this post was submitted on 20 Jul 2024
13 points (100.0% liked)

politics

26889 readers
1891 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., has issued a dire warning to her party about the chaos that could ensue if they succeed in pushing President Joe Biden off the ticket. And she criticized Democrats who’ve given off-the-record quotes that suggest the party has resigned itself to a second Trump term.

In an Instagram Live video on Thursday, Ocasio-Cortez warned liberals that a brokered convention could lead to chaos, in part because she says some of the Democratic “elites” who want Biden out also don’t want Vice President Kamala Harris as the nominee in his place. 

“If you think that is going to be an easy transition, I’m here to tell you that a huge amount of the donor class and these elites who are pushing for the president not to be the nominee also do not want to see the VP be the nominee,” she said. 

Ocasio-Cortez claimed none of the people she’s spoken with who are calling on Biden to drop out — including lawmakers and legal experts — have articulated a plan to swap out the nominee without minimizing the serious legal and procedural challenges that are likely to ensue. 

Ocasio-Cortez also highlighted the racial, ethnic and class divisions that appear to have formed between the majority of those pining to blow up the ticket — led mostly by white Democrats and media pundits — and those elected officials who feel they and their constituents have too much at stake to upend the process at this point and so are willing to do the work to re-elect Biden-Harris. She alluded to this cultural divide in her video when she spoke out against anonymous sources expressing a sense of fatalism on behalf of Democrats about what might happen if Biden remains on the ticket: 

What I will say is what upsets me is [Democrats] saying we will lose. For me, to a certain extent, I don’t care what name is on there. We are not losing. I don’t know about you, but my community does not have the option to lose. My community does not have the luxury of accepting loss in July of an election year. My people are the first ones deported. They’re the first ones put in Rikers. They’re the first ones whose families are killed by war.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] StereoTrespasser@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (3 children)
[–] JusticeForPorygon@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

That is to be determined.

On paper, her argument is sound. There are plenty of moderates who are still not down for a female president, let alone one as outspoken as Kamala Harris.

I personally think her no-bullshit attitude is exactly what we need, but we will have to see how many people agree

[–] BranBucket@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I live in deep red country, and work in a deep red career field, a lot of today's Trumpers have never forgiven Obama for being black, popular, and competent. They took it personally. Harris is going to mobilize the fuck out of them.

I think she's the right pick, I think she can govern well, I'm voting for her 100%. But the Dems need to be prepared. This was a dammed if you do, dammed if you don't situation for them. But replacing Biden isn't even a fraction of the work they're gonna have to do, and AOC is on point for speaking up about it.

[–] JusticeForPorygon@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

It's a good thing Diane Feinstein died, with the DNC's history of acting under pressure she'd have been their #1 pick

[–] BranBucket@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Good lord, they absolutely would have gone with her.

[–] samus12345@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Those Trumpers were going out to vote for him regardless of who his opponent is.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] EarthShipTechIntern@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

No bullshit attitude?

The only person that spews more bullshit than Harris is Trump.

Don't get me wrong, I'll still vote for her.

She is a shitheel, though.

[–] elbarto777@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Aging like milk implies that she isn't right about what she said.

Give it until November. If the Biden replacement wins by a landslide, then sure, it will age like milk.

Otherwise, so far, it's aging like fucking fine wine - and I'm not liking it.

[–] ALoafOfBread@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Nah she specifically said that Biden being forced out and Kamala not being supported by the establishment would be bad - which makes sense because incumbency is a huge advantage

[–] ooterness@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (3 children)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Are people here finally understanding the consequences of removing Biden? Will I continue to be berated for asking for evidence of the claims around him?

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Does she really think Genocide Joe is actually popular?

Lmao at her and the people in this thread pretending that Biden being a senile geriatric is "media propaganda".

Just watch the first 2 minutes of Bidens debating against Trump. Any sane person realizes this is completely Joever.

Nobody is attached to Biden as a candidate. Even the most hardcore superlibs here are saying they don't like Biden and just vote blue no matter who.

If anyone can be called Russian plant it's AOC because she really wants Trump to win.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 0 points 1 year ago (3 children)
[–] JusticeForPorygon@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Now we get to find out if she's right or not

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Probably lose after they put themselves in the untenable position.

[–] sgtgig@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Whoever replaces Biden will still immediately get the "I would vote for a literal hamster instead of Trump" crowd which is like 40% of the nation.

[–] inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah, because the "Anyone But Bush" strategy worked so well.

[–] Snowclone@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

That's an absurd comparison. This election has nothing in common with Bush's second election. Bush never would have survived a 10th of Trumps bullshit, he nearly got impeached for politicizing the DOJ using a litmus test. Fairly insignificant in comparison to Trump trying to blackmail Ukraine, and starting the jan 6 insurrection.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] Etterra@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Not ideal but then again the Democrats have a history of making stupid-ass decisions.

[–] HarbingerOfTomb@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This is the first time I've ever started disagreed with AOC on something. If we stick with Biden we're definitely handing the White House to Trumplethinskin. As Democrats we suck at picking candidates.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

my community does not have the option to lose

~~That's not how elections work. No one is going to count how important the outcome is to you. The election will be decided by low-engagement voters in swing states, not by the New Yorkers who elected Ocasio-Cortez. Those New Yorkers actually might as well stay home on election day, since the Democrats will definitely get New York's electoral college votes anyway.~~

~~(Your preferred Democratic candidate only matters if (1) you live in a swing state and (2) you're seriously considering voting for Trump. If you're one of those people, you probably don't have a high opinion of Ocasio--Cortez and you probably aren't on Lemmy. Otherwise your job is to figure out which candidate those people prefer and make sure he's the one running.)~~

[–] Wrench@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You're missing the point, even though it's in bold letters and flashing.

She's saying that her constituents are among those that are severely threatened by a GOP win. "Failure is not an option" is a very simple way of expressing that. A loss may eventually mean literal concentration camps or some flavor of that (deportation, loss of basic rights, etc)

[–] ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

~~I'm not missing that point, I'm replying to it. Her constituents are already overwhelmingly likely to vote for any Democratic candidate and live in a solidly blue state, and such people are not going to be the ones who decide the election. The Democrats need input from a representative whose constituents might actually vote for Trump and have their votes matter, not from her. If she's talking about what her constituents need, what she's saying is irrelevant because their need, no matter how great, still leaves their votes worthless here.~~

[–] Wrench@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You say you get the point, and then demonstrate that you missed it entirely.

The reason she's speaking out is because her constituents are exactly the kind of people that will lose the most of Trump wins. And she's calling out that the longer this uncertainty continues, the more it harms our chances. That the stakes are high, and (her) people will be hurt if the Dems fumble this again.

She's also seemingly making the case that changing nominees will hurt our chances more than keeping Biden. Primarily because there's no obvious choice behind Harris, who the old blood want to skip over, according to her.

[–] ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

~~Maybe I was reacting more to her rhetoric than to the substance of what she was saying. It's not unreasonable to argue that replacing Biden at this point is not a good idea (although I don't agree with that). What I vehemently object to is not that argument but rather the implications that the people trying to push Biden out are not serious about defeating Trump and that she has some unique insight due to representing her (politically irrelevant) constituency.~~

[–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

That's not what she was implying. She was talking about the danger her constituents face from another Trump Presidency.

load more comments
view more: next ›