this post was submitted on 22 Feb 2024
-23 points (31.1% liked)

politics

19102 readers
3301 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Biden is more of a national name.

More national than his own vice president?

[–] PrinceWith999Enemies@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago

Absolutely. The VP position is not a high profile position, and Harris has been disappointing even in that regard - and I’m saying that as someone from California who would have supported her for president. Whether you want to base it on racism, sexism, personality, or the administration in general, she’s mostly been balancing on the knife edge of being a non-entity and being actively disliked.

My personal hope was that Biden would make Harris a front and center member of the administration in preparation for stepping down after one term and giving her a slow pitch over the plate to be the next president. He did not do so - she was more in the shadows than Biden was under Obama, and far more than Cheney was under W or Gore under Clinton. The theme for the past four years should have been transitioning, rather than Biden pulling a Reagan while riding off into the sunset. Whoever Biden picked should have played that role. It could have been Pete, it could have been Warren, it could have been anyone picked from the Democratic candidates or from state governments.

What I’m saying is that there is absolutely no way that we should be looking at a very realistic possibility of a Trump re-election and that this is feeling a lot more like 2016 than 2020.

[–] SaltySalamander@kbin.social 1 points 9 months ago

Way more national than his vice president. She just plain won't beat Trump.