This is comparable to a loud family feud carried out on the streets with yelling and throwing stuff at one another and then yelling at the shocked onlookers to move away.
We’re the family that gets kicked out of the Applebee’s for having a very loud and emotional fight while some other family is trying to celebrate their kid’s 8th birthday
Yeah no. Your choice has global impact. Sadly enough.
I mean, I follow the presidental race somewhat because it has global impact, but watching the debates is not worth my time, and I’m fairly certain it’s not worth anyone’s time, especially non-americans.
I came here to skip the debate and catch up with the jokes. But seems like the joke is the debate itself
Plus it’s unlikely to change anyone’s mind. At this point you’re either pro or anti Trump and you’ve had at least eight years to pick your side.
That whole attitude of picking sides is what got us in this mess to begin with
… Picking a side is literally what an election is.
It’s what modern elections are, and maybe even all historical elections, though I’m not old enough to determine that. What elections should be is throwing your support behind someone that you think is going to be beneficial for everyone. I know that is idealistic, and unfortunately the current system makes that basically impossible, but Washington said that partisan politics would be the downfall of this country, and his words are playing out in front of us. I really wish we would throw the parties, and lobbyists, out and force candidates to run on policy and merit.
See, you’re talking partisan politics, I’m talking “you literally have to pick someone”. We’ve had these candidates before. You already know which one you’re going to vote for. You picked your side four years ago when you were asked the same question.
Beyond that though, there’s “parties” and then theirs “sides”. One side is xenophobic, homophobic and actively wishes harm on a lot of people. The other side doesn’t, for all their flaws.
There are more parties than there are sides in the past few elections.By saying you think you should vote for someone who will be good for everyone, you’ve picked a side. The side that doesn’t want to do good for only the “right” people, or make sure only the “right” people get hurt.
The only question is if you’ll vote for that side to win, or if you’ll let idealism or anger drive you to vote otherwise.I shall, once again, for the 6th time in my life, hold my nose and vote for the milquetoast candidate the DNC has foisted on us. I wish we had RCV so I could vote for someone good, like Bernie, or heck I’d almost take Vermin Supreme at this point.
A side as opposed to either side is how it should be. But don’t take my word for it, George Washington allegedly warned us of the potential perils of a two-party system on his deathbed but I’m unsure if that is common myth or actually true
George Washington eschewed political parties because he didn’t want to establish a precedent where his choice as first president set the standard everyone else had to conform to, and there’s a little irony in people holding him up as an example in that light more than 200 years later.
He, and the other founders largely, disliked political parties in their entirety, not just having some specific number of them.
They also built the system that enshrined the two party dichotomy as the only option, actively sought to ensure that the “right” people could override the will of the people if needed, and founded the parties they had previously argued against.
They are far from infallible bastions of correctness in this matter.
Yeah crazy that people have to pick the fascist or not fascist side haha
They’re both fascists.
They’re both right wing, but moderate right wing bought by corporate interests isn’t the same as fascist. It’s trending towards fascism, sure, but it’s less likely to go on a killing spree.
bOth ARe tHe sAMe!!!
They are, if you’re older than 11
You have no idea what fascism means. Stop making yourself look dumb.
It’s obviously a common vernacular simplification from authoritarian with a broad definition. This is a commonplace and accepted vernacular in most modern western media based social media outlets.
Fascist can be liberal, they can also be conservative. Or communist. Or almost anything. More often fascists will lie and say they are more socialist than many of their policies would lead you to reasonably expect.
Grown ups are talking. Go play outside. You obviously need to touch grass, child.
It’s 50% a desire to stay informed and 50% sports entertainment
Independent party exist, we need to wake up and vote for one great candidate that is not either of the two they present to US
It’s best to start doing that in county and state elections first.
I found your ballot box:
This way of thinking is how we end up watching this shitshow debate
Unfortunately, that isn’t feasible in the current system. In first past the post every vote is damage control at best.
We need ranked choice voting everywhere before people will even consider a third party.
Nope, you can’t stand there for generations going “LOOK AT ME! LOOK AT ME!” Then get shitty when we do, we want to watch you drive that burning bus into the the ocean.
We’re literally the family with the drunk uncle who’s really fun at parties but now the alcoholism has caught up and he just gets sad and angry when he gets drunk.
We’re Amy Winehouse/Lindsay Lohan/Britney Spears. We love(d) the limelight, but it’s not so great when we’re spiraling downward.
Elvis Presley. We’re currently in the fat Vegas years. We should probably stay away from submarine sandwiches, and bathtubs.
what is americas death on the toilet going to be?
An absolute shitshow
It’s just a face, and doesn’t usually represent the people.
Prez has little power when compared to most world leaders. Their lead is more of a cultural one.
So to say, it’s really not so violently serious
I wish Prez had been real, and not just a Sandman president.
Yea, sorry, no. You Americans cannot be trusted with something so important.
Biden was horrible, he is old, he should retire. (Saying this as an outsider) I have not much knowledge of US politics, just saw debate because it was viral
ZzzzzzzzzzzZzzzzzzzzzZzzzzzzzz I skibdi with um COVID dealing with uh everything hmmm we had to uh deal with uh OOOooorere if we finally beat Medicare
We are so fucked if this is Joe’s new demeanor. My god, the orange bafoon handled it so much better…fuck
My god, the orange bafoon handled it so much better
Yeah, if you completely ignore anything that came out of his mouth. His sentences very maybe more coherent, but the content was certainly awful.
Trump’s still in control of his (meager) faculties and that’s the issue. They’re going to have to put someone else in against Trump or admit that the past few years have been Weekend at Biden’s
I’ll just leave this here… :’-)
Well if you care so much how come you’re not doing anything about it?? We all know what happens when America cares about someone else’s elections…
And there’s quite a few missing!
The one on Greenland, for example
And the surveillance station in the middle of Australia (pine gap)
if we are talking about surveillance theres the internet surveillance apparatus too.
That BoyBoy video is so funny
What? there’s nothing important in Pine Gap.
nice try DoD
Yeah I heard Australia has some issues with gaps between pine trees, a certain boyboy told me ;)
That’s what they want you to think
Even the Pentagon doesn’t know where they are!
Add to this one another map of past CIA-backed coups and despair.
Honestly that’s something I never learned about until I was like, 23, 24. Still know bugger all about it and that’s fucked. Do you know any good resources where I can learn about this stuff?
Wilson, and to a lesser extent Monroe are the presidents that caused those, with Wilsonian Military Doctrine, and The Monroe Doctrine, specifically so perhaps start there.
For a fun and light read I’d start with Wikipedia entry on the attempts on the life of Fidel Castro.
For chronological read I’d start with Iran then Latin America, Wikipedia as well. Don’t skip the chapter where they associated themselves with drug lords that sent drugs to US as a way to finance anti communist operations in Central America. I think that was Nicaragua.
There’s a Wikipedia article on US interventions but it misses some afaik.
You could start by reading about the School of the Americas, Operation Condor and Operation Gladio. See how the USA treats its “friends”.
Read about cointelpro and see how it treats its citizens. Some tactics are still in use today.
As part of the CUSMA trade agreement, I think us Canadians and Mexicans are allotted one sigh of disappointment…
Como parte del acuerdo comercial T-MEC, creo que a los canadienses y los mexicanos se nos permite un solo suspiro de decepción…
Mexicans should absolutely be keeping an eye on American politics. Especially since half the debate was: Sir please explain how much you hate Mexicans and what you’ll do to prevent any Mexicans from entering our fair country and how you’ll remove the Mexicans problem when you’re in power.
Trump: internment camps, American Auschwitz if he can
Biden: further tighten border control and further restrict ability to obtain legal entry
It was just…. ugh. 😞
It shouldn’t come as a surprise.
We’re so fucked it’s absolutely insane.
I thought Trump had a chance before, but now… My god Biden embarrassed the shit out of himself… Fuck the goddamn DNC for condemning us by REFUSING to have primaries… Yeah it’s the tradition because usually the incumbent has a chance, but 90472828 year old Biden? Ffs…
Yes Trump is old too but it was plain as day how much more lucid trump is than biden…
Yes Trump is old too but it was plain as day how much more lucid trump is than biden…
And also an unrepentant crook and liar. Who also dreams of being a dictator and getting revenge on his “enemies”.
Yeah, this is not looking good, and I’m not impressed
Preaching to the choir, but I’m worried about the ignorant people that simply don’t know that about him. All they see is an old bumbling feeble man vs a “strong man.” :(
For sure. It’s a shame that being correct isn’t the strategy for electoral politics.
And unfortunately, the media is not informing people. I can’t believe there was no question last night about Project 2025. Just unbelievable.
Plus no fact checkers. Again, unbelievable.
Does it really count as “lucid” if you enunciate your lies, fabrications, misrecollections about… everything?
Loud and lying every second word != lucid.
For his voters, his lies and fabrications are the truth. They don’t listen to fact checking because they are conditioned to see it as fake and a goverment ploy to fool them.
True. But they were going to have the same criticism of Biden regardless.
It’s part of the reason I didn’t even watch. Looking over the polling, the debate didn’t really change anyone’s opinions on anything to any significant degree.
What the polling likely isn’t capturing is how many people will ultimately choose not to vote out of despair, and that was the real threat the whole time.
Oh, definitely. Not just possible, they weren’t even looking for that. They were entirely looking for what the debate did to preferences and opinions directly about the candidates.
I mostly brought it out as an example of the headline not capturing the whole message of how it impacted voters. Or didn’t impact, rather.
No-one is going to switch sides, but this performance may affect turnout.
I don’t think it has been long enough to have gathered enough data on that. Just watching it myself I could clearly see a low information voter seeing Trump as a more fit choice as Biden struggled to even form sentences :(
It was a goddamn travesty that there was no fact checking by the
button pushersmoderators.Everything was allowed to stand as fact. It was disgusting :(
No. He was not lucid, just loud.
I see so many people screaming that primaries should have been held, especially today.
Biden would have easily won the primaries.
He did win the primary in states that had them. There’s no if about it.
He was the only option on my primary lmao
The problem with Biden is they gave it to him because “he deserved it”. Life long politician. Vice president. That’s the only real reason the DNC handed the keys to him. It’s a fucking job promotion.
The next election cycle is going to be interesting.
The only reason I agree with this is that I was still living in the Midwest during the 2016 primary. I moved to California during August of that year. Time after time, I got told by Midwestern democrats that Bernie just wasn’t electable / was too progressive. The coasts would have primaried Biden, but flyover country would have messed it up.
Hmm…
Iowa, North Dakota, New York, and Massachusetts are the only ones that really surprise me in that grouping.
NY isn’t that keen on progressive politics outside NYC. Long Island is an extremely populated part of NY and it’s basically Trumpland and “moderates” out here, more Trump the more east you go. “Greater” NY is also pretty red aside from the larger cities. It doesn’t really surprise me that much unfortunately :(
This might be a hot take but any leadership selection where candidates are ranked in terms of how lucid they are is a bad time for all involved.
Being lucid is supposed to be a minimum requirement to even apply. But here we are.
Yeah, I mean we’re like lobsters being slow boiled.
This whole situation is mad, but it feels plausible because it’s been ratcheted up so gradually.
Can you imagine the country’s reaction if they say this 2 decades ago?
I need to shake the hands of potential presidents before I can make any judgements on who to vote for.
Hank?
Yessir, I sell propane and propane accessories. Ronald Reagan was the best president we ever had.
I will keep repeating this, Biden will be the reason Trump gets reelected. If he loves his country he needs to leave right fucking now. Democrats like him and Clinton are addicted to power. Bernie Sanders could have beaten Trump in both election but the democrats circles of power made sure to get the candidate they wanted. Old fool.
Bernie ain’t winning shit at a national level
You keep repeating it because a false dichotomy, that you must choose between a D or R, prevents you from accepting that the lesser evil is, in fact, evil. So, you’re stuck on stupid and not asking questions. This should help:
The Democrats already, quite predictably, ignored the outcome of their primary to nominate Clinton. They’re not going to do a fucking thing that doesn’t make a corporate donor money. All of Sanders proposals took from corporations to provide for humans. He never stood a chance of being nominated as a Democrat and he damned well knew it. If we give him the benefit of the doubt then his goal was education. If not, he rallied for Democrats to avoid the rise of a Labor Party during a critical time in history.
People keep saying Bernie could have won, but he didn’t beat Clinton.
Sanders and Clinton didn’t play on a level field.
Like what? Did she get votes for him thrown out?
People have been saying for years that she had an advantage and so it wasn’t fair, but those advantages seem to ignore that more people voted for her.
He was an independent running as a Democrat, and then claiming it’s unfair when the Democratic party was more aligned with the person who had always been a Democrat.
those advantages seem to ignore that more people voted for her.
How can that be ignored it is the conclusion of the argument. Those advantages meant more people voted for her.
He was an independent running as a Democrat,
Listen dear, all politicians who want to be president are independents running as Democrats/Republicans.
claiming it’s unfair when the Democratic party was more aligned with the person who had always been a Democrat.
The whole point of a primary is to determine who the democratic party is more aligned with. It is unfair to determine that in advance.
So what were the advantages? The usual one I hear listed is superdelegates, which doesn’t matter if more people voted for the winner, or that they didn’t proactively inform his campaign about funding tricks that the Clinton campaign already knew about.
Are you saying that Clinton was an independent who just happened to align with the party for her entire political career?
I’m not sure you know how political affiliation or “people” work. Being a member of the party for decades vs being a member for months matters. Those are called “connections”, and it’s how most politicians get stuff done: by knowing people and how to talk to them.
The point of a primary is to determine who the candidate is, not who the party is more aligned with. Party leadership will almost always be more aligned with the person who has been a member longer, particularly when that person has been a member of part leadership themselves. It’s how people work. You prefer a person you’ve known and worked with for a long time over a person who just showed up to use your organization, and by extension you, for their own goals.
We have rules to make sure that those unavoidable human preferences don’t make it unfair.The Obama campaign is a good example. He didn’t have the connections that Clinton did, so party leadership favored her. Once they actually voted, he got more so leadership alignment didn’t matter and he was the candidate. He then worked to develop those connections so that he and the party were better aligned and work together better, and he won. Yay!
So what rules did they break for Clinton? What advantages did she have over Sanders that she didn’t have over Obama?
Which of those advantages weren’t just "new people to the party didn’t know tools the party made available?”So what were the advantages?
Debbie Wasserman Schultz, chairwoman of the Democratic Party, was found to have sent an email during the primary election saying Mr Sanders “would not be president”
There were six primaries where ties were decided by the flip of a coin — and Clinton won every single one. The odds of that happening are 1 in 64, or less than 2 percent
The usual one I hear listed is superdelegates, which doesn’t matter if more people voted for the winner,
superdelegates system favoured Clinton by pre-announcing their support, giving Clinton a massive early lead.
or that they didn’t proactively inform his campaign about funding tricks that the Clinton campaign already knew about.
Clinton bought the DNC by paying off the debt created after Obama.
Are you saying that Clinton was an independent who just happened to align with the party for her entire political career?
I’m saying she doesn’t align and would happily run as an independent if she thought she would be elected.
The point of a primary is to determine who the candidate is, not who the party is more aligned with.
“The party” is the people who vote in the primary.
Party leadership will almost always be more aligned with the person who has been a member longer, particularly when that person has been a member of part leadership themselves.
Party leadership is not the party.
It’s how people work. You prefer a person you’ve known and worked with for a long time over a person who just showed up to use your organization, and by extension you, for their own goals.
Exactly. This is why the primaries were rigged in Clinton’s favor and Sanders and his supporters were right to claim unfairness.
We have rules to make sure that those unavoidable human preferences don’t make it unfair.
Those rules were broken. Debbie Wasserman Schultz has to resign.
The Obama campaign is a good example.
Of fairness (or a super strong candidate beating stacked odds).
So what rules did they break for Clinton?
- Campaign finance
- Debate questions
- Impartiality
What advantages did she have over Sanders that she didn’t have over Obama?
I haven’t researched how unfair Obama had it so I can’t compare.
Which of those advantages weren’t just "new people to the party didn’t know tools the party made available?”
Hilarious you refer to a 76 year old career politician like Sanders as a new person.
Quoting a phrase from an internal email out of context makes you seem disingenuous. The emails that were stolen show people being mean, but it also shows that they were consistently not rigging anything. Or does someone making a shitty suggestion and then a higher ranking member of the party saying “no” not fit the narrative your drawing? Or that the only time they talked about financial schemes was after the Sanders campaign alleged misconduct?
In context, Sanders told CNN that if he was elected, she would no longer be the chair person. The internal comment was “this is a silly story. Sanders isn’t going to be president” at a time where he was already loosing.
Debbie Wasserman Schultz has to resign.
She did. Eight years ago.
Tldr, party leadership preferred Clinton over Obama. Turns out that preference without misconduct doesn’t have much impact.
you refer to a 76 year old career politician like Sanders as a new person.
Oh please. It’s even in the bit that you quoted: new to the party. I act like he was new to the party because he was, and his campaign was run by people who didn’t know the party structures. When their inexperience with the party tools led to them not taking advantage of them, they cried misconduct for the other campaigns knowing about them.
How about we pick someone who vaguely approaches the average age of an American adult. There’s a ton - Buttigieg, AOC, I dunno even Kamala would be a million times better. Literally anybody under the age of 70. Why is that so hard to do?
At this point, I’m convinced the Democrats are purposely throwing the election.
It’s the usual catch - the leader of the losing side doesn’t get the post, but keeps power of his faction.
While if that leader is no longer a leader, their personal power would be less even if the faction wins.
Western Roman Empire had a similar story with Stilicho’s conviction and execution. The empire loses, but those who ate him get some power.
Maybe you’re right but too many of us think the opposite. I would much rather a younger more progressive candidate but Joe Biden has a track record of beating Trump. Biden has done a lot of good things in his first term that I’d want to continue. Even where he hasn’t gone nearly far enough or balanced bad with good, it may be necessary to appeal to the undecideds in the middle. Biden is the only one who can overcome the Trump personality cult
If a big complaint is age, how is that a plus for Sanders? I’m sorry but he missed his chance and now is solidly in “too old for this shit” territory
A track record of beating trump?
Something about the statistical validity of a sample size of one.
Most of this country is centrist, so no unfortunately sanders would have lost to trump.
lol at thinking Americans are mostly centrists…
Most Americans I know think they’re centrists, even if they support either major party… I’m an American so I know a few Americans lol
Lol at thinking Americans lean hard left or right
Can you guys just put obama back in? I would unironically say thanks. It would be poetic.
No. Trust me, this would be amazing but he cannot legally run again :(
No, there’s an amendment in our consimtituion that says a president can only be in office for two terms total. The only president who evaded this was FDR and he’s still villainized to this day.
Actually. I’m pretty sure hes the reason that amendment got passed.
Before FDR it was just a tradition, started by George Washington. Personally I think FDR deserves a pass, he got us out of the great depression and through WW2, it would have been hard to have a leadership change in the midst of that turmoil.
Totally agree. But imagine a 4-term Obamna presidency, with the orange avatar of conservative rage building in strength and gathering malice for 16 years instead of 8.
I am pro term limits, but you’re kinda making a good counter point. Eight more years of Obama instead of Trump and Biden… Doesn’t seem that bad. The conservatives went ballistic anyway, at least we’d have reproductive rights and better healthcare. I’m certain Obama would have been a lot better at managing COVID and the BLM protests. He was pro ceasefire in Gaza way before Biden too. Idk, for all his flaws, Obama seems better than what we got in his place.
I would have loved it too. But the backlash would be intense
Yeah there’s still a few doctors without borders hospitals he hasn’t bombed yet.
Sanders wouldn’t stand a chance. Too many moderate Democrats would be terrified of the scary socialist madman.
“The scary socialist madman” accompanied by the Democratic Party apparatus? A presidential candidate Sanders along with a moderate liberal VP would have gotten both the traditional Democratic vote (as long as the party collaborated with him, rather than giving him the Corbyn treatment, which I don’t trust liberals not to do) and a considerable chunk of the electorate who doesn’t feel represented by either party. The day you guys understand that you don’t have to fight the Republicans in traditional terms, but rather, to change the coordinates of the fight, you’ll force Republicans to choose between evolving or getting buried. But the real problem by this point is whether it is too late.
grabs popcorn
Its … horrible how you treat your elderly in closed wards.
I shall avert my gaze.
Didn’t mean to pry, it was just too loud to not notice it.I’d rather look at our … increasingly hard-right EU politics … wait, that can’t be right, wtf.
We used to say that conservative politics in the EU would still be considered left in the USA. Well, I‘m not so sure about that anymore.
Biden’s immigration policy is honestly a wet dream for most right extremists in Europe
I mean, in previous years we did pass some environmental laws (like banning internal combustion cars), not as much or as strict as I hoped, but change was there. Sure hope that doesn’t all get undone ‘to boost the economy’ (in the USA sense - so help the existing big corps to boost their profits & do nothing for the majority).
Hell, I rally like the vast majority of EU regulations (various directives and delegated acts) that were passed & are being constantly updated (to keep up with the times/trends & tech) over the last 20 years, I think its a rally good balance between protecting the people whilst at the same time working with the market to actually achieve a meaningful & painless change over several years. That’s why we have representatives. The added “bureaucracy” as companies call it is just extra reporting & testing (to confirm compliance with standards). This benefits us all & is of unbelievably marginal cost when you look at the economy, regardless of what lobbyists say.
The US far right actually made a project of helping the far right in Europe.
Too late, I watched it all. It would have been funny if it hadn’t been so sad.
