AOC says many who want Joe Biden off ticket also want to remove Kamala
mozz@mbin.grits.dev to 
independent.co.uk
This stupid topic again
But sure
mozz@mbin.grits.dev to mozz@mbin.grits.dev to mozz@mbin.grits.dev to This stupid topic again
But sure
I will vote for any Democrat but I would prefer it not be Kamala
I preferred not to vote for Biden but he turned out to be a good president.
He turned out to be a decent president, except for the massive, glaring failure to build any sort of meaningful bulwark against fascism. He had, like, the absolute best justification and mandate to aggressively crack down on the neofascists with Jan 6, but he pussyfooted around and dragged his feet on fucking everything so much that basically nothing has been dealt with or constructively changed since the coup attempt occurred.
I love how you skip the part where Congress blocked everything the SCotUS didn't. That's so efficient.
There are a LOT of things he could have done in a lot of areas that require neither Congress nor the courts.
Not to mention, he was so goddamn focused on “reaching across the aisle” that he picked a guy for AG that clearly doesn’t have a strong interest in, you know, preventing the fascists from winning, because he’s in the same party as the fascists.
Go on
Well he has absolute immunity now. Could hang them all on the Whitehouse lawn. /s
/s ?
The President using the armed forces to assassinate a political rival would be immune to prosecution under this ruling.
A President's use of the military is a power granted to them under Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution. In order to prosecute for this hypothetical assassination, they would first need to prove that providing orders as Commander in Chief was somehow an unofficial act.
This is one of the specific examples Sotomayor listed in her dissenting opinion on this ruling.
SCOTUS would just rule that political assassination was not an official act, assuming they were a Democrat of course. It's not like they're consistent.
That's why if Biden were to ever use this power, he'd have to go after SCOTUS first.
The President's authority as Commander in Chief is a core constitutional power, as granted in Article II, Section 2. This example is not hyperbolic.
What should he have done against fascism?
Well, not picking an AG with no interest in prosecuting perpetrators of a literal fucking coup attempt would have been a start.
Very true. I'm wondering if Garland is still holding out hope that he somehow gets on SCOTUS, as well.
I'm not exactly excited about Harris, but putting a former prosecutor in office at least makes me think she couldn't possibly put in a worse AG than Garland, at a time when we desperately need a firebrand in the position.
Plenty of opportunity to be proven wrong though 🙄
He’ll be remembered fondly if he doesn’t fuck up this election (i.e. not stepping aside).
But what if he doesn’t step aside and wins reelection?
Yeah that’d work too. But it won’t happen.
For the millionth time: every time they've done it before, they lost in a landslide. NOT stepping aside is the marginally better play.
And as a voter more on the DNC side of the floor, after the news today I weep for the next 40 years in America.
All 2 times this happened before? If that’s the best argument you have for running a candidate that is clearly too old both for campaigning and for the presidency, I think I would take my chances for a third try.
The best play is to roll the die on a real progressive but there's no data to back it up because there is no time to test it.
I think this is the only way to win, but I have very little hope that it will happen. People need a ticket that projects hope for a better future, not one that promises to maintain the status quo. If people were happy with the status quo, Trump would not be a factor. Yet, time and again, it's all the Democrats are willing to offer.
I would vote for any viable candidate not Trump. I would prefer not Biden and not Harris. In fact I’d prefer a sane Republican… but there seems to be a distinct lack of them.
I’d vote for AOC though. She reminds me of the principled republicans of yore, albeit with different views
This is a trap. Even with a "sane" Republican in office, the administration will still work to accomplish the policy goals of the GOP.
Yup, Project 2025 is not just Trump and a few MAGA extremists, it's signed off on by all the right-wing think tanks. If people want to avoid Project 2025 they need to make sure Republicans are out of power for multiple election cycles at a minimum.
How about implementing Ranked choice voting so there is a chance Republicans would vote for a more moderate group of people ?
I'm all for ranked choice, there's no real downside. I think though that Republicans, rather than become less extreme, would simply challenge ranked choice when it started to benefit the left. They are actually doing this now in Alaska, where there is ranked choice voting and they're trying to make it illegal with a ballot initiative.
They'd have to have their judicial power reduced I think. With the extremist supreme court there isn't much in the regard that would stand I don't think. Could be wrong though.
Yes, this. No Republicans at all should be allowed into office. Ever. Don't let them fool you, the agenda marches on regardless if they are "moderate" or "reasonable" or not.
Basically all sane republicans have been pushed off the national stage in the last 8 years.
There's never really been such a thing. Anyone who would be an old school republican today has just become an obstructionist right-wing democratic, so arguably worse than a Republican because they sabotage from the inside.
Besides McCain, which notable sane republican existed in the Obama era?
Pre-Obama we were dealing with the Bush-era neocons.
They haven’t been sane for at least the last twenty years.
Compared to today's Republicans, I'd argue Mitt Romney was relatively sane, though he's still quite problematic.
Sane in a, "I'm a total Mormon and all the shit that comes with that" type way. I blame the Bible belt for mainstreaming mormonism.
Oh for sure, and he was very deep into Mormonism too, but at least he's not an out-and-out Nazi and has been very vocally against Trump.
Which ones were sane in the Ronnie Raygun era? Most of the Bush team were retreads from those days.
I would not say they were "sane" per se, it's just that they've been replaced by even more overt bare-faced extremists. The Overton window on what is extremely right wing keeps getting pushed more and more to the right. A loud mouth performative asshole they believe is beyond punishment due to his "billions" has given them a permission structure to be who they always really wanted to be. These are the people that didn't understand that Archie Bunker was supposed to be a parody, not a hero.
I can't think of a single one. Even the ones that pretended to be sane and were pushed out by the party were horrible.
It's funny to me that Biden is currently both the most liberal and the most conservative presidential candidate.
You would prefer a sane Republican but you praise AOC that is at the opposite end of the spectrum...
Is that before all the GoP and DNC switched sides over slavery?
I’m not that old, no
The three I can remember from the Trump years (Kinzinger, Cheney, and Romney) have pretty much been run out on a rail haven't they? Republicans don't want sane Republicans, and anyone who appears to be one is going to get ostracized within the party, or turn out to be just like all the rest.
They are walking around with bandages on their ears in solidarity with a man who immediately rushed to sell shitty Chinese shoes to commemorate and make a profit off of the assassination attempt which killed one of his own supporters. There are no sane Republicans. There are crazy Republicans, cowardly Republicans, and probably a few with Stockholm Syndrome. They let the inmates take over the asylum and there is no cleaning house now.
Yeah most conservatives who are republicans are getting pretty psychotic. The independents and the ones who switched to Democrat can still be okay though
Moderate Democrats like Harris are like broccoli. Nobody really wants it, it's not the highlight of the meal, but you need your veggies to get the proper nutrients to fight fascism. (Plus, if your diet has too little fiber you end up full of shit.)
Eat your broccoli!
Instructions were unclear, Secret Service did not approve of me nibbling on Kamala Harris's elbow.
I never would have picked her. But the excitement and unity she's inspiring in like 2 days time is undeniable. It almost feels like a bad tv show plot twist.
I'd vote for AOC, tbh
Bernie is too old, she'd be my top pick in Congress by far.
But the Party probably wants to go maximum hail corporate neoliberal, especially when there isn't a pesky primary to deal with, because thats what they're paid to do.
You know, someone who will come to continue to protect our beloved economy... from our society and the needs of our people. Better than fascism, but just extending the meaningless subsistence in service to the owner class.
AOC isn’t even in the conversation though. I think she’d face fierce opposition to even getting the nomination. She’s a pretty divisive figure.
Not for anything she does, AFAICT.
Republicans are terrified of her. She's young, attractive, charismatic, outspoken, and intelligent to say nothing of her being a woman of color. They are giving her the full Hillary treatment. It seems like she'll be a bit harder for them to tarnish that way, but not for lack of trying.
Yes, I agree, but we ought to draw a distinction between someone who acts divisively from someone who's the target of the right-wing hate machine.
But we never do.
Well Hillary is only one or two of those traits you listed. I like Hillary, but she is not charismatic. I think she had good policy sense and could have been an excellent president, but policy doesn't win elections.
I should be clear I’m talking about public perception here, not my personal opinions or any assessment of her policies.
When she voted to disallow train workers striking was pretty disheartening. Who'd expect someone so pro-worker to knock the teeth out of a union.
Probably voted that way because she was assured Biden would continue to hammer out a better deal for the rail union, which he did! Better healthcare, more PTO, and the addition of paid sick days!
Here’s the article right from the rail union thanking Biden for not giving up on their fight. https://www.ibew.org/media-center/Articles/23Daily/2306/230620_IBEWandPaid#:~:text=These%2012%20unions%20represent%20more,agreement%20for%20paid%20sick%20leave.%E2%80%9D
The fact that she’s a conservative bogeyman is kind of besides the point. The neoliberal, corporate-friendly leadership of the DNC would NEVER let her get close to the nomination. They did the same thing to Bernie 8 and 4 years ago.
That’s exactly what I was referring to.
To be clear, the Democratic leadership is not all powerful. The people can push through a nominee leadership hates if we unite. But given the nature of this nomination process, party leaders have an exceptional amount of power this year, and the people have very little.
She's a "radical" to centrists
"Centrists"
Wha...what do you mean not in the conversation, you are literally conversing with someone about her, on a front page post about her. She is popular, and no presidential candidate has ever not been divisive. Not being trump is divisive.
The conversation among those who will decide the nominee. I’ve not heard anyone seriously discuss this outside of online forums.
So what if she’s divisive? Trumps running mate called him hitler at one point. No one wanted Trump, he came in and won the voters hearts with his vision, grotesque as it may be for other people. People want certainty and vision in uncertain times.
Narrowly and due to lies, intimidation, and structural advantages the right has in this country. Wouldn’t work for the left.
Besides, I was just saying that we the people aren’t really making this decision, and the ones that are won’t pick AOC.
I get your point, but I was saying that the RNC was super anti-Trump to start
Oh well I actually agree that the left can push through a candidate that party leaders dislike if we got organized. But usually the left isn’t very good at that, and there’s no time to do so in this specific case.
@LibertyLizard @pearsaltchocolatebar
Lol, it's what happens when you speak truth to power.
I'd vote for her because of a myriad of reasons though.
She is the future of the party.
Maybe maybe not but there’s 0 chance she’ll be the nominee this year.
@LibertyLizard
Agreed, it's not in anyone's interest to test the supreme court ATM.
I said it once here, a couple times before, & I've said it a few times in passing conversation in person. I would vote for AOC and I think she's wonderful. 👍
I like her too but I personally am not sure her popularity is broad enough to be president. But we’ll see. I hope you’re right.
She gets labeled as "divisive" because she's a woman and she's not a centrist. Name one woman who gets listed as a potential candidate and isn't under this same garbage rhetoric.
To be clear, women can and should still be scrutinized, but not to the point where the only woman who would be a great presidential candidate is the most perfect candidate who ever lived.
yeah but the democratic party would rather lose the election than nominate her.
AOC is standing with Biden, as is Bernie Sanders.
Fucking Fox and CNN are calling for Biden to step down.
That doesn't seem strange to you?
not at all. Bernie and AOC are already hated by their party and they have no pull. openly calling for him to step down is not going to help anything, if not have an adverse effect. with biden insisting on staying all they can do is try to appeal to their progressive base who doesn't like biden at all to vote for him because they know biden will depress the vote.
also i saw people on fox defending biden against these calls. it was basically "just let him run again dude, is he loses TFG gets to be president for 4 years then he's gone forever... you can't lose ONE election???" it was ridiculously desperate.
Oh so now when they're supporting Biden they're just liberal shills?
what? where did i say that?
You're saying they're only supporting biden in a cynical calculated move to try to help Democrats win. That's what "liberal shill" usually means.
no it doesn't. it's not cynical to want to defeat the openly fascist candidate. why do u think Bernie told people to vote for Hillary in 2016? because he loved her policies so much?
Ok, what do you think "liberal shill" means?
And Katy Porter
I don’t want AOC to run yet. She’s got a long political career ahead of her and folks tend to bow out of politics after they’re president.
She would be an amazing elder statesperson after her time in office. I hope to some day see it.
We should bring back the idea of a former president running for senator. Show the world that the President isn't any more special than Congress.
Just not anyone old enough to collect social security. We should also bring back the idea that retirement means actually not working anymore.
Is there any reason she couldn’t serve a different position after 2 terms as president?
No reason, it’s just the way things tend to be.
It’s she old enough right now? Can she be a candidate at 34 if she will be 35 before Jan?
Yes. The age requirement is for serving, not for running.
She's 35 on October 13th. Fully qualified.
She'd be the best populist candidate, since Bernie is too close in age to Biden. I also think she could really drum up support with her charisma. The only way to fight a populist like Trump is with another populist. Remember how far Bernie got with his campaigns that refused to take corporate money?
Honestly, the only people that would get in her way are the same DINO Democrats who didn't get behind Bernie. Funny how the progressives in the Democratic party are always the ones who are told to compromise and vote for the centrist and never the other way around.
She's not wrong.
Exactly. Like yeah girl spit your facts, but we will take what we can get and the age and health resilience are legitimate concerns we've been having. Kamala solves the age issue, that's progress to me. I don't want the president to be a puppet of someone who no one voted for.
Isn't that all presidents, like, by definition? XD
People don’t understand what a big deal this is. Corrupting the trusted-by-tradition institutions like the courts is one way fascists can get the whole country in a chokehold.
Gunned down a bunch of BLM protestors? Eh, they were asking for it. Probation.
Climate change demonstration? 10 years
We’re already about 60% of the way there. It’s already happening that people are committing really major crimes and it’s okay if they’re on the right team.
VOTE
Ugh. I agree that Kamala sucks, but I think it’d be a mistake to try to go with anyone else at this point. She has a pulse, a functional brain, lots of political experience, a long life ahead of her, and yeah, she’s made some terrible decisions and gaffs in her career, just like Joe Biden.
I don’t like that she was a cop, but Joe Biden chaired the Senate Judiciary committee for like 100 years, and got us Clarence Thomas, so…nobody has the moral high ground here.
We just need to win, and frankly I think if we try to go with someone new and untested, we’ll lose. We’ve been in a “lesser of two evils” situation for some time now.
There's weeks left to go 'til the convention, plenty of time to run an actual primary if the DNC wanted to.
Ideally, yeah, but think about the logistics of pulling something like that off. And would it be a full primary redo? Like fresh ballots sent out to all dems? Or do you mean a mini primary just with the existing delegates? Because we already voted in the Democratic primary election…
I’m just really trying to be pragmatic about this, I can’t imagine a scenario where we pull this off and come out stronger. I would love to be wrong.
Saying a month is "plenty" of time to plan and run any kind of election on a national level is so ridiculously out-of-touch I read it back like five times thinking maybe it was sarcastic. Off the top of my head there's booking polling places, securing & training staff, voting machines, ballots that need to make their way through the entire supply chain starting all the way back at pre-production. Mail in ballots alone usually go out like a month ahead of time to compensate for issues with the mail.
At this point in time, there's a higher probability of Superman flying around the world backwards to rewind time and correct the gunman's aim to actually hit Trump at that rally than there is of the Democrats being able to successfully pull off a second primary in a month. And that's not even to touch the "coming out stronger" piece of it, which again, no chance in hell that happens with the kind of chaos a second primary would cause.
People live in their fantasies, where national primary elections are just a cut and paste affair that takes two days to set up.
You know, they could be. But I agree right now they aren't.
Personally, I don't think it matters in this case. It's not like we had a robust primary from the Dems this time around.
Probly just the superdelegates choosing in secret, like they threaten too if they don’t like the public vote. If their going to only be Democratic when it’s convenient, they might as well as course correct. I am for replacing Biden, but if they are even talking about it now they best get a move on. Apathy is gaining ground every second they are not at the wheel.
If we used Ranked choice voting, then we could simply switch to the next in line. That is, if the democrats would grace us with a primary.
Please sir, but a scrap of representative democracy.
But only Harris can keep the funds accumulated for Biden's campaign, right? Wouldn't make much sense to go for another candidate I think...
I don't think there time for an actual primary. I'd favor an open convention tbh.
You're right and I wish they would, but I have near zero faith in their willingnes, ability, and coordination.
Consider working towards passing electoral reform in your state so you can vote for something that is not evil, secure in the knowledge that your vote would still count for the lesser evil.
If the party leadership goes with Kamala, we'd damned well better have a real primary in 2028.
Yep, I really do not like Harris, but in this context she's the most realistic option and she's slightly better than Biden on basically everything. Otherwise it becomes a battle against right-wing establishment democrats, and we have no more time for that really. Getting Biden out is hard enough.
I think someone like Newsom would be a better sell. Fact is, it's a dangerous election and getting Republicans that don't like trump very much to actually jump the fence a bit is going to be easier with a white man in his 50's who isn't too "extreme" of a leftist Democrat.
They could also choose someone from a swing state, too.
Who?
Nothing hurts a political campaign more than uncertainty.
I’ll bet the MAGA camp is loving this shit right now.
They are probably pushing it.
They absolutely are. And they’re doing it right in our faces.
I'm not as sure.
They'd have loved it a lot more of they were either 100% confident or was still going to be Biden or if the swap had already happened.
They just held a week-long convention without knowing who they're going to be up against in November.
Does anyone like Kamala lol
First Past The Post voting ensures that a good portion of the people voting for her do not want her. Same for Joe biden. Same for the Republican and democratic parties.
There's a gaggle of coconut memes of her on tiktok, so I guess some people do.
I'm going to vote Democrat.
Straight ticket.
Just like every freaking year because i'm too scared to vote Fully Automated Luxury Gay Space Communist Party.
SUBSCRIBE
eh I'll take Kamela. It'd be hillarious to see a racist beaten by a black woman
I'd do it just to own the cons
I'm voting for the administration that will keep democracy alive in our country.
And it's 🔵🔵🔵
I will too, but my concern is that Harris won't be able to excite the voting base.
My vote is secured - it's whoever has a D next to their name... I'm worried that not enough democrats will turn out if we choose poorly.
I'm worried black voters will not turn out in the needed numbers if they interpret skipping Kamala as the presumptive nominee to be a betrayal. I'm very concerned about a damned if you do, damned if you don't scenario.
Biden has done a good job as President. I don't love him as the nominee, but I'm afraid the chaos of him stepping down is going to create a no win scenario. Some folks think he is the no win scenario. If it's truly impossible for us to put forward a candidate who can win, that's not a problem we can pin on the other side - we did that to ourselves. And at the worst possible time for it.
The average black person cares way less about having a black president than the typical white Lemmy user assumes they do. Only the most off-the-rails liberals support allowing race to be a factor in hiring decisions. Hell - even far-left California outlawed affirmative action.
If you're picking a president based on race, you are implicitly racist and therefore part of the problem.
Every black voter I've talked to (pretty limited, but enough) is asking "what did Biden do for us?" and that's a valid question. Especially after the George Floyd priests, barely anything happened for the black community. And they're already living under the oppression of what amounts to Project 2025.
@xmunk @PunnyName
Your concerns are valid, but the supreme court is being actively used for lawfare & some Washington backroom deal for the doner class outside of the norm for anyone else besides the republican party has double ungood chances for the switched candidate to succeed.
There is so much about donald's project 2025 that isn't known by average people. There will be no election for the democrats come 2028, only for MAGA if they get their way.
https://linktr.ee/stopproject2025
Just remember that during the 2016 election, the "If not Bernie, then Trump" bros turned out to be Russian interference.
I wouldn't be surprised if it's just Russia trying to split the Dem base.
Ever wonder why it's rich media companies who are screeching from the rooftops that Biden is old and needs to step down, while AOC, Bernie, and all the actual progressives are standing behind him?
This is a revolt of the ownership class against Biden's proposed tax hikes. Nothing more. And Leftists are falling for it hook line and sinker.
That might be the catalyst, but it's very much more than that: it's a power grab. The ruling class has amassed so much wealth that they want to do away with some limits to what they can do with it and Trump will let them if they help pay his bills or just agree that he doesn't need to pay any bills.
Three things can be true
And also a certain amount of understandable panic because he really did shit the bed pretty bad in the debate, which is then fed and amplified by dishonesty from the other three camps and precious little effort invested on the other side except for random do-gooders from time to time (and people like AOC who actually understand that she and her direct constituents will be in direct physical danger from a second Trump presidency and this isn't some fucking ratings game they're playing)
Two issues with Biden:
Doesn't matter. Media will push their narrative, and sheep will eat it up. The media has literally doctored videos of Pelosi back when they were trying to push the "she's senile" narrative because they couldn't find any good clips of her saying dumb things.
Yes and people are eating it up.
Ask yourself why we have hundreds of articles on Biden yet none talking about the convicted felon, rapist, nuclear secret stealing, insurrection inciting traitor.
Did they?
Bernie had a 'uge amount of grassroots support without any mainstream media coverage.
And even if they were Russian, it seems they were correct in 2016.
Do you have a source for that claim? Many real people were upset about Bernie being overthrown and spite voted against the Democrats.
AOC should run. I'd vote for her.
She's 34
Born 10/13/89, she'd be 35 at the time of the election and thus able to run
She’d be an amazing VP, but needs experience. I’d love her to chair the Senate in 10 years as a majority leader
Delay the election. We do it all the time for baseball games.
Harris has done so little I had to think for a second to remember what her name was. Other VP have really gotten coverage, like Pence or Gore. But Harris has really stayed mostly on the sidelines.
I’m not in the US, so I might not always be aware of every political thing happening… but Harris feels completely invisible to me.
Biden was very visible as VP, and I actually have memories of Cheney, Gore, even Pence had some notable things.
Gun to my head, I couldn’t tell you one notable or controversial thing Harris did. So I’m reallllllly hoping US voters have a more positive mental picture in regards to her VP tenure. Being ‘not Biden’ only gets you so far…
Nothing from being VP... But before she was VP she was the worst kind of cop... So not a lot of love there from the left, and of course the right hates her just because... Technically she was the first woman to ever hold the power of the presidency though... For like an hour when Joe had a colonoscopy or something.
When you say cop… i see she worked as District Attorney, and the Wikipedia doesn’t really list anything that seems wildly objectionable? Of course, some will hate everything even remotely cop-adjacent…
She has a long history as a DA of siding with the cops and doing a lot of things to expand their power and influence as well as locking up a ton of people, predominantly minorities, for minor offenses, etc.
Basically she fucked over poor people to boost her career when she had ample opportunity to be a champion of the people instead. She's proven that her loyalty lies with the oligarchy and not the people.
Hmm, the Wiki does say say her office prosecuted a higher amount of weed crimes, but also that they weren’t for mere posession. She was tough on gun crime and also created a hate crimes unit focusing on LGBT-related hatecrimes. And also that she’s opposed to the death penalty, and that she actively went after truancy.
Any of those can probably be argued to be good or bad, depending on how they were applied. I can certainly see the combo of anti-truancy and anti-gun crime as policies that might disproportionately hit minorities. Not to mention that weed simply shouldn’t be illegal anyways.
Still, all of it’s hypothetical for now. We’ll see what happens the next few days…
Cheney was an outlier as he basically ran things from the VP office. Dude claimed (successfully I believe) that the office of the Vice President is a separate branch of government that was independent of the other three. And somehow it allowed him to do whatever he wanted? Shit was weird.
I bet that was strategic, to be honest. VPs are designed to mostly stay out of the limelight.
I'd prefer Buttigieg simply because he is such an effective communicator. Other than that I'd prefer someone much more leftist than him.
Really? I’ve always smelled “80’s guy” on him. “Don’t you worry about blank, let me worry about blank.”
I don't love Buttigieg, but he is at least much more progressive than Biden or Harris.
I think he would be a better candidate than either of them.
that person would not win the election
Kamala and AOC would be a lit ticket. I still think we're barreling towards another Reagan era victory by doing this. But that "medical emergency" + instant COVID was almost a sign from the universe.
VPs are usually picked to shore up an electoral weakness of the candidate in question. I don’t think adding a second brown woman to the ticket would make sense, much as I would personally love this.
The weakness this election cycle, for the dems, is the apathy of the base. In that context AOC would be a pretty solid choice.
Much as people on the left like to repeat this, I’m not sure it’s evident that this is the main weakness of the Democratic ticket. Even if true, you’d be solving one weakness by creating another.
But I’d be curious about polling on this, I could be wrong certainly. If Harris becomes the nominee, we might start to see some polling on VP picks.
She's not wrong. The only people I know who support / like Kamala work in the administration
Kamala is a brown lady cop. EVERYONE hates her and she was kept out of the spotlight for a reason.
If we do drop Biden, she is it. But anyone leaping at that is a useful idiot, at best
It's not just that everyone hates her, it's that people from different demographics hate her for different reasons.
Republicans hate her because brown+woman+democrat, left-leaning people don't like her because cop; democrats don't give a fuck as long as it's not trump (is the lettuce that outlasted truss still available?), but if given a clean slate the DNC would probably try Hillary again as a token "first female president", rather than do an actual primary.
Wide distaste does not a successful campaign make.
The DNC seems to really want another Trump presidency
The whole "but they might not be on the ballot in Ohio" rings a lot less worrisome when you see that Trump is +9 in the state vs Biden:
Ohio is Trump country. Deep, deep Trump country. From end-to-end (with maybe the exception of Columbus?). Even Cleveland loves Trump.Trump is so popular here, there are permanent Trump signs. Local businesses use Trump to advertise. One recent roadside ad said "Biden is more confused than Michelle Obama's gynecologist."
This was a sign put up by a prominent construction company on a main road. The company is doing great.
The whole "Michelle Obama is a crossdresser" myth again? What even be the point of that in a world where being trans is only controversial to your Uncle who brings a red hat
Because the person putting up the sign is your uncle wearing a red hat.
Because in Ohio, they're all that uncle in the red hat. That's the point they were trying to make.
Eh, there are far, far less trump signs than there were in 2020.
As damning as it is to the US, the best bet for winning is a good-looking, smooth-talking white guy who will look presidential when compared with Trump.
Jon Stewart. He adamantly opposes the suggestion he run, which is exactly what we need. He's got decades of experience in global politics, he's likeable, got name recognition. And to your suggestion he's a smooth talking attractive white man
It's hilarious that people genuinely believe this.
Have you noticed a worrying shake to his movements ever since he started back with the daily show?
Dunno about him, but I did. I hope he's okay, he's a national treasure.
A little bit of Palsy would help him fit right in with the octogenarian candidates
Being a comedian/activist is different than running a country, John Stewart has power outside the government and would be broken inside.
Oh no, they're trying to run Beto O'Rourke again, aren't they? Dude's going to come out on a skateboard playing the guitar and lose by double digits.
Gavin Newsom you say?
You know, I'm not picky. My primary requirement is must be able to win.
Under conventional rules he has the best fighting chance.
Well it's risky either way. That said Kamala as vp was supposed to represent the "in case of emergency break glass" younger democrat - not too left, just neolib enough for the party, yet younger - that would step in if Biden's age became an issue.
It's now an issue and she didn't play a role in reassuring the public, so...
She is spot on. Harris doesn't make a better top of ticket.
Honestly, a Harris ticket could be interesting, if for no other reason than to play into the "prosecutor vs. literal convicted felon" narrative that would inevitably be born out of it.
If they take Biden off the ticket they're gonna put a corporate puppet in power. Fuck, I wonder if they're trying to get Trump elected on purpose.
Mark Kelly is the new hotness.
IDK who that is.
Navy pilot (A6 Intruder), Combat Veteran, Test Pilot, Navy Captain, Astronaut, Arizona Senator, husband of Gabby Giffords, twin brother of Scott Kelly, who has a nearly identical resume.
Basically, a true American hero, and a Democrat who has proven he can win in a red state.
I mean I haven't heard anything about him for president or anything and he's from my state so ofc I'm aware of him.
He's a senator from Arizona, the Dems shelled out massive amounts for his campaign to beat Martha "MAGA" McSally.
All in all, not a bad idea for a Presidential bid. He's a veteran combat pilot, a former astronaut, arguably a national hero for those 2, and he's pretty progressive to boot. I'll also never, sadly, discount the advantage a white dude has.
Bonus point: Gabby Giffords as first lady would definitely be actively pushing gun control reform from the platform.
Reading these comments here, it's obvious either 1. This thread is filled with shills or 2. Democrats have learned NOTHING from Hillary and are ready to score an own goal at the 89th minute.
Two things can be true 🥲😢😭
I'll admit it, I don't want her, either (not that someone like me has any influence). But she'd be a better option than Joe.
Especially if she picks the right VP. And please, for fucks sake, I hope they do a good job picking a VP. Don't rule out cishet white males, as a for instance, FFS. The Democrats love to play stupid identity political games and constantly do these self-owns. Although if AOC has a clone they could choose as a VP, that would be fantastic. But that's not because they tick some arbitrary set of diversity checkboxes....it's about policies.
I cannot stand her or the dems. Literally have voted 3rd party all my life, but I have family in Ukraine and the EU and I'll be damned if my need to hate on the dems and repubs is stronger than letting that fascist turnip into power just to let russia kill my family members.
What third party? America doesn't really have any (that matter, anyway).
Green party or libertarian. It's not that I agree with either of them totally, I do it because I believe we need other parties represented. Unfortunately the red and blue teams are keeping us from that because neither wants to get rid of fptp voting. It's what keeps them in power.
AOC for VP or for president please!
Well, yeah. She has an even worse chance of winning than the guy with covid for brains
Bypassing her could have a powerful effect on black voters, who we need if we're going to win. If Harris can't win because no one likes her, and no one else can win because black voters are affronted by skipping her when it's her turn, we're just well and truly fucked.
Black voters aren't a monolithic block and they aren't as identity focused as people accuse them of being (well outside of Obama being the first black president). If the candidate has a solid track record of helping minority communities we'd likely see a pretty good turn out.
No, but if they turn out in lower numbers we are in trouble. They don't have to leave as a monolith, just takes agitators to decry the action as racist hypocrisy by the left and maybe 10% of them stay home. That scenario works hurt a lot.
I mean it's speculation. I don't know what the risk or damage would actually be. Maybe I'm overly concerned, but I am concerned.
Black voters are going to be upset if they skip the person who disproportionately prossecuted black people?
Well, then do what they should have done 5 months ago find a likable person as a replacement.
Let me know when you get a time machine
I'm interested in botany too, but will eagerly vote for a Harris-(anyone) ticket over a Trump-Vance ticket. But for real I want to learn how to keep orchids alive.
Oh man, such a chore. You have to make sure they get enough water but not too much water, and then they just sit there doing nothing but suddenly have this brilliant display and you think “yes, all this support was worth it!” And then nothing, for months.
But I’ll still vote Biden in the end, or whoever they offer, even though I’m above the rich people threshold - the social contract must be honored or society falls apart.
Same.
For orchids give them some nice roomy medium, I read once about a wiffle ball technique where you put a wiffle ball underneath the stem to ensure airflow at the roots. I don't have any wiffle balls whenever I've repotted, so I usually just do a bark "core" and then a slim wrap around the roots with wet sphagnam moss, and fill in any extra room in the pot with more bark. I soak the orchids in water to the base of their leaves like once every two weeks for 15 minutes in lukewarm to warm water, and put a tiny bit of orchid fertilizer in the mix every few months or so. I put them somewhere that is warm with a lot of indirect light. My oldest ones are I think 5 now, so it's been working alright for me. I've also stopped trying to make them be upright because they naturally lean over, so I just put them however they look comfortable in the pot.
AOC and the left didn't want Biden either in the first place. It's not like the left is going to go vote Trump.
Obviously not, but if people aren't excited about the ticket, they'll stay home—which is functionally a vote for Trump. At this point, we need candidates that give people hope for a better future, not just promise to maintain the status quo.
Not collapsing democracy and making women into chattel is actually a really good campaign selling point. A hopeful future is great and all, but from what I've seen so far, fear and anger and way more motivating right now.
She acts like that's a bad thing. It's the truth, and it's not the "elites," it's most democratic voters, donors, and a sizeable percentage of political elites, i.e. senators and congress people. Don't look now, AOC, but you are one of the elites.
Trading Biden for Harris is just allowing Trump to campaign against the same administration and trading a guy too old to effectively communicate for someone who is just ineffective at communicating.
I don't want Harris only slightly less than I don't want Biden. They're both losers, but not in the vague insulting sense: in the sense that they're both likely to lose to Trump.
This summary from the Independent necessarily cuts out a lot of the nuance of AOC's points - I say "necessarily" because she spoke on Instagram for a full hour - and one thing that she seemed to emphasize - more than the "They don't 100% support Harris either" point - is there there is very little time remaining in the election year to make any changes to the ticket. There are just weeks until the Democratic convention, and Ohio requires the names to be finalized even before that. She also emphasized that any change to the ticket, especially any late change, increases the chance that the presidency will ultimately be decided - if not by the bureaucracy of a swing state, many of which, like Ohio, are Republican-controlled - then by a legal case that goes before the (corrupt, she didn't need to explain, although there were arch eyebrows at this point) Supreme Court, which is just not an ideal situation for democracy.
Dude I felt bad even posting these two
Because if the whole problem is “RED RED RED RED RED RED” overwhelming anything useful then “RED RED NO IT’S BLUE RED RED BLUE RED NO BLUE NO RED” is not really an improvement
But yes I did feel like both of mine were factually relevant and the minority report should be presented, and I anyway couldn’t produce any real percentagewise increase in the tide if I made it into a full time job and hired assistants
Ignoring issues doesn't make them go away
Then don't post them, post things you think others want to see, and propagate relevant information that might be new or important. One is enough for one topic.
Not that voting is always the metric, but check the votes on this one versus the next “league of lizardman cosplayers says Biden MUST step down” story that comes along
It is good to occasionally insert a counter narrative even if the extent of the deceptive main narrative is already overwhelmingly excessive
Yep… MAGA is having quite a day with it.
Yet... First Past The Post voting continues to artificially limit the number of viable political parties.
I had to block that one account that posted most of them, very sus to me.
Eh it's not that bad. And simply quoting OP
doyee
Literally no one wanted Kamala in the primaries. Everyone knows she got picked as a token diversity VP and not because she was actually popular or anything.
She has a higher chance of losing than Biden. If we're gonna axe the incubent, then you better open up some serious candidates, otherwise this will be a repeat of 2016 and no one will vote.
This is why you never listen to panicking morons by themselves. If you remove the whole ticket they won't even have ballot access.
It really depends on how they do it. It will get challenged regardless, but I think Harris still has the best chance there too.
If Biden stepped down because of health reasons, Harris is his VP, her job is literally to step into the presidency in that case. It's her and Biden's ticket that got elected, so there can't be any talk about it being undemocratic. The people who were allowed to vote in the primary voted for Biden-Harris.
It sounds like AOC is freaked out by all these incompetent idiots around her talking about what their donors want, when really they should be coming up with a plan that has the best chance of running the gauntlet of legal challenges. The obstacle to success will be donor interference by rich idiots trying to handpick their own random people.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
New York Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez went on Instagram Live early on Friday morning to share her thoughts on Joe Biden’s floundering re-election campaign - and warning that many of those who want the President to drop out of the race, also want Vice President Kamala Harris off the ticket too.
“If you think that there is consensus among the people who want Joe Biden to leave ... that they will support, Vice President Harris, you would be mistaken,” she told viewers.
She slammed her colleagues for giving anonymous quotes to the press, calling it “bull****” and urged those resigned to a loss to Donald Trump to give up their seats.
This comes amid mounting pressure on Biden to leave the race.
While he remains publicly committed to staying in the race, Axios reports that in private, the president has resigned himself to increasing calls from lawmakers for him to drop out amid bad polling and mounting scrutiny of his age and mental acuity.
“I’m here to tell you that a huge amount of the donor class and a huge amount of these elites and a huge amount of these folks in these rooms that I see that are pushing for President Biden to not be the nominee also are not interested in seeing the Vice President being the nominee,” she added.
The original article contains 335 words, the summary contains 221 words. Saved 34%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
I mean nobody really wants Kamala but it sounds like that may be the best path. It’s one thing to have the president step down for health reasons, but it’s another to unilaterally replace the candidate after the primary as a response to bad polling.
If the second case happens you’ll see a bunch of pushback from democrats who don’t like the pick, donors who backed Biden, and virtually every Republican trying to portray the democrats in a negative light. That’s just the PR angle ignoring that there will also be legal questions around using Bidens donation money and getting a different candidate on the ballot in all 50 states.
I think that’s fair though? If you bring in a new candidate for president, it’s only fair that they get to bring in their own team. I don’t mind Kamala, the ticket should be whoever makes the strongest pair and would want to work together
I don't really care what happens as long as the Republicans don't win. If AOC's only problem is that Kamala won't be on the ticket, then is that problem really worth risking putting the fascists in power?
Her problem is that the "biden needs to step down" campaign is orchestrated by monied interests.
Ask anyone that wants to remove people off the ticket: Who should they be replaced with?
I haven't heard a good answer yet.
Kelly, Duckworth, Whitmer, Newsom, Buttigieg, Warren, Franken.
I would legit take time off and drive to a battleground to campaign for Franken...
Whitehouse would be solid as well. AOC would also be a fine pick if we got party unity behind her.
Centrists would vote for Trump.
I think you misspelled conservatives - nobody sane would vote for Trump.
Right. Like I said. Centrists.
Harris/AOC. I'm not stoked that Harris is a cop, but she is a centrist and that's what the owners want. AOC as the VP pick to actually motivate real people to vote, and to give her experience to run for President in the future.
And, ideally, every bigot's head would explode simultaneously upon electing two women of color into the highest offices in the land.
Your ears must be full of wax.
@mozz
I think so. This attack is coming from a higher income bracket than Biden.
I believe the doner class has spoken and the democratic leadership is tripping over their own balls to remove them both.
The doner class:
I'm fine keeping biden and removing kamala too, or kamala with a progressive VP
What does AOC hope to gain by going so hard in the paint for Joe? Like the initial statement of support I get, even if I don't like it, but it seems like everyone else was content to just say their support and move on, and she's stuck saying it over and over.
AOC is the only one with any balls to say anything over and over
because we don't beat dumbfuck if people don't get out to vote. for all their asshattery, republicans get one thing right - they tow the party line when it counts. by contrast, dems have been projecting increasing hysteria and doubt over the last several weeks. how does that motivate anyone?
i think AOC cares about results. the results aren't going to be good if dems don't get it together and vote for Biden or whichever politician gets the nomination. doesn't even matter at this point who it is.
Maybe - wild idea here - she's right.
Kamala is as popular as wet toilet paper. Nobody likes her. Every time she speaks in public, her ratings go down.
@mozz Everybody needs to stop untitling the Vice President. It does not help move us toward a society that doesn’t discriminate in hiring for senior positions if we keep talking about women (especially if they’re women of color) as if they’re children while simultaneously referring to male peers by last names and/or titles.