Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
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
The document says:
No, he never said that, let alone promised it. People implied it.
Calling yourself a “transition president“, and then not announcing your intention to run for reelection until after the inauguration is doing far more than implying.
Can you provide a source of Biden referring to himself as a transition president?
I've been searching and nearest I can find is a CBS interview that he did after he dropped out.
It's not unreasonable to think that he meant he wasn't intending to run again, but it's a VERY far cry from a promise. I suspect that if Trump weren't running he would have been far more willing to step down. He's the whole reason he ran in the first place.
My point really doesn’t have anything to do with the semantics of the word promise. At the end of the day the implication or promise or idea was there that he wasn’t going to run again and then he announced which pretty much tanked the public’s ability to have faith in Kamala before the fact and made it further untenable for her to separate herself from his policies.
My point, in response to the original post, was that it isn’t that he should’ve dropped out earlier it’s that he should’ve never run again at all.
He said he would be a bridge candidate lmao
Lying or gaslighting people about this is an awful look
No no... it was because of her laugh.
-Some enlightened cultist democrats
Sometimes I like to claim to the Blue No Matter Who folks that her laugh is the sole reason I didn't vote for her.
For you see, her laugh causes sufficient wave interference to trigger an integer overflow in voting interest, as demonstrated by the Loose Square Law:
V~I~ = Sign(L % 2^32 - 2^31) * (L % 2^32) / 2^32
Where V~I~ is voting interest as a percentage and L is the sound of a laugh in decibels.
As Kamala's laugh exceeded the 2^31 dB threshold, it was advisable to not vote for her to save the planet's structural integrity.
real question: what makes people think that the "6 7 center" people can make an accurate assessment of why they are bad
the skills needed to do the thing are the same skills needed to evaluate the thing
The head of the DNC says they report was done by one person who worked for free. The theory I find most likely is that they just never completed it so there is nothing to release.
I haven't heard anything about that and I am way too online.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/dnc-chair-grilled-over-why-160222861.html?guccounter=1
He's super defensive in the interview. It definitely makes him look like he is trying to pull something shady.
It was in his recent interview with Pod Save America
I thought the "one unpaid advisor" line sounded like bullshit, but if Tommy pushed on that, maybe he could just bring in that advisor for an interview
Why, did they do a good job on that too?
That report will say the party was too woke and needs to be more right wing to win elections.
I'm sure you're joking, but if that was the case, they would have released it the second it was done.
Conservative and Neo-Liberal leadership of the Democrat party won't let any other message get out. If it is released it'll 100% say the party needs to support Isreal, trickle down economics work, and tough on crime is the only answer. Believe it. Yes the report may say other things right now, but once it's released it'll have a center right spin.
Political parties aren't about being transparent or representing the people who actually vote for you.
They're about managing public relations to keep getting people to vote for the financiers of the party.
Didn't we learn this after what they did to Bernie in 2016?
The reason why they lost is because the biggest money sided with policies and candidates that voters don't want. If they tried going with a true leftist populist they would have financial support dropped and the candidate would be at odds with almost all the other elected representatives.
There are countless policies that should be changed that everyone wants changed but will never change because it will outrage the money and keeping the people in power still in power. None of this system is about putting what the people really want in place, it's about managing the narrative so they can push those horrible policies and stick to the oligarch lobbyist dynamic.
Even if they are forced to release a report, it will not be the real one. They can never release the honest truth, because it would be used against them.
Who cares? No matter what they find it wont help them to depose the current dictatorship. Idiots still trying to do things the "right" way.
I take it, you never do anything for entertainment.
https://audioboom.com/posts/8897233-why-is-the-dnc-hiding-its-own-2024-autopsy tommy grills the dnc chair quite hard on this
People like mom that voted for Biden couldn't bring themselves to vote for a woman who constantly ran ads about the need to legalize abortion.