• Grimy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      44
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      4 months ago

      As much as I hate it, I think there too much subconscious misogyny to try it. It’s a recipe for failure.

        • FinishingDutch@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          4 months ago

          Well as a European, I’m going to give the US some credit: voters did elect a black, ‘possibly-Muslim’ guy with a name that sounds vaguely like a well-known terrorist. And they elected him twice.

          Besides, the democrats really appear to be in a situation where they’ll vote for a proverbial ham sandwich if it stops Trump from getting the presidency.

          Are there racist voters who hate women? Obviously. But it’s not like it’s an immediate disqualification.

        • ikidd@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          4 months ago

          I think that would work for her. There’s way more minorities and centrists that would come out to vote for her because of Obama’s legacy than racists that would stay home out of spite IMO. I certainly don’t think she’ll be anything like Obama, but one could hope.

        • torsday@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          Though racism is a factor, that doesn’t mean she isn’t also a bad candidate.

      • TreeGhost@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        4 months ago

        Aren’t all of the misogynists already voting for Trump? I think just being a younger woman candidate could energize the younger voting base.

        • radivojevic@discuss.online
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          Yeah it will energize, and they’ll be really confused on voting day when they find out they needed to register to vote.

          I think voting should be mandatory, easier, and have an abstain option for those people who don’t want to choose.

        • Grimy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          I’m afraid a lot of older Dems just wouldn’t vote, it’s a low turnout that could be killer.

          I don’t know if she really resonated with the younger voters that much, not like AOC for instance.

      • nondescripthandle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        All the right wingers who wanted Trump are going to vote for him and all the Republicans that wanted someone else rallied behind a woman during their primaries. I think people are blowing up an issue thats less impactful than they make it out to be.

      • Blackmist@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        4 months ago

        I’m sure there’s plenty of misogyny and racism to put people off, but don’t underestimate “being another bland candidate who won’t get people excited enough to vote”.

        It wasn’t just women haters that made Trump beat Clinton.

        People’s lives are shit, and while Trump will for sure make them even shittier, “things will be mostly the same as they are now, with some baby steps towards things you’ve wanted for decades” isn’t exactly a rallying cry for the ages.

        The Democrats were never going to let Sanders have anything, but AOC? Maybe? She at least makes the news when she says things. And unlike Republicans, they’re not horrible things.

    • NevermindNoMind@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      4 months ago

      Probably not, she’s got the charisma of Hillary, and two strikes (race and gender) against her. But Biden is dragging the rest of the party down with him. With Harris we probably get a Trump presidency (we have at least a fighting chance to avoid it). But with Biden we get a Trump presidency, a landslide election giving him a “mandate” and assuredly a Republican House and Senate to go along with it. Sooo worth a shot with the old switcharoo I guess.

      • kibiz0r@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Oh no you don’t. We’ve got Whitmer until the end of 2026. You can have her then and not a second sooner.

        If SCOTUS keeps on this retro “states rights” bender, we’re just gonna make our own country. With blackjack. And great lakes.

      • spyd3r@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        4 months ago

        The only thing Whitmer is good at is destroying state economies, and killing small businesses.

        • halferect@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          Yeah…I feel no matter what we are not in a good place to defeat Trump. I’m just trying to think of best ways given what we are given. My choice would be biden and replace Harris with a progressive woman

          • Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            4 months ago

            I feel no matter what we are not in a good place to defeat Trump.

            I don’t think that’s actually true. I think the polling data we have is skewed against Biden, and models like The Keys to the White House (which don’t reference polling data) point towards a Trump defeat. 538 has Biden beating Trump more than half of the time, and it’s even using the polls. Things aren’t nearly as bad as people are making them out to be, and I don’t know why.