760
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 09 Jul 2024
760 points (100.0% liked)
politics
20328 readers
3048 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Try me. I'm waiting. No one has named a name.
My best alternative choice would be Bernie but I don't think he'd actually beat Trump because he'd lose some centrists, doesn't seem particularly less old, and hasn't held presidential office before. What's your choice?
It's two separate questions, and the second has basically only two answers: it's either Harris or some sort of open contest voted on by the delegates. Most "replace" voices don't care which of those options is selected nearly as much as they care that the guy who's going to lose can't be the nominee.
And my personal choice is "I don't care". Harris is fine, the governors are fine, Buttigieg is unlikely but fine. I'm not going to pretend the party or Biden's own delegates is going to choose a progressive. None of them is going to cause a seismic shift in the candidate's policy except for getting a chance to choose a better message on Israel and any will fulfill the need of ditching the losing incumbent who only made the race worse in his one key public appearance. Their one and only qualification is that unlike Biden, they might not lose. And that's plenty for me.
So basically your answer is you don't care because you're pissing your pants scared right now.
Harris won't beat him, literally everyone knows that, which is why no one is suggesting her. Your idea of pitting "I dunno whoever the dems elect, they're probably fine" is quite frankly preposterous on its face. Pick someone and advocate for them, or learn to shut up and not scream chicken little.
You asked for names intending to dismiss any reply.
No I asked for names because tearing down options without presenting new ones is what Russian propagandists do. Not what people who don't want Trump to win do.
Here, watch. Franken, Harris, Buttigieg, Newsom. Whitmer.
Now do what you intended to do when you asked the question and dismiss.
Franken comes off just as old and won't win over centrist voters, Harris is possibly less charismatic than Clinton, Buttigieg would be a great president and I would support his candidacy all the way, but realistically I don't know if America would rally behind him by November, Newsom might but he might also be a Mitt Romney, Whitmer I don't know enough about.
If you wanna champion Biden to step aside for Franken, go for it, but I quite frankly have an extremely hard time seeing him beat Trump.
There ya go. Would you like more names to dismiss?
Yes they would. ITT: people who don't think they deserve BETTER than Biden and DNC breadcrumbs.
ITT: people who min/max instead of focusing on winning.
LOL. Sure bud. Definitely turning my "disingenuous" opinion around with all this dumb internet posturing.
Newsom with barrack Obama as VP
VP has to be allowed to become P.
Doesn’t actually say that in the constitution, it’s untested
It's in the 12th amendment. Prior to that the VP was the runner up, so they had to be eligible to even be in the race.
Guess which court would rule on that issue.