Democrats Don't Want A Primary, This Is A HUGE MISTAKE

[@roscuro9838]

Saying Bernie isn't a viable candidate because of his age is nonsense since he's literally only a year older than Biden.

[@falconeshield]

Sadly GOP voters hate Bernie more than Biden. They'd probably call him the Socialist President. Without irony.

[@TraversyMedia]

His mind is 30 years younger than Bidens

[@a_kazakis]

To be fair Biden is not viable for president either, there is just no other choice.

[@Big_Dip1]

He's not docile enough for democrats to get behind

[@hegyak]

@@Big_Dip1 Bernie makes the Corporate OWNERS unhappy. He can't be allowed more power. Same thing the DNC is doing with Katie Porter's run for Senate.

[@thatdarnskag5043]

At this point I’ll consider donating my body for a Bernie Sanders head transplant.

[@Remedy462]

Sounds like a good Futurama episode.

[@ryno4ever433]

💯

[@cctomcat321]

"It's not me, it's we." - Future Bernie

[@jmaster2855]

@@Remedy462 Bernie Sanders' Head in a Jar is the president the future needs

[@funnyvalentinedidnothingwrong]

Turn Bernie Sanders into BERNIE

[@robynsummer7068]

What Vaush actually says: The GOP's attitude towards LGBT+ people was bad during Bush's presidency, but not as much as the current GOP. What Vaush's chat hears: Things were perfectly fine for LGBT+ people during Bush's presidency.

[@Juhz0r]

What Vaush actually says: "Bush was a monster and the Republican Party back then were homophobic, but there wasn't a similar fearmongering campaign of panic over LGBT people." What VGG chat hears: "I love and respect George W. Bush. I think him and the Republican Party were the vanguard for gay-rights, and to be honest, I also respect his decision to invade Iraq. Just a great guy."

[@sprybug]

Yeah, this is like every community of a content creator I've ever been in. People not understanding, over-reacting, and making dumb comments.

[@str8delco589]

@@Juhz0revidence that bush and the Republican Party where homophobic monsters during his administration. Be specific

[@averagedemocrat9546]

Most people seem to lack a thinking brain. I think it's pretty obvious why American democracy is failing, the voters are complete dunces.

[@_KungFuBarbie_]

Attitudes towards queer people during the Bush years were interesting. It was more patronizing like, “you’re living an immoral lifestyle, but so long as I don’t see you kissing in public I will respect your freedom to be immoral.” Queer issues also weren’t really front and center in public discourse until the 2012 election. By 2016 Republicans had even started giving up on using queer issues to stoke fear. Nowadays the return of the groomer panic has made things go downhill really fast, I feel pretty confident saying that things are now more dangerous for queer people despite the increased acceptance because of those right wing lunatics.

[@toughercoot0518]

It’s terrifying how bad things are getting now. It’s like being on the titanic as it slowly sinks and people are just laughing and partying like everything’s fine.

[@DeathProductions200]

Personally I feel like it's more of a submersible and we are all on for the ride until it inevitably implodes on us

[@julesgallaway1937]

You mean the left partying they don't seem to care outside Twitter lol

[@Remedy462]

​@@DeathProductions200That's an expensive joke hahahah- *submarine Implodes*

[@sunfeatherX3]

First time? 🇺🇸😏

[@LinkRocks]

You're too much online. Yes things are bad, but they've been bad all of our lives. All we can do is keep fighting and hope things change at some point.

[@Sneaker3719]

One thing I think primaries are good for is preventing third party voting. I think Bernie endorsing Biden was pivotal in helping Biden win, but now we have Joe Manchin legit considering running third party. People will naturally gravitate toward voting third party because of their discontent, but a primary that features progressive messaging has a chance of retaining those people.

[@falconeshield]

Isn't Manchin a GOP mole? Good riddance

[@W333L]

Do you have any data suggesting that voters of a failed primary candidate are more likely to vote for the original party vs 3rd party/abstain? The logic could make sense in theory, but I could easily see it going the other way

[@michaelnewman7248]

Who the fuck would vote for Joe manchin for president. I think he's miscalculating

[@natblank0s]

​@@W333Lon the more individualist side, the event itself can convince the candidate's following that the winner might actually be a better politician and thus more deserving of their vote. on the more partisan side, it can signal support to the party, causing the "my blorbo likes this thing so i like it too :)" effect

[@AndrewCreel]

How would progressive messaging retain people who are considering voting for Manchin?

[@Name74906]

I honestly forgot Kamala Harris is even the vice president.

[@TheAmericanAmerican]

Who?

[@BobPantsSpongeSquare97]

It's so hilariously accurate that Michelle Obama was more impactful than Kamala has been. It never crossed my mind

[@Bladeofwar94]

I never got why they didn't make Bernie the VP, but I guess he'd have too much influence so they pulled Kamala out of their asses.

[@TheAmericanAmerican]

@@Bladeofwar94 the DNC knew that Bernie would the a Leftist Dick Cheney VP to a POTUS Biden... man just imagine that!

[@aidanquiett668]

@@BobPantsSpongeSquare97 Tbf Kamala is seemingly as important as Pence. Just kinda there as a backup president, and not actually doing much actively outside making the dems mad

[@Zer0.-_]

I grew up in the early 2000s, Vaush isnt wrong. The rhetoric is worse today than it was back then. They were not allies, but they were not this vocally extreme

[@BobPantsSpongeSquare97]

The politicians weren't, they were just basic homophobes, but I remember religious leaders were. Pat Robertson for example literally blamed Hurricane Katrina on gay people

[@aidanquiett668]

Their competition also werent this vocally extreme. People werent running half nude in the streets with their kids for "muh pride" back then

[@turgid_member8717]

​@@aidanquiett668...yes they were. Pride parades have been a thing since the '70s and have gotten more sanitized over the years. Wtf are you talking about

[@grantwithers]

yeah but the state of "activism" in 2000's was to let gay people openly serve in the military (they were still don't ask don't telling when I was thinking about signing up in like 2004), and doing away with (or enacting) the DOMA defense of marriage act. And doing things like getting gay people not discriminated against in HOLLYWOOD (of all places, chortle), which was still pretty bad even in 2000 ish.

[@xBINARYGODx]

OP - you are wrong, it was this bad, but now it comes with much else outside of the queer-focused stuff and they are entirely mask off about that stuff when before they pretended to care about democracy.

[@waterfrodo4304]

Kamala’s response to Roe being overturned: “Do not come”

[@descendantofartorias2067]

Lol

[@guillaumelagueyte1019]

Oh, that speech was so yucky.

[@footballdesk4417]

No you figured it out! It’s pretty easy to not get knocked up.

[@jeffgojail]

What was she supposed to do? Abolish the court? Order the military to invade red States with trigger laws? What kind of power do you think of vice president has?

[@guyinreallife6035]

the only problem I have with primaries is that the party takes the wrong lesson EVERY time. If Biden was against, say, Bernie again, well, if Bernie loses they'll conclude that the people rejected the "far left" so that clearly means they want the same old center right. its why you CANT drag politicians to the left. ...all that said we NEED primaries so at least the ideas that 'lose' are out in the public sphere even if the winning candidate doesnt pass them, like M4A for example.

[@maudley]

Eh, that's basically by design. Gas prices have already been cranked up since Biden got elected, and I'm sure that's no accident. I'm sure execs will crank prices even higher if Bernie wins. We gotta be above shit if we want any hopes of making it out.

[@sypherthe297th2]

Well significant factions did reject those policies or considered them too risky to support. Its absurd to suggest otherwise. You're basically trying to universalize your beliefs in a not dissimilar way to how Christian's deity conveniently happens to hate who they hate.

[@synchronium24]

"its why you CANT drag politicians to the left." And yet Bernie did just that. "...all that said we NEED primaries so at least the ideas that 'lose' are out in the public sphere even if the winning candidate doesnt pass them, like M4A for example." Agreed. Props to Marianne for going this route within the Democratic Party as opposed to siphoning off votes like Cornel West.

[@sypherthe297th2]

@@synchronium24 Primaries should really be reserved, for President anyway, for situations where there isn't an incumbent running or they've screwed up so bad they're a guaranteed loss. Neither applies to Biden and a primary is a huge drain of resources and intra-party goodwill. But if you're going to insist on it then a candidate shouldn't be a braindead grifting loon like Marianne Williams. She knows some buzzwords sure but she knows zilch about policy. Shes doing it entirely to sell books and crystals. People need to stop promoting that nutjob. Anyone with a brain would rather not have lefty Donald Trump anywhere near voters especially after we've had knowledgable candidates like Sanders and Warren.

[@Inaf1987]

If the opponents were Klobuchar, Tim Kaine or Mark Kelly, this would make sense. But there is no reason to give an antisemite like RFK Jr more screentime

[@paulofevilbathrobes4627]

we need to put age limits on elected officals. every generation needs an expiration date on political power

[@jmn327]

I couldn't disagree more when it comes to a sitting president. Presidents seeking a second term who face a strong primary basically never come out unscathed: Gerald Ford in '76 was torn apart by Reagan, Jimmy Carter in '80 got beat up against Ted Kennedy, George H.W. Bush lost New Hampshire to Pat Buchanan in '92...basically, any time it happens in modern times it leads to a loss, because the primary is happening as a result of dissatisfaction (Ford not being conservative enough for Reagan and the Birchers, Carter not being progressive enough for Kennedy, Bush breaking his "no new taxes" promise ahead of '92, etc.). Beyond that, a tough primary would do nothing to dissuade third party candidates; those guys are in it for grift and vanity, and nothing's going to stop them if they're already committed to those two things.

[@Matisaro]

^ this guy basic politics.

[@piccalillipit9211]

*STATISTICALLY THERE IS A 1 IN 12* chance Biden dies in the election campaign - there is only a 50% chance he finished his 2nd term. How do dead candidates fair in elections...?

[@sypherthe297th2]

Finally. Someone else gets it. It just disturbs me most of Vaush's viewers are ignorant kiddies thinking vibes are a substitute for reality.

[@leaodacontabilidade5026]

Biden is losing to Trump in most general election polls. Wake up. 70% of Democrats don't want Biden and his approval numbers are worse than Trump's at this point of his presidency. This shit is clear

[@Dsworddance22]

I don't think the examples you brought up build your point because those incumbent presidents had a lot going on besides primary challenges. Carter was dealing with oil crisis, Iran hostage crisis, stagflation, and overall a "crisis of confidence" in the country. Gerald Ford had an underwhelming economy and was dealing with the fallout of pardoning Richard Nixon. I don't know much about HW Bush, so you could be right about him. Besides, look at 2016 and 2020 primaries. The GOP has a vicious and heated primary but Trump won. DNC also had a stacked and competitive primary, but Biden won.

[@almosthelpless9374]

You're forgetting about Kamala Harris's electric "do not come" speech.

[@grantwithers]

@@hash8169 dommy mommy kamala telling you "DO NOT COME"

[@tylerhackner9731]

Whatever happens, the donor class is happy

[@stormburn1]

Idk, I think the donor class is getting spooked by the theocratic fascists who might actually be willing to do something insane like default on the national debt if it means killing trans people. Like, one of the benefits of our current neoliberal system is that our bourgeois population is relatively large and diverse and has a shared interest in not blowing everything up for the glory of God. Their interests are at least mostly secular and material, even if still greedy and self-interested. But that's partially wishful thinking on my part and doesn't comment on the amount of control they actually have over the system. I'm not sure that even if Koch and the like tried to turn their fascist ship around now they could.

[@elliott614]

@thatdarnskag5043 are you happy? "At this point I’ll consider donating my body for a Bernie Sanders head transplant." [see comment written around same time as OP to my reply]

[@piccalillipit9211]

YEP. People say "OH China is a one party state" and America isn't...??? Its the "American Capitalist Party" you just get to choose the figurehead.

[@Azraelmaximilian]

There's a ton of differences between the GOP donors and Democrat donors, that's where alot of there differences on social issues come from and even the differences on economic issues. Even if the Democrats are corrupt as far as economic issues go they're still nowhere near as corrupt as Republicans, and that difference might not seem huge on the surface but it amounts to thousands more lives being snuffed out by Republican austerity policies each time they come to power.

[@NotShowingOff]

I don’t think Donald Trump thought he was a viable candidate, and I don’t think he in fact “gave it his all”. But he won the presidency. 🤷🏻‍♂️

[@Gingersnaps_the_pumpkin_kitty]

Nah he just thought he would with very little effort.

[@rockmycd1319]

@@Gingersnaps_the_pumpkin_kitty And yet even he thought he’d get smoked in 2016 thanks to the what the polls said.

[@AngryShooter]

I genuinely think Trump wasn't expecting to win and was surprised when he did, you can see it in his face when he walked in for the victory speech, it screamed "oh shit, what now?".

[@VannywiththeFanny]

AOC, Jamie Raskin, Katie Porter, etc. They'd all be great President's.

[@johnnybravo2926]

AOC seems like too easy of a target and is already hated in the minds of many Americans, though I agree her politics are far better than most Dems.

[@Morbing_Time]

Isn't AOC legally too young?

[@Tech4Lyfe]

All 3 of them need to do more politically first. I would vote for either in the future.

[@jonigarciajg]

Katie Porter might be able to pull the Midwestern vote because she looks culturally similar to them. She does look like she's from southern California

[@90skidcultist]

@@Morbing_Timeby two years

[@William-Morey-Baker]

idk... i actually think we should just let it ride... i never thought i would say it, but i think we need to have a unified front and cut down on infighting

[@jascu4251]

I don't actually think there is any infighting! I think its dramatically overblown,

[@William-Morey-Baker]

​@@jascu4251that's true too, but also kind of my point...

[@jascu4251]

@@William-Morey-Baker Its weird, because there's a lot of talk about infighting, but generally Democratic voters seem more unified than at any point I can recall I think there's a loud minority of people who are viscerally anti-Dem, but its not clear to me that these are actually voters, so I think they're a separate category

[@DaemonJax]

RIDIN WITH BIDEN!

[@LibertarianLeninistRants]

Democratic Party showing that its not that much concerned with Democracy again

[@Juhz0r]

It's amazing that the 2024 election will be a re-run of 2020, just more old and more senile.

[@grantwithers]

n w trump victory

[@jonigarciajg]

I graduated highschool in 2000 everyone stayed in the closet, being opposed to same sex marriage was a reasonable position. But anyone that bullied someone suspected of being gay was looked down upon. Things are muchbetter in some ways but the backlash has been super intense

[@Johnnyrocket5834]

A primary is always bad for incumbent presidents. Historically it's a guaranteed way to lose, even if the incumbent wins the primary. As an example, the last two incumbent candidates to get primaried, Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter, are each single term presidents even though they beat their primary challenger. I don't make the rules, it's just the way the world works.

[@michaelraymon111]

Why is that

[@Saxolotl0]

Vaush brought up Trump having primary opponents. The only reason he does now is because he lost 2020. Does anyone remember him having any actual primary opponents then? I sure don’t outside a few oddballs maybe.

[@yellowbeard1]

Ford and Carter had a lot of other problems going on besides primaries. Jimmy Carter is still used as a synonym for weakness and failure by older people

[@RexDartEskimoSpy]

I think George H.W. Bush is an even more recent example of that.

[@meeszijlstra5426]

Those 2 are so long ago, pre-internet and modern media, you can't just assume it'll be the exact same thing now.

[@sammaelazrael6309]

The Hillary primaries all over again.

[@jubjub444]

At least we don't have interesting third party candidates this time that idiots will flock to.

[@TheseBitchesWantNikes]

​@jubjub444 Umm Cornel West is running. That's kinda big

[@RachelAnimates]

if nobody else will run, then i will.

[@Juhz0r]

I'll vote for you. I'm Finnish, but I'll figure out a way.

[@RachelAnimates]

@@Juhz0r Thank you, comrade.

[@VoiceOfTheEmperor]

Of course not. They don't want to piss off their donors and miss out on a lobbyist position after their political career!

[@garfieldGG]

Or…more obviously, they know history and don’t want the democrat to lose.

[@VoiceOfTheEmperor]

@@garfieldGG could you please elaborate on that?

[@garfieldGG]

@@VoiceOfTheEmperor president who have faced serious primaries have lost in the general election in modern history. Incumbency advantage is a huge one. That’s why it basically took a complete disaster for someone to beat Donald trump after he was already potus.

[@evielikeshugs1055]

*I think gay marriage should be between a man and a woman* - Arnold Schwarzenegger 2003

[@ttrestle]

Keep in mind that there are actually lots of Democrats who would be probably pretty decent presidents but the reason they aren’t front and center in asserting themselves in the media is because smart people tend to be boring. So the whole hypothesis that Vaush is spouting here does not take the “smart liberal, Democrats are actually boring“ premise into account…

[@korayven9255]

Smart people also tend to be patient and willing to wait for better, less risky opportunities to present themselves.

[@Gingersnaps_the_pumpkin_kitty]

If they were really so smart, they'd know how to market themselves. This is like saying a smart artist or public speaker can't be interesting, part of your job IS to get people interested in you. A politician that can't gain traction isn't a very smart politician the same way a politician that can't manage to put out any good policies isn't a very smart politician.

[@averagedemocrat9546]

There are very few 'smart' politicians in the US, they're all demented fools or midwit millennials.

[@Pazuzu4All]

@@Gingersnaps_the_pumpkin_kitty You vastly overestimate the correlation between intelligence and charisma. Edgar Allen Poe and Vincent van Gogh are rightly considered geniuses today, but in their own time their were seen as weirdos who died in obscurity. Secondly, a smart politician also knows when to lead and when to follow. Right now, Biden has the resources, the network set up, and a decent and proven track record all ready to go. That's something anyone hoping to primary Biden faces. And if they run, they also give the Republicans a decent chance of reclaiming the White House since the Dems will waste resources on each other. And the Dem who weakens Biden will be correctly blamed if Biden loses.

[@zacharylegaspi7594]

In a single stream Vaush managed to invent the slip coach and the streetcar

[@leeam7050]

in a single stream vaush managed to invent the paperclip and the xylophone

[@trollforlife]

I agree with this entirely on principle, but I'd care a lot more if there was actually a viable candidate running. I like Williamson a lot, but I don't believe that she believes she's going to be president.

[@declan0123456789]

I think an issue with having a Democratic primary is primaries are expensive and with the current people challenging Biden they are not doing it out of good faith they're doing it out of greed and with RFK Jr just a Republican running as a Democrat. We need stronger candidates to justify a democratic primary.

[@jascu4251]

There's also no real evidence Democrats want a primary. 1) Democrats have historically preferred not to primary their own candidate when he is already president 2) The people pushing for a primary aren't generally reliable voters and have made this known already

[@korayven9255]

All the actually decent and strong candidates are smart enough not to garner ill will by trying to primary an incumbent. They're disciplined enough to keep their ambitions in check and wise enough to wait for a better opening. Part of the discontent is the belief that Democrats have a deep bench of viable candidates to choose from. They do, but (...almost) none of them are stupid enough to risk Democrats losing the (third consecutive) most consequential election in our lifetimes.

[@shinigamiryan5837]

Plus, it's also worth noting that numbers just came out for fundraising and Biden has raised more than Trump and DeSantis have combined. Issue for Dems right now is that every big donor is already either behind or has been swayed by Biden for the most part, let alone that every big name in the Dem party from the conservatives to the progressives have already gotten behind Biden. Let alone, the only person that could probably challenge Biden that isn't Bernie is Gavin Newsom and that guy is being smart by etching his name far more in the public, possibly eyeing 2028 as neither Pete nor Kamala will get anywhere.

[@communisticus191]

@@korayven9255 Just wanted to add, someone trying to primary Joe Biden wouldn't really reduce his chances to win, and there isn't a REAL increase to the risk of Democrats losing. That being said, just because that's the reality, doesn't mean that it would be perceived like that, and serious candidates aren't going to take the risk of throwing away any good-will they've gained in the party when Biden is... fine, I guess.

[@tyomega9939]

@@korayven9255 Yeah, being quite honest, I find the rhetoric about there being no TRUE primary next year to be dumb. We have a deep bench with Warnock, Mark Kelly, Fettermen, Whitmer, Shapiro, Walz, Newsom, Pritzker, but they're standing will only be damaged if they primary Biden, so I really don't get Vaush's point about democrats not having a decent bench. Literally the only notable ones are DeSantis, Tim Scott, and Nikki Haley; the rest are dipshit governors of flyover states nobody gives a shit about, or businessmen who's only qualifications are being rich. That's not an impressive bench by any stretch lol.

[@codcastrecall2738]

Actually, it's not. You don't waste resources in a forgone conclusion. You instead focus on retaking the house and keeping the senate. How are people this politically dense?

[@adnwzhre]

Yea, I didn’t expect this take from the person who correctly criticized people who voted for candidates that had little chance of winning which would take away votes from the person who has a better chance. Having a rigorous primary when the opposition would literally create death camps is to risky of an action.

[@jascu4251]

@@adnwzhre I think he's simultaneously right and wrong. He's right that in terms of democracy and transparency, it would help the credibility of the Democratic Party. But he's wrong in that Democratic voters, on the whole, don't actually want a primary

[@rainbowkrampus]

As of May, 60% of Dem voters say they back Biden. But 42% of the people who say they'd back him also indicate they could change their mind. That's only 38% of Dem voters who are ride or die Biden supporters. Toss in the 28% of people who back Kennedy (lel) and Williamson (also lel) and suddenly the Biden as favorite narrative isn't so strong. Actually do some campaigning and there will be some shakeup in these numbers. It's not a foregone conclusion at all, it's only foregone given the current landscape. Given that the party appears to be heavily pushing a no primary narrative and showing no support for anyone outside of Biden, your "foregone conclusion" appears to be entirely manufactured by the party itself. Which, granted, may indeed mean that things are still foregone. But this is not the sort of scenario we should be rolling over for. If Biden somehow loses the General, responsibility would fall squarely at the feet of the Democratic Party for actively suppressing the possibility of finding a stronger candidate.

[@djmouseshadow4735]

You are walking down a beach and a turtle is upside down flapping it's arms in distress.

[@glass_knuckles]

Do you make up these questions, Mr. Holden? Or do they write 'em down for you?

[@leejs]

When was the last presidential primary (Democrat or Republican) where there was actual competition against the incumbent? The simple fact is that this doesn't happen. It's not a bad sign for American democracy that Biden, like every other incumbent president in modern history, will coast to victory in the primaries.

[@jmn327]

1992, Pat Buchanan challenged George H.W. Bush, largely because Buchanan thought Bush wasn't Christian nationalist enough and because Bush had broken his "Read my lips: no new taxes" promise. Bush went on to lose. So did Ford in '76 (Reagan challenged him) and Carter in '80 (Ted Kennedy challenged him). Sitting presidents only get challenged if they're considered highly vulnerable to losing their next race; otherwise the party is just hurting their incumbent for literally no reason. If ALL parties held primaries every four years no matter what? That'd be a different story, it'd be a normal thing across the board. But that's not how it works, so parties instead unite around incumbents, so long as said incumbent is popular enough with the party's voters.

[@hobosorcerer]

The problem is that the democrats DON'T WANT TO HAVE primaries.

[@sidneyscott8597]

It would be an unmitigated disaster. Even then he's 80

[@Billy_Souls]

no it's not a mistake

[@edmundnagel9492]

There's literally no other popular choices and incumbents almost always win. This is the smartest choice

[@marketingIdeaslol]

No. That literally defeats the whole point of democracy. That really is giving in bc something may seem “inevitable”

[@LegendOfShaun2]

They dont want ideas "infesting" the democrat electorate

[@jatsko3113]

​@@marketingIdeaslolif canceling a primary means more people turn out to vote in November and ensure a Dem win, that's more democratic in the long run.

[@Jerdifier]

The reason there’s no other popular choices is because the democratic leadership have been moving heaven and earth to quash candidates outside of the old guard to keep themselves propped up. It’s gotten to the point where the only viable candidates for 2028 with any name recognition are basically just Butigieg and Warren. While not having a primary makes sense in this scenario, we need to remember that this entire dilemma was purposefully engineered into existence by the Dems.

[@marketingIdeaslol]

@@jatsko3113 hey…. If you get told who to vote for and then who to vote for again with out ever actually getting a choice on their policies…. That’s not democracy. Even if it’s an incumbent president they can still lose. This isn’t impossible

[@MMAGamblingTips]

I thought this, but no incumbent in modern history has had a primary IIRC.

[@jacksmith-vs4ct]

I think the last was HW bush

[@leejs]

There have been primary candidates, but they were never influential and never actually stood a chance against the incumbent. That goes against Vaush's other point of it being a ground to build up talent. President's get primaried by absolute nobodies. Anyone that has any ambitions for the presidency waits for an open field.

[@MMAGamblingTips]

@@leejs Exactly. The last time there was a Democratic primary of consequence challenging an incumbent; it was when Teddy Kennedy took on Jimmy Carter in a party nightmare. It not only destroyed any future political presidential aspirations from Teddy, but it tore the party in half.

[@LinkRocks]

Told y'all that Williamson is a fraud. 2020 told us this, but I get we're desperate for a progressive. The primary is still far away, people will jump in.

[@wastedproductions45]

I'm convinced at this point there's no such thing as a progressive in America, at least in the political sense, everytime a supposed progressive runs, it always turns out they're full of shit.

[@neil2444]

That so many would vote for Williamson or Cornell West is a sign of a serious problem to come. Getting lefties to agree on a candidate is like putting toothpaste back in the tube, except you're also on a rollercoaster and on fire because you're in hell.

[@ashupashu5559]

@@neil2444 Most people voting for a dem other than Biden would vote for RFK Jr and RFK is going to have more votes than West. I know Vaush said Kennedy has no chance and he said the same thing about Ramaswamy but honestly it's not impossible that both of them make it to the general election.

[@edd8390]

TBH people should've dropped her with her mythical thinking surrounding COVID and Vaccines and how everyone is at fault for covid because diseases are willed into existence by negative thinking. There's enough of that anti-science shit coming from right-wing Christians we don't need a left leaning "spiritual leader" pushing similar ideas no matter how desperate the left gets for a candidate

[@deeznoots6241]

Long live the Gerontocracy

[@therealnuggetball]

5:00 aged horribly

[@troll2161]

Aged perfectly actually

[@pchavez8833]

Vaush L tbh

[@jamesfirecat6652]

Name one time primarying an incumbent president has been a net positive for the party doing it…

[@big_guy_of_leiden5688]

It has never happened in American history

[@joshuaswart8211]

@@big_guy_of_leiden5688It absolutely had happened. The challenger just never wins. (And the incumbent usually goes on to lose in the general election.)

[@colinvollmer]

@@joshuaswart8211I think the guy replying above you meant “[primarying an incumbent president with a net positive outcome for that party] has never happened in American history”

[@big_guy_of_leiden5688]

@@colinvollmer nah I meant that an incumbent has never been primaried as in (the challenger won the primary)

[@sidneyscott8597]

Not once

[@freyamiles3718]

Oh I forgot Camila Haris existed and even when reminded I kinda recognized the name

[@Blackkrimson89]

Yeah same here I literally forgot she was vice president. Once he mention her name I was oh yeah she exist

[@Shanook]

She is also the first woman VP in the history of the united states. Yeah fuck idpol, but that gives her so much leverage to making her unique and memorable.

[@freyamiles3718]

@@Shanook I thought we no longer burned women at the stake. Will have to rethink the transition :P

[@abaddononion]

This one definitely went off the rails by the end of it.

[@nddragoon]

Piker-Kochinski 2024 let's fucking go

[@arjunkaycee2517]

I will say that I have seen two people with Marianne 2024 apparel. I live in rual Georgia, so this was shocking to me. Both people were older queer women. They didn't live where I live, they were just traveling by. It kinda feels like finding a rare bird or a secret rare pokemon card.

[@jayemdaewarehouse9027]

What I got from this is Vaush wants to make the trains run on time 🤣

[@SamuraIcarus3]

I do recall hearing that parties view primaries as something that tends to weaken the incumbent in the general election, but I think most of us can agree that's really dumb and probably mostly the case because we so rarely see a real primary to begin with for the presidency. I feel like it's just one of the "polite" things that parties tend to do but I do hate it. Totally agree that a robust primary would probably keep a party rigorously competing with multiple candidates at all times

[@garfieldGG]

I don’t agree. Mostly bc I know the history and we all know how often presidents get re elected. Even dummies like George W.

[@jacksmith-vs4ct]

it might seem dumb but the last few times its happened to either party its resulted in a loss for the sitting president

[@jmn327]

Historically, it's a disaster for a sitting president. Tough primaries when they're running for a second term are *not* a good sign for a general election.

[@SamuraIcarus3]

@@jmn327 Do you think that's generally the case for any democracies or mainly just because no one ever primaries a sitting president because that's just what we tend to view as the right and civil way to go about our politics?

[@jmn327]

@@SamuraIcarus3 It’s because of a couple reasons: for one, unless you know the opposition party would do the same, you’re just putting your incumbent at a disadvantage for no real gain. The modern GOP would *never* tolerate a strong primary against a sitting POTUS (see how they changed their rules last cycle to ensure Trump wouldn’t face one). More importantly, it’s because unless your incumbent is highly disliked for whatever reason, your party’s base voters probably don’t want a primary in the first place. Biden remains popular among Dems, there’s no hunger for a primary challenger against him except by the party’s fringes. And heck, for our purposes, who’d even be able to stage a strong primary from his left? Dude’s running on massive infrastructure investments, green energy, being pro-union, healthcare expansion, decriminalizing weed, etc., and he’s accomplished a lot of that stuff with the slimmest of majorities in Congress. We all know he could be further left, but who’d have a message that would resonate with the public when that’s the record Biden’s running on? His main challengers would come from the party’s right, which are the voices we’d rather *not* get a national spotlight since they’d just push more 90s neoliberalism or outright conservatism on some things.

[@Jamandabop]

The point about the DNC supposedly being more restrictive than the RNC is absolutely ludicrous. The correct comparison is the 2020 GOP Primary. Trump is not an incumbent in 2024.

[@adrianthoroughgood1191]

To avoid wasting money you could have a primary with a low spending limit.

[@daddykarlmarx6183]

Vaush seems to just forget how Bernie or busters almost sabatoged Biden last election, I don't like Biden but anyone running against him will likely be less popular, and could easily result in a similar Bernie or buster mentality, I desperately want someone better but putting our weight into supporting Biden is probably the more strategic option for what could be one of our most important elections

[@leaodacontabilidade5026]

Biden is losing to Trump in most general election polls. Wake up

[@gusvanwes6192]

I think it's kind of bad to just take the words about Marianne Williamson as fact. The campaign may need more support to get ballot access, trying to get ballot access without a campaign is useless.

[@jeddgangman4502]

I primary is literally the worst thing we can do

[@leaodacontabilidade5026]

Biden is losing to Trump in most general election polls. Wake up

[@briano9397]

This is going to break Kyle Kulinskis little tiktok heart

[@CassieAngelica]

Let’s face it, this is disappointing to many.

[@SamuraIcarus3]

Do VPs usually do anything? I just recall hearing that the position usually has people sitting around doing basically nothing the entire time someone's in it, but I dunno if that's historically been the case or if that's just a thing people say.

[@jacksmith-vs4ct]

they often do diplomacy when the president isn't available and oversees other projects that the president has started usually

[@DaemonJax]

VPs generally do nothing. Most did far less than Kamala has already done, because of the senate tie-breaking votes.

[@DrakeBarrow]

Some from Column A, some from Column B, it all depends on the VP. If a VP is noted as being stronger in a given field of expertise than the President is (like, say, foreign policy), they'll usually field stuff related to their expertise. Otherwise it's a grab bag of what they would handle, and like the prior comment said they'll often fill in for the President on projects or the like when the President isn't available.

[@jeffperteet2327]

Where tf is the go-getter young Dems getting their names in the stream of politics, even if they might not win, it's beneficial to circulate

[@_ericplace]

24:00 most of chat weren’t potty-trained yet in 2000, so I don’t really expect them to fully get it… I was in middle school 👴🏼

[@hollystardust]

I wish Whitmer had more ambitions beyond Michigan, but at the same time she's the best thing to happen to the state in a while and she's committed to seriously improving it, so it's tough. Newsom looks like the only one left...

[@jmn327]

And if either of them want a single prayer of attaining higher office, they'll wait for 2028. If they're seen as weakening the incumbent going into 2024, they'll instantly brand themselves persona non grata in the party (meaning both among party elites *and* the rank and file voters). They're both fully aware of this, and know challenging an incumbent who's popular among the party's primary voters won't get them anywhere.

[@hunterpdx7061]

@@jmn327 Exactly. Both Newsom and Whitmer are wise to keep their powder dry for 2028.

[@Piratewaffle43]

It would be nice if the democratic party was democratic.

[@DaemonJax]

It is democratic. You guys are just asking them to do something politically stupid. Seriously, you may as well be asking them to agree to never run an incumbent president for the full 2 terms in office as some form of self-censorship.

[@Piratewaffle43]

@@DaemonJax The vast majority of the country would prefer someone other than Joe Biden to be president. So tell me, how is this democratic?

[@OBAMNASODA761]

@@Piratewaffle43 The vast majority of the country don't understand the concept of incumbency advantage and how bad competitive primaries are. Appeal to majority fallacy

[@Piratewaffle43]

@@OBAMNASODA761 How is appealing to the majority a fallacy? That's how democracy is supposed to work.

[@cassif19]

It is wild to me that politicians can just do that in the US

[@bakusnacku]

I want all travel to be like a Mario Party minigame

[@bryantsfx10]

No incumbent President has had a primary so why would that change now? makes no sense to decide to change something that has never happened before, if Biden decided not to run then yes you have primaries to decide who the nominee is - primaries really didn't matter until 1976 anyway it's fairly modern where they started to become important. Also Is Biden perfect no but when you have a strong economy and the power of incumbency you ride it if he decides to run again that's the way it is in a 2 party system until something changes

[@nosondre]

Kamala may have passed the Bar but stayed at the “word salad” bar.

[@GregPrice-ep2dk]

BIden is too old and too out of touch. We need young, fresh blood like AOC in charge.

[@keropi193]

Not fair that AOC is too young and Biden isn't too old somehow

[@jeremygregorio7472]

I don't want a primary and I'm a Democrat. Why would we waste time and energy on a primary? No serious candidate is going to run but you will get a bunch of people trying to help the Republican Party win by running third-party after a failed primary

[@salamantics]

We should always have primaries, regardless of circumstance.

[@Dracomarine]

Because people deserve choices. But thank you for again showing how strong Democrat's^TM view on democracy is 😂😂😂

[@jeremygregorio7472]

@@Dracomarine you don't want choices you want Donald Trump as president. Go away troll we smell your stink.

[@salamantics]

@@Dracomarine you paint with a broad brush, I dislike that this person is a democrat. Or voting in my country’s election for that matter. Why have elections at all with doomerism like this.

[@Todtodtodtod]

Josh Shapiro, Gavin Newsom are probably the biggest names to look out for in 2028 I like Katie Porter as a dark horse

[@mathieuleader8601]

how about a primary for the vice-president considering how unpopular she is

[@Superunknown190]

Buttigieg is actually in my city today. God knows why, I live in WV, and I’ve only ever talked to one person who said they liked him. Smh*

[@str8delco589]

Is he still on paternity leave 🤣?

[@LinkRocks]

@@str8delco589 Grow up.

[@Superunknown190]

@@str8delco589 You’re a d*uche. All new parents deserve leave. I don’t like Buttigieg either but at least attack him over something substantive.

[@mazzchiudilaboca481]

just gotta avoid the kirby air ride rail station fires

[@jatsko3113]

I understood this reference. God I loved that game growing up

[@falconeshield]

I'm still waiting for Michelle to wear the boxing gloves. I was hoping this year was it.

[@johnnybravo2926]

Omegalib Obama 2.0

[@lukehenderson5097]

Vaush just invented train libertarianism. "I had to pull your house down, it was between my house and the store. Got to put the tracks the shortest distance."

[@agni-kai132]

Hasan as pres and destiny as VP would litterally cause metal wolf chaos

[@JPMitchell31721]

This is the first I've heard about Kamala being unlikeable.

[@YangyChaddyDad]

This is the first I've heard of Kamala in like 4 years tbh

[@JPMitchell31721]

@@YangyChaddyDad All I ever expected of her was to break ties in favor of democrats, and she has done that admirably.

[@SeaweedSalamander]

Wow Vaush royally vindicated.

[@SilverstringsMusings]

This is an L take tbh, I don't see any reason why the DNC should give the clowns running against Biden the time of day. They already have a strong incumbent candidate, why waste time and money on a pointless primary?

[@BRAINSPLATTER16]

63 percent of democrats what someone else.. Very strung.

[@hustle_simmons]

We only voted for Biden to stop trump that was literally it. A sentient bird turd would have gotten votes over trump in 2020. He did his job and that was stopping trump in 2020.

[@Argumemnon]

"The train stations with catch up, instead of the train slowing down" Best concept ever.

[@LithicStudios]

The only reason a primary might hurt Biden is because it would show how old and unable to conduct himself he really is. But if he can't debate policy for a few hours, is he really the Dem's best candidate choice? A primary also gives Dems a chance to showcase other potential party leaders. Right now there is very little depth of field, and a national stage gives a platform to potential leadership for 2028.

[@Pepsiman1848]

Contested primaries always hurt incumbents. From lbj to carter to hw bush, it’s political suicide for the party that has it.

[@danielkiss7003]

Doesn't matter dems lose this election anyway

[@IBeforeAExceptAfterK]

30:10 - 30:32 That's sounding dangerously close to a hyperloop.

[@b.j.robison2972]

Last Democrat incumbent president to face a primary lost in general.

[@smolmoru]

"hop on your personal little train to drive 4 blocks down to your grocery store", he says. you mean like a tram? just that it's stopping a few times down your road and you might need to walk between 2 or 5 minutes to it. ofc it's exaggeration, but trams are still neat and cute little street-trains

[@lloroshastar6347]

"Kamela has no charisma, she can never be President and never will be President" - well in the UK they said the same about Liz Truss and she still became Prime Minister despite being not only extremely stupid but also having no discernible qualities to make voters like her. She was so bad that the Conservatives still haven't recovered in the polls from how bad she was in those few short months, yet still the Tory party members decided she was the best person for the job, and even now there are still people in that party who thinks she deserves another chance. Oh, it's also worth noting that her economic policy that crashed our economy is almost exactly the same as the one being proposed by the Republicans.

[@thedaniel511]

Vaush, with all due respect, you can't compare a primary with an incumbent president to a primary with a former president that just lost re-election.

[@robertaylor9218]

To be fair, the runner up as vp makes a lot more sense in a ramked choice system.

[@DaemonJax]

We stopped doing that because it led to assassination attempts.

[@robertaylor9218]

@@DaemonJax when? What were the assassination attempts?

[@donaldmarcato7003]

Somebody show vaush the arcade game “Magical Truck Adventure” where you and a friend pump a real rail truck together lmao

[@playerkit]

18:46 Interestingly, and importantly, the social attitude towards gay people in the 2000s was heavily influenced by the gay rights activists/activism during the AIDS crisis. LGBTQ+ people were deliberately humanized in mass media campaigns and direct action protests, like the die-ins. So, from the mid-80s to mid-90s, queer people were able to counter the prevailing ignorance that surrounded queerness among the general population. Though, as is the common pattern, these diverse coalitions factionalized and split in the 90s; possibly leading to the eventual rise of rampant anti-lgbt rhetoric once again in the late 2000s.

[@umbralryu]

I like my neighborhoods like I like my coworkers... railable.

[@seanbeadles7421]

Kayfabe was not pronounced right one in this lol

[@otacon8225]

29:28 I just had a civil engineergasm.

[@smodeste92]

In Vaush's America, everyone has bodybuilder arms

[@MedusaZenovka]

30:00 That derailed quickly I must say. But I like where this train is goin' and would be among the first to jump into the next wagon towards socialism utopia. Oh yeah, the engine is really in high gears today!

[@sirusmunjak-khoury1425]

I disagree Vaush

[@BangerangEliko]

@26:08 Bloomberg is a playing both sides candidate. Knowing how he ran NYC post 9/11 it gave me insight into how Trump was gonna fuck us up. It was a vanity campaign, running the position like a business

[@VooshSpokesman]

Love from a Beauofthefifthcolumn and Christian Verstappen Fan!

[@Techyena]

0:36 I fucking knew it, too good to be true

[@OneReallyGrumpyJill]

classic funny liberal moment

[@ivorywings6094]

Vaush for President💕

[@troll2161]

Aged like fine wine

[@JSephH76]

Kick Kamala off the ticket and put AOC or Bernie on. Never gonna happen but a man can dream

[@connoc5078]

Democrats and self-sabotage. Name a more iconic duo

[@LaBlueSkuld]

In 2000 to 2001 the show Will & Grace was one of the top viewed shows. It had multiple openly gay characters. Compare that to the whole Bud Light thing today.

[@PeregrinesChagrin]

Rail-able neighborhood👀😳

[@ToastedFox]

I want shreddable cities.