• kava@lemmy.world
      6·
      2 years ago

      Wouldn’t it be more relevant? The stakes are high. Dems losing this election could have serious consequences.

      https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/biden-approval-rating/

      Biden’s approval rating is only 0.6% higher than Trump’s at the same time period. He’s not a popular president. The economy isn’t doing well which has a very high impact on election results.

      I think Democrats are taking a big risk going with Biden again, although I guess they would be taking a big risk changing him out too. What a mess, honestly.

    • Guy_Fieris_Hair@lemmy.world
      22·
      2 years ago

      Not irrelevant. Remember 2016? The options were even worse and we ended up with the cheeto. Since the DNC decided to stick with the senile sock puppet I would bet money we end up with Pence. And they will keep turning this country into a religious state. The DNC is fine with that too, because at least pence will play by the rules and keep everyone’s doners happy. That is the only reason they hated Trump so badly. Had nothing to do with his actions, it was that he said the quiet parts out loud.

  • kartonrealista@lemmy.world
    71·
    2 years ago

    Never say never, but I don’t think it matters all that much, with Trump in jail. But to answer your question, incumbent changing their running mate seems tantamount to admitting failure and you want people to view your administration as successful.

    • severien@lemmy.world
      42·
      2 years ago

      Expect a lot of discussions what will happen with Biden dying in office, and that becomes even more possible.

      And imagining Kamala as a president is a big turn off.

        • severien@lemmy.world
          31·
          2 years ago

          Some voters may see two bad choices and not seeing any decent choice won’t vote at all.

          • kartonrealista@lemmy.worldEnglish
            42·
            2 years ago

            That’s something you may think if you’re 5 y/o and going on vibes. Every decision you face not only has the consequences if you choose it, but also if you don’t.

            A pure hypothetical to demonstrate the general principle on an extreme example (not a direct comparison): you have an election with two candidates: one runs on a promise of Holocaust 2.0 and the other will twist your ankle after he wins. Would you say you can’t choose because both are bad? Obviously you would under any case want to avoid the worse outcome. Because not doing anything is risking that bad outcome, even if the alternative is bad. The upcoming election is not that extreme, but my example should have demonstrated the principle: inaction in face of greater evil is wrong.

            There is no absolute good in this world, and if you can’t choose between Kamala Harris and those horrible people you moral compass is out of whack. When you don’t vote, the choice is made for you. Whether something is good or bad has to be evaluated considering possible alternatives, you can’t just not choose and expect a miracle to happen.

          • rhacer@lemmy.world
            39·
            2 years ago

            I don’t vote because I believe voting is an immoral act, but for those that do vote, I think this is a significant comment. Voting for the lesser of two evils is still voting for evil, and that may be a bridge too far for some.

            • morgan423@lemmy.worldEnglish
              2·
              2 years ago

              The debate shouldn’t be about voting for the lesser of two evils. The entire debate should be focused on opening up more options and the actual ability to vote for third party candidates without throwing your vote away, by implementing a different system, like ranked choice voting.

              Continuing to focus on which Sith lord will blow up the country the least if elected is a losing play. We have to do better and focus our attention elsewhere if we have any chance of getting anything reformed.

            • Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world
              1·
              2 years ago

              Yeah, I used to think that when I was young and ignorant. There is a real difference, and if you don’t know that, you haven’t been paying attention at all.

              Just say that you don’t care, don’t pretend to be on some moral high ground.

              If you don’t vote, stay out of the conversation, because this has nothing to do with you. If you want to join and share your opinion, do some research and take some action.

              • rhacer@lemmy.world
                12·
                2 years ago

                So I should engage in an immoral act because other people might do something wrong?

                I have no right to tell anyone how to live their lives, and that is what I attempt to do any time I cast a ballot.