this post was submitted on 26 Jul 2024
612 points (98.1% liked)

politics

19138 readers
3339 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.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. 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.
  5. 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
 

Some Republicans are starting to seriously regret Donald Trump’s vice presidential nominee, Ohio Senator J.D. Vance.

It’s been only one week since Vance was nominated at the Republican National Convention, and already his own party members are expressing severe doubts about Trump’s pick. The former president’s allies have acknowledged that nominating Vance was the product of Trump’s absolute certainty that he would be able to defeat Joe Biden in November. While Vance wouldn’t do much for swing voters or independents, he would likely shore up support among Trump’s base.

But ever since Biden passed the torch to Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic Party’s new presumptive nominee, Republicans have begun to sour on Vance.

“The road got a lot harder. He was the only pick that wasn’t the safe pick. And I think everyone has now realized that,” one House Republican told Axios Thursday, under the condition of anonymity.

Another House Republican told Axios that Vance “doesn’t add much.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 34 points 3 months ago (3 children)

It’s amazing how much Trump got played. The democrats had to know Biden was going to drop out when they scheduled the earliest presidential debate in history. It was all a show so people would demand Biden drop out before he actually dropped out.

And not only did Trump agree to it (cause his ego told him he would dominate), now he’s picked a god awful VP pick cause he thought he knew who his opponent was.

[–] [email protected] 93 points 3 months ago (2 children)

I love this but no way our Democrat leadership thought that far ahead.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Ha, yeah. I've been a registered Democrat since I was 18. No freaking way they tried at something so hard like that.

[–] [email protected] 26 points 3 months ago

To be fair, for all we know you're 19.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago

I'm more cynical about the DNC than anybody but - people daydream all the time about what could happen in the future if this or that happens. Some asshole right winger started daydreaming about taking over the Supreme Court back in the 1970s and it doesn't mean that he planned it all out but you can still think about the next few moves to be ready if the opportunity arises.

Somebody in the DNC imagined this scenario many months/years ago and talked about it to their bosses. Gaming out the possibilities and having the slide deck ready is how wild, game changing moves like this end up happening.

[–] [email protected] 37 points 3 months ago (2 children)

The democrats had to know Biden was going to drop out when they scheduled the earliest presidential debate in history.

Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 months ago (1 children)

You're talking an extraordinary amount of stupidity vs a moderate amount of planning.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

If this election can teach us anything, if you live in a bubble then you have some incredibly stupid blind spots.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Are you saying that the people running the Democratic Party live in a bubble?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 months ago

The democratic party has as many bubbles as they have geriatric candidates. A candidate manages their staff, but the staff can also manage the candidate and it creeps into elderly abuse at a certain point. Look at Diane Feinstein or RBG: two people who should have retired but their staff didn't want to loose their relative power so they filter what their boss sees. I'm sure the same is true for Trump. Biden at least has Pelosi to pull his head from his ass and showed him the real numbers his staff wasn't showing.

[–] [email protected] 26 points 3 months ago (1 children)

You are giving way to much credit to the capability of the democratic leadership.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 3 months ago (1 children)

While I’m normally inclined to agree, this presidential debate was both historic in how early it was and historic in how bad Biden performed. There is no reason to be this aggressive about scheduling unless they know he’s either going to fail epically, or succeed epically.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

The only thing historic is about how utterly convinced that people are that Biden was awful in it.

I watched the debate. He wasnt 1/100th as awful as everyone has seemingly hallucinated themselves into thinking thanks to an endless avalance of propaganda screaming "BIDEN FAILED/INCOMPETENT,HUMILIATED/ETC"

The most awful thing about the fucking debate is the moderator kept letting trump go off on rants and not correcting/stoping him. Bidens performance isnt even in the top 3.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

People are allowed to have different opinions. Yours just happens to be in the minority.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, its amazing how that happens when you focus on facts and ignore groupthink and feels.

[–] [email protected] -5 points 3 months ago

For sure, like you and I both focus on facts (even though in this case it is 100% subjective how you think he performed) and I for sure ignore groupthink and feels as well and we both have different opinions. It's ~aMaZiNg~!