this post was submitted on 11 Jul 2024
38 points (100.0% liked)

Politics

10155 readers
210 users here now

In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it's a political happening, you can post it here.


Guidelines for submissions:

These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.


Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago (16 children)

Honestly, I'm not sure if you are making a joke about how a monarchy can't be democratic. Or if this is a comment about him legit "deserving" to be president more.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 month ago (15 children)

Monarchy... Really...? This is not even remotely close to a monarchy situation.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (11 children)

Monarchy was obviously the wrong word, but I think their underlying point is correct; there is not supposed to be a Right to Rule in America.

No one deserves to be a president any more than anyone else, and treating an incumbent as though they do, without having to go through an open, democratic primary process, is to treat them as more deserving of future authority than other citizens.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I mean, okay fair enough, this is a longstanding thing that's happened though. It's pretty rare for incumbents to be challenged within their own party (and this is normally not a controversial thing).

It's also less that "nobody could" and more "nobody [with a remote chance of winning] did."

There's no "right to rule" here, that's entirely a retroactive facade that's contrary to the facts.

(EDIT: Bit more info https://www.vox.com/2023/9/12/23868230/biden-democratic-primary-challenge-polls)

load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (13 replies)
load more comments (13 replies)