527
Democrats worry their most loyal voters won’t turn out for Biden in 2024
(www.washingtonpost.com)
this post was submitted on 04 Aug 2023
527 points (95.0% liked)
politics
19120 readers
2107 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
fuckin find a decent nominee then
In 2020 there were double digits dems in the primary...
In 2024 we're expected to believe the only choice is Biden or a Republican.
If you're pissed "there's no other nominee" be mad at the party leaders who aren't allowing a primary. And realize there's 100s of people qualified to run as a Dem
Double digit nominees...that all lost to Biden.
We gonna drag them up again? So they can lose again?
... That's what a primary is for. So people can, like, actually choose.
There are a LOT of people who don't want Biden for another four years. There are people who didn't like him, but have warmed up to him.
Would he win a primary? Yeah, probably, because of incumbent advantage.
But that should be for people to decide.
Cool. The requirements to force a debate are all posted publicly. Find someone who wants to stop Biden’s policies and run them.
Fun fact: if an incumbent President has a Primary, they are exponentially more unlikely to win the Presidency again as it can easily be spun into a "vote of no confidence" narrative.
There were four primaries in 2020 where the contest had candidates other than Biden and Bernie running. Biden lost three of them.
46 primaries had no one under 70 running on either side.
You mean like one that already beat Trump once?
Maybe one that isn't older than average life expectancy already let alone after another term. Just an idea.
Cool, if that candidate showed up and won the Democratic primary in 2020 I would have voted for them. As things stand I'll go with the most viable one that's most likely to defeat fascism. That's the incumbent, Joe Biden. I don't care if he's elderly.
I mean, I agree. If I were from the US I would also be voting for Biden. But it's a really sad state of affairs there isn't a better option. The system is ridiculous.
As an American, I'll be the first to talk about the inadequacies in our electoral system, especially for President. However, I don't think the tradition of incumbents getting the 'benefit of the doubt' and skipping a primary are a problem. They also aren't part of the 'system', that is entirely the choice of the DNC. Presidents are limited to two 4 year terms, so why not run back-to-back? It works most of the time.
The rest of the system is fucked.
The DNC choosing the candidate is absolutely part of the overall system. If that's how it works, that's how it works.
Which, is ridiculous. Maybe it makes sense this term but the fact he ran last time also makes no sense to me.
A country of 300 million people and the senile are in charge, like dude there are far better people for that job, just retire already.
Is that ageist? Yes and I stand by it. People over 70 and certainly those over 80 are in mental decline. This is just the reality. Why have a leader in mental decline? Absolutely wild to me it really is.
Can't defeat fascism with enablers of fascism.
If the DNC didn't say there would be no primary on day 1 then we might have actually been able to see people step forward. Marianne Williamson is at least running on the issues and is physically capable of having a two hour conversation. Biden... not so much
Marianne Williamson, the pseudoscience and conspiracy nutter that helped convince a bunch of people with HIV that medicine doesn't work and praying and willpower would cure them instead?
I don't know why they're so content to hitch themselves to terrible candidates. I've never in my life voted Republican, and the last time I was excited about a democratic nominee was Obama (RIP young idealistic me). Hillary had more baggage than a travelling circus, and felt a lot like just dead ass casting a vote for Goldman Sachs to run the oval office; Primary Biden made Jeb Bush seem like a live wire, besides not really having much to get excited about on his platform. Bernie was basically the only exciting thing the democrats have had going in soon to be over a decade now. The part has to do better.
They had a lot of what I considered exciting candidates in the primaries; Yang, Sanders, and Warren come to mind. They didn't win because they weren't as viable or popular.
Williamson is a nutcase, and Kennedy is a racist anti-vaxxer. How about we get a serious candidate or two?
As if Biden wasn't already a serious candidate with a provable winning record.
Biden is clearly the better option and it shows by how much money the Republicans and the far right are dumping into "Democratic candidates" like RFK Jr and Dr. Cornell West. Which is also why the Right wingers and their "Democratic" proxies are the only ones trying to push for a democratic primary that would set a new precedent by primarying an incumbent Democratic President.
The only person this infighting about these unqualified challengers to Biden helps is Trump or whatever MAGA loyalist that replaces him once Trump finally winds up in prison. (Hopefully)
cornel west isn't running for democrat nominee.
Capable of a two hour conversation maybe, but a strong candidate? Not even close
I think if there was a regular debate schedule it could have gotten interesting. But with the way it is now, you're absolutely correct
I think Dem debates would absolutely help to hold Biden to more progressive positions but no one worth the limelight is running (I'm sure partially due to not holding an open primary). I think '28 is Newsome's race to lose. He's got name recognition and is a pretty good debater in conservative spaces so far. Not as progressive as I'd like but I've been saying that since I could vote
He has definitely been positioning himself for it. The insulin moves are welcome, but the fact he let a single payer bill expire after promising to pass it leaves an all too familiar sting. But perhaps he can at least be moved on reducing prices for more pharmaceuticals and descheduling marijuana due to its legalization in CA. We'll see.
Federal ban on single-family zoning.
I'd vote for him