He's too damn old. Period.
this post was submitted on 15 Sep 2023
54 points (89.7% liked)
politics
24926 readers
2897 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Do you have some actual evidence that age is the reason so many people of colour dislike Biden?
Yeah my dementia riddled grandfather shouldn't be running the government. Pretty solid proof. For all of these old ass politicians.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
So, to understand these trends, I’ve assembled a few theories, informed by conversations with pollsters, strategists, and Democratic party operatives, for why this polling gap continues.
“We can’t bury our head in the sand and give excuses about why the polling is wrong,” Chuck Rocha, the Democratic Latino consultant who has frequently been critical of his party’s work with voters of color, told me.
“Times have changed and if we continue to rely on these constituencies to vote at such a high number, I’m afraid Democrats will be disappointed unless we put in the work needed to get them there.”
Democrats seem to face bigger hurdles to retaining support from Black and Latino men, compared with women, while Biden specifically is underperforming with lower-income voters of color.
So it’s possible that Biden has artificially deflated support just because of who he is: his age, his background, his approach to politics, him being an old-school politician in a party that has increasingly become more progressive and wants more dynamism in their leaders,” Cox said.
As my colleague Andrew Prokop has explained, the polls conducted over the last year have told a consistent story — one of near-even support for Biden and his Republican rivals in battleground states and nationally.
The original article contains 2,076 words, the summary contains 208 words. Saved 90%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
Well, for one, Biden's the guy who penned the crime bill that pipelines our communities to carceral slavery. For two, Biden's the guy who picked a fucking cop-- and not just any cop, California's "Top Cop" to be his VP. For three, he's a strike-breaker-- some 'pro-union' president we have. I wholly expect him to torpedo the UAW strike too, within the month; regardless of whatever mealymouthed 'backing' he's given the UAW for the cameras.
All in all, I still haven't been given good reason to vote for the walking cadaver. And no, your personal boogeyman is not good enough.
Uh... The railway union got their demands in the end. Biden just did it without paralyzing the economy. Quick reminder that strikes are a means (and not one you wanna use, at that), not an end.
(and not one you wanna use, at that)
If the execs won't give labor what they're due, labor is within their rights to take them by the short hairs for as long as it takes. Beyond that, they didn't get the paid sick leave that was on the demands, and they have to burn their own leave time for sick days. You know, half the fucking reason they struck in the first place that isn't the ATROCIOUSLY dilapidated state of our nation's rails, and lack of proper safety inspections that will lead to more catastrophic derailings. One fucking extra day, wooo. Some victory.
But y'know, you get your freight on time so I guess that's a victory for you, huh? And honestly, fuck your conciliatory figureheads. You want me to take you serious, show me what the actual rank-and-file are saying.
That's just for electrical rail workers, isn't it?
Is it? AFAIK it's for all of them.
You linked to the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, this agreement is for their members specifically.
So the best one I found was this, which is from back when the negotiations were still in progress but mostly done, but my understanding is that in the end the unions who it says are still negotiating got similar outcomes.
CSX was the first to grant paid sick days to several of its unions and has now granted sick days to 61% of its 17,089 unionized employees.
Union Pacific has granted sick days to 47% of its workers, Norfolk Southern to 46%, and BNSF, the largest freight railroad, to 31%.
I guess only somewhere between 1/3-2/3 of workers are human and deserve sick days. The rest are animals. Or maybe robots, to be replaced when they fail from being overworked.
An injury to one is an injury to all. Fuck this.
It does say the rest are (or were, at the time) work in progress. See: The IBEW, which were still negotiating at the time of writing this article but got their sick days when the other one was written.
If they were able to strike the work in progress would already be done.
I mean yes maybe but at what cost? Again, strikes aren't good, especially those of essential service workers like rail workers. They're something that's sometimes unavoidable, but if there's a way to resolve things without striking that's what we should be doing. It's just that most of the time the president doesn't interfere on your behalf, so you gotta strike.
It's already been a fucking year, how much longer is it going to take for the rest of the workers to get what they deserve?
I'll tell you! It will never fucking happen and you're absolutely delusional if you think a strike isn't necessary to force them to comply~
This is fucking stupid, I'm done. You can have the last word, class collaborator.
I'll just mention that this article is from May. It's outdated. So... Yeah.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
So, to understand these trends, I’ve assembled a few theories, informed by conversations with pollsters, strategists, and Democratic party operatives, for why this polling gap continues.
“We can’t bury our head in the sand and give excuses about why the polling is wrong,” Chuck Rocha, the Democratic Latino consultant who has frequently been critical of his party’s work with voters of color, told me.
“Times have changed and if we continue to rely on these constituencies to vote at such a high number, I’m afraid Democrats will be disappointed unless we put in the work needed to get them there.”
Democrats seem to face bigger hurdles to retaining support from Black and Latino men, compared with women, while Biden specifically is underperforming with lower-income voters of color.
So it’s possible that Biden has artificially deflated support just because of who he is: his age, his background, his approach to politics, him being an old-school politician in a party that has increasingly become more progressive and wants more dynamism in their leaders,” Cox said.
As my colleague Andrew Prokop has explained, the polls conducted over the last year have told a consistent story — one of near-even support for Biden and his Republican rivals in battleground states and nationally.
The original article contains 2,076 words, the summary contains 208 words. Saved 90%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
Democratic leadership always get lazy when it's time to re up.