• maniii@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      52
      arrow-down
      17
      ·
      3 months ago

      You see it. I see it. Jon Stewart sees it since forever.

      The shills on Lemmy and other places like gaslighting. A lot.

      • Monument@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        31
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Honestly, I hate the situation, but I haven’t heard any compelling arguments for alternatives.

        By compelling, I don’t mean appealing. I’d love for any number of other candidates to just swap in. But because the U.S. got “Weekend at Bernie’d”, and primaries were held (with no realistic opposition candidates), or cancelled in the case of Florida and Delaware, and the dates for holding a primary have passed in every state, I just… don’t see how another candidate can be swapped in.*

        And I know that John Stewart specifically called out other nations who were able to call entire elections within a few months, but the U.S. electoral system just doesn’t ‘do’ that. The focus on states rights means that every state has its own laws that are fairly rigid and cannot be overridden by the federal government. And even if the states could be overridden - well, I guess I don’t know if it’s possible for the federal government to do that.
        I don’t believe I’ve ever heard of that suggestion as being even a remote possibility. I’m left with the belief that it is not legally permissible.

        In fact - the Heritage Foundation said they would mount legal challenges to prevent this from occurring - but only in certain states. It’s very likely those challenges could not be resolved before the election, which would lead to at least two Democratic Party candidates, and certain defeat for both of them. The only way that Biden could drop out is if the states that have laws prohibiting candidate changes repeal or modify them, and that itself might be the subject of lawsuits.

        *The only way I see for Biden to drop out and not ensure certain defeat is to die. That’s the only path I can think of that’s workable.

        If I truly believe that Trump will end democracy and I must do everything I can to prevent his election - even if it compromises my better judgment and morals, and I know that Biden will not use the powers he was just granted to ensure that Trump is brought to justice before he can assume dictatorial powers, then… well, what’s the option but to be a shill? That’s not a rhetorical question. I legitimately feel trapped and hopeless by this shitty system, and I cannot see a way out.
        I feel like I’m damned if I do, and damned if I don’t.

        • Thunderbird4@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          Well said.

          I get Jon Stewart’s position and agree with nearly all of his criticisms, but I think the biggest thing he’s not acknowledging in his “why can France and the UK do this but we can’t?” argument is that this would absolutely not be confined to just the Democratic Party. Literally every step of the process would be decried as election fraud, cheating, “the steal of the century” etc. by republicans. If they got pissed enough to attempt an insurrection in 2020 when there was absolutely no credible evidence of fraud, just think where things will go if there’s this whole slew of unprecedented last-minute decisions that are nearly impossible to reconcile with every individual states’ laws. I’m not saying we have to bow to repubs demands, but the more excuses they have to claim anything isn’t above board, the greater the risk that the “stolen election” narrative gains traction beyond the far right.

          We’ve spent the last 4 years witnessing how slowly our legal system works on huge matters like this. By the time the dust settles on all of the legal challenges, the resulting chaos will have already rendered the decisions nearly irrelevant.

          • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            They have zero say in Democratic party policies and decisions. You guys are so conditioned to think Republicans are unstoppable political juggernauts you proactively give them power to define your actions. It doesn’t matter if they claim it’s a fraud, it’s not their party and the Democratic voters most distrustful of the Democratic party don’t like Biden in the first place.

            Some states have laws about electors voting for the candidate they were elected to represent, but they can be released from that requirement by the candidate. Some have voting round limits, which can just be bypassed with perfunctory votes without a majority. And if there are some laws that can’t be bypassed, they can just officially vote for Joe Biden while expressing their actual preference publicly. The party can very easily work around the state laws to achieve an equivalent result.

      • Jesus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        3 months ago

        IMHO, calling people shills is just going to make people defensive and not listen to reasonable arguments.

      • Soulg@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        3 months ago

        Yes yes the people on lemmy who disagree with you are the real powers behind the decision on whether he drops out or not

      • SuperCub@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        I have a feeling the DNC shills we’ve been seeing so much of are actually part of a DNC campaign. Creating a Lemmy account is free and they could easily contract a company to astroturf as has been done in the past.

    • Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Biden’s chances of winning are something like 95%. The most accurate and seasoned model for predicting the election has him winning (it’s a boolean) and it was only wrong once, which was when Bush got a controversial ruling in his favor by the Supreme Court, which knocks its accuracy down to ~95% instead of 100%.

      Also consider: Trump already lost to Biden, Trump’s popularity has contracted since then, 538 puts Biden 2% above where he was before the debate, all of the polls that put Biden and Trump neck-and-neck also show 18-25 YOs overwhelmingly voting for Trump, Dems win with higher voter turnout, the recent controversy with the Supreme Court is looking to drive people to the polls in record numbers, and people are currently looking up “Project 2025” more than Taylor Swift and the NFL combined (it’s probably going to be searched more than Taylor Swift at her peak, if you look at the growth curve).

      So why, exactly, are you making this claim? 🤨

      Edit: y’all’re doomers who hate facts.

        • Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          You’re criticizing me for not having a source when you didn’t even put forth an argument. You just said a thing you assumed was true without anything backing it up. Also, almost everything I stated was a well-known fact.

          • cabron_offsets@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 months ago

            It’s on you to produce this mysterious model, not on me to believe in bullshit over empirical observation. Kindly fuck off.