- Che Banana ( @The_Che_Banana@beehaw.org ) 24•2 months ago
Incumbent President almost always runs unopposed. That being said, he ran as the adult in the room to get us back from the right, and was NOT expected to run for reelection.
I am still going to vote for the D nominee out of pure spite for the right…but something has to give, there needs to be voting reform before the next general which incluudes ranked choice or at some point the choices will ne worse than this time around.
- Truck_kun ( @Truck_kun@beehaw.org ) English8•2 months ago
Incumbent President almost always runs unopposed. That being said, he ran as the adult in the room to get us back from the right, and was NOT expected to run for reelection.
True enough, but I also don’t think during the 2020 election, anybody thought that if Trump lost, at practically 80 years old, he would be the R candidate in the 2024 election as well.
I honestly wish the right wasn’t so regressive, crazy, and having such a hold on half the country. I’d love to vote for someone else for president, but the risk of the right winning is just too damaging.
- Che Banana ( @The_Che_Banana@beehaw.org ) 3•2 months ago
It was the Dems initiative to get someone else to go but just did nothing but ride the coattails
- Dark Arc ( @Dark_Arc@social.packetloss.gg ) English7•2 months ago
That being said, he ran as the adult in the room to get us back from the right, and was NOT expected to run for reelection.
I don’t know where this idea started, it’s certainly something I expected him to do.
- t3rmit3 ( @t3rmit3@beehaw.org ) 9•2 months ago
From his campaign saying it in 2019 and 2022, though he avoided making it a promise (not that a promise would mean anything coming from a politician anyways).
This was explicitly used as an argument to boost him over other younger candidates in the 2020 primary field.
- Dark Arc ( @Dark_Arc@social.packetloss.gg ) English6•2 months ago
Interesting; granted it seems to be a campaign advisor’s opinion stated as-if it were fact so I’d wager that’s probably more bad reporting than it is a campaign promise.
- millie ( @millie@beehaw.org ) English21•2 months ago
Yes. Clearly it is undemocratic for the person who won the last presidential election to sit as an incumbent.
🙄
- t3rmit3 ( @t3rmit3@beehaw.org ) 17•2 months ago
I mean, yes? Just because it’s a precedent here doesn’t make it democratic.
It’s literally a practice that denies or heavily suppresses having a healthy crop of new primary candidates to vote for, which makes the party much less responsive to voter sentiment changes.
8 years is a LONG time, and yeah, a lot of people who felt that a candidate represented them 4 years ago may not feel they do anymore, and they still deserve the same chance to democratically decide who represents them.
Without that happening in the primary, their only options are to get no say in their candidate, withhold their vote, or vote for another party, in the general election.
- corsicanguppy ( @corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca ) English2•2 months ago
When you say “literally” it torpedoes your argument. Do you know any other adverbs?
This is Beehaw; argue the issue or topic, but not stuff like this.
- t3rmit3 ( @t3rmit3@beehaw.org ) 3•2 months ago
Care to explain this? I’m not using “literally” to mean “practically”, I’m using it to mean “literally”.
- coyotino [he/him] ( @theangriestbird@beehaw.org ) English4•2 months ago
block and move on, t3rmit3. i think we’re getting trolled.
- Tiltinyall ( @Tiltinyall@beehaw.org ) 1•2 months ago
So 3rd term precedent is up for grabs, or are we just so superbly selective in which policy to ignore? I’m asking because I’ll be real interested in 4 years.
- t3rmit3 ( @t3rmit3@beehaw.org ) 6•2 months ago
The term limit on presidents is a law.
The incumbent presidents’ campaigns retaining control of the party organizations (DNC and GOP are entirely private entities) during primary season is entirely the self-made rule of the political parties.
The incumbent’s team should be removed from the DNC before the primary begins, have the primary, and then integrate them back in if and when they re-win the nomination.
- Didros ( @Didros@beehaw.org ) 6•2 months ago
Honestly, I’m not sure if you are making a joke about how a monarchy can’t be democratic. Or if this is a comment about him legit “deserving” to be president more.
- Dark Arc ( @Dark_Arc@social.packetloss.gg ) English7•2 months ago
Monarchy… Really…? This is not even remotely close to a monarchy situation.
- t3rmit3 ( @t3rmit3@beehaw.org ) 9•2 months ago
Monarchy was obviously the wrong word, but I think their underlying point is correct; there is not supposed to be a Right to Rule in America.
No one deserves to be a president any more than anyone else, and treating an incumbent as though they do, without having to go through an open, democratic primary process, is to treat them as more deserving of future authority than other citizens.
- Dark Arc ( @Dark_Arc@social.packetloss.gg ) English5•2 months ago
I mean, okay fair enough, this is a longstanding thing that’s happened though. It’s pretty rare for incumbents to be challenged within their own party (and this is normally not a controversial thing).
It’s also less that “nobody could” and more “nobody [with a remote chance of winning] did.”
There’s no “right to rule” here, that’s entirely a retroactive facade that’s contrary to the facts.
(EDIT: Bit more info https://www.vox.com/2023/9/12/23868230/biden-democratic-primary-challenge-polls)
- Barry Zuckerkorn ( @BarryZuckerkorn@beehaw.org ) 4•2 months ago
No one deserves to be a president any more than anyone else, and treating an incumbent as though they do, without having to go through an open, democratic primary process, is to treat them as more deserving of future authority than other citizens.
There was a primary, and Biden got the most votes/delegates under the rules. Nobody is saying that incumbents should automatically get renomination. Or even that the incumbent should get some sort of rules advantage (like say, the way the defending world champ in chess gets an auto-bid to defend his title against a challenger who has to win a tournament to get there).
The rules are already set up to where any challenger has an equal structural change of winning the primary. They just won’t have the actual popular support. You know, the core principles of democratic elections.
- t3rmit3 ( @t3rmit3@beehaw.org ) 6•2 months ago
There was a primary
The rules are already set up to where any challenger has an equal structural change of winning the primary.
Man, you’ve got some hilarious jokes. Tell me, during an incumbent primary, who controls the DNC?
https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/biden-democratic-primaries-rules/
https://www.vox.com/2023/9/12/23868230/biden-democratic-primary-challenge-polls
- Barry Zuckerkorn ( @BarryZuckerkorn@beehaw.org ) 3•2 months ago
Tell me, during an incumbent primary, who controls the DNC?
Same as during a non-incumbent primary. The person who won the most recent nomination tends to have an outsized voice in the selection of party officials (because it’s their pledged delegates who vote on all the other stuff). Yes, that means Biden-affiliated insiders had an inside track in 2020, but that’s also true of Clinton allies in 2016, Obama allies in 2012, Obama allies in 2008, and Kerry allies in 2004.
More than a year ago, the DNC adopted new rules—including a primary calendar that ignored state law in Iowa and New Hampshire and eliminated any primary debates—designed to ensure that Biden’s coronation would proceed untroubled by opposition from any credible Democrat.
Which of those changes in the rules do you think were designed to benefit Biden specifically? De-emphasizing the role of Iowa and New Hampshire? There’s been people clamoring for that for decades, within the party.
There’s basically no set of rules that will ever create a credible challenge to an incumbent who wants to run for reelection. It’s a popularity problem, not a structural problem.
- t3rmit3 ( @t3rmit3@beehaw.org ) 4•2 months ago
It’s not just about pledged delegates. The incumbent’s campaign remains in control of the party during the primary. And in 2016, Hilary’s campaign was literally in complete control of the DNC even prior to her getting the nomination despite not being an incumbent.
- Didros ( @Didros@beehaw.org ) 2•2 months ago
Thanks much! Spot on.
- Tiltinyall ( @Tiltinyall@beehaw.org ) 3•2 months ago
The edge is strong with these trolls, I’m almost positive this is what we’re dealing with here.
- millie ( @millie@beehaw.org ) English1•2 months ago
Yeah, I literally just stop replying when they trickle in. Rather plant seeds and move on than get bogged down by Putin’s trolls.
- coyotino [he/him] ( @theangriestbird@beehaw.org ) English3•2 months ago
not sure about you, but we’re trying to have political discussions in this space. Strolling into a thread a day late, accusing everyone of being Russian trolls, and then ignoring your replies is a terrible way to foster discussion.
- i_ben_fine ( @i_ben_fine@lemmy.one ) 3•2 months ago
Would you say more on this? Specifically the connection between democratic/undemocratic and incumbents.
- coffeetest ( @coffeetest@beehaw.org ) 13•2 months ago
Its ok for political parties to choose their candidates. The problem is the two party system. No one is confused that the US is not a direct democracy.
- JCPhoenix ( @JCPhoenix@beehaw.org ) English1•2 months ago
Honestly, I think we’d be better off if we got rid of primaries. I do think they tend to lead to more extreme/radical/fringe nominees, since the party candidates try to out compete each other on their party/ideology bona fides. Maybe it is better if go back to the party establishments picking a candidate.
There are other reason as well. One is that parties are private organizations. So why does a government often run them? I know that’s not true all states. In some states, the primaries/caucuses are almost entirely run and organized by the parties. But in others, primaries are done by state and local governments. Do the parties pay the state back for this? Idk. Regardless, still seems strange.
- Storksforlegs ( @storksforlegs@beehaw.org ) English4•2 months ago
I mean, has there been an instance where someone else within the party snipes the nomination before the second term?
- corsicanguppy ( @corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca ) English3•2 months ago
Two that I know of.
Both landslide losses at the polls.