I don't have to like Joe or his policies to know that voting for him is the better choice. It sucks to have vote for the lesser evil, but right now the gap between the lesser and greater evils is so large that it makes the decision simple.
Joe will be ~~a lame duck in 28'~~ ineligible to run in 28'which will hopefully give us a chance to force the issue on not wantting to vote for the lesser evil then. However right now the greater evil is the issue, if we want to have a system to reform in 28' the choice on who to vote for now isn't a choice at all.
I feel like I'm taking crazy pills when my best choice is to vote for someone who I know will not adequately address the multitude of extremely time sensitive issues facing our planet and country.
Like yeah, Trump will be worse, and the system is such that you literally have to vote blue if you want to mitigate the damage. But climate change isn't waiting for us to "fix the system", Americans dying of inadequate health care don't have time to wait, the rich aren't going to stop widening the wealth gap just because. And for all of this, my vote goes to an administration that will only employ soft tactics to stop genocide...
But hey, at least it could be worse right...
Lesser evil might have been a thing 20 years ago, calling Biden lesser evil is just ignorant.
He's going up against a man that does not believe in democracy or the peaceful transition of power.
It's like looking at broccoli and dog vomit and saying I'll eat broccoli it's the lesser of two evils.... 🤷♂️
?
He can't run a third time, even if he's alive by then.
I was under the impression that "Lame Duck" refers to a sitting president that can no longer run. I was incorrect. I ment to state that with Joe being unable to run, 28' is the better time push the lesser vs greater evil issue.
Are people this dumb? Would they really consider Trump for another presidency, let alone another insane Republican candidate?
Imagine if the DNC gave democrats a worthy candidate. Then we wouldn't have to strongarm democrats to vote for democratic candidates.
Who?
The problem is sort of chicken and egg: if there were an obvious democratic alternative the party could agree on, Biden would be out. There is no such person, so we get stuck with what we have right now.
Hard to fault the party for not wanting to bruise their most likely candidate in a tough primary, either.
This sucks, but it's not the Democrats' fault: it's our first past the post voting system.
Sadly, yes. Even a lot of people who talked about how dangerous he was while they worked in his administration aren't willing to commit to voting for Biden over Trump if it comes down to them in the general election.
If Trump is still the nominee, he will likely have been convicted in at least one of those 4 criminal cases, but still holds sway in the party to win anyway and will double-dog-dare Georgia to throw him in jail. In that case, I don't think enough people would willingly vote for a felon (even a Republican one) to give him a chance.
This leaves Biden a single thing he absolutely needs to win the election: a pulse. I think the only person keeping America from becoming a fascist dictatorship is not Biden, it's his cardiologist. That doctor needs to keep Biden's heart ticking until Jan 21 2025.
I'm equally happy with a Saddam style lookalike or if he kicks the bucket in the last few days, even a Weekend at Bernie's solution.
I think the most important metric for Biden and the Democrats in the upcoming us election is a blood pulse.
Why does anyone presume that his opponent will be the orange guy? If he hasn't keeled over with hamberders and buckets of KFC, he still has 91 felonies hanging over his head. He likely will be imprisoned, or disqualified by then.
Why does anyone presume that his opponent will be the orange guy?
Because he's winning the primaries now by some distance, it's not illegal for him to run from prison and at least one state court has already decided that he did engage in an insurrection but that that doesn't disqualify him either.
Well for starters a lot of his full trial dates are being set for after the primaries
They're basically trying to take what comy did to Clinton and dial it to 11
Speaking of which, the Russian emails, had presumably classified information. The rules over classified documents are to never comment about them, because any information released is another clue about what is contained in actual classified documents. This left Clinton in a limbo of not being able to defend herself, while being smeared. Comey, believed the emails, until they were fully investigated and well after the election. We didn't hear about the planted parts, one way or the other, because of those same security rules. I DO remember the US security council trying to limit damage after Trump was elected.
The GOP has a choice of whom to run. I assume there will be a way that will be found, for them to switch candidates, if Trump is in prison, Even if it occurs in the window between his winning the primary, and election, they will find a way. It may even be to their advantage, as the new candidate receives Trumps blessing and gives Trump clemency.
Russian emails? Are you thinking of the Wikileaks stuff, with the hacked data from Clinton's campaign staffers? I am pretty sure those are different and separate from the emails that Comey was investigating for the FBI.
There are two "Hilary's emails" stories. It is easy to confuse the two -- Republicans worked very hard throughout 2016 to make it easy to confuse the two -- yet they are two different series of events and almost totally unrelated to one another.
The original "Buttery Males" story: Comey and the FBI investigated emails that were stored on a private server owned by the Clinton Foundation, a server that Hilary had used for official business while serving as Secretary of State. In July of 2016, Comey announced that while they did find a small number of documents marked "classified" stored on the server, this violation was obviously inadvertent and should not be prosecuted. "Sloppy but not criminal," or something like that. Then later in October (after taking a few months of heat from his fellow Republicans for not going after Clinton harder) Comey announced that there may be files on a laptop owned by Hilary's assistant, Huma Abedin, that the FBI had not yet had a chance to review. Comey announced this privately to a congressional committee and it was leaked almost instantly, about a week before election day.
The "From Russia with Love" email story: Meanwhile, Russian hackers infiltrated Hilary Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign and stole thousands of personal emails and other data from her staffers and people they'd communicated with. None of these emails were classified and the FBI never investigated the Clinton campaign in this case (except as the victims of a crime). Wikileaks and Julian Assange got in on the action and built up lots of hype. That's when, in the middle of a campaign speech, Trump made his famous on-stage plea: "Russia, if you're listening, I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing. I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press."
Trump was clever, mendaciously associating the original "classified documents on your private server" controversy with the "Russia stole your data and is about to release it on Wikileaks" controversy, but the two stories don't really have anything to do with one another, at all, and they never really did.
It may even be to their advantage, as the new candidate receives Trumps blessing and gives Trump clemency.
I also have been wondering what the race will look like in six months, when all this speculation about Trump's trials (and potential prison time?) will be upon us for real.
Legally (so far at least) they say Trump can run from prison. If he were to win, as POTUS he'd have many options available to clear his name, dismiss his accusers, and attack his opponents.
I don't think Trump will give another candidate his endorsement, even from prison. If he does, it won't be without that other candidate publicly swearing fealty and promising to grant clemency, as you say. The way I see it, any candidate who'd be willing to do that will look weak and subservient, and probably look worse than Trump's going to look, even from prison, by the time they get to the general election.
I think the only way another candidate wins the GOP nomination is by taking it from Trump -- not by Trump lending it out to them.
Most of those won't go to trial until after the election, and the courts have shown zero desire to actually punish him in a meaningful way. I will be very surprised if he is not the candidate
You really think Trump will serve any time? If it were anyone else I might agree. Can't wait to see how this plays out.
I wish I had your optimism.
He shouldn't have been the nominee in 2016, either. It's not safe to assume anything at this point.
Why does anyone presume that his opponent will be the orange guy?
Why do you assume that he will suddenly begin seeing proportionate consequences for his actions in the next 12 months when it's never once happened in his life before this point?
I agree with your disposition toward him and admire and envy your optimism...I just don't share it.
I keep seeing messaging that essentially amounts to "Biden doesn't have to try, everything is great actually, and, besides, Trump is unelectable". Clearly the democrats learned nothing from 2016. This is too big to fuck up, don't phone it in.
Trump has all the weaknesses of an incumbent and few of the benefits. I knew some people who tried to play very agnostic about his record in 2016, but now as in 2020, the American people have a record to judge him on. And it's not very pretty. Biden is going to start laying into that record. And soon the negative polarization will build back up, after the GOP decides who exactly the are with their candidate chosen.
politics
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