-2
submitted 1 week ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] [email protected] -1 points 1 week ago

You're missing my point entirely. The party is not going to move further left all of a sudden. Moderates get what they want because there are more of them in the party, and also the the mythical "Swing Voter" who prophecies say will swing the election will be a moderate, once we find one.

And this "mini-primary" is not really what you think it is, the delegates to the convention are already set and pledged to Biden (for now). Those delegates will be voting on the nominee, who will either be Biden or his hand-picked successor. Those delegates will not vote for Mayor Pete or AOC, no matter how badly progressives want it.

Biden's candidacy is not in jeopardy because of his moderate policies, it's because time has caught up with him. If he backs out, his replacement will not be any less moderate. Get over it. There will be no progressive White Knight to sweep the country out of the Jaws of Capitalism.

[-] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago

The party is not going to move further left all of a sudden

I agree with that, and no one is saying any differently...

They should to maximize chances to beat Trump. But we all know that's not the priority

[-] [email protected] -1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Well, the poster I was replying to (who wasn't you) was pointing out the mini-primary as an opportunity to avoid Biden and Harris and pick someone with no chance in the general election, but who passed their Progressive purity tests. I was pointing out that the "mini-primary" is just a rebrand of the same convention roll call among delegates that the party already uses, to make it sound more inclusive. And most of those delegates were picked by the Biden campaign.

[-] jwiggler 3 points 1 week ago

What the heck dude, that's not true. I think you may have misinterpreted me. I never said a mini primary was an opportunity for a progressive candidate to slip in there, or anything about some weird progressive purity test. Jeez. I mean, I'd obviously prefer a more progressive candidate, but I'm in agreement with you that if for whatever reason Biden steps aside, it's almost certainly going to be Harris or another, (relatively) young moderate.

I said the mini primary was being spit balled in Congress, so the idea of Biden not being the nominee is not out of the realm of reality. That was my point, not that Democrats have to throw AOC or Buttigieg in order to win, or that it is even remotely likely they'll do that. It's not.

[-] [email protected] -2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Ok. My bad on that. I lose track of all the unrealistic people here.

But regardless, the "mini-primary" is just branding for what the convention does anyway. Delegates have always picked the nominee. Some congressman floated that as an excuse to have a public debate, which will be held solely to show us all how awesome Harris is, and perhaps to help her pick her running mate. But the delegates will always have the last word, and they have already been chosen.

[-] jwiggler 3 points 1 week ago

It's all good. Honestly I think if a debate gets media attention for Dems, I'm all for it. Even if it's just performative for Harris publicity, even though I'm not thrilled about her, I think the media attention and getting her name out there would be a good thing for November. Obviously that's all a huge "if" depending on Biden being in or out, which if I had to guess, this whole conversation will be moot in 7 weeks.

[-] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago

the mini-primary as an opportunity to avoid Biden and Harris and pick someone with no chance in the general election

I agree that the few people who actually want Biden personally wouldn't vote for a progressive, or even anyone besides Kamala.

It's just they're a tiny tiny subset of the Dem party

Do you remember the 08 Puma movement?

Not only were they so statistically insignificant that Obama didn't lose many votes, his progressive campaign picked up so many traditional non-voters there's a couple red states who only went blue for that election in the last 50 some years. Despite everything moderates claim about how people want moderate policy, what flips red states is young charismatic candidate running progressive campaigns.

So while I think it'll be Kamala and her 29% approval rating, and I do think she has a better chance than Biden, neither are as good as bets of someone like Pete or Whitmere. Who still aren't progressive, just too far left for the DNC.

However just the existence of a mini primary would pull whoever the candidate is (even Biden if he participated) to the left and help beat Trump in the general.

this post was submitted on 07 Jul 2024
-2 points (48.1% liked)

politics

18138 readers
3973 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! 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.
  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