• TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    The goose is cooked. Bidens’ not going to be the nominee.

    Good thing the DNC both a) prevented any kind of a meaningful primary and b) insisted that they get to select the delegates for the convention.

    Anyways. Can Blue Maga all bow their heads now and admit they were wrong; that they’ve been wrong the whole time; and that their insistence on running this geriatric is them giving Trump the greatest opportunity to win?

    • Tinidril@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      The DNC gets to pick any replacement. To them, that’s far better than rolling the dice on a progressive winning a primary.

      • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Exactly. And that’s fine. If any blue will do, lets do any (other) blue other than the one that CLEARLY can’t win.

        Smart voters, strategic voters right now understand the importance of “Literally any generic Democrat other than Biden” being the nominee right now.

        Biden has been drowning in the polls for 450 days. He __ dunzo __ after this.

        • I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          The problem is not any blue will do. I can see them ignorantly pushing Harris. Hell, I can see their out of touch asses trying to push H. Clinton again. Democrats are pros at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

          People have been talking about Newsom, or Booker, or even Warren. And… Well maybe, but even they don’t seem popular enough to take on Trump.

          I can think of like one person in the whole country that could unite the base, Michelle Obama. Unfortunately, she appears to have zero interest in running, and who can blame her?

  • multifariace@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    I very much miss the breadth of communities and depth of knowledge that came with Reddit. I am reminded on days like this how disconnected I have become since they burned the books.

  • glitchdx@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    I didn’t know biden was this far gone. We’re so fucked. the DNC is such a shitshow, they’ll refuse to nominate anyone else, and the debates prove he doesn’t have a chance.

    If trump wins the election, democracy in the western world is dead. The DNC needs to pull their collective heads out of their collective asses and figure this shit out real fucking fast.

  • notanaltaccount@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    The conspiracy theorists all say Joe is supposed to step down and Gavin Newsom somehow is added to the ticket which then will win. These conspiracy theorists also say that candidates are selected in advance by the powers that be and it’s all pagentry to deceive the gullible masses. Perhaps you are supposed to feel this way as part of the pagentry?

    • tills13@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      They want fence sitters in Pennsylvania who are college educated to see what a blabbering idiot Trump is.

      • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        There’s almost no fence sitters. This isn’t your father’s Republican party. It’s a literal christofascist cult where you’re either part of the group or hated, and one of the main prerequisites of even CONSIDERING joining is an intense irrational hatred for anyone with a (D) behind their name, whether progressives like Bernie and AOC, or conservatives like Henry Cuellar and Biden.

        The Biden campaign is wasting its time and energy trying to appeal to people who would rather die than ever vote for a Democrat while alienating most of the Democratic base and extinguishing much of the enthusiasm of the ones who still aren’t completely turned off.

        Unless they change course dramatically, voter participation will be abysmally low and the orange fascist man-child is going to win and, with the help of Project 2025, is going to dismantle everything resembling democracy, regulations, and protections for any abused minority group.

        And the “blue no matter who” apparatchiks are going to victim blame the tens of millions of alienated potential voters rather than blaming the corruption, incompetence, and stubborn refusal to listen to them that alienated them.

        After all, they’d rather die than hold the leaders of their own party accountable for their mistakes and shortcomings, no matter how much ignoring it helps the fascist GOP.

  • enkers@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    On the one hand, he fumbled his words a few times pretty poorly. On the other hand, he didn’t spend an hour blatantly lying.

    I was watching CNN’s coverage. I thought Biden did alright, asides from a few notable blunders that he recovered from. CNN’s coverage made it sound like he needed to have his adult diapers changed mid question.

    It’s crazy how they’re completely ignoring any substance of the debate and solely focusing on appearances. It’s almost like that’d favour a populist candidate or something.

    • wick@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Biden looked like they injected meth into his balls right before he went on stage. Kinda hard to ignore him staring through bits of furniture and smiling at leprechauns.

      I’m shocked he performed at all with how high he was. I’d wonder as well if he needed assistance during that whole thing.

    • brucethemoose@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      CNN can’t help themselves. They need to compete with social media I guess.

      I dunno, that debate just made me sad.

      • enkers@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        CNN can’t help themselves.

        I wonder if that has anything to do with CNN’s chairman and CEO, Mark Thompson, ranked by Forbes as the 65th most powerful person in the world. 🤔

        Would someone like that benefit from tax cuts to the ultra-wealthy?

        • Gigasser@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Didn’t this guy say that he wanted to makeCNN more “centrist”? So I guess what he meant by that was pull it a few inches to the right…

        • brucethemoose@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          I don’t think it’s even about candidates, but just focusing on appearances.

          That’s what grabs attention and makes money. Even the robotic social media feed algorithms know this.

    • Cethin@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      The issue is appearances are all that mattered. I don’t believe anyone who was interested enough in politics to watch that debate was undecided. It’s now time for the campaigns to cut up the debate to use for ads that will actually reach the undecided voters. I feel it’s going to hurt Biden a lot more than Trump.

      • enkers@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Yeah, I don’t disagree. Those who make their decisions by disregarding policy are probably not going to be doing the right things for the right reasons anyways.

        If they tip the balance and that means a dictatorship, there’s nothing anyone can do to stop it short of global intervention.

        • bitwaba@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          I’m hoping the reason this debate was agreed to so early is that the DNC needs to know if they’ve got to work out a plan B. The convention is scheduled for the end of August so until then Biden isn’t the official candidate. Like, if in 2 months they’re polling at 30%, I don’t see how they can go “oh yeah, this is definitely a losing strategy. Let’s stick with it”. Why not switch it up? You’re losing already. The worst that can happen is you still lose.

          • jaybone@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            This is exactly what I’m thinking. So next then, who do they run instead?

            BTW remember when like three years ago Biden said multiple times he would only serve one term? smdh

            • Cethin@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              The obvious answer is Harris. The less obvious but I think better option is Buttigieg. He’s not who I would pick ideally, but I think people still remember him and he’s part of the Biden adm.

              I’m pretty confident they’re running Biden unless he dies though.

              • bitwaba@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                3 months ago

                Bootygig would piss a lot of the base off to pass over a POC woman who would literally be president anyways the moment Joe croaks.

                He’s probably a better pick for the country, but the DNC doesn’t give a shit about that. I don’t think he’s a particularly strong pick, but he’s better than Harris.

                I think the best option to win the election would be to pick someone that’s not a part of the current administration. And we can definitely count on that not happening. The DNC is too up their own ass with everyone getting their compensation for previous “support” once the positions open up.

                • Cethin@lemmy.zip
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  I agree totally. He’s not the best option, just the best option that’s plausible if we entertain the hypothetical that Joe isn’t running. Also, yeah it probably would piss some people off to skip Harris, so it’s probably her no matter what.

      • enkers@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        It should be the media’s responsibility to thoroughly fact check both parties. If that means they have to pre-submit their primary answers and read them off a teleprompter, then so be it.

        You’re right, it wasn’t a win, but it should have been.

    • circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      I thought Biden did alright

      He just didn’t. In any other previous cycle, it would not have been considered acceptable. The bar has gotten very low.

      Biden looked senile, and Trump looked like regular, crazy Trump. The senility will do more for voters than Trump being Trump.

      • XIIIesq@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Exactly, people expect Trump to be Trump, but they expect Biden to not be senile.

        What a sorry state of affairs.

    • _number8_@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      you are trying to gaslight me. i want the democrats to win so we don’t have trump, and they’re voluntarily trotting out this fucking corpse.

      sure, it shouldn’t be about appearances, but it is, because that’s how most people interpret the debates (especially because it’s part of the job for politicians to lie and that isn’t exactly a meaningful shock at this point). that’s the worst i’ve ever seen anybody do in a debate in my life.

      • enkers@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        I fucking despise Biden for his policy in Palestine. If there was any reasonable chance that they could switch candidates now and still have a shot, I’d totally agree with you.

        I think he’s way too old to be president, but I’m sorry to say you’re stuck with a shit decision, and one that’s been engineered to help work against our best interests.

        I fully get where you’re coming from, but I’m not trying to gaslight you.

        • Tinidril@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          It’s come to the point where the risk of changing the candidate has to be weighed against the risk of not changing the candidate.

          • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            And it has been. The risk of sticking with Biden is the greater one by far. He’s losing the election and showing no willingness to change any of the behaviors that are causing it.

            Switching to another candidate might be a controversial choice, but it’s still a safer bet than Biden.

        • tegs_terry@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Regarding Palestine, not a single president would or could have done any different. You made your bed there, now you have to give it money. It’s the same with us here in the UK.

          • Shyfer@ttrpg.network
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            The President has plenty of power here. They can halt shipments like he did one time, which proved he could try that. He could not veto ceasefire deals in the UN. He could assign a better secretary of state that doesn’t run interference for Israel. He could not jump the gun making pro Israel statements or supporting suppressing the protests, than staying otherwise silent when they do things wrong like even kill American aide workers or Palestinian journalists. He could veto laws that get to him. He could rile up the populace to contact their local Congressmen and publish Israel’s wrongdoings in press conferences, while he’s only been doing that for pro-Palestinian “wrong-doing”, often getting the facts wrong in the process. He could threaten Israel harder to let aid through the ground. Even if some of these fail, it shows who he supports at least.

          • DAMunzy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            The president could choose to not sign the bill sent by Congress for further funding. Congress might pass it with veto proof majority but it would still be making a statement. So, not exactly true

        • troglodytis@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Na. It’s a pretty clear and easy decision. Neither option gonna get ya what you want and need, but one option is actively trying for a disastrous result.

          Unfortunately, too many people in the USA say the same thing and mean the opposite candidate.

        • This is fine🔥🐶☕🔥@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          fucking despise Biden for his policy in Palestine

          I’m not an American and even I know it is not his policy. It is a result of decades of US-Israel relationships with all kinds of ties between the two countries and has far too many stakeholders than just the head of the state.

          Not even Bernie could’ve managed to navigate this shit situation properly.

          • ✺roguetrick✺@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            Bernie would’ve led Bibi by the fucking nose. He’d have recalled his days in the kibbutz and said that Bibi is burning everything good about Israel.

          • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            is not his policy.It is a result of decades of US-Israel relationships with all kinds of ties between the two countries

            Yeah it is. Obama said about the Cuban Embargo that “these 50 years have shown that isolation has not worked”, so he changed longstanding policy.

            Meanwhile, letting Israel do whatever the fuck they want to Palestinians for 75 years hasn’t made the treatment more just (duh) or the region more stable and peaceful, and the majority of the population realizes that now.

            People are demanding of Biden and the rest of the Dem leadership, which are the people with the power to do so, to change the awful status quo of total deference to a fascist apartheid regime and Biden et al are risking the election and thus American democracy by refusing to listen to the people who they are supposed to represent.

            • TheFonz@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              An embargo on a small island nation has nothing in common with a key strategic ally in the middle east. Why are we comparing these two? Are you for real now

              • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                3 months ago

                It has one thing in common and that’s the thing I was referring to:

                In both cases, the president has the power to change bad policy, no matter how longstanding.

                Obama chose to make the right choice under little to no pressure (except from people adamant that he should do the opposite) while Biden is insisting on the wrong choice in spite of intense pressure and a very significant risk that it’ll cost him the election.

                The specifics of Cuba has nothing to do with it.

                • TheFonz@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  You’re not addressing the central point of my claim and simply restating your initial statement: that the president can change policy

                  has the power to change bad policy

                  while ignoring the key difference between Cuba and Israel. They are completely dissimilar situations with vastly different implications. The progressive left --which cares so much about genocide suddenly (forget Yemen, Syria, where more people have died int he last 6 years by an order of 10 than the entire palestine-israel conflict in the last 100 years)-- made up their mind about Biden long before Oct 7. The only way for Joe to pander to their vote is by accomplishing miracles at this point and I think that ship has sailed a long time ago so I really doubt they are the key demographic that will cost him his election.

          • enkers@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            I don’t know… I see what you’re saying, but does the president not have the power to take a principled stance on the matter? Maybe I’m being too naïve about what’s realistically possible, but ultimately intended policy decisions have to start at the mouth of the nation’s leader.

            He needs to firmly acknowledge and denounce the ongoing genocide in Palestine.

            • blackbrook@mander.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              Can someone remind me of the last time a U.S. president took a principled stand on some foreign policy issue? Seriously, I’m not just asking this to be a dick. I’m pretty sure things are set up to ensure this does not ever happen.

              • enkers@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                I mean, he certainly did say that he wants to increases taxes on the ultra-wealthy.

                It’s not a foreign policy issue, but it’s one that would be unpopular with any rich donors so it perhaps demonstrates some amount of integrity.

                Just to be clear, I’m not trying to defend the US. Their foreign policy is stinkier than blue cheese.

                • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  Their foreign policy is stinkier than blue cheese.

                  And doesn’t even compensate by also being delicious, like the cheese does!

                  Unless you have a significant profit stake in the military industrial complex and/or the fossil fuel industries, of course. Then it’s the most delicious thing ever.

              • Shyfer@ttrpg.network
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                3 months ago

                Biden has publicly criticized Russia and China before. Every US President has made statements against countries like North Korea or Iran. It’s the literally the least he could do.

              • enkers@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                3 months ago

                He did, and I’m not trying to downplay that in any way. He also called for peace, though, whereas Trump said he was also pro-Israel but thought Israel should finish what they started.

      • PunnyName@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Ok.

        Is there another criticism now, or is the one that constantly gets repeated going to continue getting repeated?

        • abracaDavid@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Are you really trying to act like Biden’s age isn’t a huge issue? Did you not see the same old man that the rest of us saw?

          • Rekorse@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            Well, Biden doesnt stand alone, he didnt come up with all these ideas himself, he’s just leading the party. Its not really that important who leads it, the ideas aren’t going to change.

            If its more likely their party wins with another candidate then fine but it seems just as risky as not changing to me.

          • PunnyName@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            It’s an issue for both candidates, so it’s moot, and therefore not worth wasting time over. Move on.

              • PunnyName@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                3 months ago

                We can later. But right now, it’s not happening. Primaries are done. We’re stuck with these fucking geezers.

      • ChillPenguin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Actually with how much trump was falling asleep in court. It could also be Donald “I’m gonna go take a nap” Trump.

      • CareHare@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Donald “Corrupt liar and professional conman” Trump is better somehow?

        You have your priorities straight.

        • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Fun fact: even as one is much worse, they’re BOTH awful.

          Even when the alternative is stage four leukemia, it’s not reasonable to demand that people pretend that it’s good to get malaria.

            • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              Still missing the point:

              Of course you’ll have to choose malaria Biden over stage four leukemia Trump. That’s obvious. And also besides the point I’m making.

              My point is that, no math how bad the alternative is, malaria fucking SUCKS and nobody should ever be forced to pretend otherwise.

              It’s opinion policing, it’s authoritarianism, and it’s standing in the way of progressing to a point where there’s actually a GOOD choice except for a bad one and a much worse one every Presidential election.

              • Rekorse@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                I personally dont attach nearly as much importance to the actual person filling the presidential seat, so much as the organization that backs and supports them. We all know trump literally will say anything to gain republican support and Biden is the spokesman for the democrats to gain support.

                The point is that trump and Biden could both pass tonight, and the people who replace them will have the exact same goals and ideas. Its not just about the person who wins president as it is about the group we want to run the country.

                So no, its not malaria and stage 4 cancer, its a mosquito bite vs a bee sting, for all the difference it makes between the two. We are voting for republicans or democrats, not Biden or trump.

                Do people really think the president sits there dictating what everyone else is doing like some extravagant conductor?

                They are fucking salespeople, client relations managers, public relations people. Trump didn’t bring a single original idea to his own campaign and people are frustrated with Biden because he won’t take a principled stance and instead just parrots back how his party feels (see Israel).

  • aleph@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    The whole thing was the strongest argument against American exceptionalism I’ve ever witnessed.

  • demizerone@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Jack Johnson vs Johnson Jack

    We’re done. Vote democrat all you want, the people in the swing states vote for people that help them, and so far they are looking at Trump.

    I am in SF Bay Area in CA, like literally the 4th largest economy in the world, my vote is worthless.

  • FinishingDutch@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    As a European… we’re not really fond of this situation either. Both candidates would get laughed off stage here. I don’t mind a seasoned, older politician, but these two should stick to golf and not running a country. Get yourself some better candidates or better, vote for a third party.

      • FinishingDutch@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        I honestly don’t mind there not being an audience. At least this way you can focus on the question and answers, without people booing, clapping, shouting, etc. An audience is great for a political rally, but for debates like this… I’d rather focus on the actual content.

    • noisefree@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      The Electoral College and most states arbitrarily deciding to award EC votes as a “winner takes all” proposition is fucking us.

      • FinishingDutch@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        I’m a biiiiig fan or ranked-choice voting as a concept. It seems like such a nice way to get a more diverse political landscape which isn’t set in stone like the US has right now. It’d certainly give other candidates an actual shot at the position. You simply don’t even SEE third party candidates these days. They’re not in any debate, they never get talked about… After all, why bother when they’re never, ever going to win with the current setup?

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranked_voting

    • /home/pineapplelover@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Third party isn’t a real option unfortunately. It’s the 2 biggest parties, nobody else has a chance in hell. In EU things are different.

      • FinishingDutch@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        You would think that US voters would’ve had enough of this system by now. The only reason third - or fourth, fifth, etc. - parties don’t really work is because people keep voting for the same two… and expecting different results. The classic definition of insanity.

        Now, it’s not going to be easy to sway enough people, but doing nothing surely isn’t going to fix things either. It clearly hasn’t to date.

        • ChillPenguin@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          We have had enough of the system. But it’s a big country. You can’t just walk down the street to the White House to end up getting curb stomped by militarized police. While your family at home starves because you stopped working for a day.

          Also with voting, one party is sending a fascist religious cult. If one person tries to do a third party vote, that takes away a vote from the other main party that has the highest odds of winning. It would have to be everyone is doing it all at the same time. But it would be much more likely that the fascist wins while everyone realigns. Do you really want to take that chance?

          • freebee@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            That means the powers aren’t balanced enough. In USA I have the impression way too much power lies with 1 person from 1 party. In a democracy, absolute majorities should always be avoided in the most powerful places and policy should always remain the outcome (compromise) of talks between many different parties. The elections serve to point out how strongly represented every faction is, but no 1 faction should ever get near the amount of absolute control it has in the USA. Fact a 3rd party can’t arise means the democracy is functionally paralysed, not functioning in democratic way.

            • ChillPenguin@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              Oh you’re definitely right about everything there. Our government is definitely fucked and the balance between powers have eroded.

      • Clot@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        there’s a reason two party system sucks and should be counted as autocracy, where two parties control the system for centuries, who knows if they have shaken hands in backdoors to loot the country and do nothing for people. Two party system is infact worse than autocracy.