13
submitted 2 days ago by jeffw@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world
top 13 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] baronvonj@lemmy.world 38 points 2 days ago

Yes. We just have to vote for him! Pretty simple really.

[-] mozz@mbin.grits.dev 34 points 2 days ago

It is fascinating to me that the "Biden is in HUGE trouble in the election because of the debate" narrative is so unanimous in the media

In a way that "Trump is in HUGE trouble in the election because of his felonies" was not in any way

Even though from the tiny amount of polling that has apparently happened, the second one was a bigger deal to the electorate than the first one

Curious

[-] ryathal@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 day ago

It's because campaigns are about convincing people to show up to vote, not winning undecided voters or opposing voters over. Trump voters are likely more likely to support him after conviction. Biden's true opponent is the couch.

[-] DontRedditMyLemmy@lemmy.world 16 points 2 days ago

That's because Republicans laid the groundwork that Democrats are attacking Trump in court, and their masses eat that shit up. On the other hand, Democrats laid groundwork that Biden is not too old, and then he pulled this. Democrats have egg on their face, and it sucks. I'd still rather vote for Weekend at Bernie's over House of Cards, which is giving Trump too much credit.

[-] mozz@mbin.grits.dev 11 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Yeah

  1. Biden got a ton of good stuff done, but even if you don't agree with that, there is no possible way that an adult human being with any level of political awareness can claim that Trump wouldn't be an objective disaster on an absolutely globe-spanning scale, or that we should do anything in this election than vote for whoever isn't Trump. It's like one of those video game puzzles that's so clear and simple that it seems like there must be more to it. "Do you want to open and find out what's in the box? Or for me to thrust this running chainsaw into your coccyx?" "What's in the box?" "It's a friendly cat, but why do you need to ask?"
  2. Biden at the debate looked old as fuck and that's a problem

It's sorta boring when you just lay it out, but IDK how anyone could disagree with either of those

[-] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 9 points 2 days ago

It’s not just republicans. Voters have been concerned about Biden’s age since 2020 but democratic leaders have been insisting it was fine anyway. The debate was the first time most voters saw Biden speaking at length in a non-scripted manner in a while, and it looked very not fine.

[-] ValenThyme@reddthat.com 7 points 2 days ago

six assholes control everything americans see and stand to benefit greatly from another trump presidency it isn't even subtle

[-] mozz@mbin.grits.dev 5 points 2 days ago

I don’t even think they stand to benefit. I think when he blows up the US their assets will lose value, and depending on how bad it gets they may start having to hang out in some other safer country like a Russian oligarch spending all his time in Western Europe.

I think it is just pure force of habit at this point, like “Biden’s gonna tax the rich fuck him let’s get behind this disaster instead.” I mean, it worked for other disasters like Reagan or W, but I think they haven’t really absorbed how big a disaster Trump 2 would be.

[-] baronvonj@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

Curious indeed.

[-] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 4 points 2 days ago

Weird I wonder why that didn’t work when I voted for Hillary.

[-] baronvonj@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

Yeah that was pretty messed up. Guess we need to swing, or something.

[-] pjwestin@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

Not sure comparing Biden's performance to the dementia President's is doing him any favors right now.

[-] autotldr@lemmings.world 1 points 2 days ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


But the classic and in some respects parallel case was Reagan’s 40 years ago, as he faced Democratic nominee Walter Mondale in Louisville, Ky.

Reagan was comfortably ahead in the polls that fall, cruising toward reelection, even if his age of 73 made him older than any previous president in history.

Cannon noted the staff had limited that document to 25 pages after first lady Nancy Reagan insisted her husband not be “overworked” prior to the debate.

The Wall Street Journal ran a headline stack asking: Fitness Issue – New Question in Race: Is Oldest U.S President Now Showing His Age?

The two candidates met in Kansas City, Mo., where most of the evening was pro forma until one of the moderators, Henry Trewhitt of The Baltimore Sun, noted that Reagan staff had observed the president was “tired” on the night of the Louisville round.

In 2012, Obama easily cleared the hurdle erected by his first-debate shortcomings much the same way simply by showing up and turning in a solid evening in the second debate with Romney.


The original article contains 1,543 words, the summary contains 177 words. Saved 89%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

this post was submitted on 30 Jun 2024
13 points (63.8% liked)

politics

18065 readers
4308 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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!
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. 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.
  6. 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

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS