this post was submitted on 12 Feb 2024
63 points (78.4% liked)

politics

19145 readers
2200 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
top 29 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Stovetop@lemmy.world 32 points 9 months ago (1 children)

What else would she be expected to say? "Oh shoot if he died tomorrow, I have no idea what we'd do!"

[–] ringwraithfish@startrek.website 3 points 9 months ago

And yet she still has to state the obvious for the oblivious

[–] FlexibleToast@lemmy.world 15 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Are we ready for her? She's been so nonexistent these past 4 years. I think she's detrimental to the ticket tbh. I expected her to be more active in building that public confidence. Instead, all we got was her going to South America and telling them not to come and becoming a meme.

[–] Xariphon@kbin.social 13 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Why the hell would somebody who built her entire early career on persecuting truants build public confidence?

If the alternative wasn't Spray-Tan Hitler, I would never have voted to put her one heart attack from the Oval Office.

[–] elbarto777@lemmy.world -1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

Why the hell would somebody who built her entire early career on persecuting truants build public confidence?

I don't understand your comment. It sounds as if persecuting truants is a bad thing...?

Edit: I think truant may have a different meaning in my native language. Truhan means a good-for-nothing, no-shame petty person. Let's see what truant means in English....

Edit 2: Ah, a school no-show. Yup. Different meaning. And yeah, prosecuting them is stupid.

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

It is when it means forcing young people into overcrowded and failing schools...

Ugh. I don't want to get re-mad over this.

Short version: School is bad for you, bad school doubly so, and she's a proud enforcer of a cruel and broken system.

[–] elbarto777@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

nonexistent

That's how I like my politics. Working for the people in a way that it feels like the air. You forget it's there, but it's doing its thing.

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

You do have a point, if they were doing their thing. Each term they seem to become less and less capable of doing anything.

[–] elbarto777@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

You, my friend, are unfortunately right.

[–] Telorand@reddthat.com 12 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Good. I'm sure she'd do fine.

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe 2 points 9 months ago

I have no doubt she'd be a liberal president. For all that's worth.

[–] Anamnesis@lemmy.world 6 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Let's hope it doesn't come to that

[–] elbarto777@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)
[–] DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe 2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

Because no one likes her, she'll get nothing done, and there's zero chance she doesn't try to run again

[–] elbarto777@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

What's your source on "no one likes her"? Because let me tell you - Cain's big mistake was picking Sarah Palin as a running mate. Biden won with his pick, so...

[–] Coreidan@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago
[–] BobGnarley@lemm.ee 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Or here's an idea, we don't keep electing old geriatric mother fuckers that don't even know how to set up a PowerPoint

[–] elbarto777@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

We can only wish, friend. We can only wish.

[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 2 points 9 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


In an interview with The Wall Street Journal just two days before Special Counsel Robert Hur released his report on Biden's handling of classified documents, Harris was asked if questions about the 81-year-old Biden's ability to serve for another term meant that she had to demonstrate to the electorate that she'd be ready to sit in the Oval Office.

The vice president then told the newspaper that people who've observed her job performance are "fully aware of my capacity to lead."

But Harris seemingly struggled early in her vice presidential term, with high-profile staff shakeups and a sense from many voters that her assignments — tackling the root causes of migration from Central America and pushing for sweeping voting-rights legislation that was eventually blocked by Senate Republicans — had not been successful.

She has also prodded Biden to express more public sympathy toward the humanitarian plight of Palestinians in Gaza amid the ongoing Israel-Hamas war, according to Politico.

Nikki Haley have sought to use the potential of Harris ascending to the presidency as a political liability against the Democratic ticket.

While Biden was not charged by Hur over his handling of classified documents, the report cited the president's "hazy" memory — a characterization which led Biden to forcefully push back in a news conference last week where he defended his acuity and his ability to run for reelection this fall and serve for a second term.


The original article contains 454 words, the summary contains 236 words. Saved 48%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 1 points 9 months ago

Oh, does trump even have a running mate yet?

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

I would love if she took over soon, and just unloads on Trump all campaign season. Pulling no punches just publicly humiliates him with every opportunity she has. It would be so cathartic

[–] Tremble@sh.itjust.works 6 points 9 months ago (1 children)
[–] distantsounds@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

well of course she won't. i have no hope for anything good regarding US politics. it was more of a day dream

[–] return2ozma@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I mean she is polling worse than Biden so that would be rough.

[–] ringwraithfish@startrek.website 2 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Polls don't mean jack shit. They're basically the "mood ring" of the political world.

[–] Pratai@lemmy.ca 2 points 9 months ago

Well said. Apt description.

[–] chakan2@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

That's what the Democrats thought in 2016 too.

[–] ringwraithfish@startrek.website -1 points 9 months ago

What I mean is don't listen to anyone who says "polls show". Polls have been weaponized by every media outlet to back up whatever story they're trying to relay.

Polls are only good for political strategists and only for forming actionable strategies. They don't capture true popular feelings about any subjects and completely eliminate room for subtleties and nuance in the debate.

For example, why is she polling lower than Biden? Could it be because the VP role is traditionally one of someone who works in the background, so the general public has very little reason to think about her too often? How many times is she mentioned in headlines (successes or failures) compared to Biden and Trump? Who was polled and who did the polling - was there any accountability for bias one way or the other?

Take all polls with a huge grain of salt.

[–] K1nsey6@lemmy.world -3 points 9 months ago

When Biden goes she needs to go too. If anyone is unqualified to be in either position it's her.