178
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 11 Aug 2024
178 points (97.3% liked)
politics
19090 readers
4178 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
I'm okay with it. It's really caught the Republicans and particularly Trump off-guard, especially since he locked in Vance in what turned out to be a too-early decision specifically because Biden waited until after the Republican convention to announce.
He's a good man and he's been such an incredibly effective President and politician. I think his main failing - and it's very much part of the way that he actually gets things done - is that they have all these successes but they never trumpet them through the media. He's gotten a lot done, but no one knows about it.
He's a product of a biased system. He was elected to the Senate in '72, over 50 years ago, and spent 36 years there. That long, during that time in a highly business-heavy state, would probably have been untenable for anything left of liberal. I'm not optimistic that anyone trying to be an effective politician in those circumstances for so long could have been much more progressive.
Considering all that, he got a lot of good done. But like you say, it's easy for the media to focus on the things that generate outrage. He wasn't a saint by any measure, but he was a decent compromise at a time when the Democrats were scared of losing the moderate votes. Him being nominated for re-election is probably a product of the political inertia that sitting and eligible presidents are rarely swapped out instead of being put up for re-election (actually, is there any precedent at all?)
Walz, by contrast, was in the House for twelve years, then governor for another five. That's a third of Biden's time in Congress, and much later too. I think it's much more realistic for someone in his position to be and stay progressive, and I hope he helps pull the Overton Window to the left. I hope this election shows that there is a platform for progress, that Biden was an emergency measure for damage control and that handing the baton over to Harris and Walz was a step in the right direction.
Of course, that hinges on Harris also driving a more progressive line than Biden did, instead of resigning to another term of mediocrity. She seems to signal as much, but whether that will be followed up with deeds remains to be seen.