Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

What happened to the Democrats?- Honest Question

Options
  • 09-03-2024 8:10am
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 15,011 ✭✭✭✭


    What happened to the Democrats in the US that they went from a party that got a 40 something year old man to the White House but less than two decades later are relying on a 80 something year old man to try and win a second term?

    Why didn't Biden run in 2016 ?

    Was it because of the hold Hilary Clinton had on the Democrats that it was seen as "her turn to run" or had Biden simply retired at that stage.

    And did he have to "come out of retirement" to run in 2020 because there was no other viable options to stop Trump?

    And where are the other viable options after Biden?



«1

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 2,956 ✭✭✭patnor1011


    Socialism in short way to describe it.

    They become obsessed with it. The bad side of it nothing to do with social values for the people but rather with what was called dictate of the proletariat they just appropriated it in a sense of dictate of corporations and approved (bought) people.



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,362 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    Biden's son Beau died in May 2015 of brain cancer.

    It was a devastating tragedy for the Biden family. Biden had previously lost his wife in a traffic accident.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,422 ✭✭✭tobefrank321


    Biden has cited Trump as one of the reasons he stood in 2020 and in fairness to him he delivered but really only postponed Trumps return.

    There's no-one else who has a huge profile on the Democratic side. Name recognition is huge in America.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,469 ✭✭✭Former Former Former


    The bigger question is what has happened to the Republican Party, and how it has been completely hijacked by one man with very little interest in democracy or any other American values.



  • Registered Users Posts: 220 ✭✭mrpdap


    But why didn’t the Democrats think ahead to 2024 once Biden was elected and have a new recognisable candidate ready to run?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 15,011 ✭✭✭✭Fr Tod Umptious


    But that's not what I started the thread for, so let's not go off topic with it.



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,011 ✭✭✭✭Fr Tod Umptious


    How much has the selection of Harris as VP affected that I wonder.

    I know VPs are not front and center but you would be forgiven for thinking that Harris was irrelevant at this stage.

    Was she a possible candidate for 2024 and it became clear early on in her tenure as VP that she was not up to it or was Biden running again regardless of what anyone else thought?

    Did the Democrats squander the opportunity to get a new fresh candidate for 2024 on a box ticking exercise with Harris or did a new fresh candidate even exist for 2024 ?



  • Registered Users Posts: 28,805 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    ...say wha!

    ...the democrats decided it was best to get into bed with the exact same entities embedded within the republicans, and not only that, to supersize it, sprinkle in a bit deregulation, financialisation, and happy happy days!

    ...all this directly shafted their intended base, i.e. working classes, by accelerating precariousness in nearly every aspect of their lives....

    ...resulting in the now defunct democrats!

    ...socialism, hahahaha, yea right!



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,011 ✭✭✭✭Fr Tod Umptious


    all this directly shafted their intended base, i.e. working classes,

    So where have the base gone and how do you get them back?



  • Registered Users Posts: 28,805 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    ...they may not be able to, the damage is deeply imbedded now, the country clearly needs another major party, but that to may never occur, it simply doesnt suit the entities that have gained from the current situation, its very very messy stuff, ive always believed that that country is very slowly moving towards a civil war, even though that also may never truly occur, its certainly looking indefinitely messy....

    ...the initial base is clearly still there, but effectively unrepresented, or at best, very poorly represented...



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 6,521 ✭✭✭Brussels Sprout



    People who refer to the Democrats (a party who'd be on the centre-right in any western european country) as Socialists are telling you two things:

    1. They're wildly ignorant about political systems
    2. They're consuming far too much content from the likes of Ben Shapiro and his ilk


  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,323 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    No one with any serious ambition for presidency wanted to run a losing campaign against Biden.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,956 ✭✭✭patnor1011


    People who never experienced socialism would not recognize it even if it kicked them in the ass.

    Those who experienced it can clearly see writing on the wall.

    Who is Ben Shapiro?



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,323 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    Can you name one actual Socialist policy of the Democrats?



  • Registered Users Posts: 28,805 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    who are these people, and where is this socialism in regards american society?



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 35,941 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    Trump is only a handful of years younger though. This ain't some isolated problem, huge swathes of the American political system, especially at the higher echelons, is dominated by men and women north of 75. Bernie Sanders, Mitch McConnell, Chuck Grassley, the list goes on; the country is a functional gerantocracy with its lifetime appointments and corporatised democracy it makes "sense" it's dominated by those who have spent money and years getting to the top.



  • Registered Users Posts: 28,805 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    'functioning', im not so sure about that, but good point, its a country in desperate need of younger policy makers, but that would threaten the status quo.....



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 35,941 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    Functioning only in the sense of the gerantocracy part - as in it's not codified but it's sure the end result.

    As to younger blood, this is where the farce of a two party system enters the equation: the young blood in the Democrats can trend far more left than the older crowd, yet this is a scenario where Nancy Pelosi and Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez (or Bernie Sanders) are in the party means you have the constant inability to affect ideological change while opposing points along a broad centrist-left axis exist.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,956 ✭✭✭patnor1011


    You need to slow down buddy and think about what do you read. I get that sometimes fingers are faster than brain but go ahead and reread my comment.

    I clearly stated that they appropriated socialist policies in regards to corporations and policy makers. Not to the benefit of the people.



  • Registered Users Posts: 28,805 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    ...but thats actually not socialism at all, its actually the opposite, yes im aware that that statement is regularly used, but we all know, its actually not true, its just another, but far more extreme version of capitalism..



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,956 ✭✭✭patnor1011


    Excuse me we all (seems to be your preferred pronoun) but I do not think for a second that for example using taxpayer money to bail out failed banks is even close to be extreme version of capitalism. In capitalism they will be left out to die and someone else would gladly jump in their place. We live in era of subsidies, dotation, bailouts, assistance and entitlement.

    Try corporate socialism.



  • Registered Users Posts: 28,805 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    ...but thats clearly and simply untrue, bailouts have nearly always been a part of a capitalist state and economy, this has nearly always been the case, and on a global level to...

    ...its just supporters of more extreme versions of capitalism, such as free market fundamentalism etc, will never accept this reality, never....



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,956 ✭✭✭patnor1011


    ...as I said... people who never experienced socialism... would not recognize it... even if it kicked them in the ass...



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,298 ✭✭✭RetroEncabulator


    I think what’s happening over there is anti-politics and the rapid debasing of democracy and it will happen here too if we aren’t careful.

    The US is an extreme example, but for the last couple of decades or more political discourse over there is just personalised vicious attacks, negative campaigns and paranoid conspiracy theories being whipped up.

    The GOP has basically been destroyed and is now some kind of weird combination of religious fundamentalism and Qanon conspiracy nuts, while the Democrats seem to have no candidates and are withering away and running octogenarians.

    The quality of candidates is at the rock bottom and nobody in their right mind would run, so you get a lot of people who fit that description - loud, obnoxious - anyone remotely sensible is rapidly driven away or just never comes forward.



  • Registered Users Posts: 28,805 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    ...and again, where is the socialism in regards american society?



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 35,941 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    Failed banks have a much more quantifiable and apocalyptic effect on a capitalist economy than almost any other industry. A capitalist county by definition won't let a bank fail cos it's literally the bloodstream of its ethos.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,323 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    So the answer is no then.

    Bailing out private enterprises is not socialist.



  • Registered Users Posts: 220 ✭✭mrpdap


    …. which shows the madness of the US competitive nomination process. Fight it out lads and lassies and we’ll nominate the winner as our candidate. Rather than having an process within the party to identify and select the best candidate.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 35,941 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    Why would any sitting President need or should run against a spread of candidates? It'd be a collosal waste of time, money and risked eroding the base for the sake of ... ... what? A nominal sense of due process? Has there ever been a sitting President voted out by their own party? Leaving aside the fact that if someone did arrive that wasn't Biden, it would immediately turn the narrative into "why is he still President if even the DNC rejected him?"

    The thread title is patently mislabelled cos it's not a Democrat problem, if indeed there even is a problem. The main elephant in the room (as it were) with American politics is the quasi-authoritarian, Unitive Executive Theory driven wing of populists who have taken over the previously economically conservative party - not the Democrats.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 15,011 ✭✭✭✭Fr Tod Umptious


    it's dominated by those who have spent money and years getting to the top.

    That's a fair point.

    But in 1992 and again not long after in 2008 Clinton and Obama bucked that trend.

    I think had Trump won in 2020 that was the end of Biden (and indeed Trump as he could not have run in 2024) and the field would then be open to younger candidates on both sides.

    But that didn't happen and it's between these two again.

    Maybe 2028 will produce someone, not AOC though, she doesn't do well out of her liberal NY base, she would just be another Elisabeth Warren.



Advertisement