| ▲ | lapcat 8 hours ago |
| > The majority of American voters in 2024 asked for this It was 49.8%, which is not quite a majority. It's also worth noting that Kamala Harris received precisely 0 votes in the 2024 Democratic primaries. [EDIT:] I see that the parent comment has now changed "majority" to "plurality." If I could make one Constitutional amendment, it would be this: publicly finance all election campaigns, and make private contributions illegal bribery, punished by imprisonment of both the candidate and briber. |
|
| ▲ | tfehring 8 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| Fixed the “majority” claim. I think a competent opposition party would be great for the US. But regardless of the candidate, US voters had three clear choices in the 2024 Presidential election: (1) I support what Trump is going to do, (2) I am fine with what Trump is going to do (abstain/third-party), (3) Kamala Harris. I think it’s extremely clear 3 was the best choice, but it was the least popular of the three. |
| |
| ▲ | AnimalMuppet 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | Option 4: I am not fine with what Trump is going to do, but I am also not fine with what Harris is going to do. And, since Harris said that she wouldn't do anything different than Biden, that could amount to "I am not fine with what Biden has been doing the last four years". Was that less bad than what Trump has done in one year? Yes. But Trump in his first term was less bad than this, and recency bias means that what we didn't like about Biden was more prominent in our minds. But my option 4 looks just like your option 2 in terms of how people voted. I'm just saying that the motive may have been different. | | |
|
|
| ▲ | munk-a 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Oh man that hits the biggest nerve in me. Never again should we allow primaries to be skipped. I don't care if the incumbent is the most popular candidate in history - running a primary makes sure the best candidates will be picked and refusing to run an election and then having the gall to suddenly anoint a chosen candidate was an absolutely disastrous decision. Democracy is a healthy process - I don't know why we buy the stupid line of "we need party unity" when what we need is an efficient expression of the voters will and having that expression is what best forms unity. There are some old Hillary quotes that make me absolutely rabid. |
| |
| ▲ | jajuuka 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | To be fair there were primaries, but the DNC only pushed Biden's candidacy. So there really wasn't any other candidates on all the ballots except uncommitted. When he dropped out in July their simply isn't enough time to run a functional primary and campaign for the vote in November. We can't really delay the election to have a primary. The delegates of the DNC do get to vote on who they want and by the time Kamala stepped in she did get the most votes. It's really a problem of money though. The DNC really are the king makers when it comes to candidates. That and PAC money are the requirements to get a nomination. At least when it comes to presidency. Smaller elections you get more freedom to have a successful without such things. The whole system needs an overhaul unfortunately and I don't see any candidate from any party looking to fix that any time soon. | | |
| ▲ | jakubmazanec 6 hours ago | parent [-] | | > When he dropped out in July their simply isn't enough time to run a functional primary and campaign for the vote in November. That's only problem in the USA. Other western democracies are able to have snap elections done in two months. | | |
| ▲ | jajuuka 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Other western democracies are much smaller or have much more uniform systems than the US as well. Not to say it's impossible, but it would take reworking the system. Right now the only elections that are highly publicized and known about are the ones every 4 years for president. Next is every two years election for congress and that's a big drop off in participation. Things like primaries you really have to go out of your way to know about them happening and when and where. The first couple states really end up determining who usually wins the nomination and financial backing. It takes time to move a candidate between places and set up multiple events and fundraisers. Now in state and city elections the US can do those quickly as well. Smaller area to cover and campaign and the community stays informed. It doesn't help that national elections involve institutions like the electoral college instead of a popular vote. That's a different problem though. | |
| ▲ | tokai 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Or less, in Denmark the average time from election announcement to voting is 20 days. |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | ReptileMan 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| My first thought when I read the Biden resignation letter was - Harris endorsement is brilliant fuck you to the Dem insiders that are ousting him. I am still lowkey convinced that he voted for Trump out of pure spite. |
| |
| ▲ | fuzzfactor 6 hours ago | parent [-] | | Biden's hail mary would have been to pick Haley as his running mate, who already had 19% of the Republicans. |
|
