298
Joe Biden reportedly more open to calls for him to step aside as candidate
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 18 Jul 2024
298 points (88.2% liked)
News
22897 readers
4262 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
~~I’m holding out hope for Newsom. The unfortunate truth is that too many Americans are racist and/or sexist, and the combination of those factors could sink Harris (who, it should be said, I would happily vote for).~~
~~There are a lot of people out there who are desperate to vote for someone who isn’t Biden or Trump. The buzz and excitement generated by an entirely new ticket (Newsom-Whitmer?) would blow Trump out of the water.~~
My stupid hot take was stupid. I am fully coconut pilled.
As a Californian, I’m always surprised when people think Newsom has a chance. Don’t get me wrong, I wouldn’t say I’m a fan but I think he’s done a lot of good (just wish he’d distance himself from PG&E especially) but I always rather assumed that in today’s political climate, anyone from California is considered toxic. Is that not the case?
Among the GOP certainly. But we aren't counting on their base voting for him.
Harris is from CA too.
I’m quite aware; I voted for her!
You and I are in lockstep on this. Whitmer, I think, would help to deliver Michigan.
I still would like to see Kamala in the Cabinet. She now has plenty of foreign experience. I think she would do well as Secretary of State or perhaps even Attorney General.
Yes, surely bypassing the current VP who is both black and a woman in favor of a white man will go over super well.
It's Harris or Biden. That's the choice.
Since I never hear anything about this angle-
The other reason it kinda "has to" be Harris if it isn't Biden, relates to campaign finance rules. If he steps aside, she can continue to use their campaign funds.
If it's neither, then whoever is nominated basically has to start fresh raising money, and with a huge time disadvantage.
Not only that but Republicans have already said they would take it to the supreme court if anyone else is on the ballot.
Plus a completely new person might not even be on the ballot in multiple states being this late into the process. Harris can keep all the donations and is certified to be on the ballots.
Is that true regardless of her VP?
Yes as president she can select whoever she wants as VP.
ELIF why they'd have to raise money? Campaign money is used to campaign, which you also said they wouldn't have much time to do. So... Why would they need gobs of money?
Not a campaign expert, but there are tons of things that political campaigns need to do in the 3 months leading up to an election -
Conduct national and local ad buys on TV, radio, and social media.
Orchestrate volunteers to call voters and knock doors.
Print promotional materials such as signs and shirts.
Conduct candidate appearances (speeches, public forums, rallys) which includes travel costs, event space, logistics.
Coordinate and encourage voter turn out (includes a lot of research, planning, data analysis).
Prepare any legal challenges related to the ballots and election procedures (this could get very complicated and expensive in a national campaign as there are so many venues; Imagine having to retain teams of lawyers and potentially file suits in all 50 states).
All that stuff costs money. Usually a re-elect campaign has years to raise money so jettisoning the entire warchest with 3 months left isn't a good idea. Granted there is so much PAC money in national races, maybe it doesn't matter as much as it used to.
No it fucking isn't. The only thing Harris is good at is being an argument that Biden should stay in the race because she'd lose it even worse.
Ok, so voter groups aren't monolithic but do you honestly think the optics of passing over a black woman who currently is #2 to have two wholly unrelated candidates be on the ballot (or keeping her as the VP choice) will be lost on black voters?
Just like everyone else here- people are throwing out wishlist bullshit without thinking of the actual political ramifications.
If you were to listen to half the people here you'd have tossed the incumbency advantage even before Biden did that debate, nominated AOC, and ensured a Mondale style wipeout repeat.
I think that Harris is an extremely hard sell as a former prosecutor who has really poor approval polling. If we made sure the ticket included someone who has done real work for minority communities then I don't think it'd be a serious issue.
I was strongly opposed to Harris getting the VP slot in the first place and I think she'd genuinely struggle to win against Trump.
I never liked Harris because she ran against Bernie and she seemed very fake and forced in 2019, on top of the prosecutor stuff making me think she was moderate.
However recently I actually looked at her voting record in the senate. She is more progressive with her votes than 99% of the senate, and there are only 100 of them. Right up there side by side with Bernie. She is even an original backer of the Green New Deal.
She has also seemed to have relaxed some, seems way less forced. Most importantly she isn't in her 80's and can actually complete sentences unlike anyone else running this decade.
The prosecutor stuff was a long time ago, and she has already been voted in as VP to step up for Biden if he gets too old. The tough on crime stuff might actually help her with independents and conservatives who don't like Trump.
https://voteview.com/person/41701/kamala-devi-harris
I dont know why anyone likes Newsom. Whitmer is a far better choice.
I don't know specifically about Newsom but I do have to agree that there may be people in the middle who really don't want to Trump but really won't vote for a woman, let alone one who isn't lily white. They won't necessarily vote for Trump but they don't necessarily need to. Just not voting at all could do it. That said anyone who isn't an independent is (I effing hope) voting against Trump no matter what.