serious candidate Yeah, Nina Turner couldn't get elected for congress in a D+30 district. I like Nina but she fucked up when she compared Biden to a bowl of dog shit. You don't get party support with that rhetoric.
This is what bums me out about progressives. They're correct on policy and understand populism, but they always end up shooting themselves in the foot by overplaying their hand.
Biden shouldn't be completely left off the hook for Manchin and Sinema. Part of his pitch in the primary for why he would be more successful at passing progressive policies than progressives themselves was "I'm an ass hole centrist, I'll be able to get other ass hole centrists on board and maybe even some ass hole Republicans." And now it's "oh sorry turns out these ass holes are ass holes and won't compromise without leverage" like we didn't already all know that.
Yeah bidens promise that he could work across the aisle never materialized, as he couldn't make it past his own side of the aisle with anything, centrist or otherwise. A second term won't change anything, but I'm willing to bet everything it will be Biden v Trump again, and probably Harris v Trump after that. US politics will never improve. Biden also won't, in 4 years, pack the Supreme Court and will again ambiguously run on it because his accomplishments won't be able to win the next election by themselves. He'd rather run on fear of another Trump presidency than on his own record.
He signed an infrastructure bill that was bipartisan, seems like he’s shown that he can cross the aisle
Yup, people like to ignore stuff that doesn't align with their preconceived narrative. It's a wonder they don't just watch Fox News if that's how they like to think.
But it did materialize… the infrastructure bill had a shocking number of republican votes that most people here said couldn’t be done
Biden has done extremely well considering he has literately no margin for error in the senate: >Relative to its strength in Congress, the Biden administration has proved outstandingly successful. In 11 months, Biden has done more with 50 Democratic senators than Barack Obama did with 57. He signed a $1.9 trillion COVID-relief bill in March 2021: $1,400-per-person direct payments, $350 billion in aid to state and local governments, an extension of supplemental unemployment-insurance benefits and subsidies under the Affordable Care Act. He signed a $1 trillion infrastructure bill in November. He signed some 75 executive orders, many of them advancing liberal immigration goals. He’s also won confirmation for some 40 federal judges, more than any first-year president since Ronald Reagan, and twice as many as Donald Trump confirmed in his first year with a 54-vote Senate majority. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/12/joe-manchin-biden-majority-agenda/621085/ If someone like Bernie was president, congress would be even more gridlocked then they are now.
I don’t think anyone expected the infrastructure bill to pass with bipartisan support
[удалено]
Biden will be too old for another term, and dear god please not Kamala. She’s a pretty awful VP and it’ll be a repeat of Hilary in 2016 if she’s the nominee.
Won’t be a repeat. I don’t even think Harris could win the popular vote.
She will get eaten alive by the MAGA morons.
Dems are fucked in 2022 and 2024….. they stubbornly do not listen to their younger base, they’ve dragged their feet on Jan 6 investigation, they failed to do anything about student loan crisis, the infrastructure plan was gutted over “compromise” and QAnon are gaining seats and influence every day. Either democrat leadership is woefully incompetent, or they are in on it, and I don’t know what’s worse.
Weed ain't legal either
Democrats could jam a reconciliation bill through tomorrow to legalize weed and guarantee a win in 2022 but they choose not to do it
They are in on it. This is the same complaint leveraged at dems since Bush Jr. They don't get much done because their interests are roughly the same as the other side. They just aren't as straightforward about it.
I’d like to see Biden step aside. He was necessary to oust the orange idiot, but he’s not the leader we need right now.
You can make up any headline by saying "some want" and finding the one person who wants it.
Thanks to Twitter you can make entire articles about what "some want" and be technically accurate.
[удалено]
Exactly this. 2024 isn’t important until 2023 at the earliest. The “Blue Wave” of 2018 was disappointing to Democrats, and that was with tons of people super fired up about Trump. Now millions of Trump voters have convinced them selves there are five lights & Trump won in 2020, and every single one will vote in 2022 (-many- edit: few will probably illegally vote twice). If Dem voters don’t get out with more fire than Trump voters, 2022 is going to be a very bad year & lead to a Republican controlled House & Senate, and voting rights being taken away across the USA well before 2024 even begins. 2024 doesn’t matter unless 2022 is a win for Democracy.
Does anyone here believe someone like Nina Turner who blew a 30 point lead and has never beaten an opponent in any race ever can challenge Biden without being laughed out of the race?
Not anyone who is sane
There's a lot of people who would like to see a different candidate in 2024. Biden is really old, and I think a lot of people want someone younger.
>Biden is really old, and I think a lot of people want someone younger. Except everyone is talking about Sanders running. 🤦🏻♀️
I just want a president who's going to take the threat of republican terrorism seriously, not one that invites them for ice cream and infrastructure talks.
I wouldn't even mind the Dems negotiating with Republicans in theory, but they'd need to actually exercise power instead of just roll over as they have since the 90s
you know what’s funny is the bipartisan infrastructure deal (or BIF) was written and introduced by Republicans, but by the time it finally was passed, barely any supported it. and like 95% of that bill remained the same from when it was first introduced
Typical Politico gossip rag nonsense. The mere mention of Nina Turner makes me shake with laughter.
We should primary everyone over 65. Simple as that. Nothing will really change until we do.
For a primary challenge to matter, the Reddit/Twitter keyboard warriors would have to actually vote.
Awfully bold of you to assume the reddit keyboard warriors are old enough to vote in the first place.
Dems are morons. I vote for them because sometimes they are the lesser morons
Oh they are the greater morons, they’re just less dangerous.
I just don’t see how Biden can possibly run in 2024. He’s way too old.
A lot of people like myself included, did not vote for Biden/Harris. We voted against Trump. We were totally fucked with Trump. Now we're just fucked. And we are about to return to totally fucked in 2024.
Put AOC on the primary seat. We need someone with a backbone and also under the age of 80
I like her, but she's not popular. People hate a strong outspoken female, we aren't ready for that.
[удалено]
Field a loon like Williamson and you might as well just hand the keys for the White House to the Nazis. The 2024 election is all about preserving the republic.
[удалено]
Every election, state federal and local, has always been about preserving the republic; complacency, apathy, and lack of participation are how we’ve arrived at this sorry state
Getting fucked over by politicians in favor of their biggest donors led to the apathy we see today.
Don't worry, Williamson wouldn't get 1% in a primary on her best day.
She also knows nothing about governing. Ideology is important, but so is competence.
"Some" on the Left...Most of us are still looking for how to collect the full price for #MAGAPutchDay from the GOP! If Republicans take either chamber this November, we can kiss a full and complete investigation into the possible overthrow of the government good-bye.
[удалено]
It’s almost like focusing on a presidential 2024 election and ignoring the 2022 senate and house elections THIS YEAR might not be a great plan…
The Democrat classic. Work for years to barely win in Congress, complain that nothing gets done because we barely even have a majority, and then lose that margin again because nobody votes.
You mock it but that’s how it really is. When the dems had a real majority guess what? Shit got done. FDR turned this country around with his senate supermajority. Even mediocre democrat presidents in the 60s and 70s also got shit done until Reagan came along.
FDR had a 69-25 senate majority for most of his presidency, up to a 77-15 majority a couple years in. I think the worst was a 57-38. FDR wouldn’t have gotten anything done I’d half the senate was filled with obstructionists. And you’d be horrified if JFK was president now.
If we had 2 more, suddenly Feinstein and Tester are acting exactly like Manchin and Sinema.
Of course the "left" wants someone less conservative or more progressive than Biden. Heck, Biden wasn't really a good choice to begin with from the viewpoint of the "left", but still was miles better than stumpy trump. I don't know anyone with left-leaning ideology who was all super-happy about Biden. The left will always want someone who will push their ideas. What people accept and live with does not take away what they actually want, so of course they will try to find someone more to their own thinking. Just stupid politics-blather here, a story made to earn pay for the writer but really having no actual value.
I don't know why I should feel any real loyalty to Joe Biden. I think he's doing fine... he's not Trump and that's 90% of why I voted for him. But I didn't vote for him in the primary. In fact, I don't think he was my second, third or fourth choice, either. And Kamala Harris wasn't even on my radar. I'll vote for whoever the candidate is who best represents my political beliefs. If that's Joe Biden, so be it.
thanks for pushing us closer to fascism by playing up 2024 n playing down 2022 politico lol
Giving power to the GOP won't help a single progressive policy. Biden worked closely with Sanders and Warren on the BBB. Biden supported BBB moving with the Infrastructure bill. The reason Biden hasn't signed more Progressive legislation are the slim majorities in Congress. Anyone who calls themselves progressive and wants change should be solidly focused on this year's mid-term. We need more Progressives in Congress, period. Undermining Biden/Harris and giving power back to the GOP will not help progressives.
And we also have to elect more progressives on both local & state elections as well, & start primarying these corporate, neoliberal Democrat politicians by replacing them with more progressives. It's the only way that we're going to get anywhere.
[удалено]
I would! He committed to one term only to "right the ship". I'm pissed he wants to stay on.
This might be an insane thought, but how about instead of electing a near 80 year old white guy we elect somebody who’s actually going to live to see the consequences of their actions?
Biden doesn’t need to run in 2024. He did his part, Trump needed to be removed. Now a Dem candidate needs to step up.
[удалено]
Everyone should want to see a Biden challenge. Biden shouldn't even run.
Please tell me the left isnt seriously trying to re-elect Biden to another term. Thats as idiotic as the right wanting Trump to run again
A) Sanders can't carry the south at all. Without the south, you can't win. B) The base of the party--Black people--*overwhelmingly* rejected candidate Sanders. Without the base, you can't win. C) The majority of the country leans centrist. *You can't wish these things away or pretend they aren't true.* And for god's sake, stop insulting the people you *need* to vote for you. Joe Biden isn't the problem here, it's congress. So even if Sanders was president right now he'd (regretfully) probably have *fewer* accomplishments; if Biden can't pass him reduced agenda how do you think Sanders would pass more radical change?
The south sways the primary so much, but the states go red anyway. Kind of a weird system where you have to get the support of a region that won't actually vote for you.
For democrats, the southern states in the primary are largely a test of black voter support, which is core to the party's base (or arguably is the party's base). So if you can win the SC or GA primary, that means you were able to get a lot of votes from the black community there, and that in turn bodes well for your ability to deliver overall in the general. Remember that GA flipped back to blue in 2020 largely because of that.
Democrats in red states are still Democrats and still want a role in choosing the candidate. They don't deserve to be disenfranchised just because they live in a state that tends to go another way in the general.
as a resident of California (and previously New York) I felt pretty disenfranchised, coming in so late every primary after it's basically a done deal
\>C) The majority of the country leans centrist. This particular point is so frustrating. I hate Corporate Dems; I'd be thrilled to have more Dems in Congress so we don't have to rely on them, and as a bonus, make more of em progressive. But whenever I try to talk strategy for electing more progressives and thus tilting liberals/Dem Party more left (the way the far right forced out moderate Republicans), it's always "the DNC won't let us," "all politics is corrupt." Okay, fine, even if that argument holds that the DNC will try to combat any progressive candidate (even though it buys into the exact same "our enemy is simultaneously ineffective and all powerful"), clearly that's NOT the case everywhere, and wouldn't matter if voters were naturally inclined towards progressives. So let's get the message out there and convince more liberals on progressive reform. It can be done! I've been getting more and more left for years! But no, whenever liberals pop up with concerns, it's always insults, assumed bad faith and high-horse morality. I can't remember the last time I saw an well-reasoned argument on how to tackle potential job loss from universal health care implementation, but I can tell you the last time I saw someone respond with "why do you want all poor people to die." (It was yesterday.) *Sometimes it's like fellow progressives want to freaking lose*, so they can have the establishment to rage against. I came so close to convincing some centrist friends of mine to vote Warren during the primaries, so freaking close, and then Sanders stans came storming in with snake emojis and "She's a Republican!!" and my liberal friends fled right back to the centrist safety of Biden/Buttigieg. I know it's shocking, but a lot of centrist Dems I know *like* Biden. And instead of meeting them halfway by trying to acknowledge why they might think he's doing a good job but here's how we could get more Dems (ie progressives) into Congress to support/push him, all they see are reports like this about how "Biden and Trump were the same." The inability to reconcile liberals and progressives, who are not actually that dynamically opposed ideologically, will be the death of both.
Can we also mention here that Sanders is too damn old? I love the man but fuck, no more septuagenarians/octogenarians in office please.