132
submitted 11 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world
top 19 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] TheMauveAvenger@lemmy.world 27 points 11 months ago

The fact that we're talking about either of these guys as viable candidates, and that they will likely be the nominations, is wild. Biden would be 86 and Trump would be 82 if they make it to the end of the term.

[-] echo@sopuli.xyz 22 points 11 months ago

It's wild that people act shocked that the Democratic party is backing an incumbent president tbh

[-] theletterd@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

I personally feel like the great American experiment has failed if these two fucktards are our choices.

[-] WhiskyTangoFoxtrot@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

The experiment failed in 1861, but once an institution as big as a country gets started it tends to keep going.

[-] NotSpez@lemm.ee 11 points 11 months ago

Experts predicted Hillary didn’t they?

[-] mace@lemmy.world 7 points 11 months ago

if you can’t grasp by now the myriad ways this cycle would be different from 2016 for trump, i don’t think there’s any way to get through to you on the matter. you’ll just have to sit back and watch.

[-] NotSpez@lemm.ee 4 points 11 months ago

I hope you are right. I just think there is a strong base, a lot of people who don’t like Biden and there are (way too) many republican politicians willing to dance to his tune.

[-] EtnaAtsume@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

Sit back? I don't think so. Vote!

[-] Chaser@sopuli.xyz 6 points 11 months ago

Five Thirty Eight was pretty spot on actually

[-] MicroWave@lemmy.world 10 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

As it stands, political scientists expect Donald Trump to win the Republican nomination for president. Most GOP candidates are in lockstep with Trumpist policies and culture wars, failing to differentiate in an already scattered field; despite the appearance of a united front, factions within the party cannot agree on when and how to pass hardline legislation. Traditional conservative forces are looking for a less volatile alternative with a more viable path to win the general election, and as that concern mounts, some experts say Biden could be narrowly re-elected if the race is a rematch of 2020.

[-] miraclerandy@lemmy.world 22 points 11 months ago

Looking for less volatile candidate… maybe they should’ve done that in 2015. You guys created this mess. Now we all have to clean up after you.

[-] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 15 points 11 months ago

Democrats cleaning up Republican messes seems to be standard operating procedure.

[-] Skyrmir@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

So they're looking for a less volatile culture warrior? I'm pretty sure that's not a thing.

[-] CodingCarpenter@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

I feel like when Trump was first running everybody considered him a joke candidate outside the redneck community. And yet look where we ended up. I don't think it's safe to assume any democratic nominee is in any sort of lead or decent position until the polls been called. People get too relaxed they Don't bother voting because they see a foregone conclusion and that is a dangerous thing

[-] xc2215x@kbin.social 0 points 11 months ago

That is good to see.

this post was submitted on 15 Jul 2023
132 points (93.4% liked)

politics

18081 readers
1475 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