Given the current state of partisan polarization, it’s unlikely Biden can get majority job approval next year even with the most fortunate set of circumstances. But the good news for him is that he probably doesn’t have to. Job-approval ratings are crucial indicators in a normal presidential reelection cycle that is basically a referendum on the incumbent’s record. Assuming Trump is the Republican nominee, 2024 will not be a normal reelection cycle for three reasons.
Don’t take it for granted. Hilary lost because of this. Get out and vote.
Hillary lost because she couldn’t read the writing on the wall and told everyone she deserved to win because it was her time. She was the worst person on the planet to go against Trump. The GOP spent 30 years demonizing her and she played right into their hands. Biden should have been the candidate then but that is hindsight.
And even with all of her mistakes and her total lack of charisma, she still only lost because of an archaic system that lets the winner of the popular vote lose.
It’s not like this system was sprung on her at the last second. She didn’t take it into account. She pretty much ignored key swing states that wound up going to Trump.
She was carried in a palanquin across the finish line in the primaries and didn’t understand that she had to run the rest of the way.
You are not wrong.
This is like saying basketball is archaic because it lets the team with the most hoops lose.
If we were deciding our leadership based on basketball games, I’d sure as shit say it was archaic.
Biden had just lost his son and didn’t want the job. He later said he regretted that decision.
The entire nation regrets that decision.
deleted by creator
She absolutely was. And with the pied piper strategy, she basically said who she thought the worst candidate was in the opposition’s field, then lost to him.
deleted by creator
Yeah, that electoral college really snuck up on her. Just popped out of the blue in 1789, giving her no time to prepare.
EDIT: Ok., that was harsh. I should go easy on her. After all, she just lost her dear friend Henry Kissinger.
biden would have easily won, being the outgoing vp of a well-liked (by most) two-term president. him not running in 2016 is, i think, ultimately what enabled the hateful, incoherent, diaper-wearing, buffoon to even have a chance–which was only enhanced by the dnc playing favorites and essentially handing the nomination to clinton.
i get the ‘why’ he didn’t run; but man, it sure fucked-up this country (and beyond).
Nope.
What gave trump a chance was Hillary boosting him because she thought she had a chance against him, but no chance against even Jeb Bush.
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/11/hillary-clinton-2016-donald-trump-214428/
Also, the structure of the Republican primary meant that the person with a plurality of votes got all the delegates. And because there was such a split field and Trump was a celebrity, he got a lead in delegates which gave him more press.
if biden ran in 2016, clinton would have been a non-factor.
Then why did Clinton feel her team had to boost him?
Do you know more than her campaign team?
I totally agree.
That year was probably when we would’ve gotten “peak” or near-peak Biden, but that was around the time when his other son Beau Biden had died, which I thought was the reason he sat out the Primaries, which might’ve made them a bit more interesting, but would’ve had the same effect of shutting Sanders out. The way I remembered it, Biden essentially saved the 2012 Obama campaign against Romney, as Obama had been having a shitty campaign and debate performance up until Biden went up against Paul Ryan and dominated. After that debate, things seemed to turn around and I thought he was a shoe-in for 2016.
If your state has mail-in voting, just use that. I like to vote while not wearing pants.
Pics or didn’t happen
I’m not giving this sweet ass away for free
Do you take expired Reddit gold?
Asking for a friend.
Moderates are really really motivated to only be just slightly better than Republicans.
They want to be as corporation/billionaire friendly as possible, so they get as many donations as possible.
It’s why Hillary spent money, time, and effort boosting trump and Ben Carson in 2016. There wasn’t much difference between her and Jeb Bush, so she didn’t think she had a chance at beating him.
The obvious risk was Hillary was/is a horrible candidate and might not have even been able to win against them, which she wasn’t.
It’s like if the pitcher in a MLB game bet for his team to win, but by less than the spread. He still wants to win, but he keeps throwing softballs over the plate if he starts to win too much.
But that’s just a game, this is literally playing with people’s lives.
Welcome to US politics.
From what I’ve heard and seen, a lot of younger voters are disillusioned by the Democrats’ stance on genocide. I’ve heard the comment many are repeating that they are single issue voters when the issue is genocide.
From what I’ve heard and seen, there’s a massive astroturfing effort to discredit Biden over the actions of an allied nation. It’s as if a massive propaganda machine is at work that completely ignores the fact that Republicans would have an even worse stance than Biden on this issue.
Charles Manson would make a better US president than Hitler…
Doesn’t mean people are going to get hype to go vote for Charles Manson.
And telling people those are the only options will depress turnout.
And when turnout is depressed, republicans win.
So how about we try running someone who actually cares about genocide and will at least stop trying to get the perpetrators even more money while telling their own citizens we’re the only first world country that can’t afford universal healthcare?
Like, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to understand that would get more votes.
But the people running the Dem party aren’t going to just turn down those AIPAC kickbacks if they can get away with “at least we’re not republicans, so shut up and vote for another genocide supporter”.
They’ll always aim for “barely better than a Republican”. So let’s fucking replace them with people willing to do more than the absolute bare minimum
There are absolutely very important reasons to still vote for Biden, but you can’t rely on millions of people to all do the right thing just because it’s logical. The person who’s running for office ultimately has the responsibility to ensure people want to vote for them. It’s just not really useful to blame millions of people when you know that there are statistically for sure going to be disaffected people out of those who need to be motivated. It doesn’t even matter whether most voters who would vote for Biden turn out to vote for him - they almost certainly will - because this fight is at the margins, and to win, you have to capture the irresponsible and unreliable people too.
The “but it could be much worse” argument doesn’t carry much weight for many people on this issue.
Has anyone tried explaining that if you allow in the people literally trying to take their rights away, they won’t get another chance to vote in a politician against genocide?
Like the genocide is awful but it shouldn’t make people forget they have very close to home issues currently happening right now.
I hear that excuse every single election and have always found it lacking.
If we always have to wait until after the next election to demand better of the Democrats then we’ll never see any change. “Lesser evilism” will only allow the Democrats to continue sliding the overton window to the right.
Even if you’re already planning to vote a straight Democrat ticket, don’t tell them that. Make them think you’re a swing voter they need to pander to.
How are you hearing it every single election? The main issues didn’t start popping up (or at least blatantly enough to change voter turnout) until the 2016 election.
Like that’s not nearly enough elections in between to hear the excuse every election.
He’s only seen 2 that he remembers.
With my ears, of course. Trump isn’t the only threat to the Democrat party, just the most recent one.
I don’t particularly care about the democratic party threat, I care about the uptick in voting issues, the supreme court, and…you know…that the opposing party is trying to vote in someone who attempted to not give up the office
So you know, the recent ones that a lot of people started voting in about.
If you truly believe that’s nothing new, i’ll just consider you to be part of that astroturfing described above and ask you to stop wasting my time. Seriously…
These tired ass arguments will no longer work for the younger generation.
Thank god
Which is still an ignorant take, because we’ve only got two realistic options. Bad and worse.
Any complaints otherwise are ignorant at best, if not maliciously deceptive.
The solution isn’t “shut up and be grateful we’re not worse”. It’s actually running someone that’s good.
We’ve tried the “shut up you don’t have a choice” strategy and that just keeps ending up with republicans in office.
Why not just run good candidates that want to help America if they get in office?
You push the Democratic Party candidate to the left. Supporting Republicans (which is what you’re doing if you don’t vote for Joe Biden, full stop) isn’t going to help anyone and won’t get you better candidates in the future. It will literally have the opposite effect. There’s a great batch of possible candidates for 2028 (Witmer, Shapiro, Newsome, etc). Sure I’d prefer them over Biden for 2024 but they’re not running.
Because that doesn’t make nearly as much
moneydonations as “Look at how awful the Republicans are.”If the D’s ran a real candidate that actually cared about the country, they’d get blasted in fund raising…People like Booker would go broke overnight if we got universal healthcare. Pelosi would lose her ass if we outlawed congressional trading.
We’re fucked…irrevocably completely and utterly fucked.
Not really, Bernie and even trump made enough off “small” donations to run effective campaigns.
The difference is small donations from voters don’t come with all the perks and kickbacks as the same amount from a single PAC/billionaire/organization.
And as long as the bare minimum is having a D next to your name, grifters are going to run with the D, and get those huge donations because the people making them expect a return.
So yeah…
Those are two great examples of politicians that need to be replaced, and why our standards need to be more than a single letter.
While implying that Trump, a literal white nationalist authoritarian fascist, somehow doesn’t support the genocide of brown people
A lot of people are clueless that Trump is going to be the GOP candidate.
The issue with that is that Republicans hold an even worse position on genocide in multiple ways and would have been gunning for not only Israel killing all Palestinians, but ejecting all Muslims from the US as well. Which they will also totally do if they win the election.
Two fascist parties?
Time to stay home on election day. I refuse to be complicit in the crimes of the State.
If the Democrats want my vote, they can start pandering to me instead of AIPAC.