1223
Trump is 78 and barely coherent. Where's everyone who questioned Biden's age and fitness?
(www.usatoday.com)
this post was submitted on 09 Sep 2024
1223 points (97.3% liked)
politics
19072 readers
3799 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.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- 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. 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.
- 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
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The majority of people who objected to Biden were Democrats that wanted a better candidate because we were afraid that Biden would lose to Trump. The majority of Republicans can't conceive of a universe where Trump ever loses an election so there hasn't been an equivalently loud push on the GOP side.
Also, while I'd personally rather Trump be off the ballot entirely a fair chunk of democratic voters seem to think we're better off with Trump on the GOP ballot than someone who is younger and may be better able to seem less openly deplorable. I disagree with that notion and also think Trump should step down because any chance that he wins the election is too high of a chance.
Basically, this article is drawing an equivalence between two very different situations.
I REALLY would hate to see a Harris v Haley election.
Harris would have it in the bag. Haley is a true believer in pro-life policies in a way that would really turn off independents. Haley is an absolutely awful national candidate and can only really thrive in regions where Christianity has a death grip on the electorate.
Trump's agnosticism is actually one of his political strengths - it should be a weakness with his base but for some reason he's viewed as the second coming of jesus fucking christ and I really don't understand how the fuck those delusional religious folks managed to square that in their mind. Especially when it was Biden vs. Trump with Biden being a deeply religious and non-shitty Catholic.
The GOP is seriously unhinged right now... and every GOP politician who has called that out has been instantly destroyed... that's actually another contrast of this article - Pelosi openly and really fucking brazenly called for Biden to step down, Johnson, Scalise... fucking McCarthy? Those clowns would never dare because unless they act as a group it's political suicide.
That's the neat part, they don't. Cognitive dissonance is one helluva drug
Cognitive dissonance causes internal suffering when trying to reconcile two irreconcilable facts or beliefs. You're suffering dissonance trying to get your head around Trump = Jesus. They are not suffering.
(For the record, Trump can represent God because he is an "imperfect vessel", and that's OK because all have fallen short of the glory of God, sinners casting stones, etc.. Besides, didn't Jesus teach forgiveness? Don't try to understand this either, just don't, or more dissonance for you!)
Well, I'm not an expert, but I don't think they don't experience it so much as their religion has trained them to rationalize it away quickly. I feel like this meme template sort of reflects this, and I think the anger you'd get from bringing the contradiction to light is primarily it
I suppose that means my original post was phrased incorrectly regardless
The meme is incomplete. Instead of the fourth panel with the realization, you open up a new meme with a different objection. And it repeats, over and over.
I like how you think. The fourth panel should be a fractal repetition of the whole meme
Religion and hypocrisy go together like peanut butter and chocolate.
They don't see Trump as the second coming of Christ, they see him as more like another King Cyrus. It's the idea that a ruler or other major figurehead can be a "vessel for God" benefiting the believers of a particular religion while not actually being a part of said religion or conforming to its morals.
Vox article on this, for example
Would the main MAGA group shift to support her? I don't think you can just switch out cult leaders like that. How would she do with policy vs. Harris? What would be fascinating is having a race where someone is going to be the first woman President, regardless, so that is removed from the reasons for voting for them - which it shouldn't be...I want someone who can be a leader, period. And for what it's worth, Trump could have been a leader (not a great one, but one still), he got a few chances during his term, even soft ball ones. And he failed them all.
The Republicans are completely fucked without Trump and they know it. There is simply no other candidate that has any traction with their base let alone is able to galvanise it. This election is all about bringing out the vote and Trump is the only one who has a shot at that on the right.
Someone get Romney on the phone - Mitt, it's your time to shine! /s
Ironically somebody probably had that idea while paging binders full of pre-Trump popular Republicans
Ah yes the man who thinks that the trees in Michigan are the right height.
Nikki Haley couldn't win the GOP primary for the same reason Kamala Harris couldn't win the Dem Primary. They've got these very fancy resumes built up through a lifetime of insider political brown-nosing and horse trading. But they were still trapped under the glass ceiling, by organizers and mega-donors that don't respect women.
Hilary - for all her flaws - did "crack the glass ceiling" by hitting a critical mass of insider support that women, up until this point, hadn't enjoyed. That won Harris a place on Biden's ticket four years later as a kind-of concession to the PUMAs. But Haley was never going to manage it, because the racism and misogyny in her party is that much thicker. There is no large active feminist wing of the Republican Party.
I don't think the GOP is realistically going to be able to put up a woman candidate unless the base of the party is drastically altered. Democrat insiders tolerate women, begrudgingly. Republicans hate them at a biblical level.
I also love the implication that it somehow wouldn't be a massive waste of time for Democrats to go tell Trump he's too old to run. Like how worthless is your time if you're gonna spend it barking up the worlds dumbest tree. If I wanted to be ignored, I'd at least ask for something like no longer selling weapons to nations credibly accused of genocide.
I want Trump off the ballot (and planet) but I do think that another GOP candidate would have been much more likely to win.*
Public opinion on the current administration and the economy is negative to the point that one would expect the incumbent party to be facing an extremely uphill battle. But Trump is even more unpopular, brings a ton of baggage, energizes his opposition and alienates his allies by threatening democracy and the rule of law, says crazy nonsense that drives away independent voters instead of focusing on issues, and sabotages his own campaign through mismanagement.
* Of course, that would only have happened if Trump hadn't run, since he would almost certainly have caused chaos and infighting if someone beat him in the primaries.
Best case scenario the felon loses and spends the next 4 years finding out.