Poll: Nearly 70 percent of voters say Biden is too old to serve again
politico.com
It's definitely an issue that's not going away. The DNC really needs to figure it out and stop pretending that it doesn't matter to voters.
You are viewing a single comment
The alternative being a ~4 years younger criminal without any morals.
How about another Dem which Biden backs and fully promotes?
It doesn’t have to be a Hobson’s choice of dinosaurs, the Dems are forcing this situation upon America. It’s not too late for someone else to step in.
Biden: #PleaseDropOut
Yes it absolutely is too late for someone else to step in. You're voting for Biden or you're holding the door open for Trump. The sooner you come to terms with that, that better you'll feel about it.
Thank you. I've been trying to get this message across. Any vote for anyone other than Biden is a vote in favor of fascism and ushers in our first dictator which likely won't be trump, it will be whoever takes over when he has a heart attack or something.
Feel free to vote for whoever you want in the primary, that includes writing in your pet if you feel like it. In the big show, anyone who actually likes our freedom and democracy (with its myriad of flaws) will vote Biden, everyone else will vote for dictatorship even if it doesn't look like it in the moment.
If the DNC is so concerned about protecting democracy from fascism, then they need to instruct Biden to step down immediately and stop wasting time before tapping his replacement.
Biden’s approval rating is in the gutter. No incumbent in federal office has ever come back to win with such a disastrously low approval rating, not once in the history of USA. You’re telling me Biden is the one who will buck the norm and mount a miraculous comeback? If you really think this, then it appears Blue MAGA is real after all. Get a clue, Jack.
> Any vote for anyone other than Biden is a vote in favor of fascism
a vote for Biden is a vote for fascism, but a vote for Cornel West or Jill Stein is a vote against fascism.
West is going to need to get on the ballot in more states than just Alaska and Oregon if that's going to happen. LOL.
In the end, it will be West at 1 to 2% of the vote and Stein at 5 to 6% of the vote, same as usual for fringe candidates.
can't talk down passing that 5% threshold. it's a big deal
It's insignificant in a national election.
you might think it's insignificant, but the people round here have their hair on fire at the suggestion anyone but biden gets 100% of the vote
Nobody will ever get 100% of the vote, last time it was 51.3% Biden, 46.8% Trump, 1.9% "Other".
I could see Biden picking up a few points thanks to the Roe V. Wade issue. They need to hang that around Trump's neck like a fucking albatross.
But the question is, can Biden win in the RIGHT states? That's still up in the air. Winning the popular vote is meaningless.
Pennsylvania - Trump is up +2 to +5 depending on other candidates.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/pennsylvania/
Michigan - Trump +4 to +5.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/michigan/
Wisconsin - Trump +2 to +4.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/wisconsin/
Biden cannot win without Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin.
it's the threshold to get federal funding and access to the debates. it's a really big deal.
Yeah, and how well did that work out for Jill Stein after 2016?
Pro-tip - it did nothing.
The debates are controlled jointly by the DNC and the RNC. They aren't going to allow contrary opinions.
The only way this changes is if the Debates are taken away from the parties and turned back over to an independent organization like it used to be before 1988.
Even then, the League was only in charge from 1976 to 1987. Prior to their involvement there had not been a debate since Nixon/Kennedy in 1960(!)
https://www.lwv.org/league-women-voters-and-candidate-debates-changing-relationship
The reason being, primarily, that anyone watching television saw Nixon as being a sweaty weasel who lost the debate, but anyone listening to radio assumed Nixon was a strong arguer who won the debate.
https://www.cla.purdue.edu/academic/history/debate/kennedynixon/kennedynixonscholarly.html
she hasn't gotten it before. this is the year
LOL Keep telling yourself that... Think this will be the year of the Linux desktop too? ;)
yea. she says she's on track to hit the mark this year.
pro-tip, if you don't know something, you can just not-speak about it.
seems like you don't know how a party qualifies for federal elections funding.
I've only been actively engaged in politics since 1988... psssh, yeah, what do I know?
Wait until the convention. The DNC will pick his replacement.
You need to go to bed and let the adults talk.
Liberals in their smug arrogance love to infantilize.
It’s not infantilizing. It’s just calling things as they appear. Children are well known for talking about things they know nothing about.
Also… this isn’t a “liberal” thing. It’s what people commonly resort to when they talk to immature randoms on the internet. If you want to be spoken to with respect and maturity, try not acting like a child when you’re corrected.
Ozma's opinion is that of the optimistic juvenile. They're absolutely wrong, but it's going to take them one or more failed election cycles to learn that. It's OK to be optimistic, the realism will creep in later.
Yeah, this guy that first started voting during the Reagan years know that this approach is not wrong. What's juvenile is doing the same thing repeatedly election after election after election expecting different results from the exact same people that fucked us over the last time because of some big boogie man that they have sold you. 50 years of the supposed lesser evil has grown so enormous they don't even recognize what is evil any longer. Where they can witness the guy they support committing a genocide halfway around the world and they believe that the other guy is more dangerous. And claim that he is completely defenseless to prevent these deaths. If the exact same circumstances were happening with Trump in office, every single liberal in this country would be in an uproar and demand that he bring it to a stop insisting he has the power and the ability to bring it to a stop. But now claim that Biden is powerless.
Even if Biden were committing genocide in Gaza, which let's be 100% clear here, he is not.
Trump is not functionally different when it comes to Israeli policy and for the same reason... both Biden AND Trump want those fat, fat Israel PAC campaign contributions.
Where they differ is that Trump wants to bring the worst Israeli policies HERE.
Remember when Israel illegally invaded Lebanon to set up a "security zone"?
https://www.britannica.com/event/2006-Lebanon-War
Yeah, about that... Trump would do the same to Mexico.
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/donald-trump-mexico-military-cartels-war-on-drugs-1234705804/
Oh, and... he'd jail his political opponents...
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/aug/30/trump-interview-jail-political-opponents-glenn-beck
and... he admits to wanting to be a dictator...
https://apnews.com/article/trump-hannity-dictator-authoritarian-presidential-election-f27e7e9d7c13fabbe3ae7dd7f1235c72
If you're legitimately serious about avoiding genocidal policies, your ONLY choice is to vote for Biden, because a Trump win will bring those policies here.
There is literally no comparison between Trump and Biden.
You mean like the 5 cop cities currently in the planning or building stage around the US that uses IDF for training? If we need to vote for the guy thats enabling a genocide so we dont get more genocide, thats an admission Biden is right wing.
One of the few promises Biden has kept is nothing will fundamentally change. Ive been around the block a few times and have seen this political song and dance several times. The only difference now is Trump is saying the quiet things out loud, exposing politics for the corruption thats its built on.
I don't know which other four you're talking about, but Atlanta's Cop City has been in the works since before Biden was elected and (as near as I can tell) has nothing to do with the IDF.
Frankly, the cops are bad enough without IDF help:
https://youtu.be/Wf4cea5oObY
Best 33 minutes you can spend today. I know it's a long watch, stick with it until you get to the bit on "Warrior Training".
You better HOPE they replace Biden at the convention if you really want to defeat Trump.
Seriously. Go sit in the corner and eat your paste, the adults are talking.
Don't cry to me when Dems lose then.
You're still not big enough to sit at the big table.
You're a child with a naive view and understanding of the world. You clearly have no idea what fascism actually is and you probably call your mother a nazi for telling you to take a shower or go to bed.
There is literally no one else that could gain enough support and name recognition to beat trump and the maggats hate fueled campaign combined with their gerrymandering.
One day you will grow up and see the world for what it really is and learn how to work with the systems we have instead of flailing around outside the system and never making a real difference. Hopefully that will happen before you retire in like 50 years.
Nothing will happen at the Democratic convention unless Trump is removed during the Republican convention a month earlier.
Biden is the de facto head of the Democratic party. He's not going anywhere unless he chooses to.
This is correct. If Biden “wins the primary”, then immediately steps down, it becomes a battle for delegates at the convention. Of course the invisible hand of the DNC will actually choose, but it will at least have the surface level appearance of a democratic process.
It will? The democrats already disenfranchised an entire state, but no one cares about that.
Which state would that be? The one that still held a primary and wrote him in?
Yep. Delaware had it's delegates removed from the convention.
Yup
Don’t so patronizing.
Biden is fundamentally incapable of defending Americans from fascism. At best he can slow it down a little.
But like? The border policy? He just moved wayyyyy over to the right on. As things stand, I don’t know if it will ever come back.
So no, I won’t feel better about it, because we’re still getting fucked in the ass.
No, I think it's too late for someone to try and beat Biden in the primary (though I did vote for a challenger, personally). But if Biden came out and said:
Then I think it'd probably go over smoothly. Newsom used above purely as an example - there are a lot of people I'd personally prefer... also, there's Kamala Harris - the person voted second most likely to lose an election, after her mentor of course.
"Biden performs better against Trump than Harris, Newsom: Poll"
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4470956-biden-trump-harris-newsom-poll/
So why Harris or Newsom over Biden?
i think op was staying that neither of them are 'valid' candidates
that's how i took it anyway
Newsom was used purely as an example. I think he's a pretty underwhelming candidate in terms of policy and also tactically a bad candidate. But yea - just grabbing a random name for demonstration.
But doesn't the fact that you couldn't come up with a name of a good candidate to beat Trump and had to use Newsom as an example tell you something?
Not really, I'm just aware that any name I threw out would be controversial - especially one I'd personally celebrate. I'd be over the moon if we ended up with President Katie Porter but a lot of people would just ignore the actual point of my comment. Newsom was my choice for most milquetoast democrat - he tweets outrage at police killings and endorses greenwashed bullshit while mostly just trying to appear inoffensive and deeply moderate.
Okay, fair.
I think the real problem for anyone who thinks someone should run other than Biden is the simple fact that, apart from Dean Phillips and Marianne Williamson, no one else in his party has said they want to. You can claim whatever reason you like for that, but the fact remains that no one else who is a Democrat has said they want to run for president in 2024.
And it's a pretty bad idea to try to get people to vote for someone who doesn't want to run.
It’s not about my feefees for “my team”. This is about seriously addressing the threat of fascism head on, and recognizing the truth that polling data is telling us - Biden isn’t going to cut it, and virtually any other Dem will do. Americans just don’t want to vote for Biden. The sooner you come to terms with that, the better chance we have of avoiding another disastrous Trump presidency.
https://poll.qu.edu/poll-release?releaseid=3889
Who do you suggest that will do better than that?
Why does it have to be these 5 specific people? I know that DC establishment is pushing hard for these to be the choices in November, but in a healthy democracy we would have an actual democratic primary where Biden could prove his candidacy is superior to the challengers. This should be done through vigorous debate, and campaigning hard on an actual platform from which to lead the nation at a time when we desperately need real leadership. Doing this has the added benefit of broadcasting Dem messaging far and wide with lots of free media coverage.
The last thing we need is another 4 years of giving corporations everything and more. Dems are so embroiled in fake Repugnantcon controversy they won’t even bother to dignify a primary race with Biden’s participation. It’s just a really bad look if you’re claiming democracy is on the line this year, and is an incredibly poor strategy to motivate voters to make it to the polls.
To answer your question, I’d vote Cenk Uygur in a heartbeat. His platform is most closely aligned with my own beliefs, and I’m 100% convinced he would end or seriously mitigate the endemic corruption in our political system within a 4 year term. We’d get paid family leave, significantly increased minimum wage, meaningful student debt relief, and mandatory federal background checks for firearm purchases, guaranteed. We’d also have a real shot at a nationalized healthcare system. These are massively popular policy positions which the majority of Americans support, on both sides of the political divide.
Because those are the five who are running and no one else has said they want to run.
Voting for someone who doesn't want to run for president in the first place does not sound like a good plan.
cenkforamerica.com my friend, he’s running. So are Phillips and Williamson, and so too would be O’Rourke, Newsom, and other high profile dems if the DNC were holding a primary in good faith. They’re not.
Of course, you won’t ever hear about political outsiders on the left in corporate media, other than perhaps occasional opportunities to denigrate them and their ideas. This is because those are real populists who would enact meaningful change, ending the terrible and corrupt system under which the vast majority of us are suffering. The same system by which the multinational media machines make their billions in ad revenue and control the narrative in near totality.
Ah yes, let's all vote for the guy who is not constitutionally eligible for the office. Brilliant move.
Ha. I didn't even know he was born in Turkey to Turkish parents.
So basically he's an intentional spoiler.
Wonder who's paying him?
He is eligible, read the 14th amendment. This is already settled case law in lower courts, and his case to finally settle the question of equality for him and 25mil naturalized citizens is now pending in higher courts.
He absolutely is not eligible, as he is not a natural born citizen of the United States, a constitutional requirement he does not meet. Supreme Court precedent has upheld this in rulings on the 14th amendment. If at any time in your life you were not a U.S. citizen - something which is indisputably true for Cenk - you cannot be president of the United States.
This guy is a clear spoiler intended to disrupt American elections, and you're either a bad faith actor complicit in his fraud or a pitiable rube who's been taken in by his song and dance.
Look I’m not a constitutional scholar, but here is a great article from someone who is that explains why Cenk had a good case. Is he likely to win with this particular Supreme Court? Probably not.
But he is running, and he maintains actual leftist populist values which aren’t seen from any of the other candidates. So yeah, he’ll get my vote before the guy enabling actual genocide today.
Your argument is essentially, "Don't vote for the incumbent polling with the highest chance of winning against Trump, instead vote for this literal no name candidate you've never heard of! Sure he doesn't meet the most basic requirements for the office, but there's this article here where it says he has a case in a court, so go ahead and throw your vote behind him!"
What absolute irresponsibility to be pushing this kind of bullshit when Trump is on the ballot.
If they're not holding the primary in good faith, then I guess it doesn't matter who is challenging Biden and you'll be stuck with Biden. I mean obviously you could vote third party or abstain to help Trump win...
Weird picking a genocide denier who made enough controversial statements Bernie pulled his endorsement before Cenk tried to Uno Reverse it by claiming he didn’t accept any endorsements.
Also weird picking a guy who cannot constitutionally hold the office he's running for. Cenk is not a natural born citizen of the United States, he can no more be president than Elon Musk or Arnold Schwarzenegger.
While most Turkish people struggle to come to terms with the genocide, Cenk has long since admitted the Armenian genocide was a thing. But ok keep holding his comments from the 90s against him in perpetuity.
Weird how bringing up really old statements and positions up as a reason not to vote for someone is ok for the people you don’t want to vote for, but it’s bad when it’s the people you support.
People can change their mind on things. When they don’t, those old statements can still be relevant.
On the Bernie endorsement retraction during Cenk’s congressional run, yeah I’m sure that stung a bit. They’ve been allies for quite some time now. But this has always been a Bernie problem - he’s way too nice to his esteemed colleagues in DC. I think Cenk saying he didn’t accept endorsements was just to provide cover for Bernie and smooth out the debacle a bit, but he definitely did accept it when it came through initially.
Cenk is ostracized from establishment politicians in DC and in the media because he constantly challenges the status quo, and fights hard for progressive policies. He would do this 10 fold in elected office. Why do you think this is such a terrifying prospect?