Support for Harris as Biden's potential replacement has increased significantly in recent days, according to a new poll.
The poll, which was conducted from July 7 to July 9, found that 73 percent of Democratic voters "somewhat" or "strongly" approve of Harris as Biden's replacement. In an earlier iteration of the same survey, conducted from July 3 to July 6, a 66 percent majority of Democrats approved of Harris as a replacement.
So it won’t matter if she replaces him, right? I mean, if it doesn’t matter who the candidate is with polling, then changing the candidate shouldn’t matter, right? Like, why are we keeping Biden if it doesn’t matter who the candidate is? Theoretically, if it doesn’t make a difference who the nominee is, and it won’t change anything, then changing the nominee shouldn’t be a problem, right?
It more has to with polls. If the electorate is more or less set, then the numbers game turns into a get out the vote campaign. There is no reason to think that the candidate will have an affect on that, unless of course if you've already voted for them once
If polling is static for all potential candidates, then what harm can come from changing them? Why fight so hard for a candidate that you know is going to lose, unless you want that candidate to lose? 🤨
We aren't "keeping" Biden, the primary process was when other people could run against him and we got to pick. Now that he has secured the nomination, only one person on Earth decides if Biden continues to run or not--Biden himself.
Unless he gets impeached and removed from office or something, which is not very likely.
Hell, he even gets immunity for all sorts of possible crimes now, thanks to the Supreme Court.
Maybe, I don't know. I was just shooting down that standard DNC conspiracy theory nonsense. "Donors deciding" is just a step away from "Jews run the world", with the George Soros conspiracy theories being the step in the middle.
Common sense dictates that money does not grant you mind control powers, however, just sway.
I am not saying there is not a shitload of money in politics, it is true there is a ton of corporate money in our politics.
However, does the money grant control? Yes or no?
If I give you one billion dollars, you personally, could I then force you to do something you did not want to do? Murder a loved one perhaps? Or resign a presidency you've probably wanted your whole life?
Think about specifics, not vague bullshit. Money does not grant control, people retain their free will. It can only help convince. Lobby. Sway. Influence. Not control.
That's the line between reality and conspiracy theory bullshit.
Money doesn’t give you control over people, it influences decisions.
Why do we pay rent or mortgage? Do the landlords or banks control us, or influence us to pay? Why do cult leaders exists if adherents have “free will?” Are they controlled or manipulated?
If money didn’t influence and control politics, we would have gun regulations, healthcare, and climate reform.
There you go, trying to say control and influence are the same thing again, when they are two separate words with distinct meanings.
Why do we really have the system we do? Because only a fraction of Americans are progressive, and far more prefer neo-liberalism for the illusion of freedom it gives. Most voters still consider "the economy" to be the most important issue to them, not any sort of progressive values.
Now, part of this is due to corporate-controlled narratives, but it's still us exercising our free will. You do not have to pay your landlord, you could trek out into the Alaskan wilderness with a backpack and a tent if you really wanted. Nobody would show up with a gun to stop you.
This is an incredibly bad position. Saying that donors decide is nothing like saying "Jews run the world". It's not a conspiracy theory, it is a recognition that campaign funds are integral to a presidential election. If Biden can't bring in money then his campaign will fold.
Biden already possesses a huge amount of donor money, and cannot run again in the future. Additionally, Biden gets almost half his money from small donors.
Yes but she's capable of actually campaigning. Expectations have been clear since the debate. If he got right out there and started campaigning immediately, he'd probably be doing fine. It's becoming clear however that he can't.