Absolutely! This is the story the media should focussing on.
the story the media should focusing on
Yet, the next twenty weeks they will pivot back to a bad debate not his performance, not his many accomplishments 1 , 2. .
Yeah, I understand that people are frustrated with inflation and the status quo. Shit keeps getting more expensive and everyone feels like they're falling behind. It's easy to blame the current leadership and say Biden isn't doing enough.
The problem is, Trump and Republicans literally have no solution for this and will only make things exponentially worse. I have this sinking feeling that more and more people are willing to vote for Trump just because they want something different. But to me it feels like cutting off your nose to spite your face.
It took an investigative news team and one of the nation's top media organizations eight years to figure that out?
NYT has been covering for Trump this whole time. Go watch their recent video about Project 2025. It's the most watered down BS that tries to absolve the orange turd from being responsible for it.
No. As an Opinion column, it’s essentially invalid. They can have an opinion column to reinstate the monarchy. And doubtless have.
Yeah we know
donald trump is unfit to exist.
The same New York Times that put up an Op ed from political expert George Clooney yesterday telling Biden to step down. Gotta get the outrage clicks from both sides I guess.
But he should.
Well, except that apparently the replacement the DNC has in mind is Kamala fucking Harris. I knew it'd be too much to expect them to grow any balls.
As bad as I think Biden's chances are, I wonder if Kamala's are not worse.
I think the idea is that she is already VP, so it creates less drama than trying to shoehorn someone else in at the last moment. We already have had to accept her being one seat away from the presidency, making her the candidate is easier for voters to swallow.
She's no worse politically than Biden, but she isn't ancient and fumbling the job either, so I would absolutely vote for her if she were the candidate.
If Biden does step down, I don't see any possibility that the DNC could replace him with anyone else that isn't going to create extreme disunity amongst Democratic voters.
Harris has been an active and progressive VP. She has been better and more effective than every VP going back to Dan Quayle.
Her only problems are charisma, and right wing propaganda. Same as Hillary.
I wouldn't call right wing propaganda "her problem", right wing propaganda is going to exist for literally any liberal that challenges the far-right.
Why are we pretending that Kamala and Hillary were uniquely hated by the right? The entire Republican platform is a platform of hate. We cannot take their prejudices seriously because prejudice is all they will ever offer.
Hillary was uniquely hated though. She was a solid first lady and an OK senator and pretty good secretary of State. And the discourse around her was brain boilingly toxic. Obama was the only Democrat that experienced something similar, maybe Pelosi. Biden, Clinton, and Gore did not get that level of visceral hatred.
No shit.
Biden's mental state is a legitimate criticism but don't expect the DNC to suddenly be anything other than center-left. Whoever would replace Biden would run with essentially the same platform.
Center-left? DNC? On what planet? The DNC is a right-wing liberal party, it's no flavor of Socialist, or even Social Democrat. Perhaps when the largest alternative is the GOP, filled with fascists and far-right populists, but that doesn't change the views of the DNC, only their context.
My argument still stands. No one should expect the DNC to replace Biden with someone more left leaning than Biden regardless of how you put the DNC on the political spectrum.
Oh, sure. The DNC will only post right wing liberals, that's their deal.
I just hoped (stupid, I know) that SOMEONE would realize that salvaging the platform is the least of their worries.
They need someone who energizes the base. That's how they won in 2008. That's how they lost in 2016. And they only won in 2020 because Trump was such a tremendous fuck up and piece of shit. AND STILL ONLY BARELY.
God damn.
This is likely a response to criticism about their editorial saying Biden should step aside. There wasn't enough "Trump bad" in that one for people so they're making their position clear.
Biden should use the recent President is King supreme court ruling to declare both of them unfit to run again.
The new candidates would be roughly on a level playing field to start and hopefully it would open up a extensive conversation about that ruling.
Yeah I don't think it matters too much how he does it but he really needs to test that ruling because that's the only way it's going to get any restrictions put on it
The only restrictions are going to be based on which party the president is a member of.
The problem is Trump seems to run the Republican party whether he's in office or not.
We can dream.
Bold take, NYT.
We need this from the New York post or one of those sites.
But then I would be forced to doubt that Trump is unfit to rule. It would be painful but necessary for any "information" found on the NY Post.
The point is conservatives get their news from it. They would implode
At this point, NYT finally writing this column is like Ja Rule finally telling us what to think .
NO SHIT. jeezus h christ NY Times tell us something we don't know.
Having continuous pieces like this make a difference. Think of how many "Biden has to step aside!" pieces have been written in the past two weeks and how much a part of the political discussion that is. The more time the media takes up shouting from the rooftops that Trump is a threat to America, the more mainstream and central the discourse becomes.
if they don't publish this and just report on biden's gaffes:
"why is the media always talking about biden but not saying anything against the orange guy?"
He wasn't fit to lead eight years ago either.
Meanwhile, America ignores this obvious fact to instead focus on….
“BiDeN oLd!”
More news, as it develops.
You left out senile and aiding in genocide
And this differs from Trump how exactly?
And Biden being the only one of the two you are allowed to talk shit about doesn’t count as an answer.
Please, tell everyone- what about Trump makes him the better choice?
Trump is not the better choice, they are equally incompetent and corrupt. You are implying people only have an issue with Biden because of age. There are a myriad of reasons why Biden isn't liked.
bOtH siDeS, amirite?
They are not equally incompetent and there are facts to prove it. But you don’t like facts, so I’ll not bother listing them. They’re out there though. It should take 30 seconds to find them.
Aside from that- who do you suggest to replace Biden that is running and capable of winning against your boy?
Trump is closer to being your boy than mine. I view them both with the same disgust as you view trump.
If you view a literal fascist with a playbook to dismantle democracy and institute dictatorship with the same disgust as a a run of the mill neoliberal, you deserve to be loaded into the cattle car next to me, and I'm going to be calling you an idiot all the way to the gas chambers.
Run of the mill neolibs are fascist. Tolerating a little bit of fascism to prevent fascism is counterproductive, that's how we ended up with 2 pieces of shit being the only option on the ballot
Yeah bud, I think my comment history will show that’s a blatant lie. However, YOUR history is shows that you really shouldn’t be accusing the kettle here.
I’m near certain that most people know why you’re here and what you’re up to. Thais why your ratio is garbage every time you say something- while on a platform that learns VERY far left.
There is nothing remotely far left, much less left in here. It's chock full of Reagan Republicans
They've endorsed a Dem every election back to 1956...
But pointing out the obvious that 81 is old and Biden acts his age and suddenly it's all "FUCK NYT" because moderates act just like trumpets.
100% loyalty is permanently required, anything less and they never knew ya.
Fucking cultists really want to make the Dem party just like the Republican.
Pointing out the obvious is fine.
Repeating the same thing over and over while ignoring newer events is not fine. In fact it can be a sign of dementia.
They look like Republicans because they are.
You're reading a lot of oddly specific subtext from a single statement.
What?
I asked one question, which is literally "why"...
Is there a reason other than them criticizing Biden?
Which hasn't gotten any response...
Then I went back in edited in how long and steadfast the NYT's endorsement of Dems have been.
And commented on how concerning it was that all it took was recognizing reality for Biden supporters to start acting like trump supporters.
It's bad enough when 1 of 2 parties act like that. When they both do were all fucked.
Is the broken clock analogy the new “we’re now in the find out phase” of the comment sections?
No shit
Remember folks --- this is an opinion piece, it is not news.
The reason you may hear more news about Biden being unfit for office than Trump being unfit is in large part because many Dems are calling for Biden to step aside, and it is newsworthy that a candidate faces calls from his own party.
The GOP is not widely calling for Trump to step down.
And frankly his antics have become normalized.
I read a few pieces saying some political journalists will retire if Trump becomes president, simply because covering him was so exhausting and stressful. I imagine many are still sick of it, and think covering him just gives him more attention anyway.
And the reason many Dems are calling for him to step aside is because of the snowballing effort of the media to push this story.
I'm not going to argue he's not old, or too old to be president - I had that opinion four years ago. As is Trump too old to be president.
What's insane to me is that there's no counter argument. There are no stories about all the accomplishments his administration has had. How incredibly productive he's been and how much better off this country is today than it was four years ago. The News is not reporting the news - they're reporting speculation. All I see is people complaining about the economy and immigration while no one is pointing out what Biden has done, or has tried to do, to help these matters. The only image they have is of an old man stammering over the course of two hours out of three years.
It's reasonable to assume that most Americans have no clue what the Biden administration has accomplished because the news rarely reports it. And now, in a moment when a wave of opposition is building, you'd think someone - the media, members of congress, Harris, Obama - would make an effort to defend the guy and at least offer some tangible, verifiable actions taken in the past three years.
Here's a few of the first results I found...
It's crazy that for something so important the dems are handling it as if they had no plan. Donald Trump should be the absolute easiest possible competition for their candidate to beat. It's like they learned nothing from 2008 and the energy around Obama. We need younger candidates who can communicate to the public well. Better policy means nothing to most swing voters if it can't be communicated effectively.
So much so he has the ability to get people to support Biden. Amazing stuff.
Both candidates are campaigning for the opposite party.
Some one should tell his voters that.
That's just, like, your opinion man. (But fo real mine too)
Water is wet.
Live
No shit.
Him, along with the entire political class. Thanks, NYT.
No, that's lazy thinking.
BREAKING NEWS!......
What is the counterpoint elsewhere on the page? "Donald Trump Must Be Allowed To Destroy Us All?"
That's been true since the dawn of donnie.
People above the age of 60 shouldn't be allowed in political positions in general
I’m interested to learn why you feel this way.
In contrast, I believe it takes decades of learning the political and legislative process and establishing the trust of your constituents and colleagues and organizations operating in your state. It’s one thing to be a junior senator or member of the house but, as a senior member of government, a 40 or 50 year may not be as well equipped to be proficient at their responsibilities; especially given the mixed bag of people being elected as representatives lately. That’s not to say I believe it requires someone to be older but I do think there’s a decent argument opposing your perspective. Also, by capping a representatives age, you’re failing to fully represent all Americans.
We still have a system to get older or inefficient people out of office - it’s called an election. Sadly, not many people take our electoral process, or politics, too seriously so we’re more often choosing to stick with the status quo. Now you’ve got to debate if we’re too stupid to be allowed certain freedoms or if we should have the government step in to make choices for us.
I feel the issue is more the disproportionate representation of ages than the age itself. But there should be better mental fitness checks as well.
NYT hiding behind its “Opinion” section again.
Bullshit. Just like last time. And the time before that.
Yeah no shit. Either is the other guy.
I'm still not voting Biden
Trump thanks you for your service.
Oh? That's odd, I'm not voting for him either.
Not voting or voting third party for POTUS does nothing. It's just pure vanity. Do what you want, I'm not really trying to change your mind, but it's a virtually pointless move that doesnt make any sense under the current way we do things.
Not voting or voting third party for POTUS does nothing.
While that's a popular and oft-repeated opinion, it's heterodox among academic historians.
"Let a third party once demonstrate that votes are to be made by adopting a certain demand, then one of the other parties can be trusted to absorb it. Ultimately, if the demand has merit, it will probably be translated into law or practice by the major party that has taken it up…The chronic supporter of third party tickets need not worry, therefore, when he is told, as he surely will be told, that he is “throwing away his vote.” [A] glance through American history would seem to indicate that his kind of vote is after all probably he most powerful vote that has ever been cast."
John D. Hicks, Professor Emeritus of American history at Berkeley
Except we have 2 parties still. How did voting third party in the past solve that problem? Proof is in the pudding.
When one of the two major parties becomes tired of losing elections, they adopt policies from a third party to attract their voters.
The impact of third parties on American politics extends far beyond their capacity to attract votes. Minor parties, historically, have been a source of important policy innovations. Women’s suffrage, the graduated income tax, and the direct election of senators, to name a few, were all issues that third parties espoused first.
Rosenstone, Behr and Lazarus
So, it didn't solve the problem? I'm not sure what you're driving at here. I'm not saying there shouldn't be multiple parties, I'm saying the vote during our presidential election, under our current system, is a strategic one, not one to throw away on a third party.
It's solved many problems.
The point that the American historians quoted above are making is that if you enjoy certain policies, like being able to vote for senators, women's rights, or progressive taxation, thank a third party voter.
Your quote talks about how third parties brought about some changes. At no point did I say third parties have no place in us politics, nor did I say never vote for third parties.
At no point did I say third parties have no place in us politics, nor did I say never vote for third parties.
Not voting or voting third party for POTUS does nothing. It’s just pure vanity.
So, you don't understand that the POTUS election is not the entirety of the us political system? I'm not sure what I'm supposed to say here, you quoted two very obviously different things.
I hope you vote for the candidate whom you feel best represents you and the interests you prioritize. I hope your interests and your morals come from a place of clarity that isn't clouded by biased content designed to manipulate you.
Which would be neither party
It must be nice to be at such a level of privilege that you are able to withstand four years of a GOP government further restricting trans, queer and woman's rights and right to exist.
You mean all the things happening right now?
Using marginalized communities as human shields to defend shitty politicians is disgusting
Throwing them (including myself) to the wolves is worse.
Thanks. The president's genocide and lies, as well as liberal media's lies and genocide support, has given me moral clarity.
🤔 Trump sure won't do that
That's great to hear.
Doing everything you can to get more lies and more genocide will surely give you the moral high ground you're looking for.
The one positive of a Trump presidency is that liberals will be allowed to come out against the genocide.
"Every one who disagrees with me is getting paid for it."
Classic projection
hey lemmy.ml. Go figure.
Hasn't .world banned a bunch of left-wing hosts? Are you proud of that or something?
Throwing your support behind the ‘teen wolf’ are ya?
Nope. No good options.
You may have done so already but you may want to see if the PSL is on the ballot where you are.
Yeah they're on but if I'm protest voting I'll be doing it in solidarity with Palestinian groups, which I'm assuming will be similar to primaries.
Unfortunately, a protest vote is a vote for Trump in our two party system. And Trump has said he wants Israel to be more aggressive and "end the war". And any Palestinian Americans should fear Project 2025 calls for rounding up anyone they think is an "illegal", or Muslim, or any non-white and wanting to put these people into death camps awaiting deportation. Although many on the right want to just execute everyone.
Anyways, you can hold your nose and vote for the Dem candidate, or you've voted for the death of those who you are trying to protect and so many more minorities.
Biden providing endless weapons and money is allowing Israel to 'end the war.' The marginalized are not afraid of P2025, most have had it their entire lives. So while liberals claimed to have the backs of the marginalized, they demanded a vote for the people keeping them marginalized
So you speak for all marginalized groups and think fascism is something they can just endure so that you can protest vote for a president that has vowed to do the thing you are protesting, only on a larger scale and against the majority of Americans. That is your stance? Don't be surprised when the leopard eats your face!
Believe it or not, I'm familiar with the most common liberal point of view, but thanks for summarizing. Would you also say this is the most important election of our lives?
How do you rationalize knowing the outcome you'd be voting for, and then staying that course? I understand taking a stand, and wanting change, but voting in a way counter to any of that becoming a possibility doesn't grok for me. Biden is 81 and is nearing the end of his time here on earth, so empowering the guy that is going to encourage more of the same abroad, and also open death camps for non-whites in the US isn't going to signal anything to him or the party.
I rationalize it by listening to Palestinians and their local advocacy groups. Nobody knows better than the victims.
If they see one candidate as better than another, they'll endorse.
So you think fascism is the answer? You would vote against minorities, in the US and around the world, to somehow save the people that are on the list of those the fascists plan to eliminate? You are voting for the leopard, and telling everyone to just deal with all the face eating? Weird stance, but if you can take a stance against everything you believe in, and believe that is somehow making things "better" more power to you I guess. You've drank your Kool-Aid and are just waiting for the meteor at this point.
I think you're confused, I'm not voting for someone who is carrying out a genocide.
If you want me to vote for a certain candidate, you should convince that candidate to stop the genocide.
It's a two party system, you're either voting for the people you claim to care about to have a chance, or your voting away any chance they have by voting for a Fascist.
You have chosen Fascism as your solution to genocide, so time to own it. I'm voting against fascism, because I want clean air/water, and I don't want family and friends fearing for their lives due to the increase in hate crimes, because they want to make who they are outlawed. I'm voting against the fascists because I don't think women should need to live in fear of becoming pregnant because they know they may not get necessary medical care to save themselves and/or their baby. I'm voting against the fascists because I believe in education, the environment, the rule of law. I'm voting against the fascist because I'm not ok with death camps to imprison anyone that isn't a white Christian nationalist.
The list goes on and on. I'm not voting for me, or any one issue (I'm a white male - so I'll be more than ok), I'm voting for everyone else in my life and community that is going to be stripped of their rights and made to live in fear.
Since I've been able to vote I've experienced 9 'most important elections of our lifetime,' and in the end nothing has improved.
Sometimes it's just about not getting worse. With every win the Right has been erroding people's rights as quickly as they can. They have packed the courts with some of the least qualified and corrupt justices the country has ever seen. They have waged an attack on minorities both directly and through defunding programs and services that help the countries most in need. They have attacked education and turned librarians from a profession nobody thought anything negative of, to one the Right now deems as equivalent to pedophiles (publicly - we know it's all projection for their private actions/feelings on pedophilia). So you may keep hearing the same message, because each election is more important than the last as the Right has been playing this long game of normalizing the erosion the foundation of our Republic. The majority of those in Trump's cult now say they are ok with a King, the very thing this country had fought against and was founded after winning are freedom from.
And voting for the other half of the team that helped get us into this mess isnt the answer. That status quo is just as harmful as republican direct action. The only change has been the entire political structure shifting to the right.
Well, the sad state of US politics is that you have a two party system in place, like it or not. By choosing not to vote, or voting some "protest vote", you are going to help the side that wants to accelerate our decline to the bottom. And once we lose our elections good luck voting for change then. The problem is the Right has been playing a long game that doesn't require morals or empathy, or even human decency. While the rest of the US is a wide swath of people from center-ish (Biden) all the way to are left-ish (AOC/Bernie), and trying to steer people with that wide of viewpoints isn't as easy. Plus we constantly have people trying to both sides everything allowing the Overton window in US politics to be dragged further right with every election. Other than waiting out all these walking corpses running the show, I'm not sure we can get the ship back on course any time soon, but not voting Trump we can at least not sink it.
Like any other vote, by machine or hand depending on where you live.
I think I'm a bit confused, is there a radio button to fill in on the ballot that says "protest " and then when all votes are counted, we can see a report that says x for dude, y for other dude, and z for protest?
Yes, fairly close to that. 3rd party votes, uncommitted, and no-votes are all tracked, and people studying the (lack of) interest in the candidates take note.
Absolutely! This is the story the media should focussing on.
Yet, the next twenty weeks they will pivot back to a bad debate not his performance, not his many accomplishments 1 , 2. .
Yeah, I understand that people are frustrated with inflation and the status quo. Shit keeps getting more expensive and everyone feels like they're falling behind. It's easy to blame the current leadership and say Biden isn't doing enough.
The problem is, Trump and Republicans literally have no solution for this and will only make things exponentially worse. I have this sinking feeling that more and more people are willing to vote for Trump just because they want something different. But to me it feels like cutting off your nose to spite your face.
It took an investigative news team and one of the nation's top media organizations eight years to figure that out?
NYT has been covering for Trump this whole time. Go watch their recent video about Project 2025. It's the most watered down BS that tries to absolve the orange turd from being responsible for it.
IG link
No. As an Opinion column, it’s essentially invalid. They can have an opinion column to reinstate the monarchy. And doubtless have.
Yeah we know
donald trump is unfit to exist.
The same New York Times that put up an Op ed from political expert George Clooney yesterday telling Biden to step down. Gotta get the outrage clicks from both sides I guess.
But he should.
Well, except that apparently the replacement the DNC has in mind is Kamala fucking Harris. I knew it'd be too much to expect them to grow any balls.
As bad as I think Biden's chances are, I wonder if Kamala's are not worse.
I think the idea is that she is already VP, so it creates less drama than trying to shoehorn someone else in at the last moment. We already have had to accept her being one seat away from the presidency, making her the candidate is easier for voters to swallow.
She's no worse politically than Biden, but she isn't ancient and fumbling the job either, so I would absolutely vote for her if she were the candidate.
If Biden does step down, I don't see any possibility that the DNC could replace him with anyone else that isn't going to create extreme disunity amongst Democratic voters.
Harris has been an active and progressive VP. She has been better and more effective than every VP going back to Dan Quayle.
Her only problems are charisma, and right wing propaganda. Same as Hillary.
I wouldn't call right wing propaganda "her problem", right wing propaganda is going to exist for literally any liberal that challenges the far-right.
Why are we pretending that Kamala and Hillary were uniquely hated by the right? The entire Republican platform is a platform of hate. We cannot take their prejudices seriously because prejudice is all they will ever offer.
Hillary was uniquely hated though. She was a solid first lady and an OK senator and pretty good secretary of State. And the discourse around her was brain boilingly toxic. Obama was the only Democrat that experienced something similar, maybe Pelosi. Biden, Clinton, and Gore did not get that level of visceral hatred.
No shit.
Biden's mental state is a legitimate criticism but don't expect the DNC to suddenly be anything other than center-left. Whoever would replace Biden would run with essentially the same platform.
Center-left? DNC? On what planet? The DNC is a right-wing liberal party, it's no flavor of Socialist, or even Social Democrat. Perhaps when the largest alternative is the GOP, filled with fascists and far-right populists, but that doesn't change the views of the DNC, only their context.
My argument still stands. No one should expect the DNC to replace Biden with someone more left leaning than Biden regardless of how you put the DNC on the political spectrum.
Oh, sure. The DNC will only post right wing liberals, that's their deal.
I just hoped (stupid, I know) that SOMEONE would realize that salvaging the platform is the least of their worries.
They need someone who energizes the base. That's how they won in 2008. That's how they lost in 2016. And they only won in 2020 because Trump was such a tremendous fuck up and piece of shit. AND STILL ONLY BARELY.
God damn.
This is likely a response to criticism about their editorial saying Biden should step aside. There wasn't enough "Trump bad" in that one for people so they're making their position clear.
Biden should use the recent President is King supreme court ruling to declare both of them unfit to run again.
The new candidates would be roughly on a level playing field to start and hopefully it would open up a extensive conversation about that ruling.
Yeah I don't think it matters too much how he does it but he really needs to test that ruling because that's the only way it's going to get any restrictions put on it
The only restrictions are going to be based on which party the president is a member of.
The problem is Trump seems to run the Republican party whether he's in office or not.
We can dream.
Bold take, NYT.
We need this from the New York post or one of those sites.
But then I would be forced to doubt that Trump is unfit to rule. It would be painful but necessary for any "information" found on the NY Post.
The point is conservatives get their news from it. They would implode
At this point, NYT finally writing this column is like Ja Rule finally telling us what to think .
NO SHIT. jeezus h christ NY Times tell us something we don't know.
Having continuous pieces like this make a difference. Think of how many "Biden has to step aside!" pieces have been written in the past two weeks and how much a part of the political discussion that is. The more time the media takes up shouting from the rooftops that Trump is a threat to America, the more mainstream and central the discourse becomes.
if they don't publish this and just report on biden's gaffes:
"why is the media always talking about biden but not saying anything against the orange guy?"
He wasn't fit to lead eight years ago either.
Meanwhile, America ignores this obvious fact to instead focus on….
“BiDeN oLd!”
More news, as it develops.
You left out senile and aiding in genocide
And this differs from Trump how exactly?
And Biden being the only one of the two you are allowed to talk shit about doesn’t count as an answer.
Please, tell everyone- what about Trump makes him the better choice?
Trump is not the better choice, they are equally incompetent and corrupt. You are implying people only have an issue with Biden because of age. There are a myriad of reasons why Biden isn't liked.
bOtH siDeS, amirite?
They are not equally incompetent and there are facts to prove it. But you don’t like facts, so I’ll not bother listing them. They’re out there though. It should take 30 seconds to find them.
Aside from that- who do you suggest to replace Biden that is running and capable of winning against your boy?
Trump is closer to being your boy than mine. I view them both with the same disgust as you view trump.
If you view a literal fascist with a playbook to dismantle democracy and institute dictatorship with the same disgust as a a run of the mill neoliberal, you deserve to be loaded into the cattle car next to me, and I'm going to be calling you an idiot all the way to the gas chambers.
Run of the mill neolibs are fascist. Tolerating a little bit of fascism to prevent fascism is counterproductive, that's how we ended up with 2 pieces of shit being the only option on the ballot
Yeah bud, I think my comment history will show that’s a blatant lie. However, YOUR history is shows that you really shouldn’t be accusing the kettle here.
I’m near certain that most people know why you’re here and what you’re up to. Thais why your ratio is garbage every time you say something- while on a platform that learns VERY far left.
There is nothing remotely far left, much less left in here. It's chock full of Reagan Republicans
My god your cognitive dissonance is impressive!
Oh my fucking god.
Can't see the forest for the trees
FUCK NYT. This opinion is like broken clock being right twice a day.
Is there a reason other than them criticizing Biden?
Edit:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_presidential_election_endorsements_made_by_The_New_York_Times
They've endorsed a Dem every election back to 1956...
But pointing out the obvious that 81 is old and Biden acts his age and suddenly it's all "FUCK NYT" because moderates act just like trumpets.
100% loyalty is permanently required, anything less and they never knew ya.
Fucking cultists really want to make the Dem party just like the Republican.
Pointing out the obvious is fine.
Repeating the same thing over and over while ignoring newer events is not fine. In fact it can be a sign of dementia.
They look like Republicans because they are.
You're reading a lot of oddly specific subtext from a single statement.
What?
I asked one question, which is literally "why"...
Which hasn't gotten any response...
Then I went back in edited in how long and steadfast the NYT's endorsement of Dems have been.
And commented on how concerning it was that all it took was recognizing reality for Biden supporters to start acting like trump supporters.
It's bad enough when 1 of 2 parties act like that. When they both do were all fucked.
Is the broken clock analogy the new “we’re now in the find out phase” of the comment sections?
No shit
Remember folks --- this is an opinion piece, it is not news.
The reason you may hear more news about Biden being unfit for office than Trump being unfit is in large part because many Dems are calling for Biden to step aside, and it is newsworthy that a candidate faces calls from his own party.
The GOP is not widely calling for Trump to step down.
And frankly his antics have become normalized.
I read a few pieces saying some political journalists will retire if Trump becomes president, simply because covering him was so exhausting and stressful. I imagine many are still sick of it, and think covering him just gives him more attention anyway.
And the reason many Dems are calling for him to step aside is because of the snowballing effort of the media to push this story.
I'm not going to argue he's not old, or too old to be president - I had that opinion four years ago. As is Trump too old to be president.
What's insane to me is that there's no counter argument. There are no stories about all the accomplishments his administration has had. How incredibly productive he's been and how much better off this country is today than it was four years ago. The News is not reporting the news - they're reporting speculation. All I see is people complaining about the economy and immigration while no one is pointing out what Biden has done, or has tried to do, to help these matters. The only image they have is of an old man stammering over the course of two hours out of three years.
It's reasonable to assume that most Americans have no clue what the Biden administration has accomplished because the news rarely reports it. And now, in a moment when a wave of opposition is building, you'd think someone - the media, members of congress, Harris, Obama - would make an effort to defend the guy and at least offer some tangible, verifiable actions taken in the past three years.
Here's a few of the first results I found...
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/02/02/joe-biden-30-policy-things-you-might-have-missed-00139046
https://www.whitehouse.gov/therecord/
https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2024-opinion-biden-accomplishment-data/
https://joebiden.com/accomplishments/
https://www.factcheck.org/2024/01/bidens-numbers-january-2024-update/
https://www.newsweek.com/joe-biden-biggest-achievements-first-year-president-1670763
https://washingtonmonthly.com/2024/04/07/introduction-who-got-more-done/
https://washingtonmonthly.com/2024/04/07/trump-vs-biden-who-got-more-done-for-families-and-workers/
https://www.politifact.com/personalities/joe-biden/
https://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/
https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/biden-promise-tracker/?ruling=true
https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/trumpometer/?ruling=true
It's crazy that for something so important the dems are handling it as if they had no plan. Donald Trump should be the absolute easiest possible competition for their candidate to beat. It's like they learned nothing from 2008 and the energy around Obama. We need younger candidates who can communicate to the public well. Better policy means nothing to most swing voters if it can't be communicated effectively.
So much so he has the ability to get people to support Biden. Amazing stuff.
Both candidates are campaigning for the opposite party.
Some one should tell his voters that.
That's just, like, your opinion man. (But fo real mine too)
Water is wet.
Live
No shit.
Him, along with the entire political class. Thanks, NYT.
No, that's lazy thinking.
BREAKING NEWS!......
What is the counterpoint elsewhere on the page? "Donald Trump Must Be Allowed To Destroy Us All?"
That's been true since the dawn of donnie.
People above the age of 60 shouldn't be allowed in political positions in general
I’m interested to learn why you feel this way.
In contrast, I believe it takes decades of learning the political and legislative process and establishing the trust of your constituents and colleagues and organizations operating in your state. It’s one thing to be a junior senator or member of the house but, as a senior member of government, a 40 or 50 year may not be as well equipped to be proficient at their responsibilities; especially given the mixed bag of people being elected as representatives lately. That’s not to say I believe it requires someone to be older but I do think there’s a decent argument opposing your perspective. Also, by capping a representatives age, you’re failing to fully represent all Americans.
We still have a system to get older or inefficient people out of office - it’s called an election. Sadly, not many people take our electoral process, or politics, too seriously so we’re more often choosing to stick with the status quo. Now you’ve got to debate if we’re too stupid to be allowed certain freedoms or if we should have the government step in to make choices for us.
I feel the issue is more the disproportionate representation of ages than the age itself. But there should be better mental fitness checks as well.
NYT hiding behind its “Opinion” section again.
Bullshit. Just like last time. And the time before that.
Yeah no shit. Either is the other guy.
I'm still not voting Biden
Trump thanks you for your service.
Oh? That's odd, I'm not voting for him either.
Not voting or voting third party for POTUS does nothing. It's just pure vanity. Do what you want, I'm not really trying to change your mind, but it's a virtually pointless move that doesnt make any sense under the current way we do things.
While that's a popular and oft-repeated opinion, it's heterodox among academic historians.
"Let a third party once demonstrate that votes are to be made by adopting a certain demand, then one of the other parties can be trusted to absorb it. Ultimately, if the demand has merit, it will probably be translated into law or practice by the major party that has taken it up…The chronic supporter of third party tickets need not worry, therefore, when he is told, as he surely will be told, that he is “throwing away his vote.” [A] glance through American history would seem to indicate that his kind of vote is after all probably he most powerful vote that has ever been cast."
Except we have 2 parties still. How did voting third party in the past solve that problem? Proof is in the pudding.
When one of the two major parties becomes tired of losing elections, they adopt policies from a third party to attract their voters.
So, it didn't solve the problem? I'm not sure what you're driving at here. I'm not saying there shouldn't be multiple parties, I'm saying the vote during our presidential election, under our current system, is a strategic one, not one to throw away on a third party.
It's solved many problems.
The point that the American historians quoted above are making is that if you enjoy certain policies, like being able to vote for senators, women's rights, or progressive taxation, thank a third party voter.
Your quote talks about how third parties brought about some changes. At no point did I say third parties have no place in us politics, nor did I say never vote for third parties.
So, you don't understand that the POTUS election is not the entirety of the us political system? I'm not sure what I'm supposed to say here, you quoted two very obviously different things.
I hope you vote for the candidate whom you feel best represents you and the interests you prioritize. I hope your interests and your morals come from a place of clarity that isn't clouded by biased content designed to manipulate you.
Which would be neither party
It must be nice to be at such a level of privilege that you are able to withstand four years of a GOP government further restricting trans, queer and woman's rights and right to exist.
You mean all the things happening right now?
Using marginalized communities as human shields to defend shitty politicians is disgusting
Throwing them (including myself) to the wolves is worse.
Thanks. The president's genocide and lies, as well as liberal media's lies and genocide support, has given me moral clarity.
🤔 Trump sure won't do that
That's great to hear.
Doing everything you can to get more lies and more genocide will surely give you the moral high ground you're looking for.
The one positive of a Trump presidency is that liberals will be allowed to come out against the genocide.
Almost time to come back from brunch
"Every one who disagrees with me is getting paid for it."
Classic projection
hey lemmy.ml. Go figure.
Hasn't .world banned a bunch of left-wing hosts? Are you proud of that or something?
Throwing your support behind the ‘teen wolf’ are ya?
Nope. No good options.
You may have done so already but you may want to see if the PSL is on the ballot where you are.
Yeah they're on but if I'm protest voting I'll be doing it in solidarity with Palestinian groups, which I'm assuming will be similar to primaries.
Unfortunately, a protest vote is a vote for Trump in our two party system. And Trump has said he wants Israel to be more aggressive and "end the war". And any Palestinian Americans should fear Project 2025 calls for rounding up anyone they think is an "illegal", or Muslim, or any non-white and wanting to put these people into death camps awaiting deportation. Although many on the right want to just execute everyone.
Anyways, you can hold your nose and vote for the Dem candidate, or you've voted for the death of those who you are trying to protect and so many more minorities.
Biden providing endless weapons and money is allowing Israel to 'end the war.' The marginalized are not afraid of P2025, most have had it their entire lives. So while liberals claimed to have the backs of the marginalized, they demanded a vote for the people keeping them marginalized
So you speak for all marginalized groups and think fascism is something they can just endure so that you can protest vote for a president that has vowed to do the thing you are protesting, only on a larger scale and against the majority of Americans. That is your stance? Don't be surprised when the leopard eats your face!
Believe it or not, I'm familiar with the most common liberal point of view, but thanks for summarizing. Would you also say this is the most important election of our lives?
How do you rationalize knowing the outcome you'd be voting for, and then staying that course? I understand taking a stand, and wanting change, but voting in a way counter to any of that becoming a possibility doesn't grok for me. Biden is 81 and is nearing the end of his time here on earth, so empowering the guy that is going to encourage more of the same abroad, and also open death camps for non-whites in the US isn't going to signal anything to him or the party.
I rationalize it by listening to Palestinians and their local advocacy groups. Nobody knows better than the victims.
If they see one candidate as better than another, they'll endorse.
So you think fascism is the answer? You would vote against minorities, in the US and around the world, to somehow save the people that are on the list of those the fascists plan to eliminate? You are voting for the leopard, and telling everyone to just deal with all the face eating? Weird stance, but if you can take a stance against everything you believe in, and believe that is somehow making things "better" more power to you I guess. You've drank your Kool-Aid and are just waiting for the meteor at this point.
I think you're confused, I'm not voting for someone who is carrying out a genocide.
If you want me to vote for a certain candidate, you should convince that candidate to stop the genocide.
It's a two party system, you're either voting for the people you claim to care about to have a chance, or your voting away any chance they have by voting for a Fascist.
You have chosen Fascism as your solution to genocide, so time to own it. I'm voting against fascism, because I want clean air/water, and I don't want family and friends fearing for their lives due to the increase in hate crimes, because they want to make who they are outlawed. I'm voting against the fascists because I don't think women should need to live in fear of becoming pregnant because they know they may not get necessary medical care to save themselves and/or their baby. I'm voting against the fascists because I believe in education, the environment, the rule of law. I'm voting against the fascist because I'm not ok with death camps to imprison anyone that isn't a white Christian nationalist.
The list goes on and on. I'm not voting for me, or any one issue (I'm a white male - so I'll be more than ok), I'm voting for everyone else in my life and community that is going to be stripped of their rights and made to live in fear.
Since I've been able to vote I've experienced 9 'most important elections of our lifetime,' and in the end nothing has improved.
Sometimes it's just about not getting worse. With every win the Right has been erroding people's rights as quickly as they can. They have packed the courts with some of the least qualified and corrupt justices the country has ever seen. They have waged an attack on minorities both directly and through defunding programs and services that help the countries most in need. They have attacked education and turned librarians from a profession nobody thought anything negative of, to one the Right now deems as equivalent to pedophiles (publicly - we know it's all projection for their private actions/feelings on pedophilia). So you may keep hearing the same message, because each election is more important than the last as the Right has been playing this long game of normalizing the erosion the foundation of our Republic. The majority of those in Trump's cult now say they are ok with a King, the very thing this country had fought against and was founded after winning are freedom from.
And voting for the other half of the team that helped get us into this mess isnt the answer. That status quo is just as harmful as republican direct action. The only change has been the entire political structure shifting to the right.
Well, the sad state of US politics is that you have a two party system in place, like it or not. By choosing not to vote, or voting some "protest vote", you are going to help the side that wants to accelerate our decline to the bottom. And once we lose our elections good luck voting for change then. The problem is the Right has been playing a long game that doesn't require morals or empathy, or even human decency. While the rest of the US is a wide swath of people from center-ish (Biden) all the way to are left-ish (AOC/Bernie), and trying to steer people with that wide of viewpoints isn't as easy. Plus we constantly have people trying to both sides everything allowing the Overton window in US politics to be dragged further right with every election. Other than waiting out all these walking corpses running the show, I'm not sure we can get the ship back on course any time soon, but not voting Trump we can at least not sink it.
How are protest votes counted?
Like any other vote, by machine or hand depending on where you live.
I think I'm a bit confused, is there a radio button to fill in on the ballot that says "protest " and then when all votes are counted, we can see a report that says x for dude, y for other dude, and z for protest?
Yes, fairly close to that. 3rd party votes, uncommitted, and no-votes are all tracked, and people studying the (lack of) interest in the candidates take note.