this post was submitted on 21 Feb 2024
-21 points (36.0% liked)

politics

19145 readers
2529 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

It's definitely an issue that's not going away. The DNC really needs to figure it out and stop pretending that it doesn't matter to voters.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] K1nsey6@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

If this was the most important election of our lifetimes, like they claim, they would have spent the money and resources to primary Biden with someone worthy of winning.

[–] jordanlund@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Running a primary against a sitting president is a fast road to losing the election.

[–] K1nsey6@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

They need to reearn their position with every election, that's why it's a separate term. Refusing to primary is undemocratic and prevents accountability. They are not entitled to 2 full terms unless they've earned them

[–] jordanlund@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

That's never been the way it has worked. The sitting president for either party is the candidate unless they choose otherwise. See Johnson in '68.

The last time a sitting President had a serious primary challenger, Carter in 1980, they lost in a landslide.

The reasoning is simple:

If a sitting President doesn't have the confidence of the party, they don't have the confidence of the voters either.

[–] K1nsey6@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

All the polling shows voters dont have confidence in him, the DNC in their arrogant hubris does have confidence because they believe they are entitled to every vote not Republican. And the disenfranchised will vote for Biden regardless of what he's done. Liberals claimed they could hold him accountable after the election in 2020, and making him earn votes is one way of doing it

[–] jordanlund@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

No, the polling is only asking and reporting half the question:

"Do you think Biden is too old to be President?"

Yes, anyone with half a brain should think that.

"Will you vote for him anyway?"

If the alternative is Trump? Yes.

[–] K1nsey6@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

That is a completely disingenuous reply. All of the polling lists every single question that was asked, what demographic it was asked of, and the results of those questions in the methodology used.

[–] jordanlund@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

It largely depends on the poll, but the reporting is often faulty as well.

[–] K1nsey6@lemmy.world -1 points 9 months ago

The perceived reliability of a poll is only based on who it shows winning. I've seen several posts on here and reddit claiming that polls were unreliable when they were showing Trump still beating Biden. On the occasional poll that gets posted showing Biden now beating Trump, all of a sudden polling is reliable and trustworthy