https://www.thedailybeast.com/democrats-mock-donald-trump-as-too-old-to-runlike-he-did-to-joe-biden?ref=home?ref=home
The party is ready to feast on Trump being 78 after being silent because of Biden's age.
Because he IS too old. Biden did the right thing. Selflessly put the country before himself and listened to his party. I don't think Trump would ever have enough morals or integrity to do that in a million years unfortunately. So we'll have to beat the old loon and his band of circus freaks at the polls, again.
Biden was never supposed to run for a second term, and then dragged his feet until the very last minute. The selfless thing would’ve been to step aside for someone younger before the race began
He never had plans to only run one term.
I am aware of that, considering that the article I linked is a direct response to that claim. If you notice the article you link does not quote Biden, but an anonymous source, and when reporters asked Biden he said: “I don’t have any plans on one term.”
Not that I'm suggesting that this was intentional or that he did right to wait, but there are a few upsides. Trump and the Republicans were fully prepared and frothing to take on that blubbering old man from that last debate, but now they're actually going to make a case for Trump over a (hopefully) real contender. And many Democrat voters went from feeling defeated and apathetic, potentially enough to not even bother voting, to being charged with a second chance and a (again, hopefully) more exciting candidate to support. If Biden had declared his intention not to run again before the primaries, the Republicans would have had much longer to prepare and pick apart someone who wasn't such an easy target, and Dems would have been infighting over the nuances of a dozen candidates and pissed off at each other. And, if Harris is the presumptive nomination, for better or worse, the knee jerk reaction from the Right will probably be to play up the racist and sexist angles, which should drive moderates away from the right, not away from Harris.
It's all conjecture, but I only see this as a net positive compared to where we were yesterday.
More importantly imo: it put Biden and the Dems in the news and overshadowed the attempted assassination. Which kept its new cycle short and put the dems back on top. Trump hates being out of the news, and was right that the media wants him back because they loved the numbers he provided. The DNC should make a circus out of this to keep it in the news and with constant breaking news events. It’s stupid, and I hate it, but it would help them win.
agreed, never should have tried for the second bite.
however... dems now have an opportunity to own the news cycle from here until the election. if they do even a halfway decent job, we start trending from "narrow loss" -> "political landslide".
I don't think all the messaging in the world can fix the reality that Biden hasn't improved material conditions of the people who voted for him in 2020, or even gone to the mat fighting for them.
The only things he's really gone around congress or the SCOTUS for is to deny more asylum seekers and give more weapons to Israel and Ukraine.
He absolutely has. We're getting public transit built out. Caps on overdraft fees. Capped the price of insulin. Invalidated most non-compete clauses. Oh, and he didn't encourage his supporters to attack the Capitol Building and hang Mike Pence.
Oh, and he didn't get a bunch of Americans killed by Covid because he cared more about the stock market than people.
I'd also like to see Ukraine not fall to Russia.
That's just what I can name of the top of my head. He was a better president than Obama.
Yeah, Biden invested in long term improvement for the first time in a long time. Yeah it’s not paying out immediately, we’re struggling in part because we kept expecting immediate returns. It’s gonna stay a bit rough for a little while longer but it’s stabilizing with hope on the horizon.
Or we could cash out our savings again…
We’re getting public transit built out
Nothing around me except wider highways, nor anyone I know. Unless the brightline is part of that, which is nice, but doesn't compete with airfare and driving.
Caps on overdraft fees
lmao just get rid of them, people who have no money don't need less penalties, they need no penalties. There is not a "medium overdraft fees" constituency who will vote against the dems if they get rid of overdraft fees.
Capped the price of insulin
See previous response. If you have the power to cap it, you have the power to make it free.
he didn’t encourage his supporters to attack the Capitol Building and hang Mike Pence.
Stop trying to make trump's army of divorced Jet Ski dealers sound cool. Most Americans hate congress and Mike Pence.
Oh, and he didn’t get a bunch of Americans killed by Covid because he cared more about the stock market than people.
He literally ended the covid protections, told people not to wear masks, and a bunch of Americans did receive long-term injury or death from covid before they stopped counting.
I’d also like to see Ukraine not fall to Russia.
Because of our actions, Ukraine will never be safe within our lifetimes. Every bomb we send is a bad day for someone, statistically mostly civilians. Any stance except peace as soon as possible demonstrates that you care less about the lives of the actual people living in Ukraine than you do supporting imperialism.
We could have had peace with similar terms to what we can get now two years ago, and millions would be alive and in their homes right now. But instead we decided to fight Russia to the last drop of Ukrainian blood.
He was a better president than Obama.
The patron saint of drones, who halved black wealth to bail out the banks? The deporter-in-chief who paved the way for Trump? That's not the flex you think it is.
Besides everything else being nonsense, every word about Ukraine is a lie because Putin explicitly NEVER wanted peace, he wants all of Ukraine and just like with Crimea he intends to take it bit by bit. Ukraine are the ones who chose fight, and you want to abandon them so Russia can occupy them and kill all the resistance under your watch, just like they're doing in all the regions they already occupied and control. That would spill MORE blood than convincing Russia they will lose the conflict and lose all land.
Back to back to back garbage takes lmao. Spare us your sanctimonious ‘improving things is unworthy of praise because they didn’t immediately make it perfect’ line of reasoning. It serves only to cause inaction and infighting. I’d much rather some improvement rather than no improvement.
By the way, don’t act like the Ukrainians don’t have a right to defend themselves, and don’t act like this isn’t an existential conflict for them. If you’re so worried about condemning imperialism, then maybe you should take a look at what Russia’s revanchist land grab here would be called, and then consider if maybe we should support the little guy so that they don’t get bowled over by an imperialist power looking to take back the glory days.
Anyways, nice bait.
Supporting unions so they got their demands for better conditions through, student debt forgiveness, everything his FTC appointment has been doing to fight monopolies, etc
the current reality is not the future reality - thats their sell, basically obama "hope-ishness". personally, I think it can work to keep trump out of office. this is a generational moment and the dems have it on their side.
so, with luck, we get to reject trump and, depending on the turnout, watch where progressives settle around.the seat of power.
between the dems and republicans, they have whittled down progressive representation, but its still there.
The real powerplay if Trump loses would be to pass an amendment setting a maximum age to run for president. Maybe tie it to retirement age. Old enough to receive social security, too old to run. Ideally you make that apply to all political offices, but I'm not that optimistic. Not that I think there's a snowballs chance in hell of this actually happening as that would be a sane and sensible thing to do and therefore antithetical to everything our current crop of politicians stand for.
dream big dreams.
if we manage to hobble past this brush against the mirror, then cool. maybe we don't like the monster after all.
Whoever the candidate is, they have to avoid talking about Israel and use vague language on the issue. If they come out swinging for Israel I think it would not be a good look.
this is where you use surrogates. signal with the surrogates and keep yourself out of the fray.
we will learn a lot by who is doing the most interesting talking on behalf of the campaign.
No messaging or surrogate can have a good answer to "why haven't you already done it?"
If instead of vaguely suggesting there might be a ceasefire sometime in the future if the dems remain in power, they stopped all arms shipments to Israel and sanctioned them until all Palestinians are granted equal political rights and right-to-return, you wouldn't be asking yourself "How do I dress up support for an ongoing genocide", you'd be telling people "We ended apartheid"
thats their sell, basically obama “hope-ishness”
That works when you've had 8 years of Bush and are campaigning on free healthcare, ending the wars, federal legalization of cannabis. It works when you've had 4 years of Trump and everyone thinks the democrats will defund the police, provide free healthcare and college, abolish ICE, codify roe, pack the court, etc. Then when you fail to do any of that, you get the shit kicked out of you 2 years later.
The dems cannot campaign on hope when they've demonstrated that they will not give the people what they want.
This isn't a messaging problem, it's a "triangulating yourself to be 2 inches left of republicans and then acting surprised when your base doesn't show up" for 30+ years problem.
How much of that was blocked in some way by the reps? Every time the peanut gallery chimes in with "what did Dems ever get accomplished?" they never provide the required addendum that reps are obstructionists.
agreed. the Democrats have been abusive. cant really do anything about that until we have a better nomination, funding and voting system.
trump is a time dilation machine. the closer we get to him the shorter my horizon gets. keeping him away from the near dictatorial powers the supreme court just sanctioned is my primary objective.
I (and perhaps you) and many others should remember that the age we grew in defined us. the younger see things a little differently
I am just tryng to make enough space between the ancient vampires and our kids to allow them to have a say in their future.
... Unlike Johnson, who didn't. And that worked out well for president Humphries in '68.
I think most people had no idea he was significantly declining, hence the astonishment at the debate. And some people around him seem to have been encouraging the denial (or worse). I'm unclear if he was doing better many months ago before primaries.
I can't imagine how insulated and reliant on advisors and other employees the president becomes. Quickly surrounded by people who have no interest in being the bearer of bad news. Probably akin to billionaires, and we see what they mutate into (some kind of Musk-like creature).
I'm so relieved that Biden was able to come to this painful decision, even if it was late. On the bright side, at least there's less time for the GOP to smear the new nominee. And no more televised convention for them to host the lies for free.
There was a significant effort to hide Biden's disability. The upper echelons in the Dem party have a lot to answer for.
You think the Repubs are ever gonna even put in any effort to hide Trumps disability?
Cos frankly, it's starting to feel like it doesn't matter when it's their king. what are your thoughts? Does trump suffer from entropy like the rest of us?
It's one of those things, strategy. If I point out an obvious flaw in the Dem's candidate, it doesn't follow that the opposition is superior. Trump can rot in hell for all I care. I don't give a tin shit about his plan or strategy. I just want the best person the Dems can find to take him down. Pretty simple really.
But you realise that having discussions like that on open public forums just legitimises the particularly twisted viewpoints of maga people then... Surely.
There are only gonna be 2 people (realistically) in the race if you truly care about what you claim... Then fuck no do the dem party not have shit all to answer for.. not when you compare them to maga.
And like you said. Strategy. That's all thats important for Americans right now.
For goodness sake. It's not just the MAGA lunatics. The whole world saw the debate. People like you are asking us to disbelieve our own eyes. Being a realist doesn't make you an enemy.
Anyway, chill, the problem has been resolved and the orange ape is going down. Unity is the watchword. The only old fluck in the race in Trump.
Don't know what you are talking about. I think that the issue is now resolved. They just left things on hold for too long.
It ain't about a bar though is it.
It's a presidential race.
Realistically, it's between 2 people.
And everyone should have foreseen the age problem with Biden running a second term....
I think most will agree, dnc should have started pushing another candidate the week after jan6.
Biden himself ran on being one term.
He only planned to serve one term? I'm sure you have a source for that...?
UPDATE: I was wrong, they have a source!
lol editing to defend yourself before anyone responds? I can’t even downvote buddy.
Yeah I was mistaken, I checked and it seems like if anyone said that it was the campaign and not Biden himself.
https://www.politico.com/news/2019/12/11/biden-single-term-082129
I honestly wonder if it was always the plan to waste the GOPs money on a campaign against Biden up until the nomination was locked in. Biden did say he'd be a 1 term president after all. The move makes Biden come off as the better person, makes room for a (slightly) younger, far more capable and progressive candidate, and wasted a ton of the GOPs effort and money. I'm truly hopeful that not only will Harris win, but due to all the shit slinging going on in the house and Senate, the left wins back a ton of seats making it so Harris's term is as effective as possible. I'm 90% sure most seats in the house are up for grabs this coming vote.
Trump doesn't care about the responsibility of being president. He likes the power and prestige of it.
But I don't want real power, because with real power comes real responsibility, and I don't want any of that shit.
I just want the money.
And the illusion of power.
And puss.
“The first party to retire its 80-year old candidate is going to be the one who wins this election.”
— Nikki Haley, in January.
BTW, I think it would be good for Dems to always call Trump 80. It will be a good irritation for Republicans
I've been getting down voted for saying it for a year...
But yeah, trump doesn't stand a fucking chance now. Also, this is probably the only way to get people excited about Kamala.
2028 better be a real primary or we just kicked the can down the road.
You know it will probably be either the Harris reelection effort, or no election due to complications from Trumpitis
Damn, I just found out Kamala is almost 60....
I don't know why I thought Biden would have picked someone young enough to be president after him.
Should have gotten one of the "kids" in their 40s.
We need to stop running elderly people, if Biden had done two and she did two after, she'd be in her 70s too
We're stuck in this situation where we demand "experience" but the people holding the spots that count for "experience" are decades past retirement age.
Even if she would serve two terms in a row, she would still only be 67 by the time shes finished, so thats still way younger than what Trump or Biden have been during their terms.
Right.
But apparently Biden always intended to run twice, making her 71 at the end of her second term....
But 67 is still too old for lots of people. And above everything thing else the presidency is a popularity contest.
Younger candidates like Obama and Bill get more votes, which carries down ballot races, and let's us get the House and Senate so the president can get shit done.
I Don't follow. In your example Biden would have served as president while 85. 71 is a problem in this logic how?
Almost 60 is fine. She's still got the majority of her mental faculties that she had at her peak. Low chance of her just randomly kicking over at any given time unlike the two candidates we had in this election until yesterday.
Almost 60 is fine.
It is.
But if Biden did a second term, she'd be 64.
And 72 at the end of her two terms.
Which is why I'm saying Biden should have picked a you Obama type who's a decade younger for VP.
Instead of someone who would be in their 70s if everything went to plan.
Gotta keep the pressure up.
Make her promise to an open and fair 2028 primary before the 2024 election.
None of this wishwashy shit where everyone close to Biden promise it's a one turn thing, but the candidate doesn't understand how shitty of a candidate they are.
Kamala's gonna win because she's not trump. Not because she's what Dem voters want.
Harris still has a lot of animosity towards her from her time as a prosecutor, but I'm thinking she's at least a better candidate than biden. The expected republican attacks of "she's black" and "she's a woman" probably won't sway anyone as much as "Joe Biden personally shoots Palestinian kids."
She'll be fine.
Moderates like her already, and as someone who's had to vote Hillary and Joe in the last two elections...
It's easier for progressives to hold their nose when they have the benefit of the doubt about how bad the candidate is.
We're fucking fighting fascism bro, her being a DA might even be a good thing if she's actually down to fight fascists. Don't forget before McCarthyism we had capitalists allying with communists to fight fascism.
Hell, if she pulls a "I know the system, I know it needs fixed, and I look forward to being president so it can be fixed" would guarantee she's the next prez.
It doesn't take much, we'rre just coming off the two worst Dem candidates in modern history, and still got a trump hangover from his term. So Kamala would have to really fuck shit up to lose.
Ughhh I am NOT looking forward to the racist pieces of shit who will go on and on now about "SEE! Democrats won't even let you pick a candidate, they have to shove their DEI applicant down our throats!"
I could see how nominating Harris this way could run people the wrong way, and both she and the DNC should vow to run a full and fair primary for the 2028 Presidential Elections. As in, treating Harris as if that would be the end of her second term (but still allowing her to run for nomination).
Many people are saying it - Is Trump too old for the Presidency? I hear it all the time from fine folks. Shouldn't we answer these folks? All we need to see if the birth certificate. Maybe Trump is younger then actually says. We don't know. Many people asking questions.
Yeah, these ads almost write themselves. Show clips of right-wingers describing Biden as old and senile, then splice in clips of Trump rambling incoherently. The entire Trump campaign has been built around attacking Biden, so there will probably be a lot of tangential benefits of switching to Harris.
Ooof, I hadn't even thought about this possibility! They could splice up some absolutely wild ads of Trump surrogates appearing to criticize Trump for being too old and senile!
Yeah, they would probably have to make it clear that they were originally talking about Biden, otherwise I think that's fraud, but basically how I would do it.
Narrator: What did some [some Republican chud] think about Biden?
Republican Chud: You can't have a senile, 80 year old grandpa leading the country!
-smash-cut to Trump-
Trump: Now all I know about magnets is this, give me a glass of water, let me drop it on the magnets, that's the end of the magnets. Why didn't they use John Deere? Why didn't they bring in the John Deere people? Do you like John Deere? I like John Deere.
Narrator: Sounds like [some Republican chud] was right!
The racist rapist, Dementia Don with 34 felonies needs to drop out, he's too old and can't even complete a coherent sentence.
Hasn't had any prison sentences to complete yet. Dude is like Teflon. He's just a toxin that builds up everywhere, can't be destroyed, and causes cancer.
Karma bats 1000, he'll get his. I bet he's having a real hard time sleeping knowing that if he doesn't win, he's very likely going to fucking jail. The ploy to get Biden to drop out seems to have backfired massively on him too.
Not to be pessimistic, but karma bats 1000? No it doesn't. So many terrible people died rich and accomplished. He'll, Kissinger died at 100, still trying to be a part of politics giving advice etc.
He's always been too old to run. It's completely ridiculous that he would go after his opponent for something that he is as well without a hint of irony.
He could shame others for having a pot on their head while he has multiple pots on his head and his voters wouldn't be able to see the farce.
It was always just about image. Trump has a bunch of other bad things to talk about and he doesn't show age as a problem as clearly as Biden does. Not to say there haven't been moments where Trump has had moments like Biden but the focus has always been on the other bad aspects of Trump. The reason they focus on it with Biden is because he doesn't really have much else interesting going on for the media to focus on instead.
Watch an interview of Trump in the 80s, after 9/11, and anything that gets put out now. A lot more controlled in the 80s, far more coherent train of thought in the 2000s, and neither of those things now.
He wasn't any less of a terrible person back then, but the veneer hadn't worn off.
One big concern is he has golfers spine. That's why it looks like he's wearing a diaper full of shit when standing. It's a serious concern as he may even need spinal surgery as bad as it looks. Has he even been checked by a spinal professional?
Many people are saying its both. Full diaper and he needs spinal surgery. He should probably just drop out right now.
I would think with access to the best medical care on the planet, (for free even on our dime), he's been checked by someone competent. It's just that you can't fix everything. And at his age, it's probably not worth the risks that might be involved.
Basically, my adhd brethren: Biden boring, but old and shows it. Trump not boring, just dumb, and shows age less often.
It's a preemptive strike. Haven't you noticed that when Trump has done something wrong, he immediately and viciously attacks his opponent for doing that thing. That's true even if the thing is being old. If you make a list of things Trump has accused others of, you'll notice quickly that he did many of those things. So many, in fact, that it will make you wonder if he's done those other things too.
He constantly accused Cruz of being a liar. He said Hilary was corrupt, racist, unstable, and that Russia wanted her to be president. He accused Obama and Biden of election tampering. It goes on and on. They say it's projection, but I think it's a calculated move to make the other people sound like they're saying "No, you are."
Weird fact: Clinton, Bush Jr. and Trump were all born in 1946. For some reason there's a clustering of president birth years. 1913 and 1924 were also popular.
Hmm, what could be the connection? It's almost as if there was a "boom" of babies born 9 months after WW2 ended.
The peak year for the baby boom was 1947, not 1946. In 1947 there were 26.6 births per 1000 population, in 1946 it was 24.1. But, even though the baby boom was a noticeable change in birth rate, it wasn't actually all that dramatic. In the depths of WWII in 1943 the birth rate was 22.7. In 1965 when the baby boom was over, it had only dropped to 19.4.
https://data.cdc.gov/NCHS/NCHS-Births-and-General-Fertility-Rates-United-Sta/e6fc-ccez/data_preview
There's no reason that there should be a cluster of presidents born in 1946 rather than a few spread around the post-war years.
I bet they were both a year earlier than the statistics because they come from wealthy families, so they already had established homes, jobs, etc, while most people were still recovering from ww2. Having a baby right after the end of the war had to be either a luxury or a poverty sentence.
I think a factor would also be post-way medical/life improvements that led to decreased infant mortality as well as longer "boomer" lifespans.
More of them lived, and for longer
Sure, slightly more for slightly longer. You'd expect a few percent more Boomers than others, but not a cluster of 3 presidents born in exactly 1946. And there's no reason why there was only ever 1 silent generation president. There were a ton of "greatest" generation guys, and lots of boomers, but only 1 born between 1928 to 1945.
I know you're citing this per 1k like they would in statistics but also want to point out that with the population increase between 1946 and 1965, more babies were actually born in 1965 than 1946.
Well, many people are saying it, not just Democrats. Just the other day, the biggest manliest Republican ran up to me with tears streaming down his face, and he fell on his knees, and he said "Sir, sir! Our orange god-emperor is actually very very old and in obvious mental decline! He needs to drop out right now!"
Like CNN is ever going to mention trumps age or any doubts about his mental capacity. They were bought out years ago.
If you ever hear a right winger whine about CNN smack them in the face for being so ungrateful. They carry trump water all day, every day.
Shit, NPR made a noticeable shift rightward during (and since) Trump's presidency due to some perception of having a liberal bias for simply stating the factual news.
I think it really depends on your station. I noticed a pretty big whiplash effect sometime around 2018 where they started really pushing back on pro-Trump guests in a way which they hadn't done previously. Recently they seem to actually be pulling fewer punches, straight up calling Trump out for telling lies (rather than just "mistruths" or "dishonesty"). This morning they called out a Trump SEC appointee who was questioning if Harris could inherit Biden's money. They seem to go back and forth depending on what specifically is in the news cycle.
It definitely depends on the station...
Not exactly my local station, but I love listening to Brian Lehrer on WNYC for that very reason. He's so good at actually asking great follow up questions that I'm usually shouting at my radio while the host allows some conservative to spew outright lies.
Brian Lehrer is the GOAT
They need an external enemy to hate. CNN and the rest of the "mainstream media" is one of those. They could grant Trump whatever he wanted, and they would still attack because that is CNN's only purpose in their headspace.
We just need a maximum age for running for president. Id like my president's to be of a normal working age. If you're going to be over 65 by the end of the term then that's too old imo since they would be older than 5/6 of the population.
Kamala would be over 65 by term 2's end. I think 70 is a good number but honestly I overwhelmingly agree with the sentiment. Make the max age lower and the right candidates will "magically" appear. The pecking order today sadly includes people in their 60s and 70s because we almost never elect different people for house/senate.
we almost never elect different people for house/senate.
Which is because of how we pick committee positions. People with longer tenures get better spots.
I figured it was more about how people essentially ignore senate and house positions unless someone is retiring. They just vote the same way again and again.
All people talk about by and large is the presidential election. I know very few people who know anything about federal senate and house reps, let alone anything at all about state senate and house reps. They think presidents decide everything when what's really broken is congress. If congress wasn't f'd they could fix the supreme court. If they fixed the supreme court then dictatorial law (and draconian interpretations of law) would change.
In terms of committees, I figured the people who got the coveted ways and means spots were the ones with the most power and influence (money), not just old timers. Jason Smith is the chair of the house ways and means committee and he's only 44. Senate side is over 70, though senators on average are much older than those in the house of reps.
Maybe it was the way I worded my comment before, but I got downvoted for criticising that too many politicians are too old to still be in office. I got response from someone that age shouldn't matter if the person is competent.
Then it occurred to me that maybe it was boomers who downvoted me for hitting a nerve. And I should have responded that if there is minium required age to become POTUS, why shouldn't there be a maximum age?
That being said, it also occurred to me that there is ageism against younger people in politics. The voting age in many places do not want to be lowered as youths are told to be too immature to vote. But how come no one says old people are too old and senile to vote? I don't mean to go into old vs young people mudslinging, but old people have elected representatives that only benefit their own demographic and not for everyone in the country. One reason for the housing crisis is that old people elect politicians who do not want to build more affordable housing so as not to devalue their property.
Voting rights aren't handed out because of pragmatic reasons, but because of fundamental principals.You don't get to vote because you're able to make good decisions, you get to vote because you're a human citizen of a particular country and on that basis alone you get to vote. It would be very difficult to objectively determine who is able to make good decisions. And even it that were possible, it would be difficult to decide where to draw the line. Of course that children don't get to vote is completely inconsistent and the age that makes the difference is completely arbitrary. But to be honest, I'd much rather allow children of all ages to vote than restrict people beyond a certain age. Check out some Noam Chomsky interview of recent years, would it really be fair if such a bright mind was not allowed to vote?
Noam Chomsky is actually a really good example. Same with some practicing MDs I've known. Some of them work into their 80s or so as well. Why would we stupidly remove wisdom from our political set? That's just dumb, IMHO.
I think the problem is that the PFC is often not fully formed, on average, until 25. I still think people as young as 16 should be allowed to vote, though. However, on the other end, I don't think arbitrary years is worth anything (and will be increasingly worthless with time as medicine continues to change the game - imagine nootropics and life extension) - the important thing is mental acuity for the job, no matter the age. If someone wants to run for office and they are 250 (assuming for the moment life extension/age slowing/age reversal becomes everyday), I shouldn't care. What I should care about is their ability to do the job. Ideally, we'd even be able to screen out psychopaths and other troublesome traits, but give it time, I guess.
Ideally, we’d even be able to screen out psychopaths and other troublesome traits, but give it time, I guess.
No you don't want that. That's one massive door to dictatorship if I ever saw one. Imagine the power of declining presidential candidates because you declare them troublesome.
Agreed. I am sick and tired of this country being run by workaholics. I want to retire some day. I want a candidate who shares that value, and is motivated to build and promote an economic, legal, and political environment where people can actually retire.
That means a first-time candidate should be no older than 57, and an incumbent no older than 61.
If there's anyway to convince him not to run that'd be wonderful. There are many Maga folks that emulate him but I don't think they're nearly as likely to be able to actually pull off a coup.
Granted, it's a fucking long shot that he'd listen to anyone.
Trump only listens to people who tell him what he wants to hear.
How do you remove a cult leader like that?
Kinetic strike, please. Similar fire effect, but no radiation (assuming you’re not yeeting depleted uranium).
I suspect he’ll die out of prison in a natural manner, but relatively soon. Prison is out of the question without the court getting members added. They are fully on the Trump train and even the plain text of the constitution doesn’t sway them.
I kind of fear what comes next after Trump (he is old and I can't imagine him serving a full term).
He will never willingly let go of his control over his base. Trump doesn't give a single fuck about the MAGA movement beyond the fact that it is his own personal army of zombie sycophants.
His followers may be dogmatic about MAGA, but I can assure you that Trump himself is not. If he dropped dead tomorrow MAGA would instantaneously begin fizzling out, and it would fracture the Republican party.
The greatest gift trump could ever giver america is, when he loses the nomination in 2028, to run as a third party candidate. Hopefully he never lets go of his base.
Hopefully before he dies he convinces his base to give themselves the Heavens Gate treatment so they can catch the golden limousine to hell right along with him.
Based on what my true-crime cult obsessed friend has said on the matter, option 2 is probably the most likely; though the party at large will always rally behind whoever the nominee is, because that's how Republicans operate.
DeSantis already tried to court the cult of Trump, and he failed because these cults of personality are entirely fixed around their leader. As my buddy described it, it's not like a hydra where you can cut the head off and the cult keeps going. Once the leader is gone, they fizzle out. Even in the case of endorsing a successor, I can't imagine the group having the same kind of following for the same reason - without Trump, the Flavor-Aid sours. There will be new leaders, but they'll have to work to sway the core voters in the way that Trump has. And the Flavor-Aid is a perfect metaphor, because Trump sounds exactly like Jim Jones according to my friend.
This is the first time in the wild that I have seen someone correctly mention "Flavor-Aid" instead of "Kool-Aid" in reference to Jim Jones.
If anything, after Trump, he’ll be revered within the Republican party for years like Reagan was. WWTD “What Would Trump Do?” will become their new litmus test for whether a candidate is worthy or not. Republicans will try to show off their credentials of how aligned they were to “Trump’s values”.
That makes alot of sense. However, I'm worried the Republicans reliaze there are better candidates that represent "their morals". So maybe not DeSantis but someone closer. They also will have to vote for someone.
Cults of personality are never quite the same once the big personality passes. They tend to fragment, shrink, or otherwise fade away. Members may join other high control organizations, but they won't be united.
Depends... If he can successfully set up a family dynasty (would probably be Ivanka and Jared he passed it on to if we're being honest), and he stayed in office until he died before passing the torch (or perhaps even stepped back as an "elder statesman" for the last few years of his death so he can work on transitioning Donald Trump diehards into Trump diehards), I could see them making this work.
These people are in deep, and most of them will do anything he tells them to do.
Can Trump transfer his cult to a successor with a mere endorsement and forever continue a cycle of scrambling to vote for this "last" democrat.
Trump cares about not going to jail and Trump in approximately equal amounts. No way he lets someone else take the wheel. If he somehow became president again he'd start looking at repealing the 22nd before he'd endorse anyone else.
That's a great point. However, I woulf think that there is a legal point where a president is to old and becomes mentally or physically incapable of being a president. Basically, someone in government would fight back and say this is a massive risk for the country's security.
I can't see Trump being the sort to try to build something beyond himself. I don't think he could see the point of trying to cultivate a successor; and even if he did, I think he would see them as potential competition - he'd likely try to sabotage them, if anything.
Trump has none of the admirable qualities of someone who's overcome a mental disability. He oozes neurotypical privilege.
I know, I didn't let the media sway me into believing he was some genius charismatic dictator. I just think the man keeps failing upwards but his time is running out.
I mean... is extreme malignant narcissism considered neurotypical?
I kind of hope not.
He oozes wealth privilege (even if he doesn't have much left). Allows him to behave however he pleases.
He doesn't have extreme narcissism. That's a social disability. Does Trump look like his social faculties are impaired to you? His cognitive faculties are because of his dementia, but he's as charismatic as anyone, much as I hate to admit it. He's neurotypical.
A "social disability"? Is that from the DSM-5? I'll save you a quick Google: no. Even if it was, so what?
It's not a one or the other thing... There is zero chance of you ever convincing me that Donald Trump is not a narcissist. Maybe you're too young to remember the 90s, but this man has always been this way and his extreme, malignant narcissism has been a common theme for 40+ years.
I have never, once in my life, heard/saw Trump speak and thought, "this man has charisma." Sorry, just no. He just says the things the lowest common denominator wants to hear. If your foolish enough to confuse that with genuine charisma then I don't know what to say. Get out of the house more often.
Trump says what the lowest common denominator wants to hear. The lowest common denominator doesn't want to hear someone being visibly neurodivergent. Trump talks like a neurotypical. Like a privileged, white, racist asshole. He does not look like a hard working person who overcame a disability. Now stop complimenting him and realise he's ordinary filth.
Yeah, the longest lasting fascist country was spain which collapsed into a republic with the death of Francisco Franco.
Say whatever you want about the advisability of Biden dropping out, it is going to make the best fucking content.
Real leftist unity right here. Either way it's gonna be 10 times more interesting than biden vs trump.
No, we've been instructed to live in interesting times, and goddammit that's what we're doing.
Whoever read this fortune forgot to add the mandatory "in bed" at the end.
Now, we're all fucked.
Idk man, sometimes switching things up is nice, gets boring when you just do it in the same place all the time.
Fortune? No, we're up against some real monkey's paw shit at this point. Someone blurted out all five wishes at once without thinking, and here we are.
Everyone, quick, grab a lamp, a bottle, a vase, anything, and start rubbing.
We're gonna need tbose genie's.
It was a big deal, but his injury was minimal and there is no flashy politcal reason for the attack. The murder of the crowd is just background noise in our gun soaked politics.
The kid had deep depression and was looking for a big target of either party to "suicide by cop." The lack of a manifesto or an outward politcal lean, regardless of his conservative roots, makes it just a weak story.
I love that the U.S. is so fucked that the attempted assassination of a former U.S. President is old news after a week.
I'm just commenting that the news cycle ate it up. I said that it would as if happened and sure enough, this did it.
You joke, and he would have been too young, but Trump and Mussolini were actually living at the same time for a brief period.
No they were not alive at the same time - Trump was born in 1946 and Mussolini was executed in 1945.
Oh.. it's mocking when Dems do it..
Why isn't it just behavioural parity?
Are both sides not allowed to behave the same? Be equal?
The very same media keeps asking democrats to go more to the right to act the moderate / centrist role, why isn't that any good when they copy this from Republicans? /s
Well the first step in changing that is expecting that... And talking as if it expected..
That's the point of Trump's leadership style. Things aren't equal. There are rules for other people, but they don't affect him though. Hypocrisy among his flock is a virtue. It shows they will all reward each other.
When presented with the American constitution or trump, and they chose trump, its self evident that they just want a king.
So many well meaning centrists and left leaning people in America have cut maga so much slack for 8 years...
Maga definitionally wants to replace the United states constitution and establishment. The conversation should be happening on those terms. But most the outspoken left leaning voices are too scared.
They are bigots. But they can't do that. They were there for 4 years and didn't and couldn't do it. I don't see that happening if the neonazi becomes president.
Are both sides not allowed to behave the same? Be equal?
No, because democratic voters at least occasionally have principles.
I get what you're saying here, but if Dems start acting "equivalently" to Republicans we're gonna have a real big, serious problem.
I'm not asking Dems to break the rules. I would like Dems to treat the left as actual partners and take their policy seriously, instead of "we need those people to shut up or Republicans are going to burn down everything". Republicans do not do that with their own reactionaries. They mine them for ideas and find ways to implement those policies through a long game.
Now that is a stance I can get behind. That's just not the initial impression that's given from the statement "we should start acting like the Republicans do".
Thanks for the clarification.
To an extent, I say it's about time you do.
Not with policy or law breaking. Not that crazy shit.
But rhetorically. Imho it's time for American Dems to stop playing so nice..
The evidence is all available online. If you support trump for office you want a king.
We already have a real big, serious problem.
Though I agree, dropping to their level just let's them go lower.
They go lower regardless. "When they go low, we go high!" has become "alright guys, they're putting trans people in the showers, but at least we played by the rules! It's important that everyone had fun!"
Imho it does nothing.
No dropping or raising of the level from dema has affected maga discourse in the least.
They will do the exact same shit. We have had too many years to learn that lesson now.
Either smack back (rhetorically) or they will just make up something anyway.