• Rapidcreek@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      20
      ·
      9 days ago

      Missing from the Clooney op-ed: The last two times Democrats changed their ticket at the last moment (1968 and 1972) they lost in landslides.

      • Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        22
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        9 days ago

        Did you expect people to not fact check this? 1968 was lost by less than a percentage point and was after the LBJ presidency, which was wildly unpopular for escalating the Vietnam War. You also fail to mention that both elections were against Nixon, who until the Watergate scandal was widely regarded positively. Edit: these two elections were also right in the middle of the implementation of the southern strategy, when racist Democrats were starting to defect to the Republican Party after the passage of the Civil Rights Act.

        Both Democratic candidates were also chosen at the national convention, so I’m not sure what you mean by last moment candidate changes. Presumably one must have an official candidate before a last moment change can be made.

        • gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 days ago

          Also, 1972 was a trainwreck because the moderate assholes of the Democratic party threw a big temper tantrum over a progressive like McGovern getting the nomination and pushed him to pick a no-name moderate as his running mate, a moderate who just so happened to have major health problems McGovern and the general public didn’t know about. When those health problems got leaked by someone (seems nobody knows who for sure), the campaign tried to stand firm and McGovern said he was behind his VP Eagleton 1000%, leading to his polling numbers falling off a cliff and never recovering (even though they ended up dropping Eagleton and getting a different running mate like a week later).

          Saying we should be worried about switching our nominee because of what happened in 1972 is like saying you shouldn’t get chemotherapy because most people who die of cancer were getting chemo, or you shouldn’t let firetrucks park on your street because most burned down homes had a firetruck parked near them recently, it’s just completely backwards.

          • Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            9 days ago

            But think of all the racists that defected to the Republican Party that might have otherwise voted Dem!!

            Actually that does make the Dem establishment’s deranged obsession with getting “undecided” voters instead of exciting their base make a lot more… I don’t want to say “sense” because it’s a strategy that goes over like a lead balloon, but the old fucks at the wheel still being traumatized by 1972 adds context.

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

          LBJ refused to run after leading in the primaries. This left three major democratic candidates, Robert Kennedy, who entered the race late, Eugene McCarthy and Hubert Huphrey, LBJ’s vice President. The major issue was Vietnam. Kennedy and McCarthy were against the war, Humphrey was stay the course. Kennedy, who just got the lead in primary votes was assassinated the night of the last primary. An open convention was held in Chicago with rioting in the streets. Humphrey was chosen as nominee in a back room deal. He lost to Nixon who said he had a secret plan to end the war. But, of course he lied.

          Fact check me all you want

          • Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            9 days ago

            Fact check me all you want

            Okay. Are you going to edit out the misinformation in your comment that says losing by less than a percentage point is a landslide, or clarify that none of the candidates were changed after the convention?

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

            LBJ refused to run after leading in the primaries

            That is more than a little bit misleading

            LBJ faced long odds in November; his top aides feared that he might not even win re-nomination. With his public approval rating at around 36 percent, LBJ had barely survived a surprisingly strong primary challenge from antiwar Sen. Eugene McCarthy in New Hampshire, who took 42 percent of the vote to LBJ’s 48 percent on March 12. Four days later, on March 16, New York Sen. Robert F. Kennedy, a long-time LBJ nemesis, declared that he, too, would challenge Johnson for the nomination

            On March 31, 1968, Lyndon B. Johnson appeared on national television and announced … that he had decided not to seek his party’s nomination for president.

            [Quotes reordered from how they were in the source for better clarity]

            https://web.archive.org/web/20240710212846/https://www.history.com/news/lbj-exit-1968-presidential-race

            Better source with lots more details (which makes it harder to excerpt) - https://web.archive.org/web/20240710213056/https://www.npr.org/2018/03/25/596805375/president-johnson-made-a-bombshell-announcement-50-years-ago

            An open convention was held in Chicago with rioting in the streets.

            A note about those riots -

            On September 4, 1968, Milton Eisenhower, chair of the National Commission on the Causes and Prevention of Violence, announced that the commission would investigate the violence at the Chicago convention and report its findings to President Lyndon Johnson.[3][36] A Chicago lawyer, Daniel Walker, headed the team of over 200 members, who interviewed more than 1,400 witnesses and studied FBI reports and film of the confrontations.[36] The report was released on December 1, 1968, characterized the convention violence as a “police riot” [37] and recommended prosecution of police who used indiscriminate violence; the report made clear that the vast majority of police had behaved responsibly, but also said that a failure to prosecute would further damage public confidence in law enforcement.[36] The commission’s Walker Report, named after its chair Daniel Walker, acknowledged that demonstrators had provoked the police and responded with violence of their own, but found that the “vast majority of the demonstrators were intent on expressing by peaceful means their dissent”.[4]: 3

            [Bolding added]

            https://web.archive.org/web/20240710214549/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1968_Democratic_National_Convention_protests

            He lost to Nixon who said he had a secret plan to end the war. But, of course he lied.

            This is completely correct, but just saying he lied is kinda understating the magnitude of the horrifying things he and Kissinger did in that region of the world. A small sample - https://web.archive.org/web/20240710215210/https://theconversation.com/henry-kissingers-bombing-campaign-likely-killed-hundreds-of-thousands-of-cambodians-and-set-path-for-the-ravages-of-the-khmer-rouge-209353

            Incidentally, as long as I’m thinking about the terrible things the 1968 election led to, its worth pointing out that Nixon’s use of law and order rhetoric brought the Dixiecrat segregationists who were big mad about the civil rights acts fully into the Republican party, who was then able to spend the 1970s dismantling lots of integrative programs and throwing black people into prison for bullshit reasons (like, this is the moment mass incarceration takes off). It’s also worth pointing out how a lot of people just remember Humphrey as a spineless Johnson lackey who kept supporting his boss’s war even though he really didn’t agree with it, but we should remember him as the badass who walked into the 1948 Democratic national convention and said it was time to drop segregationist bullshit and start promoting civil rights.

            I imagine we disagree on why it turned out how it did, but I imagine we agree that the world would have been a lot better place if Nixon lost the 1968 election.

            • Rapidcreek@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              9 days ago

              I don’t know what’s misleading. Facts is facts.

              I tried to be succinct and write as little as necessary. This medium demands it.

              I was actually pretty close to all these events, and some of the players.

              I suppose we would actually agree on why things turned out the way it did, but nonetheless history tells us that dropping in a new nominee is a good way to lose.

              The world would have been a better place had Robert Kennedy not been killed.

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

                Fair enough about the need to be succinct (that has obviously never been a strong suit of mine), and yes, your first comment was technically factually correct, but the context of Johnson being a weakened candidate who thought he probably was going to lose if he stayed in is important. My argument would be that in situations where we dropped in a new nominee we were already pretty screwed for other reasons, and the need to switch nominees was just a symptom of that.

                I was actually pretty close to all these events, and some of the players.

                Y’know, I’ve actually kind of gotten that impression. I kinda hate to get into personal/individual account stuff, but I’ve read a lot of your comments at this point and speaking as someone whose own direct campaign experience has been limited to volunreering and chatting with the paid campaign staff, you remind me of some of them in a lot of hard to articulate ways. For lack of a less judgemental way to put it, some of your comments make me think “yeah, this guy gets how it works” and the rest make me think “this guy is everything wrong with the Democratic party!” I only ever seem to end up responding to the ones I disagree with, but either way it’s a perspective I appreciate.

                The world would have been a better place had Robert Kennedy not been killed.

                110% agreed, even more than Humphrey he was the one who should have won that election. I wasn’t alive for The 1968 election, but just reading about the history of it is heartbreaking.

      • PugJesus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 days ago

        Unfortunately, the public nature of these comments from sitting Congressmembers mean that we’re left with little choice now.

  • Fapper_McFapper@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    9 days ago

    Biden had one bad debate and motherfuckers are coming out of the woodwork to condemn him. Meanwhile, Trump, the convicted felon, can say and do whatever the fuck he wants and you don’t hear shit against him from republicans. Democrats better learn real quick that the game has changed. Keep turning the other cheek and you’re just going to get slapped again.

    • superterran@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      9 days ago

      People push back against Trump on a near constant basis, pointing out Biden’s flaws isn’t an endorsement of Trump.

      • Fapper_McFapper@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 days ago

        People do, you and I push back against Trump. Retired republicans push back against Trump. But how many current Republicans in office do you see doing what democrats are doing to Biden right now? How many do you see calling for him to step aside? Is it one, two, three republicans in office? Remember, I’m not asking for those who oppose Trump like Lisa Murkowski or Susan “He’s learned his lesson” Collins. I’m talking about a two or three week thrashing on national media with the help of the media. How many?

        • bungalowtill@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          8 days ago

          Why should they? They see that Trump got good chances. And Democrats are worried that Biden could lose. It‘s not that complicated

          • Fapper_McFapper@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            8 days ago

            That’s exactly my point. Morals, decorum, ethics, etc., only apply to democrats. Republicans will vote for Putin if it serves their needs and desires. Meanwhile democrats are infighting to the point of taking their own candidate down, even if that means destroying democracy. Democrats need to understand that the game has changed, if they want to win they’re going to have to emulate republicans. I guarantee that come November every single republican will vote for Trump. Why can’t we say the same? Why don’t we stand behind Biden regardless of that one debate performance? Instead we have every Tom, Dick, Harry and Jane calling for Biden to step aside knowing damn well there is no one to take his place. Knowing damn well that Biden was the people’s choice.

    • HaleHirsute@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 days ago

      In his op-ed Clooney detailed that during his time with Biden several weeks prior that Biden was just like he was during the debate… Which is a very important day point indicating that the debate was not just “one bad night” but rather a consistent condition.

    • profdc9@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      9 days ago

      It’s about donors. The donors want Biden gone because they don’t like his policies, but don’t want to donate to the Republicans because Trump is worse.

  • PugJesus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    9 days ago

    Regardless of whether it would have been the more advantageous decision to run Biden before all of this - health and all - it’s increasingly clear that our best choice is going to be replacing Biden on the ticket. Not thrilled about it. I don’t know that this was worth throwing away a massive incumbent and name recognition advantage, but it’s a moot point - too many public figures on Biden’s side have came out in opposition. That track is rendered much less friendly by this public discourse. Our best chance now is in Biden stepping down.

    • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      9 days ago

      As much as I hate to say it, this is likely a choice about which donors still support him vs. his chances of winning, or what any of the mere mortals in the voting bloc want.

      If enough donors bail (and it looks like Clooney is a major fundraiser), that will likely seal the deal much more so than looking at Biden’s dismal, impossible-to-win numbers or polling Democratic voters about what they want…

    • Cornelius_Wangenheim@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      9 days ago

      It’s actually becoming increasingly clear that there is no replacement for Biden. We have polling data now and none of the other options come close to Biden.

    • MegaUltraChicken@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      9 days ago

      Yeah I’m with you. There’s too much inertia against him now. The Biden team needs to approach Biden with a plan to get him to step aside, not just ask him to consider it. They need to identify replacement candidate(s) ASAP and get them in front of voters. Starting from scratch right now is gonna be tough, but it’s absolutely winnable in this climate.

      • PugJesus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        9 days ago

        It’s not about whether Biden’s health is good or bad. It’s about the perception of it.

        I still think it’s a mistake. But you can’t unring a bell. You can rescind an endorsement, but sure as hell not a condemnation. We have to work with the electoral environment we’re presented with, and make the best possible decisions based on that information, not on what we hoped, wanted, or expected. With the hostility presented to Biden from within his own party and the public nature of that hostility, him being replaced looks like the most strategic choice at this juncture.

        • SatansMaggotyCumFart@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          13
          ·
          9 days ago

          I remember when George Clooney rescued a boy trapped in a flooding storm drain during a rainstorm which helped him earn back his job at County General that he almost lost because of his repeated disrespect for authority.

          • PugJesus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            11
            ·
            9 days ago

            I remember when George Clooney had meetings with Obama on the crisis in the Sudan and is a member of a foreign policy think tank, in addition to co-founding an anti-corruption NGO and being a consistent supporter of the Democratic Party, both verbally and in fundraising.

  • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    9 days ago

    Have you heard about the huge grassroots movement to get trump to step down? Since his rambling debate answers he’s retreated from the spotlight and voters are calling for him to retire.

    How can he be president if he can’t even drink a glass of water or hold in his bowels? It’s a big deal and everyone is talking about it.

    • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 days ago

      Seems we need a commonly accepted definition of that phrase. I’ll be voting Biden if he’s in the general, but not out of any special loyalty to him or his precious “legacy”. And that’s because there is no real alternative, no matter how much bleating the tankies do. I think some of the tankies would declare that this is “blue maga”, but I disagree for sure.

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

    Remeber CNN got bought by some FOX News right wing asshole. That’s why they are shilling this shit.

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

    Oh shit, somebody go find Ja Rule! We gotta know what celebrities think about this.

        • distantsounds@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          9 days ago

          Is he though? Any recent interviews, and the debate of course, have shown that he isn’t fit to manage outside of scripted appearances. He would not get hired anywhere outside of a store greeter position.

          • Rapidcreek@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            9 days ago

            Well somebody brought NATO together. Somebody moved an infrastructure act. Somebody brought manufacturing back to the US. Somebody got the largest climate change bill passed. There’s a little more to the oval office than the flub of words. Biden has never been articulate. But, he can get shit done. FDR couldn’t walk, but got shit done.

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

              When the rest of the world wouldn’t provide munition to a state engaged in active genocide, Biden stepped up.