Why would the party itself give voters reasons to vote against their incumbent?
Because thats how democracy is supposed to work. Candidates need to earn everyone’s vote every time theres an election. The purpose of an election is to give the population a chance to approve their reelection, it also holds them accountable. To just assume they are entitled to the full 8 years with no question or accountability is authoritarian.
I hate how when someone gets elected for their first term, the first thing out of everyone’s mouth is: re-election. removed, how about you bust your ass for 4 years and everyone will be begging you to stay. Instead its, get elected, work on re-election campaign, build a library. It would be amazing to see my country finally live up to this whole American dream BS that’s been shoved down my throat since birth, yet the only people actually getting richer were already rich to begin with. We talk about $100k salaries like they’re gold yet Elon, Bezos and Bill Gates wipe their asses with larger bills than that. We need a government for the people of the people. Not a bunch of 1%ers mooching off us Poors and writing policies to their benefit distancing themselves and their families from further from the people they claim to represent
It’s a “the system is broken but we have to play with the rules” thing. We can protest/protest/canvas for new voting rules to get third parties more chance to be in congress, but I can’t see the presidency ever changing in a regular setting.
In a democracy the citizens aren’t customers that need to be courted (though they often behave that way, to their own detriment). Rather, the citizens are participants. Sometimes, maybe usually, the whole process isn’t fun and enjoyable. Sometimes elections are like root canals: undesirable, but the alternative is a lot more pain and problems down the road.
True, but the Biden administration is definitely using the debate to put forward their own talking points (“watch it jack, we’re bringing roe back,” a new plan to cap student loan debt, new climate investments) so it’s not like we’re getting no taste of what the administration’s priorities will be in the next 4 years
True, but the Biden administration is definitely using the debate to put forward their own talking points (“watch it jack, we’re bringing roe back,” a new plan to cap student loan debt, new climate investments) so it’s not like we’re getting no taste of what the administration’s priorities will be in the next 4 years
Good, and they should be. I’d like to see some Democratic with the candidates who obviously won’t be getting the nod, simply because its an opportunity to hold people accountable. How about the failure by the Biden administration on student loans? How about we have some debate questions about the supreme court and how its basically been captured by the conservative movement, and apparently, open to bribery? We have so few opportunities to actually engage in politics. We can’t give up the debates simply because of decorum or that the contenders won’t win. Its literally the only time we ever get the chance to drive the party in the direction of the will of the people.
Lets here what he proposes as a solution. Its his answer to have not mine, and as President, he sure as fucking shit better have a plan, or he’s not qualified for the job. The argument here is in support of debates. Without debates, we don’t get answers to these kinds of questions.
I sure as shit want to know what Biden’s plan is to deal with a congress that wont play ball. He needs to have one.
To a point, but the President has not been given the power to be a dictator.
If the President’s agenda doesn’t get past Congress, what is the President supposed to do? Do you expect the President to start arresting members of Congress until the Presidents’ bills get passed?
Sitting Presidents are rarely challenged within the party.
They should be, they need to be held accountable for their first 4 years to check if they are worthy of another 4.
Why would dems give voters a reason to vote against Biden?
They need to earn their position, if they haven’t spent the prior 4 years earning it they shouldn’t be reelected.
You didn’t answer my question.
That is the answer, why should they expect to keep the job if they haven’t earned it
Biden not being challenged in the primary is the Democratic Party saying “you’ve earned it”.
They are not allowing any challengers to keep his accountable.
I don’t think you understand how this works
OP’s not asking about what the incumbent expects. Why would the party itself give voters reasons to vote against their incumbent?
Because thats how democracy is supposed to work. Candidates need to earn everyone’s vote every time theres an election. The purpose of an election is to give the population a chance to approve their reelection, it also holds them accountable. To just assume they are entitled to the full 8 years with no question or accountability is authoritarian.
That’s what the general election is for.
I hate how when someone gets elected for their first term, the first thing out of everyone’s mouth is: re-election. removed, how about you bust your ass for 4 years and everyone will be begging you to stay. Instead its, get elected, work on re-election campaign, build a library. It would be amazing to see my country finally live up to this whole American dream BS that’s been shoved down my throat since birth, yet the only people actually getting richer were already rich to begin with. We talk about $100k salaries like they’re gold yet Elon, Bezos and Bill Gates wipe their asses with larger bills than that. We need a government for the people of the people. Not a bunch of 1%ers mooching off us Poors and writing policies to their benefit distancing themselves and their families from further from the people they claim to represent
That’s what the general is for.
No it’s not, if they wont allow anyone to primary them then it’s assumed there is no other choice
It’s a “the system is broken but we have to play with the rules” thing. We can protest/protest/canvas for new voting rules to get third parties more chance to be in congress, but I can’t see the presidency ever changing in a regular setting.
They designed a system that’s broken for us, works perfectly for them and demand we participate in it
Actually the Republicans would love for you not to participate in it.
Then democrats better start earning votes instead of demanding them. "We are not them’ isnt good enough.
In a democracy the citizens aren’t customers that need to be courted (though they often behave that way, to their own detriment). Rather, the citizens are participants. Sometimes, maybe usually, the whole process isn’t fun and enjoyable. Sometimes elections are like root canals: undesirable, but the alternative is a lot more pain and problems down the road.
That’s obviously not the point.
True, but the Biden administration is definitely using the debate to put forward their own talking points (“watch it jack, we’re bringing roe back,” a new plan to cap student loan debt, new climate investments) so it’s not like we’re getting no taste of what the administration’s priorities will be in the next 4 years
Good, and they should be. I’d like to see some Democratic with the candidates who obviously won’t be getting the nod, simply because its an opportunity to hold people accountable. How about the failure by the Biden administration on student loans? How about we have some debate questions about the supreme court and how its basically been captured by the conservative movement, and apparently, open to bribery? We have so few opportunities to actually engage in politics. We can’t give up the debates simply because of decorum or that the contenders won’t win. Its literally the only time we ever get the chance to drive the party in the direction of the will of the people.
What is Biden supposed to do about the Supreme Court except nominate new justices? The problem is that you need Congress to do something.
Lets here what he proposes as a solution. Its his answer to have not mine, and as President, he sure as fucking shit better have a plan, or he’s not qualified for the job. The argument here is in support of debates. Without debates, we don’t get answers to these kinds of questions.
I sure as shit want to know what Biden’s plan is to deal with a congress that wont play ball. He needs to have one.
It isn’t his job, unless you make the Supreme Court a Presidential appointment alone and that they can fire justices on their own whim.
The power to deal with a corrupt Supreme Court has been clearly vested in Congress, not the President.
It sure as fuck is the Presidents job to navigate the halls of power and deliver on things they campaign on.
To a point, but the President has not been given the power to be a dictator.
If the President’s agenda doesn’t get past Congress, what is the President supposed to do? Do you expect the President to start arresting members of Congress until the Presidents’ bills get passed?