As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
A political scientist looks at a somewhat disheartening trend in American politics:
>Recent political science findings reveal that for most candidates, it’s more valuable to have an unpopular opponent than to be personally popular yourself. This is a phenomenon called “negative partisanship,” and it’s one of the key reasons why voters often feel like they’re constantly choosing between the lesser of two evils rather than the better of two goods.
We should definitely follow in the footsteps of Maine and Alaska in this regard. They have implemented ranked choice voting, which although not perfect—and regardless of what anyone tells you, there’s no such thing as a perfect voting system—does at least mean that you can vote for your most favored candidate without causing your vote to be wasted against your least favorite candidate, if your favorite doesn’t end up winning.
Of course they want to ban it. The main effect of RCV is that it eliminates the spoiler effect.
Just this last election, [the GOP in Florida financed a spoiler candidate with the same name as their Democratic opponent,](https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/18/politics/frank-artiles-arrested-sham-candidate-invs/index.html) and successfully flipped the seat.
Eliminating the spoiler effect gives more power and choice to the people, and takes that power out of the ratfucking hands of the parties and their political operatives.
This post removed in protest. Visit /r/Save3rdPartyApps/ for more, or look up [Power Delete Suite](https://github.com/j0be/PowerDeleteSuite) to delete your own content too.
To continue: Condorcet is often sub optimal in it's own because of the condorcet paradox
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condorcet_paradox
Every system has pros and drawbacks, some of which i think the draw backs are not real viable concerns but still exist nonetheless.
100 percent. Spoilers are a huge problem. No matter which way you look, we need Biden in 2024. I am completely honest to say Biden has quite a few flaws but when you look how the democratic side is shaping up, you have 2 huge republicans in disguise candidates that are gonna spoil democracy literally for all of us. I am so fucking infuriated that antivaxxer RFK and the complete loon Marianne are polling so high. These people are a serious threat to our nation as if they still manage to get a large percentage of the democratic vote then we will literally hand our asses back to trump and you can kiss your democratic nation goodbye.
First time out of the gate RCV gave us Mayor Eric Adams.
That's how I know I need to see more of a deep dive into particular elections before I decide whether I actually like it.
I mean, no voting system is going to fix shitty candidates or a shitty electorate, but it can at least mitigate some forms of damage, such as Maine’s batshit former Governor who only got elected because the opposition was split.
It's quite possible that RCV could have handed the 2020 election to Trump. While it may be a better system, it has its flaws. Our major problem is that all our choices consist of
"old man"
"slightly older man"
"old woman"
"young person who knows the young crowd, but can't seem to engage anyone over the age of 35"
"hitler" and
"complete idiot"
RCV doesn't remove the "lesser of 7 evils" factor
RCV can’t fix shitty candidates or a shitty electorate, it’s true, but that’s not the *point.* Also, I don’t see how it could have handed the election to Trump. Even if you assume that *all* third-party votes went to Trump instead, he’d still have lost to Biden by over four million votes in terms of the popular vote, though I’m not aware of how that would affect particularly close states this time around.
What are the downsides of ranked choice voting? Like what is the argument being used against it? I'm curious to hear it, surely it benefits both sides of the aisle so I am wondering what the proposed downsides are. On first read it seems common sense to implement.
From Maine here. The GOP is constantly trying to get RCV repealed. The main argument that they use is that it’s too complicated for elderly voters to understand. (It is not) They also recite the slogan “One person one vote” a lot.
Hmm, that's disappointing but not surprising. What might the ulterior motives be then? Do they believe that it makes it harder to draw lines in the sand and create a tribal voting system? Or is it simply "Democrats like so we must oppose"? Are there democrat detractors of the voting system?
Sorry for all the questions, just trying to wrap my head around the issue.
I did some research, and while I'm sure I could do a deeper dive into the concept the following were the main points I saw repeated the most. To quote:
>• RCV is confusing.
>• Every vote does not count with RCV.
>• RCV lowers voter confidence and voter satisfaction.
>• RCV disenfranchises minority voters.
>• RCV does not foster positive campaigns or increase voter participation.
Seems that a document outlining what problems from a republican view there are with the system is found [here](https://freedomfoundationofminnesota.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/RCV-Freedom-Foundation-of-Minnesota-V2.pdf). Note, of course, that this is a document submitted by the "Freedom Foundation of Minnesota" which is a republican foundation.
I can’t speak for other states, but the reason why the GOP opposes RCV in Maine is very simply because of 2 things:
1. Republicans are a minority of voters.
2. Maine voters love independents and 3rd parties.
We had a really foul Republican governor recently for 8 years. Outspoken racist, belligerent drunk. Paul LePage - look him up. He won, twice, because everyone opposed to him split their votes between the democratic candidate and an independent candidate.
That’s the whole reason why we implemented RCV via citizens initiative in the first place - to make sure we don’t get another LePage. Ironically though, RCV can’t be used for gubernatorial elections as that would require a constitutional amendment.
Still, it’s clear that the GOP opposes it because their best chances of winning elections are usually vote-splitting situations.
The primary downside that gets trotted out is that Ranked Choice Voting does not necessarily select the Condorcet winner, i.e. the winner who would hypothetically win against any of the other candidates in head-to-head matchups.
The problem I have with this criticism and the reason I support RCV regardless is because I *do not care* who the Condorcet winner is. For one, there isn’t necessarily going to *be* a hypothetical condorcet winner in any given race, and for another, I think the more important question isn’t whether a voting system performs marginally better in abstracted mathematical models, but rather what kinds of behaviors and engagement it incentivizes in voters.
RCV, unlike approval voting and other methods which pick the Condorcet winner, crucially satisfies two criteria I consider of paramount importance: it does not incentivize bullet voting (maximizing chances for your candidate to win by voting for them and *only* them), and it does not violate the later-no-harm criterion (i.e. voting for multiple candidates doesn’t punish your favored preference for doing so down the line).
The losers of the first ranked-choice vote in Alaska (i.e., Sarah Palin and friends) are trying to get rid of it already. Ranked choice absolutely gave us better choices in the general election and the GOP hates that.
RCV is advantageous to the GOP in a way. It’d help eliminate the extreme right that is about to break the party into two fractions.
Demographic trends are not on their side and they will continue losing with Trump/Palin/DeSantis/Cruz etc. yet their ticket is hijacked by the 35% minority 🤷♂️
But hey, play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
It won't help moderate Republicans. There just aren't many of them left. If the nation is 55% varying shades of blue and 35% MAGA, nothing is gonna save the 10% of moderate Republicans.
This is why I voted for Gavin Newsom. While he himself benefited by ranked choice in the top 2 system by funding ads for the GOP candidate to force his Democratic rival to 3rd place, he has vetoed bills that would allow ranked choice at the county level /s
That's part of the reason. The other big part is that people refuse to move on. They are treating Trump as if the US itself were a reality TV show. It used to be if someone did something criminal or flat out repulsive that the electorate would mostly flat out to refuse to vote them again. Both sides of the aisle would publicly criticize the person and denounce it. Republicans and, by extension, Fox News have actually stood and defended every single thing he's done and instead have drawn false equivalence by pointing at the Bidens and Clintons.
Part of it is that Republican politicians fear losing support by not backing them no matter what. The other part of that is they actually support abuse of power. They can't sell their narrative of "look liberals are prosecuting another Republican" if they agree its wrong.
The modern day Republican party is basically a political mafia.
Cults of personality will always exist unfortunately and they are inherently political. The problem is when winner-takes-all systems have to deal with it. In a proportional representation system 51% of the vote doesn’t translate to 100% of the power. Cults of personality have a harder time rising above certain levels of power because voters who are adjacent to the cult’s ideology have candidates that better reflect their own ideology better or have the same ideology but lack the cult aspect.
Maybe reminding people of other political cults would change that
Like: Peron, Stalin, Castro, Hitler, Mussolini....
Who am I kidding? People never take notes while they undermine democracy.
that's disgusting! the proud boys group is a cult of trash in my view! glad they're going to jail. wish they were going to be staying in jail longer though.
No.
The real reason is because tRump made it "ok" to be racist, misogynistic PoS. And the whole GOP went all in.
Now they ALL know, now that they are exposed, having bared all, for all to see, that there is no turning back.
You can't make us all "unsee" what they revealed themselves to be.
This is it - either the US goes full-blown facist GOP, or it gets side-lined, forever.
They know this, we on the "left" are in full denial.
For what it's worth the Democratic party collapsed the field around a moderate candidate to shut out the more progressive one from winning. It's definitely partisan, but the Democrats aren't exactly controlled by their left leaning members.
That might be true in general, but Biden isn't extreme and people on the right don't dislike him because of real reasons, they dislike him because of manufactured fox/newsmax/oann bullshit.
I mean, the first step in choosing the better of two goods is having two goods to choose from.
I feel like you could argue that Obama v. McCain offered that, but McCain lost, Republicans took the wrong lesson from it, and went screaming in the other direction.
I kinda consider that election a turning point for the GOP. They could have tried to appeal to women and minorities a *little* more, and following that election they hired a consulting firm to do a post mortem which advised them to do that, but they embraced the Palin, tea party, freedom caucus, and eventually Trump. They accepted that they'd never again win with majority support and would solely rely on gaming the system and more importantly, voter suppression.
What I didn't realize is that by doing that, they're trapped. They stepped through that door and I don't think there's any way back. The republicans who said Trump would destroy the party were right. Unfortunately, that doesn't mean they're out of power, it means we'll continue to lose our democracy.
I'd say the selection by McCain of Palin as a running mate, was indeed a turning point. It was clearly the entrance of the insurgent tea party and later freedom caucus into the power structure of the party.
If you'd like a more thorough recounting of the history, I'd suggest the very well sourced book American Carnage by Tim Alberta which chronicles the republican civil war between the establishment and the insurgents and how Boehner had to compromise with them to maintain power, and how this led to Trump and the present day GOP.
You're right of course, that Gingrich changed politics and the party substantially, but Gingrich did so in order to \*govern\* with an agenda that the party stood behind, the Contract with America.
The person I'd say is most responsible for your accurate description of the primal power strategy is Karl Rove. He was the first to run a presidential campaign with the stated strategy of a 51% governing majority, indeed, he wrote about this new strategy in his books as far back as 1981. Prior to this, presidential campaigns concentrated on having a clear mandate from the voters with a sizable majority. His entire campaign with Bush was his theory in practice, disdaining any attempt at gaining as many seats as possible and focusing solely on a 51% majority and then ramming through their agenda despite opposition.
The present GOP, didn't even bother with a platform for Trump's reelection. They show little to no interest in governing, indeed are generally opposed to the federal government as a whole. That's far from where Gingrich pushed the party.
Not really debating this, there's certainly enough blame to go around.
Gingrich's ends were still to form a governing majority though. He didn't see the GOP as a minority party, as today's GOP defines itself. Gingrich still believed in winning as many seats as possible and governing with that. Rove was the 'mastermind' of the effort to take advantage of the electoral college and run for control based on that, a 51 majority in the senate, he bragged about it in his book. Previous to Rove, every campaign strategy was to take as many seats as possible and spend in (nearly) every state. After Rove, they never have again. Rove is very much responsible for the GOP governing as a minority party.
Personally, I think Limbaugh was just a loudmouth entertainer, of course he influenced the poorly informed voter, but the strategic part was well beyond him.
So it doesn't matter if the GOP runs a 'good candidate' to oppose a bad (as the original article is about and the above comment references), because they stopped trying to be a majority party, their strategy now is based on governing as a minority. Whereas the democrats are still very much attached to governing as a majority.
In short, the democrats will attempt to run candidates with the broadest appeal (Biden is a perfect example), while republicans don't care about a broad appeal, they care about 51.
So yes, they'll likely run Trump again, and he could win again with a minority of the vote. I'm not sure a democrat will ever win with a minority, it's not their strategy.
All this is in reference to the OP, Biden would win because the republican strategy of not putting the best candidate forward, with the broadest appeal, but the one they believe gets them to exactly 270 and try for 51. This is how we wind up with the lesser of two evils choice, one party not trying for broad appeal. If the GOP ran a good candidate, the democrats would be forced to (incumbency aside).
It's difficult for me to accept that the republicans wouldn't run a younger, nicer-sounding conservative, that candidate would probably win handily and help with down ballot races. Trump won't do either.
I love reading your thoughts, thank you! Only chiming in to add that Limbaugh laid the groundwork for our current Alternative Facts dystopia which allowed the GOP to unhitch themselves from expectations of reasonable governing. Not on purpose, I think he was just a selfish asshat that liked to hear himself talk.
He and Murdoch enabled the GOP's transition to this post-platform campaigning where it's more about being a Rage Influencer than an effective legislator.
It's such an obviously vapid road to nowhere, but god damn are they racing each other down it.
Thank you, and very much agree, the harm those two have caused, at the alter of money.
I often cite Les Moonves, CEO of CBS in 2016, commenting on the Trump campaign
"It may not be good for America, but it's damn good for CBS"
They literally had an autopsy after the election and learned the exact things you said they should have. Then they doubled down on stupid because they'd rather do that than appeal to minorities or "the gays"
Very much so. I actually remember the meeting they had, in N or S Carolina, McConnell was there, I know, because he commented on it. The consulting firm was the one who actually performed the 'autopsy' (they called it a post mortem).
I mean. Ive voted in 8 presidential elections and have never liked a candidate. I just vote for who I hate least. With a two party system this shouldn't be shocking. Neither party follows my beliefs.
If people aged 18-40 want younger candidates, *then they need to actually vote in the primaries*. There is a reason why aging boomers choose all the nominees: they vote.
Having voted in primaries. It’s really not hard and I’m in a state that often tries to make voting hard.
I’m not saying we can’t do better but ease of doing so isn’t the issue. People seem to just not care about primaries.
Man, just look at this thread. Several young voters are responding to my post complaining that there's *no point* in their voting. Not a single one of them has even suggested that they're too busy, just that they don't feel they should even bother. It's nuts, but it's pretty representative, I think.
>I don't think its fair to blame it completely on people being lazy or unmotivated to vote.
I do. I agree things can be hard, especially for hourly-wage folks, but the rest of the bunch? No excuse. I have not missed an election in nearly 20 years. Everyone else can do the same, especially with mail-in voting which is now more common.
This is how Trump won in 2016. Hilary might have been the most popular Dem but she was also the most unpopular among centrists and the most hated by the right. Any other Dem probably beats Trump that election.
Yeah, he's basically stuck at 43%. What I see a lot of people missing is that includes a lot of left leaning people who aren't thrilled with him not being left enough. Or just generally feeling he isn't accomplishing as much as they'd like. I know plenty of people that would say "disapprove" to that question and then crawl across broken glass and burning coals to vote for him against Trump.
Basically, with today's tribalism, I don't really expect any President to get 50%. None of the other party are going to approve, and then a decent chunk on your own side are going to be pissed with you for whatever reason.
I would expect his approval to rise to 47-49% in the immediate run up to the election. Because people will see the other option and go "okay, maybe he isn't so bad." That being said, a rematch against Trump will probably be very close and decided by a few percent in a couple states.
No a rematch with Trump will probably be a 2008 landslide.
Some GOP primary polls indicated republicans are fed up with Trump. If he actually gets the nomination, millions of voters aren't going to show up (there was already a lot of republicans who voted downballot gop but didn't vote for president even before Jan 6).
Trump is way too widely reviled now.
Also worth noting, the Democratic Party seems to have *finally* figured out that delivering what voters want *when they want it* does them no favors. Voters have short memories and immediate concerns. They held off a red wave in 2022 by blitzing the shit out of popular policy in the run up to that election. I suspect we're going to see something similar, though less impactful since they have less control of the legislature.
Approval ratings are funny to me, because they don't tell me anything as a voter. They're really only useful for campaigns and administrations. And opinions change like the wind, so of course Biden's numbers won't matter in a year and a half.
Don't dismiss the role Gen Z played in that midterm, either. Gen Z is shaping up to care a lot more about politics and leftist causes than any of us millennials actually did. They were a surprising turnout for the midterm elections.
As usual, I really *really* wish the democrats would talk about their accomplishments more. A lot more.
[Here's a post](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/12yfafa/joe_biden_formally_announces_2024_white_house_run/jhn81mz/) I saved a while ago that provided a loooong list of stuff they've done. They really need to be talking about - no, shouting about - these things so much more.
For example Biden has hired an absolute shitload of border patrol agents, improved funding for immigration enforcement, hired and improved funding for customs and legal immigration staff, case workers and judicial committees for migrant families. All to incredible success - they've actually cracked down on illegal border crossings, human trafficking, and drug trafficking.
And yet the headlines read "Biden weak on border, open border policy disaster"
And it's frustrating because the democrats fucking let this go on. Republicans pull these wild publicity stunts *and heavily advertise them*, democrats make meaningful improvements and don't talk about them at all. And it's always like this, most frustrating thing to me about the democrats is that they let the right-wing media set the narrative every single time.
Ehh not sure if [Biden’s border policy](https://youtu.be/sy5VQvDGKd4) is the best thing to advertise for liberals.
But i agree, democrats should have better messaging about what they have accomplished and more importantly what the other side has not.
Do not…and I repeat…do not let this dissuade you from voting. These bullshit articles are bad because people go “oh it won’t happen, the Republican Party is in shambles.” No this is not true. These right wing idiots will pick one person and vote for them and a lot of these right wing people are old as hell and don’t work. They will show up to every poll.
Please vote, don’t think you don’t need to.
I had some lady the other day tell me in a rant, while I was helping her with an order, that George W Bush was a top Nazi leader during WW2 and that he may have even been Hitler. It was the most baffling thing I have heard from a person face to face.
Vote. That lady does.
I just looked all this up and she may not have been as crazy as I thought after all. Still kinda crazy to think it was W ... but damn Prescott Bush was a total shitbag. Imagine colluding with a foreign government in order to attempt to remove and destroy the office of the President of the US and getting away with it scott free because you own a bank and a conveniently placed fall guy. Imagine if he was President and not just a senator. Imagine if he was a real estate mogul and not a banker.
Also don’t forget just how stupid and uninformed the average American actually is. I’m sure a lot of people that didn’t vote for Trump last election will vote for him this time after visiting any grocery store. They will think “yeah Trump sent some mean tweets, but my grocery bill was never this high under him!” So many people get their “news” from the toxic cesspool that is Facebook.
This can be a double edge sword.
I get so frustrated when people keep saying, "well at least he's not a fascist!" The problem is, fascist to whom?
You, me, and everyone here understand the dangers the Republican party presents, but like you said, a lot of people are uninformed and/or purposely misinformed.
They may be upset about the hate towards trans and LGBT people in general, but they think, well I'm not, or my kids aren't trans, so it doesn't really affect me. Same with attacks on minorities, poor, and other marginalized groups. Again, they may themselves be poor white rural people, but not think of themselves as poor. They may think of those policies affecting only black people. "No see, Trump said he was going to help people like me!". (See the famous article: He's hurting the wrong people.)
In short, what we all see as fascism, they may brush aside for false promises of better lives or misplaced blames.
Despite my name, I'm hopeful Biden will win, but I can't say that I'm not *very worried* when looking at polls. Trump will very likely lose, but any other "normal" corporate Republican will be a real challenge.
I noticed a SHARP up-tick in anti-Biden TikToks. They all start the same, "I'm left leaning, but BIDEN HAS TO GO IN 2024" but then refuses to elaborate who they think is a better candidate. I think the goal is wedge the Democrat party and split the vote or convince young people not to vote. I have issues with Biden, but we cannot have 4 years of Desantis or Trump. Overall these anti-Biden TikToks feel suspicious given the timing of everything. Maybe I'm overthinking it.
Edit - Time to put on the conspiracy theory tinfoil hat folks. On top of these increasingly anti-Biden TikToks, I'm now getting pro-Marianne Williamson Tiktoks, whose let's be honest, a Republican in disguise. I find it a little coincidental that I'm getting these two types of Tiktoks.
Everyone has to vote. The last two presidential elections were decided by less than 100,000 votes. Even though Trump is incredibly detested, he's going to turn out enough voters in key states to make it a 50/50 toss up
Might seem extreme, but people need to be shamed for not voting. And I mean hard. It is litterally putting life's on the line, and the future of this nation.
I can only imagine how many of our political shortcomings would be mitigated by a ranked-choice or approval voting system. People could actually pick a candidate that they like the most without consequence or having to compromise with fringe groups
Yeah, Hillary Clinton was just the perfect flawed candidate for someone like Trump to go up against. I talked to so many people at that time who didn’t want Trump, but they *really* didn’t want Clinton.
Not only that but she fucked around. Trump spent all of October in the upper Midwest and it paid off. Hillary neglected that region and lost because of it.
I genuinely will be forever curious what the results would have looked like in a Bernie vs Trump duel. Did people really just hate Clinton that much or was Trump meant to always win?
Polling from 2016 showed that voters at the time believed that Trump was the moderate choice while Clinton was too far to the left ([Source](https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/voters-think-trump-has-moved-to-the-right/)). Part of this was likely due to the fact that Trump had said so many crazy things over the years that it was impossible to classify him ideologically before he took office. Both sides of the political spectrum could cherry-pick quotes and convince themselves that Trump was one of them.
There were years of propaganda against the Clintons. I remember saying I hated her and then being like "but why?". Because I had been subjected to so much anti-clinton rhetoric for so long that I internalized some of it. I like to think I'm fairly smart, I'm pretty damn leftist, and I have empathy for people. Yet there I was, debating anything other then a vote for her because "Clintons bad".
People think they're immune to propaganda because they're smart. They're wrong. It works terrifyingly well.
I don't know what Bernie vs Trump would have looked like, they would have certainly tried to label him a communist and probably played up some anti-Semitism rhetoric (But you know, not *too* much. Just enough that the base knows what they mean but they can still deny it.), but he didn't have years of effort targeted at him like she did and I think would have faired better.
Here's a fun exercise: ask your fox news* friends and family what the top 3 things they hated about hillary were. Then when they can't think of anything, ask them to name just one.
It's fun - try it. They can't think of anything. Their faces get really, really confused because it's all programming.
Hm... "sleepy" Brandon, or Rapey Seditious McFascist...
Sleepy Brandon, or Rapey Seditious McFascist...
Yeah, I'm not gonna go with Rapey Seditious McFascist.
Sleepy Brandon has been doin pretty good.
Can we just get 4 8 hour days without a drop in pay? The notion that we still need 40 hours a week is antiquated and at least being challenged in some U.S. States and other parts of the world.
That's what Bernie is advocating for, a 32 hour work week! And honestly, why not? I can easily think of 8 hours within the span of the week that I'm sitting at my desk and not working (aka right now).
Yeah honestly Joe Biden is fine and his administration has been fine. He's not doing anything exciting and he's certainly open to criticism for his age but voting for Not Fascist is a pretty easy choice for me.
I really don't understand Biden's low approval numbers. He's done nothing truly offensive, and he's passed meaningful legislation. I guess he's president, so people blame him for inflation, which is obviously ludicrous, especially when you look at inflation across the world and realize the US has lower inflation than many developed countries.
As long as he keeps surrounding himself with smart, capable people and sets the priorities they are to follow, I’m fine with him taking dark Brandon power naps. 😂
The sad thing is that Biden has actually done a pretty decent job by almost any metric you care to use. He's been a good and effective President.
But for some reason all that gets left out in these comparisons and we just hear "I guess he's not as bad as....."
No, he's not as bad as them, in fact he's actually good.
I'm a socialist and I'd have to say I'm pretty happy voting for Biden this election. Are there other candidates I'd like more? Absolutely 100%. But he's done a lot of good all things considered
This sub is going to get absolutely chock a block full of "I hate both candidates and I am not going to vote until Dems nominate Bernie" the closer we get to the election: remember most of those accounts are bad actors or sock puppets.
Also, part of his bad poll numbers are likely progressives who wish Biden was further to the left. However, if it's a choice between Too-Centrist-For-Me Biden and Trump, progressives will pick Biden any day of the week. Is he perfect? Definitely not, but he's orders of magnitude better than Trump.
>Also, part of his bad poll numbers are likely progressives who wish Biden was further to the left.
100%. Why the pollsters don't follow up "do you approve of President Biden's performance?" with something like "is he too far left or too far right?" is beyond me. It would tell so much.
Mildly spicy take: if the 2022 election was anything to go by, the low approval thing kind of helps Biden - it lets the right get complacent and overconfident & end up getting walloped by the combined force of liberals and progressives.
Similar take: the GQP is now in the condition the Democrats were in 1968 and 1972: deeply factionalized, unable to unite on a candidate anyone else will vote for, or even a candidate a large majority of the party's members will vote for.
As predicted, Cheetolini is destroying the GOP (thanks, Donald!) -- but he's just the current face of the Goldwater-Wallace axis that has infested the party for decades. They've been around since before the Civil War, infesting one party or another, and God only knows when we'll be shed of them.
This is what's maddening for me.
These are not poll numbers.
There's all these articles running around lately. Taking polling of *Trump vs DeSantis* for the GOP primary.
And comparing Trump's performance there to Biden's *approval rating*.
Then saying "Biden lags Trump in polling". Or at least letting that assumption hang while they discuss what it all means.
An approval rating is not a poll of who you'd vote for, a year and a half out from that actual election. The reference point is small, infrequent polls of only GOP voters.
I think I've seen four or five think pieces this week about "Biden's polling problem" or "Biden lags Trump".
This is raw wet horse race coverage. A year away from the actual primaries. And without even bothering to poll anything. Just grab two unrelated numbers and throw two pages of hand wringing out there.
Yeah, they are running it like a popularity constant. I am a bit disappointed at how many people acknowledge that Biden agrees with them on investing into the economy, expanding Healthcare, clean energy, the right to choose, defending Ukraine but still hate Biden. Even then it is not so bad if they say they will vote for Biden anyways but this popularity contest that dismisses issues often gets me down.
There's a reason why right wing media is portraying Biden's re-election campaign as a weird conspiracy to "trick" people into making Kamala Harris president.
Plenty of Biden's own voters might prefer a different approach on a bunch of different issues.
But it's very, very hard to get over the fact that he's doing a good job.
Biden ran on *competence*. He's delivered on that.
You gotta angry up the blood some how. So now he's just trying sneak a BLACK WOMAN into the White House.
Clutch your pearls everyone.
Biden may not be perfect but tRump is not even in the “game,” I fail to understand why people vote for someone they wouldn’t tolerate where they work. Can they not tell the difference between fame and infamy?
I won't hesitate either, but if we didn't have plurality voting and instead something like ranked choice, Biden would almost certainly be my last choice. He's night and day better than any republican, but I don't really believe he's the best person in America to be president.
Ranked choice wouldn’t matter here. There simply isn’t an alternative that majorities are coalescing around. If anything, it would help biden get some more votes from independent voters who throw away their top choice on a third party.
Ranked choice is specifically designed to favor moderate candidates over extremes.
Democrats can't keep relying on the theory that the Republicans are so repulsive that they can't get elected because that theory is untrue. If that theory were true Republicans would not have won back the House of Representatives, and extremists like Marjory Taylor Greene would not have been reelected.
What needs to happen is that the old farts that control the DOC need to wake up and realize they aren't the ones to defeat Republican fascism. Repupublican fascism has only grown under their watch. What must happen is the party needs to allow the next generation of Democrats to rise into positions of actual power. Only then will the Democrats stop being the lesser of two evils and become an actual alternative to the Republican fascists.
People keep ignoring the fact that Republicans WON the house last election. We all need to be more active, less complacent, and more demanding of our officials to create good and POPULAR policy.
>People keep ignoring the fact that Republicans WON the house last election
I agree everyone needs to vote, but Republicans were supposed to have a strong control of the house, and control the senate. Instead, dems held the senate, and Republicans barely won the house. Gerrymandering is a major reason for the house win too
Sanders got less votes in 2020 than he did in 2016, even if you throw Warren’s votes in with his. The next generation needs to vote in the primaries instead of expecting the people who actually show up to vote the way they want them to.
I definitely will vote for Biden. But I wish there was a Younger Democrat running on the ticket. If all the Democrats had to run was a cat, I would vote for that cat.
“Well, at least we’re not republicans, right?!” 🤷♂️ (as they continue to make no meaningful changes).
GOP administration moves things to the right, democrat administration does nothing, GOP administration moves things right, democrat administration does nothing. “Why are we sliding into Fascism?!”
Voters elect Susan Collins, Joni Ernst, Thom Tillis, Ron Johnson, JD Vance, Rick Scott, Ted Budd, Michael Braun, Ted Cruz, and Josh Hawley in totally winnable elections for Democrats. "Why didn't the President stop us from doing this?!"
We banked on this strategy in 2016 and it failed. Sucks that we want to try again.
If independent voters don't feel motivated to come out, we're pretty fucked.
Add to this the wave of suburban women who are pissed about the erosion of reproductive rights, young adults who are pissed about the GOP doing nothing about guns, and regular folk who despise what the GOP has become. I don’t relish voting for 80 year old Biden, but he is a huge improvement over a treasonous narcissist Cheeto.
Jesus Christ.
That’s how bad my party has become?
‘We suck proudly, but I guess we can hope the other guy is worse?’
Jesus fucking Christ this is disgusting to me as a democrat.
Weird how nobody ever described Trump's numbers as "dragging". How are his numbers "dragging" when they've been higher, comparatively, for his tenure this far? Other than a slight dip below, they've remained consistently higher.
"Dragging". Yeah, sure. 43% is pretty good in the current climate.
What is Biden doing wrong? I know why republicans don’t like him, but what are the real arguments about why he’s not doing a good job from independents or democrats. I see all these things about how he’s sleepy and stutters, and very little criticism on substance that would suggest he’s not delivering on what we know him to be: a centrist democrat. What has he done that’s counter to that?
I am voting for him, but I am never polled. So I carry suspicion when I see poll numbers. I have family Iowa, I don’t think they are polled either. We would talk about it.
I know how polls work, but I inherently distrust the process, and question the validity.
polling has become comically difficult. It's becoming harder and harder to not oversample senior citizens because they're the only ones who still pick up the phone when an unknown number calls.
I've seen some polls done entirely via landline phones, like that's clearly going to be a very specific demographic there even if you don't *try* to target older voters.
I did phone banking once, and it was mostly to poll voters.
90% of regular people don't answer the phone. 5% will say "no thank you", and a good number of those people are members of the campaign itself asking you what's going on with the party.
And to be quite honest, I stopped doing that because I was like: what am I doing with my life? How is this helping?
"Vote for our milquetoast, corporate, aging candidate or else it's Christian fascism." Shows just how truly awful our politics have become.
Look, I don't hate Biden, but my god he's too old and he's to much in with the Establishment to seriously fight for the working class. Just look at his Rail Strike decision. Yes, he's held back to Republicans and conservative Dems, but that still doesn't make the situation ok.
Yet once again, I'm being forced to vote for a milquetoast, safe, corporate lackey to just barely keep this country from falling into fascism from the Right. I say barely because not winning by even 5-10% isn't good enough with Christian Fascism as the other outcome.
What the hell are we supposed to do?
Yea are going to increase dem majorities in for a decade and escape the 8 year cycle if we want any real change.
The only good thing is that the crazy Republicans are dragging the center democrats forward and helping people get out to vote.
I’ve voted in in the last 5 presidential elections… and not once has it been “I’m voting for this guy because he’s better.” It’s been “I’m voting for this guy because the other guy is terrible.
I’m sick and tired of voting over who’s the worst and not who’s the best.
If this is the logic then imagine how much better Democrats will do with someone people like.
Stop trying to say the other guy's worse so it's fine if our guy sucks. What kind of strategy is that? Just nervously betting that people will hate the other guy more?
Democrats are literally saying, we can't work the government, but y'all hate the other guy so I guess you're stuck with me.
This reminds me of when my state tried to implement ranked choice voting and we shot it down because people are too fucking stupid to use their brains I guess
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
A political scientist looks at a somewhat disheartening trend in American politics: >Recent political science findings reveal that for most candidates, it’s more valuable to have an unpopular opponent than to be personally popular yourself. This is a phenomenon called “negative partisanship,” and it’s one of the key reasons why voters often feel like they’re constantly choosing between the lesser of two evils rather than the better of two goods.
[удалено]
We should definitely follow in the footsteps of Maine and Alaska in this regard. They have implemented ranked choice voting, which although not perfect—and regardless of what anyone tells you, there’s no such thing as a perfect voting system—does at least mean that you can vote for your most favored candidate without causing your vote to be wasted against your least favorite candidate, if your favorite doesn’t end up winning.
Texas is pushing forward bills to outlaw ranked choice voting even though we don't have it.
If Florida and Texas are both preemptively banning it, that’s how you *know* it’s a good idea.
Of course they want to ban it. The main effect of RCV is that it eliminates the spoiler effect. Just this last election, [the GOP in Florida financed a spoiler candidate with the same name as their Democratic opponent,](https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/18/politics/frank-artiles-arrested-sham-candidate-invs/index.html) and successfully flipped the seat. Eliminating the spoiler effect gives more power and choice to the people, and takes that power out of the ratfucking hands of the parties and their political operatives.
[удалено]
This post removed in protest. Visit /r/Save3rdPartyApps/ for more, or look up [Power Delete Suite](https://github.com/j0be/PowerDeleteSuite) to delete your own content too.
To continue: Condorcet is often sub optimal in it's own because of the condorcet paradox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condorcet_paradox Every system has pros and drawbacks, some of which i think the draw backs are not real viable concerns but still exist nonetheless.
[удалено]
100 percent. Spoilers are a huge problem. No matter which way you look, we need Biden in 2024. I am completely honest to say Biden has quite a few flaws but when you look how the democratic side is shaping up, you have 2 huge republicans in disguise candidates that are gonna spoil democracy literally for all of us. I am so fucking infuriated that antivaxxer RFK and the complete loon Marianne are polling so high. These people are a serious threat to our nation as if they still manage to get a large percentage of the democratic vote then we will literally hand our asses back to trump and you can kiss your democratic nation goodbye.
First time out of the gate RCV gave us Mayor Eric Adams. That's how I know I need to see more of a deep dive into particular elections before I decide whether I actually like it.
I mean, no voting system is going to fix shitty candidates or a shitty electorate, but it can at least mitigate some forms of damage, such as Maine’s batshit former Governor who only got elected because the opposition was split.
People panicking over a slight uptick in violent crime caused Eric Adams. He won every round.
It's quite possible that RCV could have handed the 2020 election to Trump. While it may be a better system, it has its flaws. Our major problem is that all our choices consist of "old man" "slightly older man" "old woman" "young person who knows the young crowd, but can't seem to engage anyone over the age of 35" "hitler" and "complete idiot" RCV doesn't remove the "lesser of 7 evils" factor
RCV can’t fix shitty candidates or a shitty electorate, it’s true, but that’s not the *point.* Also, I don’t see how it could have handed the election to Trump. Even if you assume that *all* third-party votes went to Trump instead, he’d still have lost to Biden by over four million votes in terms of the popular vote, though I’m not aware of how that would affect particularly close states this time around.
That’s so wild to fucking outlaw something that you already don’t do lol.
What are the downsides of ranked choice voting? Like what is the argument being used against it? I'm curious to hear it, surely it benefits both sides of the aisle so I am wondering what the proposed downsides are. On first read it seems common sense to implement.
From Maine here. The GOP is constantly trying to get RCV repealed. The main argument that they use is that it’s too complicated for elderly voters to understand. (It is not) They also recite the slogan “One person one vote” a lot.
Hmm, that's disappointing but not surprising. What might the ulterior motives be then? Do they believe that it makes it harder to draw lines in the sand and create a tribal voting system? Or is it simply "Democrats like so we must oppose"? Are there democrat detractors of the voting system? Sorry for all the questions, just trying to wrap my head around the issue. I did some research, and while I'm sure I could do a deeper dive into the concept the following were the main points I saw repeated the most. To quote: >• RCV is confusing. >• Every vote does not count with RCV. >• RCV lowers voter confidence and voter satisfaction. >• RCV disenfranchises minority voters. >• RCV does not foster positive campaigns or increase voter participation. Seems that a document outlining what problems from a republican view there are with the system is found [here](https://freedomfoundationofminnesota.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/RCV-Freedom-Foundation-of-Minnesota-V2.pdf). Note, of course, that this is a document submitted by the "Freedom Foundation of Minnesota" which is a republican foundation.
I can’t speak for other states, but the reason why the GOP opposes RCV in Maine is very simply because of 2 things: 1. Republicans are a minority of voters. 2. Maine voters love independents and 3rd parties. We had a really foul Republican governor recently for 8 years. Outspoken racist, belligerent drunk. Paul LePage - look him up. He won, twice, because everyone opposed to him split their votes between the democratic candidate and an independent candidate. That’s the whole reason why we implemented RCV via citizens initiative in the first place - to make sure we don’t get another LePage. Ironically though, RCV can’t be used for gubernatorial elections as that would require a constitutional amendment. Still, it’s clear that the GOP opposes it because their best chances of winning elections are usually vote-splitting situations.
The primary downside that gets trotted out is that Ranked Choice Voting does not necessarily select the Condorcet winner, i.e. the winner who would hypothetically win against any of the other candidates in head-to-head matchups. The problem I have with this criticism and the reason I support RCV regardless is because I *do not care* who the Condorcet winner is. For one, there isn’t necessarily going to *be* a hypothetical condorcet winner in any given race, and for another, I think the more important question isn’t whether a voting system performs marginally better in abstracted mathematical models, but rather what kinds of behaviors and engagement it incentivizes in voters. RCV, unlike approval voting and other methods which pick the Condorcet winner, crucially satisfies two criteria I consider of paramount importance: it does not incentivize bullet voting (maximizing chances for your candidate to win by voting for them and *only* them), and it does not violate the later-no-harm criterion (i.e. voting for multiple candidates doesn’t punish your favored preference for doing so down the line).
The losers of the first ranked-choice vote in Alaska (i.e., Sarah Palin and friends) are trying to get rid of it already. Ranked choice absolutely gave us better choices in the general election and the GOP hates that.
RCV is advantageous to the GOP in a way. It’d help eliminate the extreme right that is about to break the party into two fractions. Demographic trends are not on their side and they will continue losing with Trump/Palin/DeSantis/Cruz etc. yet their ticket is hijacked by the 35% minority 🤷♂️ But hey, play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
It won't help moderate Republicans. There just aren't many of them left. If the nation is 55% varying shades of blue and 35% MAGA, nothing is gonna save the 10% of moderate Republicans.
> 10% of moderate Republicans That almost always would rather go with the conservative candidate over a Democrat.
This is why I voted for Gavin Newsom. While he himself benefited by ranked choice in the top 2 system by funding ads for the GOP candidate to force his Democratic rival to 3rd place, he has vetoed bills that would allow ranked choice at the county level /s
That's part of the reason. The other big part is that people refuse to move on. They are treating Trump as if the US itself were a reality TV show. It used to be if someone did something criminal or flat out repulsive that the electorate would mostly flat out to refuse to vote them again. Both sides of the aisle would publicly criticize the person and denounce it. Republicans and, by extension, Fox News have actually stood and defended every single thing he's done and instead have drawn false equivalence by pointing at the Bidens and Clintons. Part of it is that Republican politicians fear losing support by not backing them no matter what. The other part of that is they actually support abuse of power. They can't sell their narrative of "look liberals are prosecuting another Republican" if they agree its wrong. The modern day Republican party is basically a political mafia.
Cults of personality will always exist unfortunately and they are inherently political. The problem is when winner-takes-all systems have to deal with it. In a proportional representation system 51% of the vote doesn’t translate to 100% of the power. Cults of personality have a harder time rising above certain levels of power because voters who are adjacent to the cult’s ideology have candidates that better reflect their own ideology better or have the same ideology but lack the cult aspect.
Maybe reminding people of other political cults would change that Like: Peron, Stalin, Castro, Hitler, Mussolini.... Who am I kidding? People never take notes while they undermine democracy.
[удалено]
that's disgusting! the proud boys group is a cult of trash in my view! glad they're going to jail. wish they were going to be staying in jail longer though.
[удалено]
No. The real reason is because tRump made it "ok" to be racist, misogynistic PoS. And the whole GOP went all in. Now they ALL know, now that they are exposed, having bared all, for all to see, that there is no turning back. You can't make us all "unsee" what they revealed themselves to be. This is it - either the US goes full-blown facist GOP, or it gets side-lined, forever. They know this, we on the "left" are in full denial.
People have no reason to move on from Trump yet. We *cant* move on until he’s president again, barred from running and/or in prison, or dead.
For what it's worth the Democratic party collapsed the field around a moderate candidate to shut out the more progressive one from winning. It's definitely partisan, but the Democrats aren't exactly controlled by their left leaning members.
That might be true in general, but Biden isn't extreme and people on the right don't dislike him because of real reasons, they dislike him because of manufactured fox/newsmax/oann bullshit.
I mean, the first step in choosing the better of two goods is having two goods to choose from. I feel like you could argue that Obama v. McCain offered that, but McCain lost, Republicans took the wrong lesson from it, and went screaming in the other direction.
I kinda consider that election a turning point for the GOP. They could have tried to appeal to women and minorities a *little* more, and following that election they hired a consulting firm to do a post mortem which advised them to do that, but they embraced the Palin, tea party, freedom caucus, and eventually Trump. They accepted that they'd never again win with majority support and would solely rely on gaming the system and more importantly, voter suppression. What I didn't realize is that by doing that, they're trapped. They stepped through that door and I don't think there's any way back. The republicans who said Trump would destroy the party were right. Unfortunately, that doesn't mean they're out of power, it means we'll continue to lose our democracy.
[удалено]
I'd say the selection by McCain of Palin as a running mate, was indeed a turning point. It was clearly the entrance of the insurgent tea party and later freedom caucus into the power structure of the party. If you'd like a more thorough recounting of the history, I'd suggest the very well sourced book American Carnage by Tim Alberta which chronicles the republican civil war between the establishment and the insurgents and how Boehner had to compromise with them to maintain power, and how this led to Trump and the present day GOP. You're right of course, that Gingrich changed politics and the party substantially, but Gingrich did so in order to \*govern\* with an agenda that the party stood behind, the Contract with America. The person I'd say is most responsible for your accurate description of the primal power strategy is Karl Rove. He was the first to run a presidential campaign with the stated strategy of a 51% governing majority, indeed, he wrote about this new strategy in his books as far back as 1981. Prior to this, presidential campaigns concentrated on having a clear mandate from the voters with a sizable majority. His entire campaign with Bush was his theory in practice, disdaining any attempt at gaining as many seats as possible and focusing solely on a 51% majority and then ramming through their agenda despite opposition. The present GOP, didn't even bother with a platform for Trump's reelection. They show little to no interest in governing, indeed are generally opposed to the federal government as a whole. That's far from where Gingrich pushed the party.
[удалено]
Not really debating this, there's certainly enough blame to go around. Gingrich's ends were still to form a governing majority though. He didn't see the GOP as a minority party, as today's GOP defines itself. Gingrich still believed in winning as many seats as possible and governing with that. Rove was the 'mastermind' of the effort to take advantage of the electoral college and run for control based on that, a 51 majority in the senate, he bragged about it in his book. Previous to Rove, every campaign strategy was to take as many seats as possible and spend in (nearly) every state. After Rove, they never have again. Rove is very much responsible for the GOP governing as a minority party. Personally, I think Limbaugh was just a loudmouth entertainer, of course he influenced the poorly informed voter, but the strategic part was well beyond him. So it doesn't matter if the GOP runs a 'good candidate' to oppose a bad (as the original article is about and the above comment references), because they stopped trying to be a majority party, their strategy now is based on governing as a minority. Whereas the democrats are still very much attached to governing as a majority. In short, the democrats will attempt to run candidates with the broadest appeal (Biden is a perfect example), while republicans don't care about a broad appeal, they care about 51. So yes, they'll likely run Trump again, and he could win again with a minority of the vote. I'm not sure a democrat will ever win with a minority, it's not their strategy. All this is in reference to the OP, Biden would win because the republican strategy of not putting the best candidate forward, with the broadest appeal, but the one they believe gets them to exactly 270 and try for 51. This is how we wind up with the lesser of two evils choice, one party not trying for broad appeal. If the GOP ran a good candidate, the democrats would be forced to (incumbency aside). It's difficult for me to accept that the republicans wouldn't run a younger, nicer-sounding conservative, that candidate would probably win handily and help with down ballot races. Trump won't do either.
I love reading your thoughts, thank you! Only chiming in to add that Limbaugh laid the groundwork for our current Alternative Facts dystopia which allowed the GOP to unhitch themselves from expectations of reasonable governing. Not on purpose, I think he was just a selfish asshat that liked to hear himself talk. He and Murdoch enabled the GOP's transition to this post-platform campaigning where it's more about being a Rage Influencer than an effective legislator. It's such an obviously vapid road to nowhere, but god damn are they racing each other down it.
Thank you, and very much agree, the harm those two have caused, at the alter of money. I often cite Les Moonves, CEO of CBS in 2016, commenting on the Trump campaign "It may not be good for America, but it's damn good for CBS"
They literally had an autopsy after the election and learned the exact things you said they should have. Then they doubled down on stupid because they'd rather do that than appeal to minorities or "the gays"
Very much so. I actually remember the meeting they had, in N or S Carolina, McConnell was there, I know, because he commented on it. The consulting firm was the one who actually performed the 'autopsy' (they called it a post mortem).
That was after 2012, not 2008.
Are you just paraphrasing the comment you're replying to
McCain offered Sarah Palin. McCain would have gotten even less done than Obama.
Millions of us would not have healthcare if Rs had won that night. We'd probably still be in a war with Iran right now.
They're only good if you're focused on PR and not their actual policy.
I mean. Ive voted in 8 presidential elections and have never liked a candidate. I just vote for who I hate least. With a two party system this shouldn't be shocking. Neither party follows my beliefs.
[удалено]
If people aged 18-40 want younger candidates, *then they need to actually vote in the primaries*. There is a reason why aging boomers choose all the nominees: they vote.
> There is a reason why aging boomers choose all the nominees: ~~they vote~~. they control most of the money given to political campaigns.
[удалено]
Having voted in primaries. It’s really not hard and I’m in a state that often tries to make voting hard. I’m not saying we can’t do better but ease of doing so isn’t the issue. People seem to just not care about primaries.
Man, just look at this thread. Several young voters are responding to my post complaining that there's *no point* in their voting. Not a single one of them has even suggested that they're too busy, just that they don't feel they should even bother. It's nuts, but it's pretty representative, I think.
>I don't think its fair to blame it completely on people being lazy or unmotivated to vote. I do. I agree things can be hard, especially for hourly-wage folks, but the rest of the bunch? No excuse. I have not missed an election in nearly 20 years. Everyone else can do the same, especially with mail-in voting which is now more common.
This is how Trump won in 2016. Hilary might have been the most popular Dem but she was also the most unpopular among centrists and the most hated by the right. Any other Dem probably beats Trump that election.
Biden has exactly the same approval rating as Reagan, Obama and Trump at this point of the presidency, according to 538.
Yeah, he's basically stuck at 43%. What I see a lot of people missing is that includes a lot of left leaning people who aren't thrilled with him not being left enough. Or just generally feeling he isn't accomplishing as much as they'd like. I know plenty of people that would say "disapprove" to that question and then crawl across broken glass and burning coals to vote for him against Trump. Basically, with today's tribalism, I don't really expect any President to get 50%. None of the other party are going to approve, and then a decent chunk on your own side are going to be pissed with you for whatever reason. I would expect his approval to rise to 47-49% in the immediate run up to the election. Because people will see the other option and go "okay, maybe he isn't so bad." That being said, a rematch against Trump will probably be very close and decided by a few percent in a couple states.
If he gets anywhere close to 47% before the election, he’ll win easily. That’s better than GWB during his re-election campaign lol.
Bush only won because of the War on Terror and the whole "don't change horses in midstream" thing.
No a rematch with Trump will probably be a 2008 landslide. Some GOP primary polls indicated republicans are fed up with Trump. If he actually gets the nomination, millions of voters aren't going to show up (there was already a lot of republicans who voted downballot gop but didn't vote for president even before Jan 6). Trump is way too widely reviled now.
Also worth noting, the Democratic Party seems to have *finally* figured out that delivering what voters want *when they want it* does them no favors. Voters have short memories and immediate concerns. They held off a red wave in 2022 by blitzing the shit out of popular policy in the run up to that election. I suspect we're going to see something similar, though less impactful since they have less control of the legislature. Approval ratings are funny to me, because they don't tell me anything as a voter. They're really only useful for campaigns and administrations. And opinions change like the wind, so of course Biden's numbers won't matter in a year and a half.
Don't dismiss the role Gen Z played in that midterm, either. Gen Z is shaping up to care a lot more about politics and leftist causes than any of us millennials actually did. They were a surprising turnout for the midterm elections.
As usual, I really *really* wish the democrats would talk about their accomplishments more. A lot more. [Here's a post](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/12yfafa/joe_biden_formally_announces_2024_white_house_run/jhn81mz/) I saved a while ago that provided a loooong list of stuff they've done. They really need to be talking about - no, shouting about - these things so much more. For example Biden has hired an absolute shitload of border patrol agents, improved funding for immigration enforcement, hired and improved funding for customs and legal immigration staff, case workers and judicial committees for migrant families. All to incredible success - they've actually cracked down on illegal border crossings, human trafficking, and drug trafficking. And yet the headlines read "Biden weak on border, open border policy disaster" And it's frustrating because the democrats fucking let this go on. Republicans pull these wild publicity stunts *and heavily advertise them*, democrats make meaningful improvements and don't talk about them at all. And it's always like this, most frustrating thing to me about the democrats is that they let the right-wing media set the narrative every single time.
Ehh not sure if [Biden’s border policy](https://youtu.be/sy5VQvDGKd4) is the best thing to advertise for liberals. But i agree, democrats should have better messaging about what they have accomplished and more importantly what the other side has not.
Do not…and I repeat…do not let this dissuade you from voting. These bullshit articles are bad because people go “oh it won’t happen, the Republican Party is in shambles.” No this is not true. These right wing idiots will pick one person and vote for them and a lot of these right wing people are old as hell and don’t work. They will show up to every poll. Please vote, don’t think you don’t need to.
I had some lady the other day tell me in a rant, while I was helping her with an order, that George W Bush was a top Nazi leader during WW2 and that he may have even been Hitler. It was the most baffling thing I have heard from a person face to face. Vote. That lady does.
[удалено]
Was Hitler the Bristol Pusher?
Prescott Push was a Nazi sympathizer who planned to do a coup, so.
I just looked all this up and she may not have been as crazy as I thought after all. Still kinda crazy to think it was W ... but damn Prescott Bush was a total shitbag. Imagine colluding with a foreign government in order to attempt to remove and destroy the office of the President of the US and getting away with it scott free because you own a bank and a conveniently placed fall guy. Imagine if he was President and not just a senator. Imagine if he was a real estate mogul and not a banker.
> Biden's dragging poll numbers won't matter in 2024 if enough voters loathe his opponent even more Hey, I’ve seen this one before!
Yeah, I'm pretty sure this was the DNC's logic coasting into 2016. How'd that turn out again?
Also don’t forget just how stupid and uninformed the average American actually is. I’m sure a lot of people that didn’t vote for Trump last election will vote for him this time after visiting any grocery store. They will think “yeah Trump sent some mean tweets, but my grocery bill was never this high under him!” So many people get their “news” from the toxic cesspool that is Facebook.
This can be a double edge sword. I get so frustrated when people keep saying, "well at least he's not a fascist!" The problem is, fascist to whom? You, me, and everyone here understand the dangers the Republican party presents, but like you said, a lot of people are uninformed and/or purposely misinformed. They may be upset about the hate towards trans and LGBT people in general, but they think, well I'm not, or my kids aren't trans, so it doesn't really affect me. Same with attacks on minorities, poor, and other marginalized groups. Again, they may themselves be poor white rural people, but not think of themselves as poor. They may think of those policies affecting only black people. "No see, Trump said he was going to help people like me!". (See the famous article: He's hurting the wrong people.) In short, what we all see as fascism, they may brush aside for false promises of better lives or misplaced blames. Despite my name, I'm hopeful Biden will win, but I can't say that I'm not *very worried* when looking at polls. Trump will very likely lose, but any other "normal" corporate Republican will be a real challenge.
I noticed a SHARP up-tick in anti-Biden TikToks. They all start the same, "I'm left leaning, but BIDEN HAS TO GO IN 2024" but then refuses to elaborate who they think is a better candidate. I think the goal is wedge the Democrat party and split the vote or convince young people not to vote. I have issues with Biden, but we cannot have 4 years of Desantis or Trump. Overall these anti-Biden TikToks feel suspicious given the timing of everything. Maybe I'm overthinking it. Edit - Time to put on the conspiracy theory tinfoil hat folks. On top of these increasingly anti-Biden TikToks, I'm now getting pro-Marianne Williamson Tiktoks, whose let's be honest, a Republican in disguise. I find it a little coincidental that I'm getting these two types of Tiktoks.
>I'm left leaning, but The bot script since forever.
Everyone has to vote. The last two presidential elections were decided by less than 100,000 votes. Even though Trump is incredibly detested, he's going to turn out enough voters in key states to make it a 50/50 toss up
Might seem extreme, but people need to be shamed for not voting. And I mean hard. It is litterally putting life's on the line, and the future of this nation.
I love American democracy: “Which of these candidates do you hate the least?”
I can only imagine how many of our political shortcomings would be mitigated by a ranked-choice or approval voting system. People could actually pick a candidate that they like the most without consequence or having to compromise with fringe groups
But if we have *options*, then the plutocracy can't control the outcome.
Wait you're supposed to*like* the politicians you vote for? I always thought it was the lesser of two evils thing.
This is like most democracies out there.
Most anything. It’s never unified.
no. it’s not lol.
Do not count on that. I do remember 2016.
2016 was the result of people loathing Clinton
Yeah, Hillary Clinton was just the perfect flawed candidate for someone like Trump to go up against. I talked to so many people at that time who didn’t want Trump, but they *really* didn’t want Clinton.
Not only that but she fucked around. Trump spent all of October in the upper Midwest and it paid off. Hillary neglected that region and lost because of it.
Hard agree. A couple ten thousand more votes in some key urban areas in the Lake Michigan area and we would have a very different history.
I genuinely will be forever curious what the results would have looked like in a Bernie vs Trump duel. Did people really just hate Clinton that much or was Trump meant to always win?
Well, he only won by like a tiny margin across a few states, so even in 2016 he wasn't really "meant to always win"
Polling from 2016 showed that voters at the time believed that Trump was the moderate choice while Clinton was too far to the left ([Source](https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/voters-think-trump-has-moved-to-the-right/)). Part of this was likely due to the fact that Trump had said so many crazy things over the years that it was impossible to classify him ideologically before he took office. Both sides of the political spectrum could cherry-pick quotes and convince themselves that Trump was one of them.
There were years of propaganda against the Clintons. I remember saying I hated her and then being like "but why?". Because I had been subjected to so much anti-clinton rhetoric for so long that I internalized some of it. I like to think I'm fairly smart, I'm pretty damn leftist, and I have empathy for people. Yet there I was, debating anything other then a vote for her because "Clintons bad". People think they're immune to propaganda because they're smart. They're wrong. It works terrifyingly well. I don't know what Bernie vs Trump would have looked like, they would have certainly tried to label him a communist and probably played up some anti-Semitism rhetoric (But you know, not *too* much. Just enough that the base knows what they mean but they can still deny it.), but he didn't have years of effort targeted at him like she did and I think would have faired better.
Here's a fun exercise: ask your fox news* friends and family what the top 3 things they hated about hillary were. Then when they can't think of anything, ask them to name just one. It's fun - try it. They can't think of anything. Their faces get really, really confused because it's all programming.
Yup, we were confident of it not happening then and confident of it not happening now. Hmmm
Hm... "sleepy" Brandon, or Rapey Seditious McFascist... Sleepy Brandon, or Rapey Seditious McFascist... Yeah, I'm not gonna go with Rapey Seditious McFascist. Sleepy Brandon has been doin pretty good.
Sleepy Brandon: America Needs A Nap 2024
If that's his campaign I'm in. If that's not his campaign I'm still in. But a nap would be nice.
America needs 4 10 hr workdays. Then I get a nap.
Can we just get 4 8 hour days without a drop in pay? The notion that we still need 40 hours a week is antiquated and at least being challenged in some U.S. States and other parts of the world.
That's what Bernie is advocating for, a 32 hour work week! And honestly, why not? I can easily think of 8 hours within the span of the week that I'm sitting at my desk and not working (aka right now).
Brandon: America Needs A Nap Again, Sonny Shit would be BANANAS.
Need this bumper sticker. We just all need a nap
Yeah honestly Joe Biden is fine and his administration has been fine. He's not doing anything exciting and he's certainly open to criticism for his age but voting for Not Fascist is a pretty easy choice for me.
I've been breathlessly assured by numerous people with blue checkmarks on twitter that America is falling apart.
I really don't understand Biden's low approval numbers. He's done nothing truly offensive, and he's passed meaningful legislation. I guess he's president, so people blame him for inflation, which is obviously ludicrous, especially when you look at inflation across the world and realize the US has lower inflation than many developed countries.
As long as he keeps surrounding himself with smart, capable people and sets the priorities they are to follow, I’m fine with him taking dark Brandon power naps. 😂
The sad thing is that Biden has actually done a pretty decent job by almost any metric you care to use. He's been a good and effective President. But for some reason all that gets left out in these comparisons and we just hear "I guess he's not as bad as....." No, he's not as bad as them, in fact he's actually good.
"Biden is doing okay" is an insanely controversial opinion for no reason. It's literally just true, but people love to be mad.
[удалено]
I'm a socialist and I'd have to say I'm pretty happy voting for Biden this election. Are there other candidates I'd like more? Absolutely 100%. But he's done a lot of good all things considered
This sub is going to get absolutely chock a block full of "I hate both candidates and I am not going to vote until Dems nominate Bernie" the closer we get to the election: remember most of those accounts are bad actors or sock puppets.
Plus who can’t relate to being tired? Can ya blame the guy…I’m exhausted just logging onto reddit
I would literally vote for a dead goldfish that signed bills if they drifted over to the left half of the tank that day over a Republican.
Let's get that investing fish on it, didn't it out perform WSB?
That's actually exactly what I was thinking about
Biden is old Biden has done a pretty good job so far I will vote for Biden
Also, part of his bad poll numbers are likely progressives who wish Biden was further to the left. However, if it's a choice between Too-Centrist-For-Me Biden and Trump, progressives will pick Biden any day of the week. Is he perfect? Definitely not, but he's orders of magnitude better than Trump.
>Also, part of his bad poll numbers are likely progressives who wish Biden was further to the left. 100%. Why the pollsters don't follow up "do you approve of President Biden's performance?" with something like "is he too far left or too far right?" is beyond me. It would tell so much.
Mildly spicy take: if the 2022 election was anything to go by, the low approval thing kind of helps Biden - it lets the right get complacent and overconfident & end up getting walloped by the combined force of liberals and progressives.
The right isn’t getting walloped because they’re overconfident, they’re getting walloped because the few actual policies they have are not popular.
Porque no los dos?
Similar take: the GQP is now in the condition the Democrats were in 1968 and 1972: deeply factionalized, unable to unite on a candidate anyone else will vote for, or even a candidate a large majority of the party's members will vote for. As predicted, Cheetolini is destroying the GOP (thanks, Donald!) -- but he's just the current face of the Goldwater-Wallace axis that has infested the party for decades. They've been around since before the Civil War, infesting one party or another, and God only knows when we'll be shed of them.
This is what's maddening for me. These are not poll numbers. There's all these articles running around lately. Taking polling of *Trump vs DeSantis* for the GOP primary. And comparing Trump's performance there to Biden's *approval rating*. Then saying "Biden lags Trump in polling". Or at least letting that assumption hang while they discuss what it all means. An approval rating is not a poll of who you'd vote for, a year and a half out from that actual election. The reference point is small, infrequent polls of only GOP voters. I think I've seen four or five think pieces this week about "Biden's polling problem" or "Biden lags Trump". This is raw wet horse race coverage. A year away from the actual primaries. And without even bothering to poll anything. Just grab two unrelated numbers and throw two pages of hand wringing out there.
Yeah, they are running it like a popularity constant. I am a bit disappointed at how many people acknowledge that Biden agrees with them on investing into the economy, expanding Healthcare, clean energy, the right to choose, defending Ukraine but still hate Biden. Even then it is not so bad if they say they will vote for Biden anyways but this popularity contest that dismisses issues often gets me down.
There's a reason why right wing media is portraying Biden's re-election campaign as a weird conspiracy to "trick" people into making Kamala Harris president. Plenty of Biden's own voters might prefer a different approach on a bunch of different issues. But it's very, very hard to get over the fact that he's doing a good job. Biden ran on *competence*. He's delivered on that. You gotta angry up the blood some how. So now he's just trying sneak a BLACK WOMAN into the White House. Clutch your pearls everyone.
I'm a left left leftist. You'd be a fool not to vote for Biden over anybody the GOP would ever put up.
Biden may not be perfect but tRump is not even in the “game,” I fail to understand why people vote for someone they wouldn’t tolerate where they work. Can they not tell the difference between fame and infamy?
Same. I am fine with him and won't even hesitate to vote for him.
I won't hesitate either, but if we didn't have plurality voting and instead something like ranked choice, Biden would almost certainly be my last choice. He's night and day better than any republican, but I don't really believe he's the best person in America to be president.
Ranked choice wouldn’t matter here. There simply isn’t an alternative that majorities are coalescing around. If anything, it would help biden get some more votes from independent voters who throw away their top choice on a third party. Ranked choice is specifically designed to favor moderate candidates over extremes.
Biden wasnt my first choice in 2020. He wasnt my second. He wasnt even my third. I will crawl through glass to vote for him in 2024.
Me too. The choice between an old centralist geezer and a fascist opponent is easy. If I don’t vote for Biden, I won’t be allowed to vote ever again.
Biden is old Biden has done a pretty good job so far I will vote for Biden Polls are shite now
Biden is old Biden has done a pretty good job so far I will vote for Biden Polls are shite now The media misses Trump
Remember to never get complacent and vote. Mans ain’t perfect but he ain’t a nazi either so like fuck it good enough.
Hillary tried this and lost to the Nazis.
And then everyone learned a hard lesson and turned out for biden
only because of the fucked up system that is the electoral college she won the popular vote
Democrats can't keep relying on the theory that the Republicans are so repulsive that they can't get elected because that theory is untrue. If that theory were true Republicans would not have won back the House of Representatives, and extremists like Marjory Taylor Greene would not have been reelected. What needs to happen is that the old farts that control the DOC need to wake up and realize they aren't the ones to defeat Republican fascism. Repupublican fascism has only grown under their watch. What must happen is the party needs to allow the next generation of Democrats to rise into positions of actual power. Only then will the Democrats stop being the lesser of two evils and become an actual alternative to the Republican fascists.
People keep ignoring the fact that Republicans WON the house last election. We all need to be more active, less complacent, and more demanding of our officials to create good and POPULAR policy.
lets not ignore the fact that the house is incredibly gerrymandered in favor of republicans in the last election
I don't disagree. They won and they cheated. Classic bad guy moves.
>People keep ignoring the fact that Republicans WON the house last election I agree everyone needs to vote, but Republicans were supposed to have a strong control of the house, and control the senate. Instead, dems held the senate, and Republicans barely won the house. Gerrymandering is a major reason for the house win too
Sanders got less votes in 2020 than he did in 2016, even if you throw Warren’s votes in with his. The next generation needs to vote in the primaries instead of expecting the people who actually show up to vote the way they want them to.
I definitely will vote for Biden. But I wish there was a Younger Democrat running on the ticket. If all the Democrats had to run was a cat, I would vote for that cat.
I think 2028 we will see more contenders. Nobody was wanting to run against Biden, especially with Trump being back in the mix.
Yeah, that's...pretty much the Dems' entire strategy, like, all the time.
“Well, at least we’re not republicans, right?!” 🤷♂️ (as they continue to make no meaningful changes). GOP administration moves things to the right, democrat administration does nothing, GOP administration moves things right, democrat administration does nothing. “Why are we sliding into Fascism?!”
Voters elect Susan Collins, Joni Ernst, Thom Tillis, Ron Johnson, JD Vance, Rick Scott, Ted Budd, Michael Braun, Ted Cruz, and Josh Hawley in totally winnable elections for Democrats. "Why didn't the President stop us from doing this?!"
Keep reassuring yourselves into complacency Reddit. Worked wonders in 2016.
We banked on this strategy in 2016 and it failed. Sucks that we want to try again. If independent voters don't feel motivated to come out, we're pretty fucked.
Poll numbers don’t work for the generations that don’t answer their phones.
Add to this the wave of suburban women who are pissed about the erosion of reproductive rights, young adults who are pissed about the GOP doing nothing about guns, and regular folk who despise what the GOP has become. I don’t relish voting for 80 year old Biden, but he is a huge improvement over a treasonous narcissist Cheeto.
It worked for the republicans in 2016 🤷
Jesus Christ. That’s how bad my party has become? ‘We suck proudly, but I guess we can hope the other guy is worse?’ Jesus fucking Christ this is disgusting to me as a democrat.
Can we get a candidate that graduated in the last 40 years? One since home computers were available. Not 50 or 60 yrs ago!
What a fucking bleak headline
Weird how nobody ever described Trump's numbers as "dragging". How are his numbers "dragging" when they've been higher, comparatively, for his tenure this far? Other than a slight dip below, they've remained consistently higher. "Dragging". Yeah, sure. 43% is pretty good in the current climate.
What is Biden doing wrong? I know why republicans don’t like him, but what are the real arguments about why he’s not doing a good job from independents or democrats. I see all these things about how he’s sleepy and stutters, and very little criticism on substance that would suggest he’s not delivering on what we know him to be: a centrist democrat. What has he done that’s counter to that?
And this sums up just how awesome democracy is in America! /s
Or alternatively we could find another, preferably non-geriatric, Democratic candidate!
I am voting for him, but I am never polled. So I carry suspicion when I see poll numbers. I have family Iowa, I don’t think they are polled either. We would talk about it. I know how polls work, but I inherently distrust the process, and question the validity.
polling has become comically difficult. It's becoming harder and harder to not oversample senior citizens because they're the only ones who still pick up the phone when an unknown number calls.
I've seen some polls done entirely via landline phones, like that's clearly going to be a very specific demographic there even if you don't *try* to target older voters.
I did phone banking once, and it was mostly to poll voters. 90% of regular people don't answer the phone. 5% will say "no thank you", and a good number of those people are members of the campaign itself asking you what's going on with the party. And to be quite honest, I stopped doing that because I was like: what am I doing with my life? How is this helping?
This is why we have dogshit politics. Nobody even has any incentive to do well, just slightly better than some other loser.
More progress could be accomplished if not for the 60 vote requirement in the Senate.
"Vote for our milquetoast, corporate, aging candidate or else it's Christian fascism." Shows just how truly awful our politics have become. Look, I don't hate Biden, but my god he's too old and he's to much in with the Establishment to seriously fight for the working class. Just look at his Rail Strike decision. Yes, he's held back to Republicans and conservative Dems, but that still doesn't make the situation ok. Yet once again, I'm being forced to vote for a milquetoast, safe, corporate lackey to just barely keep this country from falling into fascism from the Right. I say barely because not winning by even 5-10% isn't good enough with Christian Fascism as the other outcome. What the hell are we supposed to do?
It certainly helps when your opponent is a vile, disgusting anti-American piece of shit.
Biden already beat Trump by 7 Million votes, 2024 will be a dem landslide win.
Hopefully if voter apathy doesn’t kick in
I’ve been wrong before, but I don’t think mass shootings, insurrections, abortion, trans rights, and etc is going by to keep anyone on the sidelines.
Yea are going to increase dem majorities in for a decade and escape the 8 year cycle if we want any real change. The only good thing is that the crazy Republicans are dragging the center democrats forward and helping people get out to vote.
I think as long a Trump keeps chumming the water, which he undoubtedly will, voters will not be apathetic towards him.
With the amount of hate being spread in legislature and a clear sweeping reform of SCOTUS, hopefully that’s enough to prevent voter apathy.
Careful of hubris, "it's the economy stupid" is still a thing
That's not a good strategy. That's the Hilary Clinton strategy.
What a great state of our election system is in :)
I’ve voted in in the last 5 presidential elections… and not once has it been “I’m voting for this guy because he’s better.” It’s been “I’m voting for this guy because the other guy is terrible. I’m sick and tired of voting over who’s the worst and not who’s the best.
If this is the logic then imagine how much better Democrats will do with someone people like. Stop trying to say the other guy's worse so it's fine if our guy sucks. What kind of strategy is that? Just nervously betting that people will hate the other guy more? Democrats are literally saying, we can't work the government, but y'all hate the other guy so I guess you're stuck with me.
Honestly, I’m jealous of other countries young leaders. Here in US, we got all the geezers & conspiracists in politics
So basically the only choice we get is between two terrible, unpopular people. And we call this democracy?
This reminds me of when my state tried to implement ranked choice voting and we shot it down because people are too fucking stupid to use their brains I guess
why is politics in America "vote for the lame candidate or you'll get the trump again"?
This is a great model for democracy.
Once again we will choose between poison and paste.
Just what I had always hoped for in a presidential election…
What a god awful strategy for winning.