564
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

With the 2024 presidential race beginning to unfold, Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont said he believes that President Joe Biden will again earn the Democratic nomination — and the president likely win reelection if he runs on a strong progressive campaign.

"I think at this moment ... we have got to bring the progressive community together to say, you know what, we're going to fight for a progressive agenda but we cannot have four more years of Donald Trump in the White House," Sanders said Sunday on "Face the Nation."

Sanders endorsed Mr. Biden in April. Sanders referenced several of those issues in underscoring what he believes is the importance of building "a strong progressive agenda" to win the presidency in 2024.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] CMahaff@lemmy.world 64 points 1 year ago

Look, I'd love for that to be true, but it just isn't. Biden will win by being a boring centrist, because that's who he is and that's who will win a general election (generally speaking).

With the GOP going completely off the rails the easiest path to victory is to simply go middle of the road and pick up all those independents/centrists and conservatives with brains. Progressives will vote Biden regardless because Trump (or any Trump wannabe) is too terrifying of a reality.

This country has never shown it has some giant progressive silent majority - Bernie would know, he bet and lost on that materializing in his own presidential runs.

I don't see Democrats running hard on progressive policies until either the GOP starts running moderates again (forcing Democrats to pickup votes elsewhere) or young people prove they can be a force at the ballot box.

All this is not to shit on what Biden has achieved, because he has done things for progressives, but I don't see him suddenly switching to anything resembling a "strong progressive agenda" because it will just give his GOP opponent ammo to claim "see he's radical too". Biden will be the most boring, normal politician he can, while highlighting how bad things will get if his extreme opponent gets into office, and that's probably the smartest thing to do.

[-] MonkCanatella@sh.itjust.works 47 points 1 year ago

This country has never shown it has some giant progressive silent majority - Bernie would know, he bet and lost on that materializing in his own presidential runs.

nonsense. The dems pulled the dirtiest tricks to kneecap bernie - including ALL of them dropping out on super Tuesday. They battled bernie harder than they fucking did trump. Don't spread garbage like this

[-] spider@lemmy.nz 14 points 1 year ago

The dems pulled the dirtiest tricks to kneecap bernie

This was, of course, documented in the Wikileaks e-mails, whose contents were largely ignored by the mainstream media.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (38 replies)
[-] minnow@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago

because it will just give his GOP opponent ammo to claim "see he's radical too".

But they already do that, so why care?

[-] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

I voted for Biden in hopes that

  1. The clown show would be over

  2. We would get one nice progressive win.

He gave me half of what I wanted. So I guess partial victory.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 64 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

But he's not all that progressive. He never has been. In a sane country, he'd be a middle-of-the-road Republican. There is no progressive left in this country. Not with any real power.

[-] HWK_290@lemmy.world 73 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I keep seeing this but I'm not sure what you all want ..

  • biggest investment in climate infrastructure ever
  • biggest investment in infrastructure since the new deal
  • codified gay marriage into law
  • attempted to forgive $10k in student loan (blocked by republican scotus, still attempting a workaround on interest at least)
  • attempted ban on assault weapons (let's face it, this will never happen without an act of congress)
  • negotiated drug prices for Medicare (10 drugs so far, a blueprint for more)

Dude is ticking a ton of boxes. Sure we're not living in a socialist utopia with universal basic income, etc but it's been 3 years

Edit: with a republican congress no less

[-] admiralteal@kbin.social 38 points 1 year ago

They don't like Joe Biden because he doesn't pick losing fights on principle, in general, and because they don't want to admit that the primary process on the left actually does select for the strongest candidates.

I get it. I feel the same way at least emotionally. But $1.3 trillion dollars towards climate change and what is almost certainly the most important climate bill ever passed in the world so far is really hard to argue with.

I would like him to stand up and advocate for court reform. We need to strike while the iron is hot and people are seeing the Supreme Court for the corrupt political institution it always has been. He's backed down with very little fight on a couple of the things they've pulled lately when the Trump Administration would have just kept hammering on passing the exact same laws with tiny changes until they accept it. For example, the opinion on that student loan relief case made this incredibly idiotic argument about how the HEROES Act doesn't give permission for partial waivers because it only allows a modification or a full waiver and the partial waiver apparently doesn't count as either of those. I think you should have just come back and said well all right then, full waiver and total jubilee. That probably would also have been struck down but it would have really shown how vapid and hypocritical the court was.

The word neoliberal has basically lost most meaning. But everything they accuse Joe Biden of being are things that describe Joe Manchin. The guy who singularly keeps killing Progressive legislation put forward by the Biden administration.

load more comments (14 replies)
[-] Bonskreeskreeskree@lemmy.world 18 points 1 year ago

He's also yet to declassify weed even though he carrot on a sticked it leading into the general and then again before primaries. He could do it any time and has not.

[-] Boddhisatva@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

If Biden were to make any such change to Marijuana scheduling by executive order, the next president would just undo it the same way. Worse still, the GOP would use such a move as a talking point that Biden is soft on crime and trying to get their kids on drugs, which the GOP base would eat up.

In fact, though, the Biden administration actually is making progress on this front. Some time ago, they requested that U.S. Department of Health and Human Services study whether or not Marijuana should be rescheduled. Just a few days ago, HHS sent their recommendation to the DEA to reschedule marijuana from a Schedule I drug to a Schedule III drug. The DEA has sole authority on drug scheduling.

“While HHS’s scientific and medical evaluation is binding on DEA, the scheduling recommendation is not,” the HHS spokesperson said. “DEA has the final authority to schedule a drug under the CSA (or transfer a controlled substance between schedules or remove such a drug from scheduling altogether) after considering the relevant statutory and regulatory criteria and HHS’ scientific and medical evaluation. DEA goes through a rulemaking process to schedule, reschedule or deschedule the drug, which includes a period for public comment before DEA finalizes the scheduling action with a final rulemaking.”

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] toxicbubble@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] purahna@lemmygrad.ml 8 points 1 year ago

this just hurts to read friend, please, want better for yourself. We deserve more. Don't settle for the pathetic Biden offering, you and I deserve so much more than these crumbs.

[-] HWK_290@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

Ok, I agree, we do!

I'm curious... Can you sketch a realistic road map for me where we exist in 2023 with more than crumbs? I'm genuinely interested

The future is wide open but I'd say we're doing the best we can possibly hope for given the last 8 years.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[-] purahna@lemmygrad.ml 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

these are the lowest fucking bars imaginable

try the following:

  • enough climate infrastructure to at least stave off apocalypse
  • enough infrastructure to keep people from sleeping on the streets in the richest nation on earth
  • codifying gay marriage?? that's where you want the bar? maybe try codifying trans rights, that one isn't a political softball for free. It's not even true either, states don't have to issue marriage licenses if they don't want to
  • "attempted" lmao really? he pretended to around midterms to stir up votes and then let it flop. he was never going to.
  • attempted a ban on assault weapons? Again, if he cared, he'd executive order it
  • how about we don't make people pay a corporation to not die

in regards to ticking boxes, if someone ticks every single box I've outlined here, I'll think about calling them a centrist instead of a rightist

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago

There are certain facets to consider here. The nuance I would add is that if he campaigns as a progressive, that will be a more winning platform but they will still just be campaign promises.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] HerbalGamer@lemm.ee 7 points 1 year ago

Pretty sure he lines up well with the neoliberal side of most European parties, which is on the right.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] TrueStoryBob@lemmy.world 58 points 1 year ago

The infra bill was a huge shot in the arm and, based on the ads I'm seeing, he's going to run on its passing... that bill is beyond amazing, but they should have gone harder. While the ~$1.6 trillion is an eye watering amount of money, ~$4-6 trillion is what was originally asked for and what is needed. Hopefully he'll run on a Build Back Better: Part Deux. Also his appointees to the NLRB have been super progressive and aggressive, the return to Joy Silk will give the reinvigorated labor movement serious steam, but he also busted the RR workers ability to strike and he seriously shouldn't have done that. Overall, I'm not mad at the Biden WH on domestic issues... but more is needed and he should have let the RR workers strike. Like, the economy be damned, call the hedge fund's bet and end the Reagan era union busting.

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] stormtrooper@sopuli.xyz 29 points 1 year ago

He had better. Nothing worse than an incumbent democrat losing to fascists.

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] archchan@lemmy.ml 25 points 1 year ago

No more please can we just get normal human beings as presidential candidates and not whatever the fuck this has been?

[-] SuiXi3D@kbin.social 13 points 1 year ago

They don’t exist. Not in politics, at least. All we get are crooks and 80 year olds.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] zerkrazus@lemmy.world 23 points 1 year ago

Yeah...no. Enough of the fucking 70+ year olds. I'm so fucking tired of people who should be fucking retired owning and running everything. Fuck the mother fucking hell off fossils. God damn it. Enough with the fucking retirement home bullshit. Holy fucking hell.

load more comments (10 replies)
[-] Zoldyck@discuss.online 22 points 1 year ago

Stop putting old farts in leading roles.

[-] shapis@lemmy.ml 18 points 1 year ago

I'm 35 and I already feel a little out of touch tbh. It's insane people in their 80s being in positions of power is so normalized.

[-] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

To old to be on a jury but not too old to make the law.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] nucleative@lemmy.world 19 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

After the last guy the country just needed a guy who mostly plays but the rules, as unwritten as they are. Understands the system. Makes the country look like its head is connected to the neck. Generally speaks diplomatically. Doesn't have too many ideas that are way outside center. Looks after the little guy sometimes. Hires advisors who have a clue.

We got that guy. That's a good thing.

Now we need a newer, younger person with vision. Somebody who can help rebuild an American dream. Somebody who will be alive to see their dream come true. Somebody who can get everyone excited about figuring out what it means to be an American. Somebody who can set aggressive goals and make the case for why we should pursue them, and get the ball rolling. Somebody who shows the average American that their life specifically can be better tomorrow than it is today.

Regrettably that person will still struggle to defeat the ancient skeleton incumbents.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Hairyblue@kbin.social 12 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Biden is too old to run. And Trump is a liar, criminal, un-American, and working to get rid of our democracy, AND is too OLD. But it looks like I will be voting for Biden again. And he has done some good things while in office.

So, I hope that Biden will have a moment of clarity about the needs of the middle class and poor people of the US. And he'll want to die of old age with history saying he was very helpful in fighting for policies to help us.

Maybe. But I do know Republicans don't believe in our democracy and they don't want young people voting. They want to rule us with religion even though they are a small part of your nation.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Thursday@lemm.ee 11 points 1 year ago

Biden? a progressive? yea right.

load more comments (7 replies)
[-] JTode@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

Hey everyone, go outside and find some grass and take your shoes off and put your feet in it. Stand there for a minute or two and just feel the grass on your feet. Have fun!

[-] Metal_Zealot@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Maybe the US should create a "Geriatric Party", where all these senile diaper wearers are put in a home.

Voting for a guy who has at MOST 5 years to live is not good foresight, regardless of what political party you rally behind.

[-] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 14 points 1 year ago

Any human being of any age is better than a Republican fascist.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 04 Sep 2023
564 points (95.9% liked)

politics

19097 readers
4579 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