These polls are just his approval ratings, right (sorry, can’t access the article), not a measure who is willing to vote for him in 2024? Yeah, people don’t approve of you backing Israel when it’s indiscriminately killing civilians and committing war crimes. Surprise, surprise. Doesn’t mean they’re going to vote for Trump over you, Joe, don’t worry.
As always:
The issue isn’t people voting for trump, it’s them not voting.
Because for some people, voting can take hours.
This is intentional because Republicans know depressed turnout is how they win. Unfortunately Dem party leadership just refuses to acknowledge that.
It’s why trump beat Hillary, and can 100% happen again in 2024. The most important job of any candidate is getting votes. And just saying: “What are you going to do, vote Republican instead?” Isn’t going to motivate enough voters to get to the polls.
The party is obsessed with stealing voters from Republicans, because that matches their preconceived notion that the democratic party needs to move to the right and gives them an excuse to do so.
Despite the fact that it’s easier to get a non voter to vote than convince a Republican to start voting D.
And Biden - who has won elections for the past 40+ years - really understands this.
Which is why he is frustrated.
We have to be honest. Things really aren’t looking good.
Let’s not fool ourselves. Trump has a large, dedicated base willing to vote for him.
If turnout is high, his chances of winning are low. But with a low turnout, his chances are high.
A potential Biden voter staying home, because of low motivation to go stand in a line for hours - that’s the Republican winning ticket.
Which is why the conflict in Israel and stalemate in Ukraine are good for Trump, it de-energizes the Democrat base.
Removed by mod
Normally I’d agree, but it seems like the only people who are polling less favorably than Biden are literally every other GOP primary candidate. Even beloved local candidates like De Santis are floundering on the national stage. The MAGA schism is too wide for the Republican party to recover from at this point, if you ask me. This was something that started gaining momentum under the Obama administration and can’t be easily stopped or redirected. Without Trump at the vanguard, the Republican party would be in complete disarray. Why else would they continue supporting him while he’s under so many felony indictments?
It’s not just turnout, turnout was much higher in 2020 than 2016 but even with that Trump gained 12M votes between the two. Millions of people who sat out the 2016 election looked at those four years and decided Trump deserved another go. But Biden got nearly 19M more than Hillary did, and more importantly, got those margins in the correct states to make an EC win out of it.
It’s not just turnout, turnout was much higher in 2020 than 2016
This is another area Hillary’s campaign fucked up, despite being very simple if looking at the larger picture.
The population increased like 16 million in that time.
So “turnout” when viewed as a total number makes it look like it constantly gets better. Hillary ignored that and chased beating Obama’s total votes out of pride rather than focusing on the electoral college to win.
So its best to use percentages, and 2016 was the lowest it’s been in 20 years, ironically enough, that was the other Clinton.
https://www.cnn.com/2016/11/11/politics/popular-vote-turnout-2016/index.html
In 2020 it was like 2/3s of eligible voters who voted. But it’s a lot easier to motivate people to vote for someone solely because “they’re not a Republican” when the Republican is already in office. Especially when the challenger is telling everyone they’re going to fix all the shit the Republican is breaking.
But four years later after that didn’t happen…
And I don’t know how anyone can’t forsee a decline in turnout.
And just to be safe I’ll say it again:
Republicans only win when turnout is low, so we need to focus on increasing turnout
And poll numbers show Biden most likely won’t be able to match 2020’s numbers. Republicans tho…
Not many voted for trump in 2020 but won’t in 2024.
Well, the ones who died due to not following covid protocols. ;) And the ones in jail for 1/6.
While we’re being cynical, don’t forget it only matters in swing states and down ticket races.
The game isn’t “get people to approve of my performance.” The game isn’t even “get most people to vote for me.” The game is “get a marginal victory in a few states, because land matters more than people.”
Perfect explanation ☝️
The party is obsessed with stealing voters from Republicans
What? Democrats don’t need to steal votes. Democrat voters outnumber Republicans but a fairly decent margin. It IS as you say: they just need people to vote. Which is why Democrats generally back voting by mail and early voting that Republicans try to stop.
That was what givesomefucks was saying. Team Blue does not need any Team Red voters. They need Team Yellow and Team Green and Team No-Colour-Because-They-Stay-Home votes. But they keep reaching out to Team Red voters by shying to the Right in the stupid and hopeless quest to draw some of those voters over to their side, ignoring a much larger slice of people who don’t want our government slipping to the right. Of course, I have my theory – Team Green especially is horrible about staying home if they don’t get EXACTLY what they want. Team Red SEEMS to be the more reliable answer than Team Green, but they’ve already bought the propaganda that we’re all baby-eating, baby-f**king Satan worshippers over here on the Left.
I think your confusing me saying what the party has spent decades doing, and me saying it’s a good idea.
Clearly it’s not.
Because even if it gets a few in office, they’re unwilling to actually fix anything because it may piss off the hypothetical former Republicans that never vote D anyways.
A cynic would say party leadership is smart enough to understand this, and it’s all a lie to justify keeping donors happy. Because the party wants those donations and is banking on “what are you going to do, vote Republican?” To get just enough votes to win the election.
In reality it just makes the office cycle between the two parties. And Republicans break as much as they can, and Dems don’t fix it fast enough before Republicans get it back.
Resulting in a slow but consistent destruction of America, which further depresses turnout and keeps the cycle going on a long timeline.
Which could all be fixed by electing progressives willing to try as hard as they can, even if they fail
If we do that, then the wealthy donors stop donating. And current party leadership gets replaced.
Good luck convincing them to do that.
This. Democrats are way better with ideas and policies that help working people, minorities, women, LGBTQ people, non Christians, and the middle class. Republicans only have tax cut for the wealthy and culture war hate.
I wish Biden were more progressive, but he is a good president. And Trump is a criminal who wants to be a dictator.
This. Democrats are way better with ideas and policies that help working people, minorities, women, LGBTQ people, non Christians, and the middle class.
Now if they would get out of their own way and pass some.
Biden has passed a lot of good policy: Inflation Reduction Act, CHIPS Act, Respect for Marriage Act, American Rescue Plan, and more. He has also put put fair judges on the bench and one of the supreme court. None of these would have happen under Republican control.
Democrats have blocked good policy as well. BBB and the minimum wage increase spring to mind. Democrats won’t end the filibuster to pass the John Lewis Voting Rights act. They didn’t end it to codify Roe. They won’t end it to codify Obergefell. They didn’t end it to support rail workers. Biden promised to revisit the public option during his campaign. Hasn’t bothered to try. And this is a pattern of behavior going back decades. Our own caucus killed the public option with no help from Republicans. We had a filibuster-proof majority and we still managed to find enough no votes. Even after the bill went to reconciliation and could have been passed with a simple majority, did we put the public option back? Of course we didn’t. Did we even try to? Nope.
Nothing stops Democratic policy like Democrats.
Biden is a good president? He is literally funding and supporting a genocide. The fact that the alternative is worse doesn’t make biden good.
I can’t think of a US president in my lifetime who shouldn’t have been tried and convicted by the ICC.
We’re Americans: We don’t get nice things. Especially government.
In that case theree’ no need to move right IR appeal to “centrist” voters so the Democratic cannidate can focus on turning out their base by throwing them red meat, right?
Despite the fact that it’s easier to get a non voter to vote than convince a Republican to start voting D.
Both of those are hard. Which is why Democrats focus on option three: convincing independent voters (who do not consistently vote D or R) to vote D this time.
Depends on the poll.
There are multiple polls showing him down vs. Trump in multiple key states that he HAS to win to get elected.
Arizona:
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/arizona/Georgia:
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/georgia/Michigan:
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/michigan/Nevada:
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/nevada/North Carolina:
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/north-carolina/Pennsylvania:
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/pennsylvania/Wisconsin:
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/wisconsin/Im sure Joe has a mountain of people to interpret the numbers.
Truth is, numbers are bad. Just the other day there was an abysmal poll that showed people trust trump more on everything but behaving well and abortion. Not by a thin margin. I don’t know much about it, but It was reported on a reputable left wing network. It’s really not looking good for him and for the Democrats that have no backup plan. The right have succeeded to portray him as a frail senile incompetent man with corruption issues. It’s a failure of the democrat establishment.
Polls vary but this sort of poll typically asks “If there was an election tomorrow…” So no, not an approval rating.
They’re not a prediction of who will win in 2024, they’re a snapshot guesstimate of who would win tomorrow (if the pollster got their methods right, which they don’t, always).
But regardless, you absolutely should not be telling people not to worry. Trump voters will turn out (and predicted turnout is a huge part of pollsters’ methods). If Biden’s voters don’t turn out, he might lose. And it would be for exactly the same reason Clinton lost in 2016: complacency.
People on Lemmy are so confident in this sentiment, you guys are kidding yourselves so fucking hard. Many many people are not going to vote at all because of the Israel support. Things are clear for you, sure. But the blind assumption that this will have no effect is straight up delusional
Like, how is this the top comment in this thread? Just dismissing the possibility of this actuly having an effect, almost exactly mirrors the sentiment when the DNC snuffed Bernie
My attitude is that if people who don’t want Trump, but also don’t like Biden are stupid enough to either not vote or vote third party, and it causes Trump to get re-elected, we as a nation will deserve whatever happens under Trump, but especially those stupid MFers. You can’t stop people from being utter fucking morons.
I’m not voting for Joe solely because of his unwavering support for Israel.
I’ll vote third party and whatever happens, happens.
If joe-supporters have a problem with it, they can support better candidates in the next election.
Enjoy the Trump presidency then, someone who whole-heartedly supports the genocide even more than Biden.
Yeah, I’d rather vote for no genocide than the lesser genocide.I guess hurting the genocide-supporters is a bonus.Sorry, I thought about it and there is no ‘lesser-genocide.’ Genocide Joe has done nothing to curtail Israel’s genocide. Literally nothing.
And in so doing you will help get the greater genocide elected. Congrats, you managed to achieve an even worse outcome than you wanted.
Nah, it’s the people voting for genocide that got genocide to win.
See how there’s no winning unless you support genocide?
Because the US is a two-party system due to first past the post voting. Until the country adopts ranked-choice or single transferable vote, there will only be two parties. A vote against one party is simply a vote for the other party.
So by voting third party you are voting for the Republicans. Congrats on supporting the greater genocide.
Just a reminder, this is what happened in 2016. If you wrapped up all the Green Party and Libertarian Party votes and gave them to Hillary instead in the swing states, she would’ve won. Instead, those third-party voters helped doom us to a lifetime of higher taxes due to the Tax Cuts & Jobs Act, the politicization of a deadly disease that is now endemic, a court system with a supermajority that is more interested in stripping away rights rather than granting them, and the very real threat of the discarding of our democracy as we know it.
There’s more to it than that, but both of these men are known quantities, and one is orders of magnitude worse. Any vote not for Biden will be a vote for a massive increase in genocide rather than status quo, which while unfortunate gives us a chance for a tomorrow where that doesn’t happen.
Why don’t the democrats support ranked-choice voting, then?
Congrats on supporting the greater genocide.
What has Biden done to curtail the genocide of Palestinians? There is no lesser genocide because Biden is a Zionist.
Whoever you vote for as a write it, it will be spelled “Trump” in the end.
I get your frustration, but this is the way our system works. You have to vote for the lesser of two evils, more often than not. I wanted Bernie in 2016, but I still voted for that cunt Hillary, because it was either her or Trump. Unless you’re certain your state will go Blue in 2024, a vote for a third party is functionally a vote for Trump. If you’re in a swing state, your protest will only amount to getting a person you like even less than Biden elected, and you’ll be part of the problems that creates.
My real frustration is having to deal with people like you every time I say I’m doing something independent.
Ahh well. I hope Trump wins just so people like you get to suffer the consequences of your actions. That’s a boon in my eyes because otherwise you’re never going to change.
If you don’t like it, run better candidates. Perhaps a few losses will get that through your heads. Hillary clearly wasn’t enough.
My real frustration is having to deal with people like you every time I say I’m doing something independent.
Good. I love vote shaming.
You lost us Roe v. Wade.
I’m sorry you feel that way. If a certain justice had retired sooner we would’ve been able to replace them during a Democratic presidency instead of the Trump presidency that we got because Hillary lost.
Seriously though. Can we stop pretending like being 81 isn’t a liability? And a reasonable concern?
If Democrats had brains, they’d run a buff, tall white guy with progressive policies and a hot wife. Fascists follow strength and heteronormative values, so? Just use it against them. Trump only looks strong next to an 81 year old dude with a speech impediment. All love to Biden, but hang 'em up, bro, damn.
Guy can’t let go of the game even though the game let go of him.
To be fair, that one also has speech difficulty.
I’d like a refund on my government, it seems like it’s just a bunch of out of date, moldy, spoiled, cheese of some kind.
Let Hunter run. We already know hes drowning in poon and has massive schmeat. Trump couldn’t possibly compete.
You’re a poet, and you didn’t realize.
Newsom?
Jeff Jackson of North Carolina would be my personal pick. He’s just too new. If he were 4-8 years further into his career I think it would be a slam dunk.
Unfortunately agreed but wish he’d run anyway
Yeah, I think Biden should draw all the hate over Israel, take it with him and pave the way for Newsom to step up strongly against genocide.
You know… The first half has catapulted me into a constant state of chagrin. But I think you’ve got a plan that can turn it around. He’s so good at the game, he could probably pull it off without even throwing Biden under the bus lol
This is good, let’s get all the bad ideas out of our system
Share a good idea
Tim Walz, Shawn Fain, AOC…
In Newsom’s defense, his state is overrun with the largest, most politically-active companies on the planet - but I can’t say he’s actually done much to fundamentally improve working-class conditions or addressed housing affordability or COL. He’s applied a lot of band-aids, though.
He’s a loud voice in a liberal state, but he’s essentially just a younger Biden. He does the most optically-left thing he can without ruffling any feathers of the biggest DNC donors.
Fuck yeah. Great selection! I wish we were still on trajectory for AOC, but 2016 set us back decades overnight. That’s how we got Biden. Walz is a great milk toast caring Dem, definitely great in Midwest, not sure about angry rust belt, don’t know his policy stances as well. Fain… oh man. That MF cares about us. He can get the Bernie vote, the wannabe libertarian vote, etc
I might feel slightly less critical about what Gavin done here than I’m imagining your sentiment, but I can’t say you’re wrong, especially on housing. You’re absolutely right he hasn’t done the real work to make systemic changes. I do think we have tons of QoL improvements.
To be fair, that’s my exact point. Biden’s most unelectable quality is his age. Newsom’s perfectly polished and architected candidate for this age. And he’s hot and charming. Very electable. Could probably even spin his ex for some kind of GOP brownie points?
On the contrary, Walz has been anything but milquetoast, he’s just not as publicity-oriented as Newsom. He’s passed a number of extremely popular progressive policies, including a campaign finance reform banning corporate contributions from companies who have 5% or more foreign ownership (that’s poised to be struck down, but still an unambiguous signal against monied interests). Minnesota also has one of the lowest inflation rates in the country.
He’s done his wildly progressive legislating while lowering taxes and running a surplus.
But Newsom is the Democratic darling because he’s… Hot? Idk what makes him a good candidate other than his optics, and even then, he’d have almost as bad a time as AOC would agaist a reactionary GOP, but with none of the desirable progressive policies we actually need. I’m honestly a little frustrated by this sentiment… He’s a neoliberal candidate that has no other actual qualifications other than his media literacy and age, but he’s also basically the GOP’s definition of ‘Elite-westcost-liberal’. I think he’s the worst of the losing choices.
I don’t think you’re hearing my point. Electability, not policy. I agree with you on what makes for good policy. It unfortunately doesn’t stop a Trump election win
He’s said he will, if Trump isn’t nominated. I don’t think he ever planned to hold two terms.
Why is he magically the foil to trump?
Biden’s whole pitch is “I’m boring and sensible”
Trump’s campaign is going to be “Let me finish what I started…Trust what you saw last time.” - so he can leverage both voters who want change and those who want the same old.
If there’s a new Dem candidate, all of a sudden they’re trying to convince people to expect stability from trying something new.
Compared to that, Trump looks a lot more reliable. And that’s before you even get into the personal attacks (which Biden thinks he’s already covered).
We’ve also already passed the point at which the DNC would start backing a new candidate. We’re stuck with Biden unless he croaks before election night.
Incumbent bump, appeal to moderates/neo-libs, decades of experience in D.C. I suppose the mentality is that Trump will get the MAGA and R-no-matter-who voters, which form too great a bloc to gamble against.
He isn’t, but he beat Trump once already. He may not see anyone in the Democratic field that he trusts to win. It’s his decision to run or not; he’s going to follow what he thinks is the best course to deny Trump a second presidency. Not running means he has no control over the outcome.
In his place, would you roll those dice?
Anyone else would lose the pro-Israel vote by denouncing genocide?
I feel like, in this highly politicized environment amplified by misinformation, echo chambers, and the horrors of social media, no incumbent president will ever again crack 50% approval
You know what it would take? An actual thought leader. Someone who can make a persuasive argument and communicate a coherent message. Someone who can actually convince supporters to follow, who can challenge the bullshit and elevate the actual dissenting opinion.
But I’ve just rewatched The Newsroom, so I’m feeling particularly spicy about the quality of journalism right now. We let our politicians feed the echo chambers because consumers retreat to safety when challenged. Nobody argues, nobody calls out bullshit, nobody is challenged at all. Your identity is your team, and your actions are good or bad because of who you are. It is entirely upside down.
Obama was I think their best case scenario in this era, he gave the party a powerful brand people could adopt. Trump is essentially that for the GOP now.
Nah, I’m pretty sure after Trump is elected he’ll be at 90%+ approval, according to mandated “fake news-adjusted” polling by OAN, Fox News and Newsmax, the last remaining news sources under the Trump Media Reform Act of 2025.
It’s Israel, stupid
It’s* Israel
This is me caring about horse-race corporate news articles.
Did you hear about her emails?
Washington Post so badly wanted to get into the “Dems in disarray” game that they hired an author away from Politico.
Buttery males!
Well, to be fair he did steal the presidency from Bernie Sanders and doom us all to pre-fascist neoliberal hell
True
Condoning genocide and telling us we are doing great when we can see we are not might be impacting those numbers. He needs to drop out. And Dems refusing to demand their party offer up someone else are complicit when trump gets reelected
I don’t particularly like him either, but if he doesn’t run again, it becomes significantly easier for Trump to get reelected. Pick your poison. I’d rather Biden than Trump, so I want him to stay running and I’ll vote for him again.
Maybe you should vote for a write-in candidate if you feel that strongly about it? Just know that whatever you write, it will spell “Trump.”
I don’t think Biden should drop out.
I also don’t think Biden should be the automatic nominee. There should be a full primary election, and whoever wins that (maybe Biden, maybe someone else) goes to the general.
Biden has done a bunch of good stuff, but he’s also woefully out of touch on an absolute FUCKTON of issues that non-boomer voters give a whole hell of a lot of shits about. I am so fucking done with gerontocracy.
I also don’t think Biden should be the automatic nominee. There should be a full primary election, and whoever wins that (maybe Biden, maybe someone else) goes to the general.
So…exactly what is happening?
Not sure I understand. Is that a general question, or are you unfamiliar with the electoral terms that I used?
There is a full Democratic Presidential Nominee primary election happening this year. Biden is almost certainly going to be the nominee, but primaries/caucuses are happening in every state and there are other candidates (Marianne Williamson & Dean Phillips).
So exactly what you asked for is happening.
Not sure if you’ve ever paid attention to the US electoral process, but lately, the DNC and its leadership have definitely put its finger on the scales more than a bit in tons of recent elections. That interference has directly caused serious yet preventable failures in general elections multiple times, to the extent that the Democrats might have maintained their majority in the house if not for some wrongheaded influence in key races, and a total lack of support provided to some others.
…okay. What does that has to do with our conversation here?
If you had said from the start that you don’t like how the Democratic primaries are run or wish there were better candidates, great. I’d agree with you! However, that’s not what you said.
but if he doesn’t run again, it becomes significantly easier for Trump to get reelected.
Biden disagrees…
He just said a week or so ago that “at least 50 other Dems” could beat trump.
The polls disagree too, they show that Biden doesn’t have a very good chance against trump.
We ignored those polls in 2016 to run an unpopular candidate, and trump was elected.
The polls in 2016 showed Clinton beating Trump.
For popular vote nationwide…
State polls for battleground states was very concerning with a lot Dems took for granted had results for Clinton but margain of error showed a trump win possible.
That’s where Republicans focused effort, while Clinton was going to states like Cali on her preemptive victory lap
The thing was, pointing that out before the election got shouted down by moderates and you would be accused of wanting her to lose.
Pretty much what’s happening now with 2024…
The only polls that favored Hillary were ones that only polled her established demographic. NONE of them included the 18-34yo demographic, and heavily leaned female polling
An unpopular candidate that won the popular vote in 2016?
She was so politically inept that she didn’t take the electoral college into account. This is what happens when party leadership decides the winner before the primaries. They nominate someone who runs a coronation parade instead of a campaign.
After boosting trump in the primary because she thought he was her easiest opponent…
She was willing to risk trump winning because it was her best chance to be president.
But even that wasn’t enough to get her in office due to her campaign team not understanding what the electoral college is and instead campaigning for the popular vote…
Which pretty much sums up why she’s so unpopular. She gambled with America and lost because she wanted to be able to say she got more votes than Obama.
Again, that’s something that would have happened organically because of constant population increase.
She was the favorite of the superdelegates/party darlings as well. Also she by far isn’t the only Democrat who helps the insane GOP candidates, that’s like a common strategy to give money to the insane fascist, a bunch of Dem campaigns do this.
A generic Democratic Perry cannidate would be a safer choice. Draft a blue state governor or something
Why don’t democrats run somebody better than Biden without all the baggage?
For the same reasons I just cited.
Democrats running Biden would be the best thing for a Trump campaign.
They’ve already lost the republican vote. The best thing they can do is try to gain the independent one.
What baggage?
Polls don’t mean shit, they’re wrong constantly and shift on a dime. Just write some good fucking policy and focus on the people
Polls are actually pretty good. It’s just that people only really notice when they are “wrong.” At this time, they probably don’t mean much when it comes to the outcome of the election because we are so far out, but that doesn’t take away their value when it comes to taking the temperature of the American people.
It’s just that people only really notice when they are “wrong.”
they also get wildly misreported and speculated on. this is the source of the idea that “the polls were wrong” and “trump outperformed the polls” in 2016. The real truth is that the polls said that clinton wins three times out of four, but you had media outlets like HuffPo reporting that she had a 99% chance of winning, and they established the narrative that trump was a clown and the election was a foregone conclusion. Then the coin came up heads twice in a row, which is what a 25% chance represents in intuitive terms, and while Clinton was doing her preemptive victory lap in BlUe TeXaS he actually won the election.
Nothing can predict the election with 100% confidence, but polls are literally the best data we have to go off of. Sure, they can vary pretty wildly based on who the research agency is, but there’s no better predictor of election outcomes than a good meta analysis / aggregate. If the research is sound and the poll results shift, that’s typically a good indicator of actual voter intent.
It is worth pointing out that a number of state democratic parties have declared the only primary candidate will be Biden. Others are denying some combination of candidates from being on the primary ballot opposing Biden.
So that kinda sucks, and something people should be aware of: attempts are being made to force Biden as the candidate by the party.
Biden was already the forced candidate in 2020 so I don’t know why people care now.
2020 actually had debates and a primary process wherein Biden was yes, forced. Much like Hillary was in 2016.
But this time the DNC is trying to avoid a primary process altogether. Running any kind of reelection campaign is a liability for Biden.
Any amount of spotlight on Biden will probably damage his chances in the general, which the party is all to aware and afraid of.Can anyone make the case that either of these candidates was forced? They both won overwhelmingly more votes more than the next closest candidate.
In 2016 and 2020 alike Bernie Sanders was winning the primaries. Each time the party pushed the scales away from the popular candidate.
In 2016 the superdelegates, which is essentially party establishment, backed Hillary in spite of the primary votes supporting Bernie to tip the scales. It caused the convention rules to be changed in 2018 so superdelegates can only vote in a contested convention instead of being able to just pick their chosen candidate.
In 2020 with the rule changes you had a few maneuvers in the primaries designed to hamstring Bernie and split votes. Namely by having Warren stay in the race and all the moderates and conservatives drop out and back Biden. You also have Clyburn in South Carolina. They manufactured consent for Biden being the popular candidate.
Definitely was a case for a forced candidate by the party establishment to control the options the people could choose from.
The only point at which sanders was winning the primary in 2016 was after like the first couple of primaries. Quickly after that, Clinton started to crush him. She won the popular vote, by far, so trying to pin it on super delegates doesn’t hold up to scrutiny. Without them, she still crushed him. I don’t see any way to argue that Clinton was forced on the democratic party.
In 2020, youre right a bunch of moderates were splitting the vote, they dropped out and all of the moderate votes went to a single moderate candidate. There’s no doubt they picked the one who they thought had the best chance of beating trump. However, that candidate went on to crush the total of both sanders and warren put together in the popular vote. He won a majority of all votes cast, not just most of everyone remaining. Clearly the moderate candidate better reflected the will of the voters.
Maybe one could argue that some other moderate candidate got screwed, but this a problem with the fptp voting system where if all the moderates stayed in, sanders, someone who doesn’t (unfortunately) represent the will of the voters likely would have won. I don’t see how that would have been better representation of the will of the voters.
In 2016 the superdelegates coming out early and in support of Hillary was specifically to stunt the momentum Bernie was showing early on. That reality is why the party had to change the rules in 2018.
In 2020 the DNC similarly made effort to contest the convention to sidestep the 2018 rule changes to allow the superdelegates once again the room to tip the scales.
The thing to keep in mind is this happens outside the presidential elections. The state and local elections with the Democratic Party also follow this pattern. Progressive suppression is their mode of operation, it is just people only engage in politics once every four years typically.
Also, slightly aside you also had media storms expressingly fear and loathing about progressive candidates like Sanders, like suggesting public executions in central park should he win.
So you’re saying that people were basing their votes on how the superdelegates were voting? I find this incredibly hard to believe. Do you have any information to back this up? Either way, how is the party having a preference for a candidate forcing it on everyone?
At the end of the day, both Clinton and Biden received far more votes than any progressive candidate. The democratic party is just not that progressive. Whether or not people are manipulated into feeling this way doesn’t change the fact that it’s not a forced thing. They voted this way.
If Super Tuesday had been a week or two later, after the lockdowns got serious, I think we would have President Sanders or Yang. But the world was still mostly normal besides Trump’s bs, so a return to status quo candidate carried the day.
The debates between biden and trump will be so pathetic. Just two decrepit fools, desperate to hold onto power, bumbling about whatever.
Well, Zionism is the new Nazism.
Maybe he should denounce Zionism.
support americans instead of genocide and your numbers will improve. this thing where you treat votes as a necessary evil and your real mission is to allow the wealthy to plunder the globe and murder the inconvenient has become really clear in the last few years.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
After pardoning a pair of turkeys, an annual White House tradition, Biden delivered some stern words for the small group assembled: His poll numbers were unacceptably low and he wanted to know what his team and his campaign were doing about it.
He complained that his economic message had done little to move the ball, even as the economy was growing and unemployment was falling, according to people familiar with his comments, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a private conversation.
Rep. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.), who is running for the state’s open Senate seat, has expressed concern to allies that she may not be able to win her race if Biden is at the top of the ticket, according to people familiar with the conversations.
Adding to the challenging political landscape, Biden’s agenda hangs in the balance on Capitol Hill as his pleas to provide more aid to Ukraine and Israel are mired in partisan battles after the visit from Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky failed to secure a breakthrough.
They routinely point to comments made by lawmakers, donors and pundits who declared Biden’s 2020 primary campaign over when he was routed in Iowa and New Hampshire before he went on to win the nomination and the presidency.
Only recently, though, have Biden officials started to scale up the campaign, which they launched in April, after months of warnings from top Democrats in battleground states that they were too slow to build out their operation.
The original article contains 1,575 words, the summary contains 247 words. Saved 84%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
Hasn’t there only been a single ‘one term’ president in about 50 years? (Trump). I just can’t see how a bloke who lost the last one of going to find new votes given the charges he is facing. Seems like clickbait
Could legalize weed today and announce single payer plan that just needs house and congress control to pass. Could sweep the elections. But won’t. Best he can offer is alienating supporters with weapon bans.
If I were to show a poll that indicates people hate heavy metal, but my poll criteria involved camping out next to opera houses, college theater groups, and retirement homes with the questions “would you rather watch a production of Lion King: The Musical or Corpsegrinder” I’ve technically polled multiple places, with multiple age groups and multiple ethnicities and backgrounds, but it’s a very heavily skewed poll because of how I went about filling those.
Which is basically a long winded way of saying poll numbers rarely mean shit, Go Vote.
