The first presidential debate is done and the aftermath has not been good for the incumbent, Joe Biden.

Some Democrat politicians and operatives reportedly texted CNN commentators with hopes that Mr Biden, 81, would step aside. Some floated the possibility of going to the White House and publicly stating concerns about him remaining as candidate.

But if Mr Biden were to drop out, it would be a free-for-all. There is no official mechanism for him or anyone else in the party to choose his successor, meaning Democrats would be left with an open (Democratic National Convention (DNC) in Chicago from August 19-22.

  • 𝕽𝖚𝖆𝖎𝖉𝖍𝖗𝖎𝖌𝖍@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    16
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Once again, we agree.

    Why always with the old white men, when we have prominent politicians like Yang, Buttigieg, Klobuchar? And as for Bernie, if you want a firebrand who’s going to alienate moderates, why not AOC? Well, she’s too young to run, but she’s not the only truly liberal option. Warren is old enough, progressive enough, and a woman. But, no, Bernie Bros gotta Bro.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      5 months ago

      I’m honestly trying to think of who they could run this late and I’m coming up short. Gavin Newsom is terrible idea in my opinion. Like you said, AOC is too young. Kamala Harris? People hate her.

      • ironhydroxide@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        5 months ago

        The age specifics might be important. AOC turns 35 in October, before she’d take office if elected. And therefore might actually be eligible.

          • citrusface@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            23
            ·
            5 months ago

            There’s no battle to be had. You can be elected at 34 and you have to be 35 to serve. As long as you are 35 before inauguration, you are good. There is nothing to challenge. It’s cut and dry.

              • citrusface@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                12
                ·
                5 months ago

                In this case - it is.

                Article II, Section 1, Clause 5:

                No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

                There is NOTHING that prevents anyone from campaigning or running for president that is younger than 35. You have to be 35 to serve as president. There is no ambiguity.

                • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  9
                  arrow-down
                  7
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  Dude, SCOTUS is currently deciding whether or not it’s legal for a president to assassinate his political rivals.

                  • citrusface@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    15
                    ·
                    5 months ago

                    Okay - you know what. I yield. I shouldn’t have to in the first place, but I legitimately cannot argue your point.

      • AlligatorBlizzard@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        Tim Walz. Minnesota has been kicking ass with progressive legislation these past few years, and here in Minnesota we’ve been wondering if he’s been quietly trying to get his name out there to run for President. (And the general consensus is that we don’t want to lose him as governor, but I guess we’ll give him up to save US democracy, lol.) On paper he’s fairly moderate too.

          • AlligatorBlizzard@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            Is that really a bad thing, though? Generic Democrat polls really well against Trump. The people who know of Walz really like him, even the more reasonable rural Republicans here grudgingly admit that while they don’t agree with him politically he clearly cares about Minnesotans. Newsom doesn’t have that. The past couple of years have seen some semi-viral quotes from him poking at politicians in red states, mostly along the lines of “we fed children, what have you done?”, and I’ve seen them posted here. The people who know him like him. For the people who don’t, he’s Generic Democrat. He’s well spoken enough to handle the discussions around the George Floyd protests (which already came up in the first debate but Biden didn’t address directly). He’s well spoken, smart, kind, and down to earth - everything Trump isn’t.

            Also, I hadn’t heard of Obama before he ran for president. For a sufficiently likable candidate, it’s not a deal breaker.

            • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              Then there’s this little time to campaign? I’d say yes. You had a lot more time to learn about who Obama was.

      • 𝕽𝖚𝖆𝖎𝖉𝖍𝖗𝖎𝖌𝖍@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        5 months ago

        Agreed, and agreed.

        Why not Klobuchar? She’s got some national recognition from the 2019/20 cycle, politics are acceptable to moderates, progressive (enough), and she’d eat Trump for lunch in debates and on social media. Plus, she’s from the Midwest, and might pick up some folks for regional loyalty, and could play against the “slick New Yorker” which might still work.

        The bases are going to vote party lines. I think undecideds and wavering moderates are the pick-up points, and I think Klobuchar could do that.

        I like Yang’s politics, but he’s got a popularity problem, and Buttigieg - Trump would just harp on his sexual orientation, and I’m not confident enough that America’s ready yet to vote for a gay president. Hell, we can’t even get a woman into office.

        IMO Klobuchar’s the safest bet against Trump.

        • njm1314@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          5 months ago

          Trump won’t agree to a debate with a new candidate. I doubt that there be another debate at all as is.

          • 𝕽𝖚𝖆𝖎𝖉𝖍𝖗𝖎𝖌𝖍@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            For sure. But there will be a lot of indirect debate on social media, because Trump can’t keep his burger-hole shut, and Klobuchar’s free to murder him (metaphorically) on public platforms. Even if he only posts to TruthSocial, everything he says gets parroted on X and Facebook, and that’s still where the most eyeballs are.

            And old school public media picks this stuff up and repeats it - that’s mostly what they’ve been reduced to -but it still reaches a lot of eyes and ears.

            And: Trump refusing another debate, she could just hammer on his cowardice, over and over. That’d be a win.

            Klobuchar is tough. If nothing else, I’d love to see that fight. Only slightly less than I’d love to see an AOC v Trump fight; that’d be like watching a skinny junkie enter the MMA ring against Holly Holm. It’d be hilarious. But AOC is too young, and Trump will be either dead or in a home by the time she’s old enough to run. I just hope Bernie is still active enough by then to support her. I don’t know that she could get elected - she’s too polarizing - but it would be a marvelous spectacle.

            Anyway, I prefer Yang’s politics, and I’d be thrilled to see Buttigieg in the White House, but I stand by Klobuchar as the best bet.

            • dogslayeggs@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              5 months ago

              AOC turns 35 before the election, so she’s eligible. She might be “too young” to vote for but not too young to run.

              • She was born in October; shit, you’re right. She’ll be barely legal in time for the election, and certainly eligible by the time she’d take office. So she won’t be too young to vote for by the time of the general election.

                Wow.

                • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  And imagine the click-through rate for “hot barely legal candidate” ads going straight to a policy video.

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          Klobuchar is definitely a good idea. Although I’m not convinced that replacing Biden this late in the game is going to save the presidency either. I don’t know what should be done.

          • NobodyElse@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            5 months ago

            The only reason to vote for Biden at this point is anti-Trump and Blue No Matter Who. Those still apply to anyone else that the DNC puts forward, as a base score, with any actual merits, charisma, or vigor adding to that. This should have been an easy decision six months ago and doing-nothing-and-hoping-for-the-best doesn’t seem to be making the prospects any better.

            • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              5 months ago

              anti-Trump sounds like a pretty damn good reason for me. Unless you think there’s a good reason to let a dictator win.

              • NobodyElse@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                5 months ago

                You clearly didn’t read what I wrote, but you sure took the time to start talking some more.

                The only reason to blindly insist on Biden as the only possible nominee, a bad-mouth someone who discusses an alternative approach, is if you want Trump to win.

                • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  I read every word. I still maintain that “not dictator” is always a better vote than “dictator,” even if that is your only reason.

                  • NobodyElse@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    5 months ago

                    I said that the DNC should run someone who is more charismatic and younger so that they could more easily beat Trump. Where are you getting the dictator garbage?

                  • OfCourseNot@fedia.io
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    5 months ago

                    I think what the other commenter meant was that for many people, like yourself, a D near the name is enough to vote for that person but the bar can be higher for other people. If the dems had put (might be time yet?) a not-absurdly-bad candidate, as they have now, they would’ve won easily. But seeing how it’s going you guys are gonna enjoy four years (hopefully only four) of Trump as president, and the rest of the world will have to put up with all his crap as well.

              • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                5 months ago

                If that were all it took to win, we wouldn’t have been worried before the debate and twice as worried after. Not-Trump isn’t the autowin the establishment wishes it was.