politics

18828 readers

4683 users here now

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

• 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

[email protected]

312

Historians meet Biden for a White House lunch, urge him to speak out more forcefully (www.politico.com)

submitted 8 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

93 comments fedilink hide all child comments

President Joe Biden hosted a small group of scholars and historians for lunch on Wednesday as he gears up for a speech framing the upcoming election as a battle for the nation’s democracy.

The discussion revolved around “ongoing threats to democracy and democratic institutions both here in America and around the world, as well as the opportunities we face as a nation,” the White House said in a statement.

Princeton’s Eddie Glaude Jr. and Sean Wilentz, Harvard’s Annette Gordon-Reed, Yale’s Beverly Gage and Boston College’s Heather Cox Richardson were among the attendees, as well as presidential biographer — and occasional Biden speech writer — Jon Meacham.

Attendees were tight-lipped about what was discussed at the gathering. One would only go so far as to say they “talked about American history and its bearing on the present — a lively exchange of ideas.”

Another person in the room, who like the others was not authorized to speak publicly about a private meeting, said the historians urged the president “to call out the moment for what it is.” In blunt terms, the academics discussed looming threats to the nation’s democracy and warned about the slow crawl of authoritarianism around the globe.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago (2 children)

You're so hell bent on making it a Republican vs Democrat thing. We should be primarying Biden out. They're both too old and need to go the fuck on.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Whether you like it or not, until we get RCV, approval voting, STAR, or some other method better than first-past-the-post (we don't even have majority!), it is a Democrat vs. Republican thing. Which I should mention, is also how YOU framed it in your post. The only thing I'm pointing out is that if you choose the option that's bad for LGBTQ+, it's also just as bad for Palestinians as the other option is.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

This skios the part where the Dems act like Biden is the only candidate that can beat Trump. He may beat him, he also may beat him to his grave. He's too old and should be primaried out.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago

Who would run instead? Harris? I haven't seen a single article about her. Bernie? The DNC would never do that. Biden is the incumbent, and what other good options are there?

[–] [email protected] -1 points 8 months ago

Finally someone who gets it!