Vice President Kamala Harris appears to have energized Democrats in the early days of her candidacy, with the surge in warm feelings extending across multiple groups, including some key Democratic constituencies that had been tepid about President Joe Biden.
The idea that Biden didn’t need to drop out was where they went wrong.
Everyone who didn’t want Biden to drop out needs to reevaluate how they look at politics, because the benefits of doing so should have been extremely obvious even without hindsight.
I was one of those that thought biden shouldn’t drop out, because I was worried about the risk of infighting breaking out over who would replace him, distracting everyone and driving away voters, and I was also concerned about throwing away the incumbent advantage. I still feel the risks of that happening were real and valid, but I’m immensely pleased that those worries didn’t come to pass and everyone immediately unified behind Harris.
Those risks were indeed real, but they were also much, much less likely than you feared because the DNC is not the democratic institution it pretends to be.
Support was always going to immediately solidify behind Harris because she’s an incumbent, has access to Biden’s PAC, and the DNC chairperson is a Biden appointee. If there was another candidate who could have contested Harris they’d have already contested Biden during the aborted primary.
Right now, the election is still a toss-up, but it won’t stay that way. The next couple of weeks will show Harris on track to come out just ahead in the electoral college, and the results of the election depend on whether or not the Republicans can reclaim the initiative in time to swing the needle back.
The real question, regardless of who wins, is the Republican party establishment itself. Tensions between the party’s wealthy financiers and the right-wing culture warriors they depend on for electoral relevance have never been higher. Winning the presidency might prolong the status quo a little longer, but I don’t see how they can resolve this fundamental conflict amicably. How long can the house stand divided against itself, and who will rise to challenge the Democrats from the Left once they’re gone?
this sounds a bit like survivorship bias. Because the outcome has been good does not mean risks where less likely. That being said for myself it was not about risk per se but more I just liked him over any realistic possibility including harris. that being said I see little difference between voting for harris as vice president or potential president given the age and directly for president. so ultimately its fine.
Me too. Happy as heck to have been wrong.
I feel like Cassandra 'cuz I keep getting downvotes whenever I speak true prophecy or ask people to use hindsight to reckon with why their judgements were incorrect.
There is a blue flavor of the MAGA mindset. Just say don’t want your tax dollars supporting an active genocide and watch those downvotes pile up
Ignorant take.
Huge post yesterday about Israel blowing up a water facility.
All the comments “durrrr, another one? See it’s genocide!”
No. It’s the same one fifteen other people have posted about it’s still based on an unverified second-hand “report.” Still doesn’t give enough details to verify underlying story is even based on real places or events.
It’s Iranian- and Qatari- sponsored lawfare, seeping into the media discourse through repetition. And it really drowns out the handful of legit war crimes and murders that have occured.
link
It’s okay to be wrong. You can still change. Extremism in Israel is off the rails. The Israelis themselves are showing you the crimes they commit.
@JustZ@lemmy.world
Did you check the link? What is your excuse for Israeli crimes today, now that we know it definitely happened on the hands of the IDF?
Thats a level of politics thats not for me. How I feel is how I feel.