I’ve seen some random videos of Tucker saying that suicides are way up, economy is way down, addiction and crime are rampant and the cost of living is insanity where nobody can really thrive in this environment.

On the otherside, inflation is slowing, people are working and it feels we’re slowly getting back to some normalcy.

What’s your personal perspective on how life is right now/since 2020? Is that the biggest factor for determining who you will vote for in 2024?

    • stanleytweedle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      There wasn’t an incumbent Democrat in the oval office in 2007.

      Again - you should check how many times in US history an incumbent presidential candidate has not won their party’s primary.

      • MasterOBee Master/King@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t care if there was an incumbent or not. The chances were extremely small, everyone thought hilary had it in the bag.

        Again - you should check how many times in US history an incumbent presidential candidate has not won their party’s primary.

        I believe twice.

        Who cares? And at this point in time especially, nobody is excited for a run off the same as 2020. You’re telling me now ISNT the time for another democratic candidate to try to run for something they believe in?

        Let me guess, you’re gonna bitch about how we had no other choice behind biden this election, but you’re sitting here arguing against challengers to biden. I want democracy, I don’t want the RNC and DNC choosing 1 candidate for me to pick, you’re furthering the motivations of the establishments of the two parties.

        I disagree with you.

        • stanleytweedle@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Doesn’t matter if you care. The fact that there’s an incumbent in office means they win their primary by default. Did you really just now learn that’s how it works?

          • MasterOBee Master/King@lemmy.worldOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            their primary by default. Did you really just now learn that’s how it works?

            Maybe this is news to you - but that’s not how it works. There’s still a run off for the democratic candidate. You do know that Reagan ran against an incumbent, right? He’s one of a few.

            Here ya go, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primary_challenge - go ahead, read up, you clearly have a lot to learn.

            • stanleytweedle@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              There’s still a run off for the democratic candidate

              It’s called a primary, and they do go through the motions. It’s kind of adorable you think that means there’s a chance.

              You do know that Reagan ran against an incumbent, right? He’s one of a few.

              He ran against Jimmy Carter- an incumbent democrat… so no, he didn’t beat an incumbent in his party’s primary. Wow, man, you really don’t get any of this, do you? You are fun.

              • MasterOBee Master/King@lemmy.worldOP
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                The fact that there’s an incumbent in office means they win their primary by default.

                You said that they win their primary by default.

                They do not, you are mistaken.

                It’s kind of adorable you think that means there’s a chance.

                Always a chance, bbe

                He ran against Jimmy Carter- an incumbent democrat… so no, he didn’t beat an incumbent in his party’s primary. Wow, man, you really don’t get any of this, do you? You are fun.

                Man you didn’t read the link at all, did you? You still got a lot to learn, buddy! I gave you the entire wikipedia page, but apparently I have to dig it up for you, still!

                “In the 1976 Republican Party presidential primaries, President Gerald Ford, who was never elected president or vice president, and ascended to the presidency after being appointed vice president by Richard Nixon, faced a challenge from former California governor Ronald Reagan. Ford’s popularity with voters suffered from his decision to pardon Nixon for his role in the Watergate scandal.[6] Reagan won 24 primaries, but was narrowly defeated by Ford on the first ballot of the 1976 Republican National Convention. Ford went on to lose the general election.”

                • stanleytweedle@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  I love that you’re actually looking this stuff up now and learning new things. Now circle back and apply what you just learned about incumbents and primaries to RFK Jr’s chances.

                  • MasterOBee Master/King@lemmy.worldOP
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    I love how you blatantly say false things, and when you’re corrected time after time proving you wrong, you just bypass it and act like you’re right.