AOC turns 35 right before the election, she's eligible. I think she'd be incredible. She knows how to energize people
I really wish she wasn’t constantly referred to by an acronym, it makes her sound like a super PAC or some other soulless organization instead of an actual person. Pedantic I know, but as someone only vaguely familiar with her, it’s the first thing I think of when I hear about her.
What about MLK, LBJ, JFK, RFK, etc? Lots of people get "initialized"
FDR, NAS,
Milky, Leblanc jayce, Jesus fucking Krist, no idea.
I prefer names tbh. I'm not american tho.
That's fair. In the US we use those initialisms almost exclusively to refer to those people in casual conversation. They are Martin Luther King (Jr; civil rights advocate I perhaps arrogantly assume most people know of), Lindon B. Johnson (president), John F. Kennedy (president), Robert F. Kennedy (current presidential candidate/Democrat spoiler), and AOC is Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez
Why doesn't it ever stop
It's not just in the politics subs now, it's everywhere
Please, won't someone make it stop
You can try to ignore politics all you want but it'll fuck up your life anyway.
Not everyone lives in the USA you donkey. Your circus is EVERYWHERE and it's driving me insane. It's literally all you can talk about.
I don't live in the US and I'm as fed up with the whole shitshow as you are. But US politics unfortunately influences the entire world and if Trump gets elected everybody will suffer, no matter where they live.
It’s almost like US politics have a slight impact beyond the US.
You know non USA people are not allowed to vote in the USA presidential election, right?
The arrogance is astounding.
I don’t mean to be arrogant. But I assume you realize US politics have implications worldwide. That is why many people in many countries take interest in it. Maybe it would be a good thing if US politics only affected the US, but that doesn’t seem to be the current situation.
Where do you live? I bet the US has a military base either there or within one of your neighbors. Not to mention that the US has caused or perpetuates a lot of wars your country is probably involved in now or in the past, especially if you live anywhere in Europe (who are supporting things like Israel or are in NATO), Australia, Canada, Mexico, anywhere in South America, some African countries, or East Asia. The world reserve currency is also currently the dollar. And they are a major player in all of the major international organizations like the UN security Council (the only part of the UN with teeth), NATO, the IMF, and orgs like that.
US politics influence EVERYTHING.
If you don't live in the territory of the American Republic, don't worry, the American Empire aims to change that.
And it'll fuck up your life if you don't ignore it either. Talking about politics online does not equate to political activism.
Welcome to Mr. Bones' Wild Ride, it never ends!
I want to get off Mr. John Adultman’s repeated explanations of why Biden needs to step down
It's only going to get worse for almost a year.
Just keep your head in the sand bruh. Its where you've been this whole time.
Hey! It's the guy with nothing worth saying. That still manages to say it too loud.
If you follow me, I've called this entire mess, its causes and its resolutions, 9 months out.
And I've pretty much been entirely correct, except that I called that Biden would drop out about 2 weeks earlier than he did.
In fact I have bets going back as far as December/ January that I'll be able to collect on.
You can have a world view that predicts future states of reality, or can have whatever anti-scientific, reality denying mess Blue-MAGA has wrapped themselves up in.
The choice is yours.
As long as you believed it that makes one person. No on else does. No one has to follow you. We've seen you immaturely spamming/trolling, unable to articulate actual solutions. All over the place. You aren't collecting on anyone. But I comend you on your vivid imagination.
Its all here my dude. Documented for all to see. As is the gaslighting, lying, cult-like behavior that you've been engaged in.
I won. History is and will be on my side.
It's cute you think so. If only believing made it so.
Not everyone lives in the US you idiot.
Bernie sanders with AOC as his VP pick
Biden is too old but you want to pick Bernie? I love the guy and donated to his campaigns, but he is not the Biden replacement.
Old yes but still on his game, which is all that matters
Yes, but also no. The whole point of switching from Biden is to disarm the "too old attack."
Yeah traitors want to argue the rest of us don't want nazis
I mean, ultimately, I'm voting for whoever the democrats put on the ticket for that very reason. However, I would really like to see someone who has a chance of winning be on that ticket instead of just watching the train wreck happen in front of us.
i dont want someone that old either. unfortunately, he is most likely to beat trump. can't see harris winning cause she is a woman and a minority and this country is still very racist/sexist. i also predict biden would step down shortly after 2nd term. worst case of biden winning is he dies in office of old age
Worst case of Biden is him losing like the polls indicate. Harris is not a suitable replacement either like you said. But there are plenty of others.
Like? Everyone wants to say there are others but can never name one
You're literally in a thread that started with a picture of names of others...
You, "literally", don't understand that this is the disunity that gop and outside powers want and rellying on to put Trump back in power.
The disunity that can be solved by Biden dropping? The GOP loves running against Biden. He's an easy target.
Bernie is only 4 years older than trump. Tbh, they all should have retired years ago, but crying about age while supporting a senile geriatric is just as baseless as the rest of their grievances.
You're not wrong. But Trump is far more coherent than Biden. It's all lies, but they were coherent lies at the debate.
Trump has never been coherent, not once in his life.
Remember this?
“I’m speaking with myself, number one, because I have a very good brain and I’ve said a lot of things. I know what I’m doing and I listen to a lot of people, I talk to a lot of people and at the appropriate time I’ll tell you who the people are. But my primary consultant is myself and I have a good instinct for this stuff.”
— Donald Trump, March 16, 2016, after being asked who he consults with about foreign policy
Or this?
"My uncle was a great professor and scientist and engineer, Dr. John Trump at MIT; good genes, very good genes, okay, very smart. The Wharton School of Finance, very good, very smart — you know, if you're a conservative Republican, if I were a liberal, if, like, okay, if I ran as a liberal Democrat, they would say I'm one of the smartest people anywhere in the world — it's true! — but when you're a conservative Republican they try — oh, do they do a number — that's why I always start off: Went to Wharton, was a good student, went there, went there, did this, built a fortune — you know I have to give my credentials all the time, because we're a little disadvantaged — but you look at the nuclear deal, the thing that really bothers me — it would have been so easy, and it's not as important as these lives are (nuclear is powerful; my uncle explained that to me many, many years ago, the power and that was 35 years ago; he would explain the power of what's going to happen and he was right — who would have thought?), but when you look at what's going on with the four prisoners — now it used to be three, now it's four — but when it was three and even now, I would have said it's all in the messenger; fellas, and it is fellas because, you know, they don't, they haven't figured that the women are smarter right now than the men, so, you know, it's gonna take them about another 150 years — but the Persians are great negotiators, the Iranians are great negotiators, so, and they, they just killed, they just killed us."
Yet Biden was so bad that Trump was far more coherent than Biden was. That's how bad of a candidate Biden is.
I haven't actually watched the debate because that would mean having to watch trump who literally makes me angry with his ignorant, smug, arrogance, but I've been assuming that a lot of the criticism about Biden is propaganda, hyperbole, or a misunderstanding about his speech impediment. Granted, a speech impediment is a horrible quality for a world leader, for one because it can lead to situations like this, but it doesn't mean his mental competency is any less than if he didn't have one. Did you watch the debate? If so, what did you think, and also because apparently it matters more than anything else in the world now to most people, what is your political party? What I mean is that trumpers could be handed the best leader in the history of the universe, one who speaks as Shakespeare writes, and solves problems like Einstein, and still lob the same accusations that they're lobbing at Biden now.
Edited: typos
Fair point about not watching the debate because Trump pisses you off. I did watch the debate live. It's not hyperbole, Biden was that bad. It felt like watching Biden lose the race in real time. He couldn't form complete thoughts. I know he is normally a gaf machine, but this was different. It wasn't struggling to find the right word, it was struggling to find a thought. It honestly reminded me of when my Grandma was struggling with brain cancer and how she struggled to speak. It was excruciating to watch because I've liked what he had done as president. Him staying in would have ruined his legacy and potentially undone everything he has fought for if Trump beat him.
Oof. Well thanks for the context. That's unfortunate. I'm not a huge fan of Biden, but he's been respectable, boring, and actually benefitted the American people during his presidency, all of which are qualities I appreciate in a president. That's another thing I hate about trump. He's so desperate for attention that he does ridiculous shit on a daily basis, multiple times per day, just to stay in the headlines. I don't want a celebrity hound for a president, I want a competent leader that quietly does their job.
I think you and I have very similar feelings about Biden. I donated to Bernie's campaign and wasn't happy when Biden won the primaries last go around. But overall, he did much better than I expected. His biggest blunders I think have been only supporting Ukraine enough to stay on their heels and not actually beat back the invasion and supporting Israel after they've shown they're either committing genocide or they're so incompetent they shouldn't be fighting a war. Also, he ignored the border for too long, but I think any democrat would have made that mistake as well.
How about we appreciate the work he’s done but get some actual you get folks who aren’t boomers in charge. His time has unfortunately passed for the highest office but he can be hugely effective in an important cabinet position.
Shutup Feinstein
lol, no you. Feinstein was too old as well. There should be an age restriction on both ends for government jobs.
I don't think they expected people to live this long when they wrote the constitution, and I know they didn't consider how tribalistic the country would get. Well, Washington did, but nobody listened to him.
I've been saying that for over ten years now, but the time has passed for him. Doesn't he have a younger protege that we can start pushing?
I think it's AOC, but conservatives have a disdain for her that I worry would be Hillary part 2.
I expect to see big things from her in the next 10 years.
If she drops some of her extreme positions, calms down a bit and moves further to the center, she'll have a real shot at the candidacy by the time she's 75.
You just nailed the disdain - it's that she's a woman. And a minority, at that. We can never win those people over.
Yes exactly, Bernie has similar politics but doesn't get the same hatred. There were some Bernie voters who even hopped to Trump. They care more about sexism/racism than actual politics.
I voted for him in the 2020 primary, but if were pushing Biden out because he's too old then the same certainly applies to Bernie. Even if he's more coherent and effective now, how will he be in four years?
The obvious answer is "whom ever the corporate lobbyist says should take over."
I should’ve answered that. But, I picked Harris even though I wanted Whitmer.
Why the fuck is Michelle Obama even in the list?
Can't have america without political dynasties
Seriously. Even here on Lemmy people are suggesting her. I think she's an awesome person but what makes her even remotely qualified to be president other than being married to a previous president? When I see shit like this it just reminds me of Hollywood and their insistence on rebooting anything and everything familiar to the populace whether they want it or not. If they'd more consistently won it'd be Bush, Clinton, Bush, Obama, Clinton, Biden, Obama spanning the last 40 years in a country with 330 million individuals.
To be fair, being married to a previous president is more experience than most people have.
It would also be a hilarious kick in the teeth to Hillary if Michelle got elected.
Good choice, but he’s contracted to play the next Wolverine.
If Danny DeVito were president, I would love to America in a heartbeat.
I'm pretty tired of celebrities with no qualifications running the country.
Other: Birdie Sanders, the only politician benevolent enough to be blessed by a visit from a bird during his speech.
If Democracy is threatened by fascism, as we’ve been told, then it’s time for Michelle Obama to step up. She can resign after the win. Do the right thing Michelle.
Other
Pete Buttigeg/AOC dream team.
Young, wicked smart, progressive enough.
The McKinsey consultant? The guy managing the Boeing stuff currently? I guess he couldn't be too much worse than the current situation but why would you proactively choose him?
Because he could talk his way out of a pair of handcuffs and a locked cage, and I think we need someone to highlight the stupidity coming from the right and he can do it. Let AOC be the power behind the office and keep him in line.
Fair enough
Found the New Englander.
I want to get off mr bones wild ride
None of the above, although Michelle would rock it - but she's said she's not interested, and having watched her husband do the job for 8 years, that's probably a hard "nope."
Harris will lose the race. She'll be a popular punching bag for conservatives, and she's polling even lower than Biden.
My favorites aren't on there. Where's Cory Booker? Where's Amy Klobuchar? Where's Andrew Yang? Where's Buttigieg, or Warren?
Yang, Buttigieg, and Warren would lose, for different reasons. Klobuchar or Booker would stand a chance, i think. But of all of these "pre-vetted" options, I guess Whitmer's in a strong position.
But not Harris. It'll be her, of course, if he does step back, but they'll crucify her. It'll be Clinton all over again, only she's starting even less popular than Hillary was. I don't think conservatives have quite the visceral hatred for her that they seem to have foot Hillary, and she's less prone to sticking her foot in her mouth, but nobody likes her, either. At least Hillary appealed to progressive women.
At least Hillary appealed to progressive women.
As a progressive woman, this is news to me.
Harris is the least disruptive choice. I want a socialist, but that ain’t happening.
Why not? Republicans won with a fascist.
Surely this means as the "center" position liberalism can accept a socialist.
I honestly don't fully understand the Kamala hate. I know she was a prosecutor, but I don't remember having a strong negative opinion of her in 2020.
I have no opinion about her. I just know she hasn't polled well.
I have read that some progressives didn't like her performance as prosecutor, but you're never going to win with some groups with that job.
It's just racists and misogynists not wanting to vote for a WOC
Where’s Andrew Yang?
#YangGang is a glimpse into the reality of the Democratic Party's Asian American problem. (this isn't the appropriate venue to actually discuss those issues; a quick Google search will quite contemporary results showing the trend).
Yang has moved on and created the "Forward Party" which is working to gain ballot access at the local level in a handful of States.
Thanks! I know Yang's active, but I wasn't aware he was that active. I hope he gets traction; it's a steep, nearly impossible hill for third parties.
You might want to look at who his allies are and what his current policies are compared to what he claimed they were.
That's good advice. Is there something in particular you think I should look out for?
I mostly go by stated planks and policies, and I admit I have assumed they haven't changed much; when I do see news about him, nothing much seems to have changed.
OK. I'm sorry. That video is over an hour long, and even skipping forward through the toilet humor puppet parts, I found it hard to watch.
But I did watch far enough to grab this screenshot
which is the Forward Party's planks. I take it you object to some of them? The YouTuber obviously did. I sat through his mocking the idea that the government should make policy on divisive issues based on facts (science) and, failing that, listening to the citizens and letting popular opinion decide policy. I dropped out before hearing his opinion on human-centered capitalism, although I could almost smell the laissez-faire economics through the screen, so I'm guessing he was equally dismissive of that.
If he mocked (and, could he not have?) the "Effective and Modern-Day Government," well, I can't blame him, because I don't know WTF that means, either.
But, oh, if that guy's a libertarian, and I've got a buck that says he is, then I'll bet UBI really got him worked up. Although, I'd like to hear his solution for when ML eliminates white collar jobs, including his.
"Grace and Tolerance" are just being good people. It's sad it has too be included as a plank, but considering that one party is objectively and openly opposed to any form of grace or tolerance (except tolerance of intolerance - Nazis deserve to be in government, too!), it's not absurd that the Forward Party included it. It's a sort of "Do no evil" company motto that served well, until accountants took over.
I got about a third of the way through before I bailed. Not my kind of humor, and I think from my brief exposure, I think I'd really dislike that guy as a person. He looks like someone I'd end up punching because he's pushing his girlfriend around outside of a club.
Lol, incredible. Cody Johnston is for sure a libertarian, you have demonstrated incredible insight and intellectual rigor.
I think you're exactly the kind of voter the Forward Party is looking for!
Someone who wants to know what they actually stand for, but, not, like, by doing something that would take more than 15 minutes.
✅ Military experience. We may need a leader who knows first hand the danger they are putting our young men and women in.
✅ Governing experience (if you can be a community organizer, peanut farmer, or reality TV star, being a mayor is absolutely legitimate experience)
✅ Federal experience
✅ I'm gonna say it- in hindsight he managed the rail union strike amazingly well. He avoided a supply chain catastrophy, then a few months later got the union the sick time they need. He had his cake and ate it too.
✅ Medicare for those who want it is a realistic plan. It's it perfect? No. But it's better and more importantly can pass through Congress.
I fully expect comments to fully support this take without any criticism for a center left candidate who doesn't plan on tearing down capitalism brick by brick./s
Also, I'm gonna say it, I'd love to vote for a gay man. I'd love to see the GOP desperately try to bite their tongue knowing that the overwhelming majority of Americans wouldn't support them saying "don't vote for the f*****" which we all know they'd want to say so damn hard. You know they'd end up slipping up and showing their true colors which could help turn people away.
Oh absolutely. We need an inspiring queer leader to mark a new era, where young LGBT children can grow up knowing they have a future in our country, let alone a future at all.
You forget that half of the GOP are closeted, self-loathing homosexuals.
All of that and he does SO much better than any one else I've seen on interviews. If he isn't president this year he'll run in 2028.
I dunno. He seems kinda Cunty In Allegiance.
I don't do these polls. They are just a way to get a foot in the door to solicit donations. The majority of the time you can't even complete them without pledging to donate.
Yes, they solicit donations. It doesn’t mean you have to donate. I do them to influence the party. Give me the policies I want, then I’ll donate.
They get their guiding information from real polls, collected by real people, over the phone or in person. There is no way they would rely on a crazy inaccurate web poll to gather any useful information. If you analyze these "polls" at all, you can easily see that they are barely disguised push-polls without any statistical value. They would be crazy to rely on them.
I DO participate when an actual pollster conducting an actual scientific poll calls me,
Just got another one:
I understand this. But the fact that a PAC is using disinterest for Biden to solicit donations is telling. I know that it won’t affect the party decision. But it is a way display dissatisfaction for those decisions.
Boaty McBoatface
I'd pick the one that polls the highest against Trump whether I like them or not. That was the only reason I was supporting Biden in the past. If I could go back in time and do a real primary and pick someone based on who would run the country the best it could be a million people (Bernie, AOC, Buttigieg, etc), but the thing that matters to me most is who stands the best chance against Trump. A milquetoast do-nothing dem is a mile ahead of Trump 2.0 + P2025.
That's pretty much the entirety of the DNC platform now, "Not Trump". I went to the Democrat's website last night to actually read the platform and the first thing I saw was a huge banner with Trump's face.
As POTUS I don't doubt that she'd adopt the same shitty foreign policy as Biden, but I do like what Whitmer has done in Michigan. We could do worse.
I wanted Whitmer but I chose to be pragmatic and picked Harris. I just want Biden to bow out.
Unless they run another primary, Kamala is the best choice IMHO. Already tied to the Biden ticket, so it would feel less like the DNC is hand-picking whoever they want as a candidate. She polls well. Can get creative with the VP.
Please don't take Josh Shapiro. I don't have faith in my fellow Pennsylvanians not to elect a Republican.
We probably aren't lucky enough to get three in a row.
Also, he reminds me of David Rosen from Scandal, and it already feels too much like we're living in that dystopia.
I'd prefer the Scandal dystopia to this. At least the main characters would be better looking.
I'm not American and actually don't know much about him but aside from the one glaring topic in that wiki, he sounds ok to me? Curious as to what shitty things he's done if anyone feels like sharing.
Editing to say: the one glaring topic is a pretty fucking important topic in my books, but I don't imagine any other American politician with a chance having a different opinion on the matter
AFAIK he's not done anything shity, which is why I want to keep him as my governor. He's smart, dedicated, and has a good head on his shoulders.
Bernie
No Pete Buttigieg? Probably just as corporate as the other ones, but seems like he’d make a semi-decent pick.
Come now, that's just proof of international goodwill and diplomatic accumen. We should all be kind to each other.
Also, being a polyglot is something to always be admired.
Michelle Obama would honestly just win by default, but I'd probably pick Whitmer realistically.
I got another message. This one I picked Whitmer.
Probably Harris because Michelle said no and newsome is an easy target.
There was a poll a few weeks back that showed Michelle Obama being the most popular pick; take that with a grain of salt because we all know how biased and skewed those poll results are based on a number of factors which we can't know.
That said, I think she did a lot of great work as First Lady and I'd happily vote for her. I think she's got the potential to get people fired up and excited about the possibilities, much like Obama did, and everything else aside, that's what we really need - excitement, enthusiasm, and for people to want to get out there and vote. I think she could provide that moreso than anyone else on the list.
Has she expressed an interest?
afaik she's expressed a disinterest
It makes me want to vote for her. It's a tough job, only a crazy person wants it. We should only give it to people who don't want it lol. Like her or Jon Stewart.
Pritzker has been awesome in IL. He would be an amazing president. Probably the most progressive of anyone in that list.
I would unitity, not division
Like Cyclops, Unitity is an interesting mythical character: one boob.
I also like unity.
Aquaman it is.
Gretchen Whitmer.
Garlin Gilchrist is way more pro transit and would be great for Michigan.
Harris would be the only pick that would prevent the Supreme Court from installing trump as dictator.
Mark Kelly
All of 'em are better than Trump and I think Kamala probably has the best chance of winning the general.
These options are kinda wild, and I'm wondering from where they're sourced. Of the ones available, I think I'd prefer Newsom.
Has Pritzker expressed any interest? I thought he was a bit busy being my governor.
Pritzker has done a good job here for us, but I don't know if I'd want him as president. I hear good things about this Gretchen lady, even if she has an unenviable name. I'd have to do some actual research first, and I'm not doing that right now.
Its a coming to Jesus moment for party centrists about being so historically wrong they've been about everything, this entire time. And this is them trying to make up for it in rapid time. This is them realizing they don't and didn't know what the fuck they were doing, ever.
Real answer: We should nominate whoever is most likely to win. The most important and only point is that we need to beat Trump, and we need to stop project 2025. Keeping Biden as the nominee has continuously fucked over our ability to fix this idiotic and stupid unforced error, but here we are. We can fix this.
I think the most electable combination is Kamala + 1. I think that + 1 should be either farther to the left or farther to the right, but regardless you need to get a demographic. The two best options are AOC and Andy Beshear. If you go Andy Beshear, you are trying to pull off NC and GA, and PA. If you go AOC, you are doing so to recover the upper midwest. Andy Beshear is the harder path in an extremely polarized environment; Democrats have been notoriously bad at clawing back votes in southern states. If you go the AOC route, you let her take an oppositional stance on Israel/ Gaza and claw back MI/ MN/ WI.
AOC is a lightning rod for conservatives, moreso due to sexism imho than her politics because she gets way more hate than Bernie even though they're politically very similar. She's not a good choice just because of that. I don't think the general population of the US is ready for two women on a ticket, esp two women of color. Could make an exciting ticket in the way Obama was, but only if Kamala proves to be as engaging of a speaker. Which, honestly I think she's a good orator but a lot of people will have trouble seeing past the fact she is a woman, and Kamala will unconsciously or consciously have all the usual biases against women in power (bossy, crazy, etc).
I honestly had no idea who Beshear is but just looking him up, I think he'd be an okay pick. Looks like a boring white guy, has solid liberal track record. I feel like a white guy who supports Palestine would be better, Kamala has a lot of pushback from leftists from her time as DA in CA. Idk who that would be.
This hand wringing around what "conservatives" want is not a way to decide who the Democratic nominee should be.
She’s not a good choice just because of that.'
If anything, having them as a lightening rod to be able to put the racism & sexism of the republican party on full display; there is narrative power in that.
You put AOC on the ticket and you let her step left on Gaza/ Israel.
You make the ENTIRE campaign about abortion rights and a woman's right to choose. Get back to the progressive roots that underpinned the platform that got Harris/ Biden elected in the first place. Activate a base around specifically abortion rights and I think you get this thing in the bag. Women right now are incredibly disenfranchised by the shockingly weak way in-which Biden has responded to the overturning of Roe V Wade. This is a chance to activate the singularly largest voting block there is in the US: Women. And they overwhelmingly support a womans right to choose.
VP's are notoriously bad at "getting" their states. Beshear is the soft answer and MSNBC is test-ballooning this right now.
If Andy Beshear "gets you" KY, he's worth it. If he can't get KY (and really also GA, and NC), he's a waste of space. But maybe he can do it. I just don't see any other conservative Democrat who can fit that bill right now.
I think the double woman ticket leaning into the only thing thats worked for Democrats in 20 years, progressive idealism, is how you lock things up.
I'm not talking about catering to Conservatives, I'm talking about the cultural campaign of meme-ification of AOC that conservatives have been waging for years, that could be convincing to moderates and moderate Democrats.
The only successful Democratic presidential candidates in the last twenty years have been Obama and Biden. Obama won because he has a lot of natural charisma, and came along with a story of having our first black president. Biden won as a reaction to the first Trump presidency. Neither were really particularly idealistic Democrats... Obama did not even express public support gay marriage when he came into office, he had pretty centrist positions overall and gave off an idealistic message with campaign art, speeches and slogans, but his actual policy was not especially progressive.
So Obama won as a biracial black man with the conservative stance against gay marriage, and overall very center-liberal politics, but flashy idealistic messaging.
If progressive idealism had been working, we would have had Bernie presidency by now tbh
I just to be clear, you are arguing that Obama didn't campaign as an idealist?
Not how he governed, but his 2008 campaign. You know, the one where he delivered the famous acceptance speak "The audacity of Hope". You know, the campaign with these posters:
Your saying this wasn't a campaign based on idealism?
Not how he governed to be clear, where I agree on your evaluation of Obama's alignment; but his 2008 campaign.
Obama didn't win 2008 on centrism or being against gay marriage. He won 2008 in spite of those things.
I think I was pretty clear saying his campaign was based on the idea and image of idealism, but his politics did not reflect that, not his actual politics or his promised politics in 2008. You're showing me this poster as if I didn't directly mention the art and sloganing as a major reason for his win.
AOC may have idealistic policy positions, but her public image is so meme-ified I don't think she could successfully do the Hope thing that Obama did. Obama was much less well known of a politician when he ran.
I think you are muddying the water between campaign/ candidate Obama that misrepresents the fact that he campaigned as a progressive idealist, and it worked to get him into office. His platform was a very progressive platform that he did not govern to; this has been brought up repeatedly as an issue with Obama and was brought up when he was campaigning for a second term.
I think it's utterly disingenuous to present the Obama 2008 campaign as anything but a campaign focused on progressive idealism even if it was more of a show than how Obama ultimately governed.
Correspondingly, Bidens 2020 platform was maybe the most progressive platform any president has run on since Jimmy Carter, and it was a horse trade that got him Sanders voters and effectively the election.
Feel like I mentioned again and again that I'm talking about his campaign politics. I took a look at his 2008 campaign policies to see if I was misremembering anything and it's pretty centrist to me, even his health care plan. And like I mentioned, he explicitly did not support gay marriage which at the time would have been an easy progressive signalling, but he either truly opposed gay marriage or he was trying to cater to a broader audience.
Like I said, he had a convincing image of idealism but not the politics to back it up, and you are saying AOC could win because she has progressive politics. She would need the flashy campaign to back it up, and so many people just hate her I don't think it would work.
Anyway I'm just saying the same things over and over again in different wording and it's getting tired, respond if you want, idc, but I'm going to stop here.
I’m just saying the same things over and over again
Yeah. You keep just repeating the same patently wrong, historically inaccurate characterization of Obama's campaign. The discussion was about idealism and how it sells in-terms of getting elected. My central point, is that it absolutely does sell, even its just the trappings. You run as a progressive idealist, like Obama did or like Sanders did, or based on just lift and shift the progressive platform like Biden did, and you catch W's.
You want to win an election as a Democrat? Either run on a progressive platform, or at least paint yourself that way in your campaign.
The idea that you can win as a Democrat running towards the center isn't supported (at least since Clinton).
MN hasn't voted republican in a presidential election since tricky dick in 1972. There have been a few close calls.
Dems up by 10, and polling 15 pts ahead of where they are polling today.
Dems only won MN by five points on election day. Anything close to a tie in polling for Dems is an L.
Yes. It's a correct statement to say that Dems have to have to claw things back to win MN.
As a non-USAmerican I only know Michelle Obama from that list. But if you want real change and young voters, get AOC on the ticket. I bet you that'll wake people up. She's media savvy and could probably get the entire tiktok+insta viewership to campaign for her. The facebook folk probably less so, and the redditors 50/50. She would need a male vice president though. Two women in the US ain't making it this year.
But honestly, I want Trump to win. The world needs a good shake up and divorce from the USA. New alliances have to be made and the reliance on US tech and media has to stop. I know it would hurt USAmericans, but it'd be the best for the world to stop following the USA as if hypnotised.
You're delusional if you think it would only hurt Americans. America would become EVERYONE'S problem in a big way.
I doubt they can become a problem in 4 years. Come election time (2028), there will be a civil war and it'll implode as Trump tries to hold on to power and become president for a 3rd time. He's unpredictable, but one country against the world? They lost countless war games.
Already happened 2016. It was awful. Hoped we'd never be here again.
Unless you've been hiding under a rock, you can see its influence spread over the globe. Germany recently voted hard right. Israel is a genocidal shithouse. India is Modi's Muslim hate factory. All strutting the Putin way: oligarchs ruling & fascist division of the people spread with propaganda (RT, Fox news, Facebook & twaXtter).
Do you seriously think that was Trump? Nah dude, that was US media that has been infecting the world since the second world war. After Europe collapsed, the US swooped into the void and filled it with media portraying themselves as the victors and saviors. It spread USAmerican tribalism far and wide.
Then social media came along and Europe still hadn't caught up nor recognised the power of media. Investments in film, TV, music, and internet were, and still are, ridiculously small compared to US investments. The internet just helped US media percolate deeper into European society. Now it's on everbody's phones and is an endless barrage.
Of course fossil fuel companies have a large role to play too. They helped mold a world focused on their product, which fucks up the environment. And tech companies play an even bigger role today, exploiting poor countries that were kneecapped by the US by destroying their democracies (or attempts at democracies) decades ago.
People want to flee and Europe comparatively easier to reach than the US, so they tried and still try to escape their situations. That of course gives right wing parties fodder to spread their hatred and blame a defenseless scapegoat.
I'm not saying the US is the root of all evil, I'm saying they play a monumental part in it. Trump is just an accelerator to a possible decoupling of Europe and other economies from the US.
We all know the DNC is controlled by corporate interests. They aren't protecting the population. All they are protecting is their investments. Had they cared about the people, they'd never had thrown their support behind a second term for Biden. He too old 4 years ago and is way too old now. If the vote is won by a democrat, and that will only happen if the DNC takes a fucking stick out of their ass and force Biden to drop out ASAP, that will just mean another 4 years where the US can keep semi-good relations with the world. The world won't have a reset button.
AOC turns 35 right before the election, she's eligible. I think she'd be incredible. She knows how to energize people
I really wish she wasn’t constantly referred to by an acronym, it makes her sound like a super PAC or some other soulless organization instead of an actual person. Pedantic I know, but as someone only vaguely familiar with her, it’s the first thing I think of when I hear about her.
What about MLK, LBJ, JFK, RFK, etc? Lots of people get "initialized"
FDR, NAS,
Milky, Leblanc jayce, Jesus fucking Krist, no idea.
I prefer names tbh. I'm not american tho.
That's fair. In the US we use those initialisms almost exclusively to refer to those people in casual conversation. They are Martin Luther King (Jr; civil rights advocate I perhaps arrogantly assume most people know of), Lindon B. Johnson (president), John F. Kennedy (president), Robert F. Kennedy (current presidential candidate/Democrat spoiler), and AOC is Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez
Why doesn't it ever stop
It's not just in the politics subs now, it's everywhere
Please, won't someone make it stop
You can try to ignore politics all you want but it'll fuck up your life anyway.
Not everyone lives in the USA you donkey. Your circus is EVERYWHERE and it's driving me insane. It's literally all you can talk about.
I don't live in the US and I'm as fed up with the whole shitshow as you are. But US politics unfortunately influences the entire world and if Trump gets elected everybody will suffer, no matter where they live.
It’s almost like US politics have a slight impact beyond the US.
You know non USA people are not allowed to vote in the USA presidential election, right?
The arrogance is astounding.
I don’t mean to be arrogant. But I assume you realize US politics have implications worldwide. That is why many people in many countries take interest in it. Maybe it would be a good thing if US politics only affected the US, but that doesn’t seem to be the current situation.
Where do you live? I bet the US has a military base either there or within one of your neighbors. Not to mention that the US has caused or perpetuates a lot of wars your country is probably involved in now or in the past, especially if you live anywhere in Europe (who are supporting things like Israel or are in NATO), Australia, Canada, Mexico, anywhere in South America, some African countries, or East Asia. The world reserve currency is also currently the dollar. And they are a major player in all of the major international organizations like the UN security Council (the only part of the UN with teeth), NATO, the IMF, and orgs like that.
US politics influence EVERYTHING.
If you don't live in the territory of the American Republic, don't worry, the American Empire aims to change that.
And it'll fuck up your life if you don't ignore it either. Talking about politics online does not equate to political activism.
Welcome to Mr. Bones' Wild Ride, it never ends!
I want to get off Mr. John Adultman’s repeated explanations of why Biden needs to step down
It's only going to get worse for almost a year.
Just keep your head in the sand bruh. Its where you've been this whole time.
Hey! It's the guy with nothing worth saying. That still manages to say it too loud.
If you follow me, I've called this entire mess, its causes and its resolutions, 9 months out.
And I've pretty much been entirely correct, except that I called that Biden would drop out about 2 weeks earlier than he did.
In fact I have bets going back as far as December/ January that I'll be able to collect on.
You can have a world view that predicts future states of reality, or can have whatever anti-scientific, reality denying mess Blue-MAGA has wrapped themselves up in.
The choice is yours.
As long as you believed it that makes one person. No on else does. No one has to follow you. We've seen you immaturely spamming/trolling, unable to articulate actual solutions. All over the place. You aren't collecting on anyone. But I comend you on your vivid imagination.
Its all here my dude. Documented for all to see. As is the gaslighting, lying, cult-like behavior that you've been engaged in.
I won. History is and will be on my side.
It's cute you think so. If only believing made it so.
Not everyone lives in the US you idiot.
Bernie sanders with AOC as his VP pick
Biden is too old but you want to pick Bernie? I love the guy and donated to his campaigns, but he is not the Biden replacement.
Old yes but still on his game, which is all that matters
Yes, but also no. The whole point of switching from Biden is to disarm the "too old attack."
Yeah traitors want to argue the rest of us don't want nazis
I mean, ultimately, I'm voting for whoever the democrats put on the ticket for that very reason. However, I would really like to see someone who has a chance of winning be on that ticket instead of just watching the train wreck happen in front of us.
i dont want someone that old either. unfortunately, he is most likely to beat trump. can't see harris winning cause she is a woman and a minority and this country is still very racist/sexist. i also predict biden would step down shortly after 2nd term. worst case of biden winning is he dies in office of old age
Worst case of Biden is him losing like the polls indicate. Harris is not a suitable replacement either like you said. But there are plenty of others.
Like? Everyone wants to say there are others but can never name one
You're literally in a thread that started with a picture of names of others...
You, "literally", don't understand that this is the disunity that gop and outside powers want and rellying on to put Trump back in power.
The disunity that can be solved by Biden dropping? The GOP loves running against Biden. He's an easy target.
Bernie is only 4 years older than trump. Tbh, they all should have retired years ago, but crying about age while supporting a senile geriatric is just as baseless as the rest of their grievances.
You're not wrong. But Trump is far more coherent than Biden. It's all lies, but they were coherent lies at the debate.
Trump has never been coherent, not once in his life.
Remember this?
— Donald Trump, March 16, 2016, after being asked who he consults with about foreign policy
Or this?
Yet Biden was so bad that Trump was far more coherent than Biden was. That's how bad of a candidate Biden is.
I haven't actually watched the debate because that would mean having to watch trump who literally makes me angry with his ignorant, smug, arrogance, but I've been assuming that a lot of the criticism about Biden is propaganda, hyperbole, or a misunderstanding about his speech impediment. Granted, a speech impediment is a horrible quality for a world leader, for one because it can lead to situations like this, but it doesn't mean his mental competency is any less than if he didn't have one. Did you watch the debate? If so, what did you think, and also because apparently it matters more than anything else in the world now to most people, what is your political party? What I mean is that trumpers could be handed the best leader in the history of the universe, one who speaks as Shakespeare writes, and solves problems like Einstein, and still lob the same accusations that they're lobbing at Biden now.
Edited: typos
Fair point about not watching the debate because Trump pisses you off. I did watch the debate live. It's not hyperbole, Biden was that bad. It felt like watching Biden lose the race in real time. He couldn't form complete thoughts. I know he is normally a gaf machine, but this was different. It wasn't struggling to find the right word, it was struggling to find a thought. It honestly reminded me of when my Grandma was struggling with brain cancer and how she struggled to speak. It was excruciating to watch because I've liked what he had done as president. Him staying in would have ruined his legacy and potentially undone everything he has fought for if Trump beat him.
Oof. Well thanks for the context. That's unfortunate. I'm not a huge fan of Biden, but he's been respectable, boring, and actually benefitted the American people during his presidency, all of which are qualities I appreciate in a president. That's another thing I hate about trump. He's so desperate for attention that he does ridiculous shit on a daily basis, multiple times per day, just to stay in the headlines. I don't want a celebrity hound for a president, I want a competent leader that quietly does their job.
I think you and I have very similar feelings about Biden. I donated to Bernie's campaign and wasn't happy when Biden won the primaries last go around. But overall, he did much better than I expected. His biggest blunders I think have been only supporting Ukraine enough to stay on their heels and not actually beat back the invasion and supporting Israel after they've shown they're either committing genocide or they're so incompetent they shouldn't be fighting a war. Also, he ignored the border for too long, but I think any democrat would have made that mistake as well.
He's still sharp, and there's literally no one I trust more to do the job tbh.
You're kidding yourself if you think he's still sharp.
I'm curious who Bernie would pick.
Bernie?
How about we appreciate the work he’s done but get some actual you get folks who aren’t boomers in charge. His time has unfortunately passed for the highest office but he can be hugely effective in an important cabinet position.
Shutup Feinstein
lol, no you. Feinstein was too old as well. There should be an age restriction on both ends for government jobs.
I don't think they expected people to live this long when they wrote the constitution, and I know they didn't consider how tribalistic the country would get. Well, Washington did, but nobody listened to him.
I've been saying that for over ten years now, but the time has passed for him. Doesn't he have a younger protege that we can start pushing?
I think it's AOC, but conservatives have a disdain for her that I worry would be Hillary part 2.
I expect to see big things from her in the next 10 years.
If she drops some of her extreme positions, calms down a bit and moves further to the center, she'll have a real shot at the candidacy by the time she's 75.
You just nailed the disdain - it's that she's a woman. And a minority, at that. We can never win those people over.
Yes exactly, Bernie has similar politics but doesn't get the same hatred. There were some Bernie voters who even hopped to Trump. They care more about sexism/racism than actual politics.
I voted for him in the 2020 primary, but if were pushing Biden out because he's too old then the same certainly applies to Bernie. Even if he's more coherent and effective now, how will he be in four years?
The obvious answer is "whom ever the corporate lobbyist says should take over."
I should’ve answered that. But, I picked Harris even though I wanted Whitmer.
Why the fuck is Michelle Obama even in the list?
Can't have america without political dynasties
Seriously. Even here on Lemmy people are suggesting her. I think she's an awesome person but what makes her even remotely qualified to be president other than being married to a previous president? When I see shit like this it just reminds me of Hollywood and their insistence on rebooting anything and everything familiar to the populace whether they want it or not. If they'd more consistently won it'd be Bush, Clinton, Bush, Obama, Clinton, Biden, Obama spanning the last 40 years in a country with 330 million individuals.
To be fair, being married to a previous president is more experience than most people have.
It would also be a hilarious kick in the teeth to Hillary if Michelle got elected.
Whatever it is, it's more than trump has.
Danny DeVito
Good choice, but he’s contracted to play the next Wolverine.
If Danny DeVito were president, I would love to America in a heartbeat.
I'm pretty tired of celebrities with no qualifications running the country.
Other: Birdie Sanders, the only politician benevolent enough to be blessed by a visit from a bird during his speech.
If Democracy is threatened by fascism, as we’ve been told, then it’s time for Michelle Obama to step up. She can resign after the win. Do the right thing Michelle.
Other
Pete Buttigeg/AOC dream team.
Young, wicked smart, progressive enough.
The McKinsey consultant? The guy managing the Boeing stuff currently? I guess he couldn't be too much worse than the current situation but why would you proactively choose him?
Because he could talk his way out of a pair of handcuffs and a locked cage, and I think we need someone to highlight the stupidity coming from the right and he can do it. Let AOC be the power behind the office and keep him in line.
Fair enough
Found the New Englander.
I want to get off mr bones wild ride
None of the above, although Michelle would rock it - but she's said she's not interested, and having watched her husband do the job for 8 years, that's probably a hard "nope."
Harris will lose the race. She'll be a popular punching bag for conservatives, and she's polling even lower than Biden.
My favorites aren't on there. Where's Cory Booker? Where's Amy Klobuchar? Where's Andrew Yang? Where's Buttigieg, or Warren?
Yang, Buttigieg, and Warren would lose, for different reasons. Klobuchar or Booker would stand a chance, i think. But of all of these "pre-vetted" options, I guess Whitmer's in a strong position.
But not Harris. It'll be her, of course, if he does step back, but they'll crucify her. It'll be Clinton all over again, only she's starting even less popular than Hillary was. I don't think conservatives have quite the visceral hatred for her that they seem to have foot Hillary, and she's less prone to sticking her foot in her mouth, but nobody likes her, either. At least Hillary appealed to progressive women.
As a progressive woman, this is news to me.
Harris is the least disruptive choice. I want a socialist, but that ain’t happening.
Why not? Republicans won with a fascist.
Surely this means as the "center" position liberalism can accept a socialist.
I honestly don't fully understand the Kamala hate. I know she was a prosecutor, but I don't remember having a strong negative opinion of her in 2020.
I have no opinion about her. I just know she hasn't polled well.
I have read that some progressives didn't like her performance as prosecutor, but you're never going to win with some groups with that job.
It's just racists and misogynists not wanting to vote for a WOC
#YangGang is a glimpse into the reality of the Democratic Party's Asian American problem. (this isn't the appropriate venue to actually discuss those issues; a quick Google search will quite contemporary results showing the trend).
Yang has moved on and created the "Forward Party" which is working to gain ballot access at the local level in a handful of States.
Thanks! I know Yang's active, but I wasn't aware he was that active. I hope he gets traction; it's a steep, nearly impossible hill for third parties.
You might want to look at who his allies are and what his current policies are compared to what he claimed they were.
That's good advice. Is there something in particular you think I should look out for?
I mostly go by stated planks and policies, and I admit I have assumed they haven't changed much; when I do see news about him, nothing much seems to have changed.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dd399ppGoBU
OK. I'm sorry. That video is over an hour long, and even skipping forward through the toilet humor puppet parts, I found it hard to watch.
But I did watch far enough to grab this screenshot
which is the Forward Party's planks. I take it you object to some of them? The YouTuber obviously did. I sat through his mocking the idea that the government should make policy on divisive issues based on facts (science) and, failing that, listening to the citizens and letting popular opinion decide policy. I dropped out before hearing his opinion on human-centered capitalism, although I could almost smell the laissez-faire economics through the screen, so I'm guessing he was equally dismissive of that.
If he mocked (and, could he not have?) the "Effective and Modern-Day Government," well, I can't blame him, because I don't know WTF that means, either.
But, oh, if that guy's a libertarian, and I've got a buck that says he is, then I'll bet UBI really got him worked up. Although, I'd like to hear his solution for when ML eliminates white collar jobs, including his.
"Grace and Tolerance" are just being good people. It's sad it has too be included as a plank, but considering that one party is objectively and openly opposed to any form of grace or tolerance (except tolerance of intolerance - Nazis deserve to be in government, too!), it's not absurd that the Forward Party included it. It's a sort of "Do no evil" company motto that served well, until accountants took over.
I got about a third of the way through before I bailed. Not my kind of humor, and I think from my brief exposure, I think I'd really dislike that guy as a person. He looks like someone I'd end up punching because he's pushing his girlfriend around outside of a club.
Lol, incredible. Cody Johnston is for sure a libertarian, you have demonstrated incredible insight and intellectual rigor.
I think you're exactly the kind of voter the Forward Party is looking for!
Someone who wants to know what they actually stand for, but, not, like, by doing something that would take more than 15 minutes.
Pete Buttiegieg
✅ Military experience. We may need a leader who knows first hand the danger they are putting our young men and women in.
✅ Governing experience (if you can be a community organizer, peanut farmer, or reality TV star, being a mayor is absolutely legitimate experience)
✅ Federal experience
✅ I'm gonna say it- in hindsight he managed the rail union strike amazingly well. He avoided a supply chain catastrophy, then a few months later got the union the sick time they need. He had his cake and ate it too.
✅ Medicare for those who want it is a realistic plan. It's it perfect? No. But it's better and more importantly can pass through Congress.
I fully expect comments to fully support this take without any criticism for a center left candidate who doesn't plan on tearing down capitalism brick by brick./s
Also, I'm gonna say it, I'd love to vote for a gay man. I'd love to see the GOP desperately try to bite their tongue knowing that the overwhelming majority of Americans wouldn't support them saying "don't vote for the f*****" which we all know they'd want to say so damn hard. You know they'd end up slipping up and showing their true colors which could help turn people away.
Oh absolutely. We need an inspiring queer leader to mark a new era, where young LGBT children can grow up knowing they have a future in our country, let alone a future at all.
His response to Pence was amazing.
You forget that half of the GOP are closeted, self-loathing homosexuals.
All of that and he does SO much better than any one else I've seen on interviews. If he isn't president this year he'll run in 2028.
I dunno. He seems kinda Cunty In Allegiance.
I don't do these polls. They are just a way to get a foot in the door to solicit donations. The majority of the time you can't even complete them without pledging to donate.
Yes, they solicit donations. It doesn’t mean you have to donate. I do them to influence the party. Give me the policies I want, then I’ll donate.
They get their guiding information from real polls, collected by real people, over the phone or in person. There is no way they would rely on a crazy inaccurate web poll to gather any useful information. If you analyze these "polls" at all, you can easily see that they are barely disguised push-polls without any statistical value. They would be crazy to rely on them.
I DO participate when an actual pollster conducting an actual scientific poll calls me,
Just got another one:
I understand this. But the fact that a PAC is using disinterest for Biden to solicit donations is telling. I know that it won’t affect the party decision. But it is a way display dissatisfaction for those decisions.
Boaty McBoatface
I'd pick the one that polls the highest against Trump whether I like them or not. That was the only reason I was supporting Biden in the past. If I could go back in time and do a real primary and pick someone based on who would run the country the best it could be a million people (Bernie, AOC, Buttigieg, etc), but the thing that matters to me most is who stands the best chance against Trump. A milquetoast do-nothing dem is a mile ahead of Trump 2.0 + P2025.
That's pretty much the entirety of the DNC platform now, "Not Trump". I went to the Democrat's website last night to actually read the platform and the first thing I saw was a huge banner with Trump's face.
As POTUS I don't doubt that she'd adopt the same shitty foreign policy as Biden, but I do like what Whitmer has done in Michigan. We could do worse.
I wanted Whitmer but I chose to be pragmatic and picked Harris. I just want Biden to bow out.
Unless they run another primary, Kamala is the best choice IMHO. Already tied to the Biden ticket, so it would feel less like the DNC is hand-picking whoever they want as a candidate. She polls well. Can get creative with the VP.
Please don't take Josh Shapiro. I don't have faith in my fellow Pennsylvanians not to elect a Republican.
We probably aren't lucky enough to get three in a row.
Also, he reminds me of David Rosen from Scandal, and it already feels too much like we're living in that dystopia.
I'd prefer the Scandal dystopia to this. At least the main characters would be better looking.
I don’t know much about him
I'm not American and actually don't know much about him but aside from the one glaring topic in that wiki, he sounds ok to me? Curious as to what shitty things he's done if anyone feels like sharing.
Editing to say: the one glaring topic is a pretty fucking important topic in my books, but I don't imagine any other American politician with a chance having a different opinion on the matter
AFAIK he's not done anything shity, which is why I want to keep him as my governor. He's smart, dedicated, and has a good head on his shoulders.
Bernie
No Pete Buttigieg? Probably just as corporate as the other ones, but seems like he’d make a semi-decent pick.
elizabeth warren
John Cena.
Haven’t seen him campaigning /s
He heh.
After he apologized to the CCP in Mandarin?
Please don't make this turd president.
Ah yes, Zhong Xina
Come now, that's just proof of international goodwill and diplomatic accumen. We should all be kind to each other.
Also, being a polyglot is something to always be admired.
Michelle Obama would honestly just win by default, but I'd probably pick Whitmer realistically.
I got another message. This one I picked Whitmer.
Probably Harris because Michelle said no and newsome is an easy target.
There was a poll a few weeks back that showed Michelle Obama being the most popular pick; take that with a grain of salt because we all know how biased and skewed those poll results are based on a number of factors which we can't know.
That said, I think she did a lot of great work as First Lady and I'd happily vote for her. I think she's got the potential to get people fired up and excited about the possibilities, much like Obama did, and everything else aside, that's what we really need - excitement, enthusiasm, and for people to want to get out there and vote. I think she could provide that moreso than anyone else on the list.
Has she expressed an interest?
afaik she's expressed a disinterest
It makes me want to vote for her. It's a tough job, only a crazy person wants it. We should only give it to people who don't want it lol. Like her or Jon Stewart.
Pritzker has been awesome in IL. He would be an amazing president. Probably the most progressive of anyone in that list.
I would unitity, not division
Like Cyclops, Unitity is an interesting mythical character: one boob.
I also like unity.
Aquaman it is.
Gretchen Whitmer.
Garlin Gilchrist is way more pro transit and would be great for Michigan.
Harris would be the only pick that would prevent the Supreme Court from installing trump as dictator.
Mark Kelly
All of 'em are better than Trump and I think Kamala probably has the best chance of winning the general.
These options are kinda wild, and I'm wondering from where they're sourced. Of the ones available, I think I'd prefer Newsom.
Has Pritzker expressed any interest? I thought he was a bit busy being my governor.
Pritzker has done a good job here for us, but I don't know if I'd want him as president. I hear good things about this Gretchen lady, even if she has an unenviable name. I'd have to do some actual research first, and I'm not doing that right now.
Its a coming to Jesus moment for party centrists about being so historically wrong they've been about everything, this entire time. And this is them trying to make up for it in rapid time. This is them realizing they don't and didn't know what the fuck they were doing, ever.
Real answer: We should nominate whoever is most likely to win. The most important and only point is that we need to beat Trump, and we need to stop project 2025. Keeping Biden as the nominee has continuously fucked over our ability to fix this idiotic and stupid unforced error, but here we are. We can fix this.
I think the most electable combination is Kamala + 1. I think that + 1 should be either farther to the left or farther to the right, but regardless you need to get a demographic. The two best options are AOC and Andy Beshear. If you go Andy Beshear, you are trying to pull off NC and GA, and PA. If you go AOC, you are doing so to recover the upper midwest. Andy Beshear is the harder path in an extremely polarized environment; Democrats have been notoriously bad at clawing back votes in southern states. If you go the AOC route, you let her take an oppositional stance on Israel/ Gaza and claw back MI/ MN/ WI.
AOC is a lightning rod for conservatives, moreso due to sexism imho than her politics because she gets way more hate than Bernie even though they're politically very similar. She's not a good choice just because of that. I don't think the general population of the US is ready for two women on a ticket, esp two women of color. Could make an exciting ticket in the way Obama was, but only if Kamala proves to be as engaging of a speaker. Which, honestly I think she's a good orator but a lot of people will have trouble seeing past the fact she is a woman, and Kamala will unconsciously or consciously have all the usual biases against women in power (bossy, crazy, etc).
I honestly had no idea who Beshear is but just looking him up, I think he'd be an okay pick. Looks like a boring white guy, has solid liberal track record. I feel like a white guy who supports Palestine would be better, Kamala has a lot of pushback from leftists from her time as DA in CA. Idk who that would be.
This hand wringing around what "conservatives" want is not a way to decide who the Democratic nominee should be.
If anything, having them as a lightening rod to be able to put the racism & sexism of the republican party on full display; there is narrative power in that.
You put AOC on the ticket and you let her step left on Gaza/ Israel.
You make the ENTIRE campaign about abortion rights and a woman's right to choose. Get back to the progressive roots that underpinned the platform that got Harris/ Biden elected in the first place. Activate a base around specifically abortion rights and I think you get this thing in the bag. Women right now are incredibly disenfranchised by the shockingly weak way in-which Biden has responded to the overturning of Roe V Wade. This is a chance to activate the singularly largest voting block there is in the US: Women. And they overwhelmingly support a womans right to choose.
VP's are notoriously bad at "getting" their states. Beshear is the soft answer and MSNBC is test-ballooning this right now.
If Andy Beshear "gets you" KY, he's worth it. If he can't get KY (and really also GA, and NC), he's a waste of space. But maybe he can do it. I just don't see any other conservative Democrat who can fit that bill right now.
I think the double woman ticket leaning into the only thing thats worked for Democrats in 20 years, progressive idealism, is how you lock things up.
I'm not talking about catering to Conservatives, I'm talking about the cultural campaign of meme-ification of AOC that conservatives have been waging for years, that could be convincing to moderates and moderate Democrats.
The only successful Democratic presidential candidates in the last twenty years have been Obama and Biden. Obama won because he has a lot of natural charisma, and came along with a story of having our first black president. Biden won as a reaction to the first Trump presidency. Neither were really particularly idealistic Democrats... Obama did not even express public support gay marriage when he came into office, he had pretty centrist positions overall and gave off an idealistic message with campaign art, speeches and slogans, but his actual policy was not especially progressive.
So Obama won as a biracial black man with the conservative stance against gay marriage, and overall very center-liberal politics, but flashy idealistic messaging.
If progressive idealism had been working, we would have had Bernie presidency by now tbh
I just to be clear, you are arguing that Obama didn't campaign as an idealist?
Not how he governed, but his 2008 campaign. You know, the one where he delivered the famous acceptance speak "The audacity of Hope". You know, the campaign with these posters:
Your saying this wasn't a campaign based on idealism?
Not how he governed to be clear, where I agree on your evaluation of Obama's alignment; but his 2008 campaign.
Obama didn't win 2008 on centrism or being against gay marriage. He won 2008 in spite of those things.
I think I was pretty clear saying his campaign was based on the idea and image of idealism, but his politics did not reflect that, not his actual politics or his promised politics in 2008. You're showing me this poster as if I didn't directly mention the art and sloganing as a major reason for his win.
AOC may have idealistic policy positions, but her public image is so meme-ified I don't think she could successfully do the Hope thing that Obama did. Obama was much less well known of a politician when he ran.
I think you are muddying the water between campaign/ candidate Obama that misrepresents the fact that he campaigned as a progressive idealist, and it worked to get him into office. His platform was a very progressive platform that he did not govern to; this has been brought up repeatedly as an issue with Obama and was brought up when he was campaigning for a second term.
I think it's utterly disingenuous to present the Obama 2008 campaign as anything but a campaign focused on progressive idealism even if it was more of a show than how Obama ultimately governed.
Correspondingly, Bidens 2020 platform was maybe the most progressive platform any president has run on since Jimmy Carter, and it was a horse trade that got him Sanders voters and effectively the election.
Feel like I mentioned again and again that I'm talking about his campaign politics. I took a look at his 2008 campaign policies to see if I was misremembering anything and it's pretty centrist to me, even his health care plan. And like I mentioned, he explicitly did not support gay marriage which at the time would have been an easy progressive signalling, but he either truly opposed gay marriage or he was trying to cater to a broader audience.
Like I said, he had a convincing image of idealism but not the politics to back it up, and you are saying AOC could win because she has progressive politics. She would need the flashy campaign to back it up, and so many people just hate her I don't think it would work.
Anyway I'm just saying the same things over and over again in different wording and it's getting tired, respond if you want, idc, but I'm going to stop here.
Yeah. You keep just repeating the same patently wrong, historically inaccurate characterization of Obama's campaign. The discussion was about idealism and how it sells in-terms of getting elected. My central point, is that it absolutely does sell, even its just the trappings. You run as a progressive idealist, like Obama did or like Sanders did, or based on just lift and shift the progressive platform like Biden did, and you catch W's.
You want to win an election as a Democrat? Either run on a progressive platform, or at least paint yourself that way in your campaign.
The idea that you can win as a Democrat running towards the center isn't supported (at least since Clinton).
MN hasn't voted republican in a presidential election since tricky dick in 1972. There have been a few close calls.
MN Polling: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/minnesota/ MN polling at a toss up (keep in mind Trump almost always outperforms his polling).
Another fun one, Jersey is now a swing state: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/new-jersey/
Your comment about "claw back" implies that the dems lost MN. You can't claw back that which hasn't happened yet.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2020/minnesota/
Minnesota 2020.
Dems up by 10, and polling 15 pts ahead of where they are polling today.
Dems only won MN by five points on election day. Anything close to a tie in polling for Dems is an L.
Yes. It's a correct statement to say that Dems have to have to claw things back to win MN.
As a non-USAmerican I only know Michelle Obama from that list. But if you want real change and young voters, get AOC on the ticket. I bet you that'll wake people up. She's media savvy and could probably get the entire tiktok+insta viewership to campaign for her. The facebook folk probably less so, and the redditors 50/50. She would need a male vice president though. Two women in the US ain't making it this year.
But honestly, I want Trump to win. The world needs a good shake up and divorce from the USA. New alliances have to be made and the reliance on US tech and media has to stop. I know it would hurt USAmericans, but it'd be the best for the world to stop following the USA as if hypnotised.
You're delusional if you think it would only hurt Americans. America would become EVERYONE'S problem in a big way.
I doubt they can become a problem in 4 years. Come election time (2028), there will be a civil war and it'll implode as Trump tries to hold on to power and become president for a 3rd time. He's unpredictable, but one country against the world? They lost countless war games.
Already happened 2016. It was awful. Hoped we'd never be here again.
Unless you've been hiding under a rock, you can see its influence spread over the globe. Germany recently voted hard right. Israel is a genocidal shithouse. India is Modi's Muslim hate factory. All strutting the Putin way: oligarchs ruling & fascist division of the people spread with propaganda (RT, Fox news, Facebook & twaXtter).
Do you seriously think that was Trump? Nah dude, that was US media that has been infecting the world since the second world war. After Europe collapsed, the US swooped into the void and filled it with media portraying themselves as the victors and saviors. It spread USAmerican tribalism far and wide.
Then social media came along and Europe still hadn't caught up nor recognised the power of media. Investments in film, TV, music, and internet were, and still are, ridiculously small compared to US investments. The internet just helped US media percolate deeper into European society. Now it's on everbody's phones and is an endless barrage.
Of course fossil fuel companies have a large role to play too. They helped mold a world focused on their product, which fucks up the environment. And tech companies play an even bigger role today, exploiting poor countries that were kneecapped by the US by destroying their democracies (or attempts at democracies) decades ago.
People want to flee and Europe comparatively easier to reach than the US, so they tried and still try to escape their situations. That of course gives right wing parties fodder to spread their hatred and blame a defenseless scapegoat.
I'm not saying the US is the root of all evil, I'm saying they play a monumental part in it. Trump is just an accelerator to a possible decoupling of Europe and other economies from the US.
We all know the DNC is controlled by corporate interests. They aren't protecting the population. All they are protecting is their investments. Had they cared about the people, they'd never had thrown their support behind a second term for Biden. He too old 4 years ago and is way too old now. If the vote is won by a democrat, and that will only happen if the DNC takes a fucking stick out of their ass and force Biden to drop out ASAP, that will just mean another 4 years where the US can keep semi-good relations with the world. The world won't have a reset button.