One House Democrat said he spoke for others in the wake of the president’s stunningly feeble debate performance on Thursday: “The movement to convince Biden to not run is real.”

The House member, an outspoken defender of the president, said that House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer should consider “a combined effort” to nudge President Joe Biden out of the race.

Crestfallen by the president’s weak voice, pallid appearance and meandering answers, numerous Democratic officials said Biden’s bet on an early debate to rebut unceasing questions about his age had not only backfired but done damage that may prove irreversible. The president had, in the first 30 minutes of the debate, fully affirmed doubts about his fitness.

A second House Democrat said “reflection is needed” from Biden about the way ahead and indicated the private text threads among lawmakers were even more dire, with some saying outright that the president needed to drop out of the race.

  • LordCrom@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    6 days ago

    Isn’t it too late to get a new democrat as candidate anyway, right? I mean you need to register in all states before a deadline no?

    • Todd Bonzalez@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 days ago

      I’m pretty sure he could step down and hand it to Kamala. Maybe he could even run as VP. That might rock the boat the least, and while I don’t like Kamala, I have more faith in her to actually do the job.

      • towerful@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        28
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 days ago

        I always figured the role of president was more of a figure head.
        I get the buck stops with them, they can do their veto and special powers thing, and I’m sure there are other “ultimately this is your decision” type things.
        But it’s the administration you are voting on.

        I’m sure it feels amazing to have “that one guy” steering your country. But, I’m sure they mostly do what their advisors tell them to

        • CleoTheWizard@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 days ago

          I mean, that’s partly true. From my keeping up with politics, some of the candidates actions are their own but about 80% of the job is what you described. Your party recommends actions to you and congress sets you up for most of your actions. Vetoing things is only common when the opposition holds congress.

          I’ll highlight though that lately the presidents have seized more and more power and continue to do so. It started with Bush basically declaring war without congress and lately it’s been Biden doing things like canceling student loans and blocking the border up. Which I get that’s all power they’ve always had, but they’ve been reluctant to use it improperly because it’s so abusable. Now those robes are off and so trump will come into office and immediately write laws by himself basically

          • dustyData@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            6 days ago

            The US has been on a governance crisis for some time now. It is slow and gradual, but they already had a coup attempt. It is the sort of things that is surreal and only possible to see when you look at it from a multi decades POV. Like Asimov’s foundation, it will take centuries and lots of things can happen in the mean time, but you can already see the empire imploding, rotting from within. Rome took almost 3 centuries to fall, and it was more like an erosion rather than crumble. I can see something similar.

        • Asafum@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 days ago

          I want a president who has a vision and some form of understanding, but who knows what he doesn’t know and knows how to get that information. I want someone who I know has the best team guiding them and has sound judgment.

          I can’t fucking believe this is an impossible ask. :(

    • girlfreddy@lemmy.caOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      6 days ago

      There, a candidate must win support from the majority of “delegates” - party officials who formally choose the nominee. Delegates are assigned to candidates proportionally based on the results of each state’s primary election. This year, Mr Biden won almost 99% of the nearly 4,000 delegates.

      According to the DNC rules, those delegates are “pledged” to him, and are bound to support his nomination.

      But if Mr Biden were to drop out, it would be a free-for-all. There is no official mechanism for him or anyone else in the party to choose his successor, meaning Democrats would be left with an open convention.

      Presumably, Mr Biden would have some sway over his pledged delegates, but they would ultimately be free to do as they please.

      That could lead to a frantic contest erupting among Democrats who want a shot at the nomination. Source

  • Freefall@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    5 days ago

    Hate to give attention to polls, but pretty much all polls say otherwise, so “bot pushing narrative” orrrr?

  • lennybird@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 days ago

    I am right now drafting a message to send to the White House contact form advocating for just this. Will do nothing most likely, but it’s my drop in the ocean.

    • Snapz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      6 days ago

      You joke, but that’s exactly the next step trump will take if elected to secure “president for life” for the federalist society.

  • big_slap@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    7 days ago

    “reflection is needed”

    I hate being pessimistic, but they’re gonna drag out “reflecting” for so long that they will lose the election.

    if our elected officials are actually serious, they better act quickly on this because yesterday was extremely embarrassing. time will tell.

  • Etterra@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 days ago

    Isn’t it legally too late regardless? Don’t they have to have their application and fee in by a certain date?

      • EatATaco@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        5 days ago

        The court affirmed that the DNC and Debbie Wasserman Schultz held a palpable bias in favor Hillary Clinton.

        Wow, what a garbage site that grossly misrepresents what the judge said (and then went on to contradict this in the article). The judge didn’t ‘affirm’ their claims of bias, but just assumed they were true because whether or not they are true makes no difference to the ruling, as they basically claimed it was the wrong place for the suit. They even explain later on that assuming the plaintiffs claims are true is a common practice when dismissing a case.

  • CleoTheWizard@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 days ago

    My prediction is that one of them doesn’t make it to Inauguration Day and the country panics as a result. Is likely? No. But on this timeline it makes the most sense

    • ShaggySnacks@lemmy.myserv.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      6 days ago

      If Trump wins and dies before taking office would be a lot worse then Biden dieing.

      Before Trump’s body is even cold there would be endless amount of conspiracies that Democrats killed Trump. The only saving grace would be Trump’s VP and other blood suckers all have diarrhea for brains and lack the charisma to take advantage of the situation.

  • circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    5 days ago

    Remember when a huge coalition of people wanted RBG to retire? And then she didn’t, and those people took it as courage or some such other virtue?

    • notanaltaccount@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 days ago

      There’s a herd mentality that often overrides practical thinking, along with the desire not to offend.

      I think for RBG she had worked so hard to get there as a woman, and she probably felt like men don’t retire from the role just to please political concerns so why should she? Could she see the mess the country is in, she would have retired.

      • Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        5 days ago

        Her lack of oversight is one of the only things many of us will ever remember her for. She set all women back 50 years by not stepping down. That’s part of her legacy now, and it always will be.

        Her decision is a lesson for all those who will listen. We need to stop gambling with the future of our country. The best decision for everyone always needs to be put forward, and even the best people need to step down, if needed, to preserve and secure progress.

        • notanaltaccount@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 days ago

          It’s true. Her stubbornness leading to a conservative supermajority is what her legacy is now, instead of her trailblazing. Maybe one day when trans people aren’t considered fourth class citizens and we live in a better world, people will go back to remembering her trailblazing. She made a terrible gamble due to a lack of fear, and it was selfish or naive.

    • Blackmist@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 days ago

      Fucking hate when you get “too old” out of people for one side but not the other.

      All these fossils should have been sent to the farm years ago.

      Max age for starting a term should be 70. In most places you can’t be in control of a car without regular tests when you reach that age, yet you can be in control of the largest nuclear arsenal on Earth if you can still tell the difference between a cow and a horse.

    • Crikeste@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 days ago

      I only remember people being so pissed that she didn’t, they celebrated when she died. I don’t remember anyone who wanted her to step down calling it ‘courageous’ when she didn’t.

  • anon_8675309@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    6 days ago

    It’s too late. They should have listened when we all said that before. But MMW, if they switch now they’ll not win in November. Stay the course and there’s a squeak of a chance.

    Here’s the thing, if they push Biden out and pick Harris, she can’t beat Trump.

    If they push Biden out and DONT pick Harris they’re literally telling the public that this presidency is not legitimate.

    • EatATaco@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 days ago

      If they push Biden out and DONT pick Harris they’re literally telling the public that this presidency is not legitimate.

      The rest of your post makes sense, but if they choose a new person to run they aren’t admitting that this presidency is not legitimate. How the fuck do you even get yourself to this point? And how does this nonsense even have any upvotes?

  • randon31415@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    6 days ago

    “Biden can’t be persuaded let alone pressured”

    Which sums up both Biden’s strength and all his problems in one statement.

  • mojo_raisin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    7 days ago

    Maybe one of these people? Not that I like them, but they are not trump, have a chance, and are not on their deathbed.

    • Gretchen Whitmer
    • Pete buttigieg
    • Jamaal Bowman
    • mlg@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 days ago

      I’m convinced Whitmer refused the first time because she didn’t want to suck the DNC’s requirements so that they’d choose her as the preferred candidate in their sham primary.

    • WanderingVentra@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      6 days ago

      Maybe we should’ve had a real primary with debates and interviews and stuff =(

      We need an America 2 where we can apply all the lessons we’ve learned, like primary every election and judges that can be recalled easier for corruption.

        • bmsok@lemmy.world
          cake
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 days ago

          Gretchen is such a wonderful person, too. I used to deliver groceries to her and her family. She just used an app with the username Gretchen W. She always helped me get the groceries from my car and into the kitchen if she was home.

          Her daughters were also extremely polite and willing to help.

  • aleph@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    67
    arrow-down
    17
    ·
    7 days ago

    Democrats have nobody to blame but themselves. They stayed mum for three and half years and now they’re reaping the whirlwind.

    ☝️

    • Omega@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 days ago

      He has never sounded like that before and he has the record to show that he can do the job. Republicans tried to say he was on drugs because they heard him actually speak at the State of the Union.

      There was no reason to expect him to sound like he did. If they do the second debate, I hope he doesn’t try to recall every single statistic and just stick to the big points. But Trump might just not debate like he did in the primaries. In fact, it would be stupid to give Biden a chance to recoup.

      • aleph@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        6 days ago

        Biden has been conspicuously avoiding speaking at unscripted public encounters for quite a while now, though, and reading from an autocue at SotU is a far cry from having to react on the fly and put together coherent arguments in response to moderator questions and Trump’s lies during a debate. I have the feeling Biden’s staff knew full well that the debate was going to be rough going into it.

        • Omega@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 days ago

          I don’t think they were expecting this at all. Otherwise they wouldn’t have had him recite such specific information. You could tell he was flustered. If they knew it was going to be like this, I think they would have done a completely different strategy.

          I think the cold threw him off and they couldn’t pivot strategy. It should have been a focus on his image from the start. A few times where he laughed at Trump he looked good. In the after party he even sounded completely fine. That should have been the goal of the debate instead of reading receipts.

            • Omega@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              6 days ago

              “Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth.”

              I think the cold legitimately threw him off. Not that he was feeble from the cold. Just that it made him more easily flustered and he snowballed.

              I’ve also had interviews that I was “prepared for.” But trying to remember all the information at the moment was difficult. Hell, I was told one of my interviews was the best they had ever seen, and the last question had me flustered until I finally came up with my talking points after a minute.

              That’s what it felt like to me, a flustered man in a bad interview that snowballed.

      • njm1314@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        21
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        7 days ago

        They did? That’s weird I remember voting in them just like I do every 4 years.

            • AdamBomb@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              5 days ago

              So that’s the point that DancingBear was making and I was reinforcing- as Democratic voters, we were not presented with a choice this cycle

        • Maggoty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 days ago

          Even Russia puts the opposition on the ballot. That wasn’t an election it was a roll call.

        • DancingBear@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 days ago

          You can generally vote in primaries every year where one is needed, not just every four years fyi, if you’re in to voting and all.

        • Count042@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          45
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          edit-2
          6 days ago

          You weren’t paying attention. Many states banned anyone else from the ballot, even though there wasn’t cause for that by the rules.

          There were no debates (Something that would have given Democratic party members time to decide if they thought Biden was electable.)

          Some states were told their delegates wouldn’t count.

          There was no fair Democratic Party primary. If you think there was you were either not paying attention, or you didn’t want a fair primary in the first place.

          This problem is a problem of the Democratic Part{EDIT}y’s own making.

        • DancingBear@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 days ago

          Mmmmm, yea…. Mmmkay. No debates, no media coverage, rarely allowing any primary candidates on corporate media, I’m gonna have to give your statement a mostly false

        • bamboo@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          17
          arrow-down
          9
          ·
          6 days ago

          Putin also wins by a landslide. It’s easy to do if you ban all the competition.

          • Omega@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            6 days ago

            Nobody noteworthy was competing and all of the elections were landslides. I understand wanting to go through the motions in all states, but it really made zero difference.

            • DancingBear@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 days ago

              Nobody noteworthy? “Going through the motions”? I guess democracy is just like making love with some kind of boring spouse? Okay, fine by me just don’t blame me when I leave the presidential option blank in November if Biden and Trump are the only two options on the ballot. But I do live in a blue state, Jesus H Christ thank god I can vote my conscious.

              • Omega@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                4 days ago

                Weird, my conscience is to vote against the corrupt, fascist, rapist with a grudge against America. After dealing with Trump’s presidency and the aftermath, I can’t even imagine not voting for Biden. And I’m in a red state, so my vote definitely doesn’t matter.

                • DancingBear@midwest.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  4 days ago

                  Well before this we had neoliberals I guess so…. But yes vote… even if you have to leave it blank, vote your conscious…… in a red state I don’t think I could live there, but vote regardless

  • Xyre@lemmus.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    61
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    7 days ago

    This is how Bernie can still win! /s

    In the off chance they do replace him, they’re going to force the worst possible candidate on us (Kamala?). Because what else are you going to do, let the bad guy win?

      • hightrix@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        6 days ago

        Running Kamala would be making the same mistake they made back in 2016. She is polarizing, and extremely unlikeable. Anyone that worked with her or her department when she was in law in CA has nothing but bad things to say about her.

        Running Kamala would be giving Trump a second term.

      • ganksy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        28
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        7 days ago

        She’s not worse than Biden but not great. He should have chosen Stacey Abrams.

      • Xyre@lemmus.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        43
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        7 days ago

        A bland and unprincipled candidate whose positions shift based on polling numbers. Not to mention her prosecutorial background and close proximity to SF corruption scandals makes her an easy target.

      • Count042@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        25
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        7 days ago

        Everyone hates her for very good reasons.

        There is a reason California didn’t vote for her.

          • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 days ago

            She was incredibly unpopular when she ran in the primary. Her campaign failed well before Biden was the heir apparent.

          • grue@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            21
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 days ago

            Her background is as a “tough on crime” (read: shitty on civil rights) prosecuting attorney.

        • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          7 days ago

          Why do people just go on the internet and tell lies like this? California elected her attorney general for 8 years and senator once.

          • WanderingVentra@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            11
            ·
            6 days ago

            They might be talking about her primary run for President specifically, but she had dropped out way before then I’m pretty sure. That is, I am not sure if California even had a chance to vote for her. It’s one of the parts that suck about US primaries and being in a late state. Sometimes you don’t even get a chance to vote for the person you wanted to vote for before they drop out.

      • JJROKCZ@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        7 days ago

        She’s not white and female, those reasons alone mean she’s lost over a quarter of the nation.

  • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    7 days ago

    Biden’s big problem in the debate was that, for a few moments, he mumbled a confused answer that sounded like Donald Trump.

    • Optional@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      29
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 days ago

      It was a no-win situation. The DNC gave in - once again - to their republican-lite mindset of ‘capturing undecided voters’ and agreed to get socked in the face , twice, for absolutely no gain and everything to lose.

      DNC consultants have always been morons, but now they’re morons-from-the-90s who still don’t understand what’s changed.

      • Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 days ago

        Seriously, they are so far behind their conservative counterparts is not even funny. They need to hire better PR specialists, and marketing teams.

      • kromem@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        6 days ago

        Having a presidential election without debates would have been a big step back and loss for American democracy.

        We shouldn’t champion erosion of democratic institutions when it helps our side of the ticket.

        And generally, if eroding democratic institutions helps your ticket, it’s a red flag about your ticket.

        • Optional@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          6 days ago

          Having “debates” be this ridiculous mud-wrestling that only benefits trump or another conman is the big step back and the loss to democracy.

          They are apparently unable to create a forum in which a position can be taken and defended with facts and reason. UNABLE. Because the republiQans are fielding a demented sociopath and a compulsive liar.

          The format is beyond broken, and there isn’t a way to fix it when one party has no intention - never had any intention to follow the rules, or decorum, or common decent behavior.

          We found that out eight years ago. I can’t believe they walked right into it again.

          • kromem@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            13
            ·
            6 days ago

            Literally any half competent debater could have torn Trump apart up there.

            The failure wasn’t the moderators but the opposition candidate to Trump letting him run hog wild.

            If Trump claims he’s going to end the war in Ukraine before even taking office, you point out how absurd that claim is and that Trump makes impossible claims without any substance or knowledge of diplomacy. That the images of him photoshopped as Rambo must have gone to his head if he thinks Putin will be so scared of him to give up.

            If he says hostages will be released as soon as he’s nominated, you point out it sounds like maybe there’s been a backroom tit-for-tat deal for a hostage release with a hostile foreign nation, and ask if maybe the intelligence agencies should look into that and what he might have been willing to trade for it.

            The moderators have to try to keep the appearance of neutrality, but the candidates do not. And the only reason Trump was so successful in spouting BS and getting away with it was because his opposition had the strength of a wet paper towel.

            • Optional@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              6 days ago

              Literally any half competent debater could have torn Trump apart up there.

              He’s “debated” a large number of half-competent people in primaries and post-convention. Which one tore him apart? Examples please.

              The failure wasn’t the moderators but the opposition candidate to Trump letting him run hog wild.

              While the visual of hog-tying trump by a cowboy-hatted Biden is fun, it’s simply not his job to chase the gish. That’s why trumps insane rambling works; it’s not possible to practically address each batshit claim or outright lie. It’s just not. Biden’s already got the job of presenting and defending his own platform.

              It is absolutely the moderators’ job to check him and a failure to do so means not only that it’s wide open Crime Time for trump but that the proceedings themselves lend authority to his lies.

              The moderators have to try to keep the appearance of neutrality, but the candidates do not.

              The appearance of neutrality? As opposed to just neutrality? Okay, well either way, again - no. The moderators have to acknowlege reality and remind the shit-talkers that they can’t say what they just said because it’s bullshit. And once again, they can’t do that with trump because he’s a compulsive liar who is incapable of acknowledging anything but his own reality.

              And the only reason Trump was so successful in spouting BS and getting away with it was because his opposition had the strength of a wet paper towel.

              Spouting BS and getting away with it is the entirety of what trump does. He’s not an authority on anything, he can’t function as any sort of manager without a stadium’s worth of assistance, and - really, hear me now - he is utterly. incapable. of not lying.

              Nothing will stop him from trying to babble nonsense and if the moderators, effectively the referees, the arbitrators, refuse to hold him to any standard, there’s no other outcome than to watch helplessly at his idiot spewhole as it disgorges lie after lie after lie.

              Biden blew it, yes, but if you think there was something to be gained by engaging with trump, i encourage you to consider the simple fact that trump is not able to acknowledge truth if it does not directly benefit him, and any attempt to do so will be met with more lies, more vitriol, and no one will succeed.

              It’s unconscionable that anyone at this late date would even consider that even a remote possibility.

    • WanderingVentra@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 days ago

      The problem is that there was no live fact checking. Wtf can you do against a constant Gish Gallop of blatant lies? Even if they drugged him, I’m not sure what he could’ve done with that debate format.

    • Not_mikey@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      7 days ago

      That’s a pretty fatal mistake when your average person is only gonna watch a 10 second clip of the debate.

      • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        7 days ago

        That’s it for me. I’m not voting for anyone who sounds confused for 10 seconds. Unless maybe they ran against someone who sounds confused for 10 years, but only in that circumstance.

    • PsychedSy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      6 days ago

      He does this shit consistently and has been for a couple years. It wasn’t one fucking answer in the debate. Christ. We are so fucked.

    • Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 days ago

      It is, and it isn’t… People love drama, and nothing about Trump’s stance is based on tradition or stability.

      The right replacement could theoretically sweep the election. I just don’t trust the DNC with this… So I guess I agree with you in the end.