politics
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.
- 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.
- 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
view the rest of the comments
These polls are just his approval ratings, right (sorry, can't access the article), not a measure who is willing to vote for him in 2024? Yeah, people don't approve of you backing Israel when it's indiscriminately killing civilians and committing war crimes. Surprise, surprise. Doesn't mean they're going to vote for Trump over you, Joe, don't worry.
As always:
The issue isn't people voting for trump, it's them not voting.
Because for some people, voting can take hours.
This is intentional because Republicans know depressed turnout is how they win. Unfortunately Dem party leadership just refuses to acknowledge that.
It's why trump beat Hillary, and can 100% happen again in 2024. The most important job of any candidate is getting votes. And just saying: "What are you going to do, vote Republican instead?" Isn't going to motivate enough voters to get to the polls.
The party is obsessed with stealing voters from Republicans, because that matches their preconceived notion that the democratic party needs to move to the right and gives them an excuse to do so.
Despite the fact that it's easier to get a non voter to vote than convince a Republican to start voting D.
And Biden - who has won elections for the past 40+ years - really understands this.
Which is why he is frustrated.
We have to be honest. Things really aren't looking good.
Let's not fool ourselves. Trump has a large, dedicated base willing to vote for him.
If turnout is high, his chances of winning are low. But with a low turnout, his chances are high.
A potential Biden voter staying home, because of low motivation to go stand in a line for hours - that's the Republican winning ticket.
Which is why the conflict in Israel and stalemate in Ukraine are good for Trump, it de-energizes the Democrat base.
Normally I'd agree, but it seems like the only people who are polling less favorably than Biden are literally every other GOP primary candidate. Even beloved local candidates like De Santis are floundering on the national stage. The MAGA schism is too wide for the Republican party to recover from at this point, if you ask me. This was something that started gaining momentum under the Obama administration and can't be easily stopped or redirected. Without Trump at the vanguard, the Republican party would be in complete disarray. Why else would they continue supporting him while he's under so many felony indictments?
It's not just turnout, turnout was much higher in 2020 than 2016 but even with that Trump gained 12M votes between the two. Millions of people who sat out the 2016 election looked at those four years and decided Trump deserved another go. But Biden got nearly 19M more than Hillary did, and more importantly, got those margins in the correct states to make an EC win out of it.
This is another area Hillary's campaign fucked up, despite being very simple if looking at the larger picture.
The population increased like 16 million in that time.
So "turnout" when viewed as a total number makes it look like it constantly gets better. Hillary ignored that and chased beating Obama's total votes out of pride rather than focusing on the electoral college to win.
So its best to use percentages, and 2016 was the lowest it's been in 20 years, ironically enough, that was the other Clinton.
https://www.cnn.com/2016/11/11/politics/popular-vote-turnout-2016/index.html
In 2020 it was like 2/3s of eligible voters who voted. But it's a lot easier to motivate people to vote for someone solely because "they're not a Republican" when the Republican is already in office. Especially when the challenger is telling everyone they're going to fix all the shit the Republican is breaking.
But four years later after that didn't happen....
And I don't know how anyone can't forsee a decline in turnout.
And just to be safe I'll say it again:
Republicans only win when turnout is low, so we need to focus on increasing turnout
And poll numbers show Biden most likely won't be able to match 2020's numbers. Republicans tho...
Not many voted for trump in 2020 but won't in 2024.
Well, the ones who died due to not following covid protocols. ;) And the ones in jail for 1/6.
While we're being cynical, don't forget it only matters in swing states and down ticket races.
The game isn't "get people to approve of my performance." The game isn't even "get most people to vote for me." The game is "get a marginal victory in a few states, because land matters more than people."
Perfect explanation ☝️
What? Democrats don't need to steal votes. Democrat voters outnumber Republicans but a fairly decent margin. It IS as you say: they just need people to vote. Which is why Democrats generally back voting by mail and early voting that Republicans try to stop.
That was what givesomefucks was saying. Team Blue does not need any Team Red voters. They need Team Yellow and Team Green and Team No-Colour-Because-They-Stay-Home votes. But they keep reaching out to Team Red voters by shying to the Right in the stupid and hopeless quest to draw some of those voters over to their side, ignoring a much larger slice of people who don't want our government slipping to the right. Of course, I have my theory -- Team Green especially is horrible about staying home if they don't get EXACTLY what they want. Team Red SEEMS to be the more reliable answer than Team Green, but they've already bought the propaganda that we're all baby-eating, baby-f**king Satan worshippers over here on the Left.
I think your confusing me saying what the party has spent decades doing, and me saying it's a good idea.
Clearly it's not.
Because even if it gets a few in office, they're unwilling to actually fix anything because it may piss off the hypothetical former Republicans that never vote D anyways.
A cynic would say party leadership is smart enough to understand this, and it's all a lie to justify keeping donors happy. Because the party wants those donations and is banking on "what are you going to do, vote Republican?" To get just enough votes to win the election.
In reality it just makes the office cycle between the two parties. And Republicans break as much as they can, and Dems don't fix it fast enough before Republicans get it back.
Resulting in a slow but consistent destruction of America, which further depresses turnout and keeps the cycle going on a long timeline.
Which could all be fixed by electing progressives willing to try as hard as they can, even if they fail
If we do that, then the wealthy donors stop donating. And current party leadership gets replaced.
Good luck convincing them to do that.
In that case theree' no need to move right IR appeal to "centrist" voters so the Democratic cannidate can focus on turning out their base by throwing them red meat, right?
This. Democrats are way better with ideas and policies that help working people, minorities, women, LGBTQ people, non Christians, and the middle class. Republicans only have tax cut for the wealthy and culture war hate.
I wish Biden were more progressive, but he is a good president. And Trump is a criminal who wants to be a dictator.
Now if they would get out of their own way and pass some.
Biden has passed a lot of good policy: Inflation Reduction Act, CHIPS Act, Respect for Marriage Act, American Rescue Plan, and more. He has also put put fair judges on the bench and one of the supreme court. None of these would have happen under Republican control.
Democrats have blocked good policy as well. BBB and the minimum wage increase spring to mind. Democrats won't end the filibuster to pass the John Lewis Voting Rights act. They didn't end it to codify Roe. They won't end it to codify Obergefell. They didn't end it to support rail workers. Biden promised to revisit the public option during his campaign. Hasn't bothered to try. And this is a pattern of behavior going back decades. Our own caucus killed the public option with no help from Republicans. We had a filibuster-proof majority and we still managed to find enough no votes. Even after the bill went to reconciliation and could have been passed with a simple majority, did we put the public option back? Of course we didn't. Did we even try to? Nope.
Nothing stops Democratic policy like Democrats.
Biden is a good president? He is literally funding and supporting a genocide. The fact that the alternative is worse doesn't make biden good.
I can't think of a US president in my lifetime who shouldn't have been tried and convicted by the ICC.
We're Americans: We don't get nice things. Especially government.
Both of those are hard. Which is why Democrats focus on option three: convincing independent voters (who do not consistently vote D or R) to vote D this time.
Depends on the poll.
There are multiple polls showing him down vs. Trump in multiple key states that he HAS to win to get elected.
Arizona:
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/arizona/
Georgia:
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/georgia/
Michigan:
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/michigan/
Nevada:
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/nevada/
North Carolina:
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/north-carolina/
Pennsylvania:
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/pennsylvania/
Wisconsin:
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/wisconsin/
Im sure Joe has a mountain of people to interpret the numbers.
Truth is, numbers are bad. Just the other day there was an abysmal poll that showed people trust trump more on everything but behaving well and abortion. Not by a thin margin. I don't know much about it, but It was reported on a reputable left wing network. It's really not looking good for him and for the Democrats that have no backup plan. The right have succeeded to portray him as a frail senile incompetent man with corruption issues. It's a failure of the democrat establishment.
Polls vary but this sort of poll typically asks "If there was an election tomorrow..." So no, not an approval rating.
They're not a prediction of who will win in 2024, they're a snapshot guesstimate of who would win tomorrow (if the pollster got their methods right, which they don't, always).
But regardless, you absolutely should not be telling people not to worry. Trump voters will turn out (and predicted turnout is a huge part of pollsters' methods). If Biden's voters don't turn out, he might lose. And it would be for exactly the same reason Clinton lost in 2016: complacency.
People on Lemmy are so confident in this sentiment, you guys are kidding yourselves so fucking hard. Many many people are not going to vote at all because of the Israel support. Things are clear for you, sure. But the blind assumption that this will have no effect is straight up delusional
Like, how is this the top comment in this thread? Just dismissing the possibility of this actuly having an effect, almost exactly mirrors the sentiment when the DNC snuffed Bernie
My attitude is that if people who don’t want Trump, but also don’t like Biden are stupid enough to either not vote or vote third party, and it causes Trump to get re-elected, we as a nation will deserve whatever happens under Trump, but especially those stupid MFers. You can’t stop people from being utter fucking morons.
I'm not voting for Joe solely because of his unwavering support for Israel.
I'll vote third party and whatever happens, happens.
If joe-supporters have a problem with it, they can support better candidates in the next election.
Enjoy the Trump presidency then, someone who whole-heartedly supports the genocide even more than Biden.
~~Yeah, I'd rather vote for no genocide than the lesser genocide.~~
~~I guess hurting the genocide-supporters is a bonus.~~
Sorry, I thought about it and there is no 'lesser-genocide.' Genocide Joe has done nothing to curtail Israel's genocide. Literally nothing.
And in so doing you will help get the greater genocide elected. Congrats, you managed to achieve an even worse outcome than you wanted.
Nah, it's the people voting for genocide that got genocide to win.
See how there's no winning unless you support genocide?
Because the US is a two-party system due to first past the post voting. Until the country adopts ranked-choice or single transferable vote, there will only be two parties. A vote against one party is simply a vote for the other party.
So by voting third party you are voting for the Republicans. Congrats on supporting the greater genocide.
Just a reminder, this is what happened in 2016. If you wrapped up all the Green Party and Libertarian Party votes and gave them to Hillary instead in the swing states, she would've won. Instead, those third-party voters helped doom us to a lifetime of higher taxes due to the Tax Cuts & Jobs Act, the politicization of a deadly disease that is now endemic, a court system with a supermajority that is more interested in stripping away rights rather than granting them, and the very real threat of the discarding of our democracy as we know it.
There's more to it than that, but both of these men are known quantities, and one is orders of magnitude worse. Any vote not for Biden will be a vote for a massive increase in genocide rather than status quo, which while unfortunate gives us a chance for a tomorrow where that doesn't happen.
Why don't the democrats support ranked-choice voting, then?
What has Biden done to curtail the genocide of Palestinians? There is no lesser genocide because Biden is a Zionist.
Because they get elected by the current system.
Helped negotiate a ceasefire that Hamas broke, and has spoken publicly about Israel not doing enough to avoid civilian casualties. Not much I admit, and far from enough, but not nothing.
The US could send more money and weapons to Israel and publicly support the killing of civilians. So yes, there is a lesser genocide.
People abstaining or not voting democrat in 2016 because they were mad Sanders didn't get the nomination led to a Trump presidency. It didn't help make the Dems move more to the left, it didn't help people get more social services. It just led to a vastly more right wing era that was hostile to minorities, removed many LGBTQ+ protections, ended abortion protections, and enshrined a corrupt supreme court for the next few decades.
But I'm sure you're so happy to return to such a government to stick it to Joe Biden.
Really? Looked to me like the prisoner exchange was what got a ceasefire. Do you legitimately believe Biden was the cause of it? I don't, especially considering how little impact he has on everything else happening in the area.
The US is already sending Israel everything it wants and has pledged its support. If you can cite an example of the Biden administration withholding aid to Israel, then you would have a point. All I've seen were empty threats.
I'm happy to do my part in breaking an endless cycle. You're happy to do your part in perpetuating it. If you have a problem with me, then you need to change to get my support.
The US was heavily involved in mediating the talks, and getting the ceasefire extended.
Everything the current administration wants. They could absolutely send way more if they wanted to, and the Republicans certainly would.
That would be you, because a Republican government = more gerrymandering, more fascist laws, more restricted voting, a more right wing judicial system, all of which leads to less ability to vote against them.
Congrats on being a Republican puppet, and making the country more right wing authoritarian.
Really? How?
No, everything Israel wants. Do you have any examples to the contrary?
Maybe once it gets bad enough, people like you will start fighting back instead of rolling over.
To think, we could be talking about a legitimately new president without Trump having ever entered office.
Do you blame the democrats for nominating Hillary Clinton, or the independents who didn't fall in line? Why isn't it the responsibility of those who support Hillary/Joe to fall in line if a Progressive wins the nomination?
IIRC they acted as a go between Israel and Qatar to enable talks in the first place, and they threatened reduced support if Israel didn't agree to a ceasefire. But those articles were from a month ago, and I cannot find them now.
Do you honestly think if the US was like here's $100 billion more Israel would turn it down? The US could send way more money.
Ah yes, let's allowing a fascist dictator with absolute power to rise in order to potentially start a doomed rebellion because I don't like something the government is doing. You think 1 million Palestinians potentially being killed is bad, but you're A-OK with starting a civil war that will result in 10s of millions of deaths? You really have to get your priorities straight.
Them, I blame them. Sanders would not have won a general election, he is too far left for the vast majority of Americans. But the minority that did support him would have been enough to tip the scales in the Dems favor, allowing the country to avoid the ultra-right wing hell it now finds itself in.
That doesn't make any sense. If independents prefer Sanders and Republicans hate Hillary, then you're only going to lose voters by alienating independents.
Republicans were never going to vote for her.
I see what the problem is now. You legitimately believe Hillary was a better choice than Bernie against Trump, even though she lost.
I can't reason with people like you because you refuse to see reason. You will do whatever the establishment tell you to because they're always right and you just have to go along with it (even when they're wrong.)
Sorry, this paragraph just oozes reddit-brain. I'm gonna let you think on why rational people won't take such charged comments seriously. I'd be here all fucking night unraveling this bullshit like it's a Calabi–Yau manifold.
Anyways, I've said my piece. You seem like no matter what you're going to believe you're correct, so I'll just let you have the last word and we can be done with it.
Goodbye.
You're forgetting the moderate Dems, 60 million + people, and a much larger voting Bloc than the socialist independents.
Yes, Bernie would have certainly lost too. And lets not forget Hillary actually did win the popular vote.
Why do you think Bernie would have beat Trump given the vast majority of US voters are right wing?
What do you think a resistance would lead to if not armed conflict?
Funny how often stubborn people who refuse to see reason say this. Nice projection.
Both.
Unless they're a DNC candidate, they won't.
Do you know how many people you need to convince to move over to one, not several, third party?
Let's look at the 2020 election results:
Are you going to convince seventy five million people to choose one single other candidate?
And what then? You realize if they did win, they just become the new establishment, right?
What happens when someone like you doesn't like the way Hawkins handled the mess at the border that Trump left and starts another "shit sandwich, fart taco" fiasco about moving to a 4th party?
The green party got 0.2% of the total vote, man. That's not enough. That's not nearly enough. You need over 50.0%, and they were aiming for 5.0%.
Do you know anything about the electoral college?
Whoever you vote for as a write it, it will be spelled “Trump” in the end.
I get your frustration, but this is the way our system works. You have to vote for the lesser of two evils, more often than not. I wanted Bernie in 2016, but I still voted for that cunt Hillary, because it was either her or Trump. Unless you’re certain your state will go Blue in 2024, a vote for a third party is functionally a vote for Trump. If you’re in a swing state, your protest will only amount to getting a person you like even less than Biden elected, and you’ll be part of the problems that creates.
My real frustration is having to deal with people like you every time I say I'm doing something independent.
Ahh well. I hope Trump wins just so people like you get to suffer the consequences of your actions. That's a boon in my eyes because otherwise you're never going to change.
If you don't like it, run better candidates. Perhaps a few losses will get that through your heads. Hillary clearly wasn't enough.
Good. I love vote shaming.
You lost us Roe v. Wade.
I'm sorry you feel that way. If a certain justice had retired sooner we would've been able to replace them during a Democratic presidency instead of the Trump presidency that we got because Hillary lost.