this post was submitted on 29 Feb 2024
-34 points (25.0% liked)

politics

19143 readers
2432 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
 

The “uncommitted” vote in Michigan way outperformed expectations last night, reflecting Democratic unhappiness with Joe Biden’s support for Israel’s brutal war. He should change course on Gaza immediately.

top 16 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] JaymesRS 20 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

Biden gets 80% of the vote = political suicide Trump gets 60% of the vote = massive victory.

?🤔?

[–] FenrirIII@lemmy.world 10 points 9 months ago

It's the usual doom and gloom disinformation posts. Lemmy is becoming just as bad as Reddit for shills and bad actors.

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

I don’t think people saying Biden getting 80% is bad are saying Trump’s 60 is good.

At least not without being trumpers.

Maybe the media could do with ragging on trumps lack of decisive wins.

Prior to this, Biden had been primarying at like 95%

[–] JaymesRS 4 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

It was mainly a media critique. For example This was how The NY Times covered it. Trump’s 68% of the vote is “coasting”

a title from the yew york times framing trumps win as coasting but biden as protest votes hurting biden

[–] Sanctus@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)
[–] phreekno@lemmy.world -4 points 9 months ago (2 children)

yes yes i know. i dont want my main acct blown the fuck for having a real unpopular opinion that I can't help but voice. question me all you want, i won't shirk away

[–] kittenzrulz123@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago (1 children)
[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

Abuse: for when you can't defend your positions.

[–] rdyoung@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

But you are shirking away by hiding behind an alt.

You are part of the problem with the left. Yes, the Israel thing is fucked up and a mess, but, as much as it sucks, Biden would have to do something much much worse than stick with a long standing policy of supporting Israel (regardless of how we feel about it) before I would not support him, especially over trump.

No one else has the support or name recognition to beat trump and every vote for anyone other than Biden (in the actual election) is a vote in support of fascism and helps usher in our first dictator. It won't be trump but I won't be surprised if they find a way to give his vp a total of 3 terms and push legislation that will make sure that they get whoever they want in office after that.

The above said. I'm not in the mood to argue anymore with an alt so I'm blocking you so I don't have to see this bullshit, astroturf you are pushing.

Have a nice day.

[–] MdRuckus@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago (2 children)

This is a joke article. Biden got the traditional vote percentage for an incumbent. Let’s talk about how Trump loses at least 35%-45% every single primary.

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

I encourage shit talking trump. go off

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

Except that it’s extremely rare for it to be against literally no-one.

It also represents enough people for him to lose Michigan.

Biden really - really - needs the ceasefire he’s saying will happen Monday. It already looks like it’s an attempt to salvage something before Super Tuesday (which is, Tuesday,).

If it turns out to look like he’s blowing smoke…..

[–] snipgan@kbin.social 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

No that is not true. Biden had two other opponents in this primary, so he wasn't "against literally No one."

And he won this state by a bigger margin in the last election compared to "undecided" voters in this primary.

The constant goal post moving and dishonesty about this primary ahs been quite disgusting.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

two others

Who didn’t get 100k votes. At best; 80k people specifically voted uncommitted in protest to Biden. And that’s generously subtracting the “normal” 20k, despite the feeling of exit pollsters that no one who voted so, were not doing so in protest.

bigger margin

A margin that has almost certainly gotten smaller. 50k votes is practically nothing. Therefore it’s not dishonest to say that Michigan is in serious doubt.

dishonesty

Whose being dishonest? Are you seriously saying that Biden’s actions on Gaza aren’t hurting his election?

Edit: you can see the shrinking margin by looking at how many people voted and where:

the Republican had 1,104,385 people voting, with Trump getting 753,003 votes.

Democrats had 762,697 people voting, with Biden getting 618,426, and uncommitted getting 101,100 votes (81.1% and 13.3%)

It’s a bad expectation to say there won’t be more people voting in the regular election, but if we use it as a bellwesther, we can soundly say that Biden is most likely to loose Michigan. Particularly because history shows that republicans are more likely to fall in line than democrats.

In- as I’ve been saying for a while now- a repeat of ‘16. Where the only difference in rhetoric is that others are already blaming voters.

[–] ctkatz@lemmy.ml 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

uncommitted barely got more of a percentage of the vote than they normally do. is it "political suicide" because they got more than 100k votes? for every vote uncommitted got, biden got 6. if 100,000 people voted in the primary and we had the same vote distribution, uncommitted would have 13,000 votes.

that's not political suicide. political suicide would be if uncommitted got enough of a threshold to win delegates from the statewide pool. as it ended up last night, they only pulled 2 delegates out of 117 on offer, those 2 coming from one congressional district.

people who are pushing that story are trying to sew democratic chaos and discontent when the democratic party is very much in array.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Normal is 10-20k votes, so 100k a bit eye popping. Obama’s primary they went 208k uncommitted to support Obama (who was not on the ballot.), but normal is 20k give or take.

Also? That’s enough votes for him to lose Michigan if they simply don’t vote for Biden. And if they vote for Trump out of pure spite?

It’s a problem.

People can beat the “not voting Biden is a vote for Trump” drum; but to perfectly candid, that’s not going to change behavior…. Which is why Hillary lost in 16.