613
submitted 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

Summary

President Joe Biden touted his administration’s economic recovery efforts, citing job growth, reduced inflation, and infrastructure investments, as he prepares to hand off a strong economy to Donald Trump.

Biden criticized Trump’s proposed steep tariffs on imports, warning they could harm the economy and reintroduce inflation.

Trump plans tariffs against China, Mexico, and Canada, raising concerns about trade disruptions similar to those seen during his first term.

Economists caution that such policies could quickly reverse recent economic gains and weaken the U.S. economy.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] SatansMaggotyCumFart@lemmy.world 9 points 2 weeks ago

There was nothing wrong with Harris except seven million people who voted for Biden weren't ready for her to become president.

[-] BaldManGoomba@lemmy.world 8 points 2 weeks ago

It is more like 250k in 4 states that flipped.

[-] SatansMaggotyCumFart@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago

Harris got about seven million less votes then Biden.

[-] BaldManGoomba@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago

In states that didn't matter. In every swing state but Pennsylvania they had record turnouts. She even beat some of bidens support in those states and still lost. 7 million isn't the story it is she didn't really gain 250k votes in 4 key states and lost.

[-] yarr@feddit.nl 4 points 2 weeks ago

There was nothing wrong with Harris except seven million people who voted for Biden weren’t ready for her to become president.

I didn't enjoy what she did as district attorney. I would also argue if she was not electable in 2024, then she doesn't meet the bar of a "good candidate". Now her viability is irrelevant entirely, unless she plans to run in 2028.

[-] SatansMaggotyCumFart@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

I would also argue if she was not electable in 2024, then she doesn’t meet the bar of a “good candidate”.

I think it is more of a reflection of the voters and non-voters.

[-] Tangent5280@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

Harris, like Hillary, was put forward without the express will of the people - she didn't win a primary over Biden, because there was no primary elections.

[-] yarr@feddit.nl 4 points 2 weeks ago

Arguably the "will of the people" was exercised through them supporting the Democratic party. The Democratic party put forth a new candidate in accordance with their own guidelines, which were in place prior to 2024. This was no coup, it was the Democratic party putting forth a candidate as they may. This is not new. They can put forth anyone they wish.

Kamala was put into place by receiving the most votes during a virtual roll call: https://ballotpedia.org/Democratic_delegate_rules%2C_2024

If one supports the Democratic party, surely one would sanction the process by which Kamala became the presidential candidate, as they were acting in accordance of their own party guidelines, which were in place long before this election. If a president would have withdrew prior to Biden, the exact same process would have taken place. A similar action took place in 1972 when VP nominee Thomas Eagleton withdrew. None of this is new.

[-] toddestan@lemm.ee 1 points 1 week ago

The "will of the people" was Joe Biden, who won the Democratic primary quite handily. However, the Joe Biden people thought they were voting for wasn't the Joe Biden we actually had, as there was a very deliberate effort to hide his declining health by the party leadership. Hence the whole reason they had to change candidates, once it became too obvious that Biden wasn't fit to serve another term as president.

So while the Democratic party still followed their processes and guidelines by ultimately putting forth Kamala Harris as their candidate, it's not like they had to do it because Biden withdrew due to some freak accident or something like that. You can't really sanction what they did when the whole thing is rooted in the party leadership deliberately deceiving people.

[-] SatansMaggotyCumFart@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

I think the bigger problem is that she is a non-white woman.

this post was submitted on 12 Dec 2024
613 points (96.8% liked)

politics

19244 readers
3180 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS