Kamala Harris

Anything is better than Trump. Anything at least allows you to vote again.

Biden seems OK. Not amazing, but who's hoping for amazing? Just normal, as decent as US Presidents ever get, as sane as they ever get, with some empathy.

You have to be insane or a white male racist to vote for Trump.

I like Sardonicky’s take on this:
Joe Biden is being sold as a warm, fuzzy security blanket covering an entire planet that is currently writhing in pain on a bed of Trumpian nails. We'll finally feel so safe huddling beneath his platitudes, his gaffes, his gropes, his empathy, his decency, his bereavements, his humanity, that we won't even realize that Blankie Biden is smothering us with all that warmth. If you lost a loved one prematurely or have untreated medical issues yourself because of lack of health insurance, you'll forget all about Uncle Joe's adamant opposition to Medicare For All. Because he'll always give you a pat on the head or get your phone number in an elevator while you suffocate to death under all that folksy, toxic warmth. At least you'll find comfort in the fact that, as you turn blue in the face, you'll have Voted Blue, No Matter Who.

It's worth asking yourself why, a few months before the election, some people are so invested in presenting two false narratives: that your vote doesn't count and that both sides are equally bad.
If anyone is posting on a UK forum in the hope of influencing a US election may I gently suggest they are wasting their time. Most of us have no vote but we are watching and talking and speculating and working things out, as you do on a talk forum.

As a left leaning outsider, I am exasperated by the Democrat party. Four years on they still seem to me to have no clue as to why people voted for Trump and no idea how to deal with him. And when the pro Democrat arguments presented on here can be pretty much summed up as, 'There is no choice so shut up and vote Biden' then all it does is confirm my opinion.

bad in somewhat different ways
Really. Understatement of the year there.
As in the difference between “often well-intentioned but unfortunately often bad” and “duplicitous, malevolent, criminal and ill-intentioned from the start”.

chewing over 40 year old legislation is looking backwards
it serves no purpose

It’s usually helpful to look backwards to see how we might attempt to avoid making the same mistakes. FireUnderTheHand makes a lot of very good points.

It's worth asking yourself why, a few months before the election, some people are so invested in presenting two false narratives: that your vote doesn't count and that both sides are equally bad.

They aren’t equally bad, but they are both very bad in somewhat different ways. As for my vote counting (I get to vote in both the US and the UK - yay?), the only thing I know is that it probably does, indeed, get counted.

Also, yes, to what Honeysuckle and borntobequiet says.

It's worth asking yourself why, a few months before the election, some people are so invested in presenting two false narratives: that your vote doesn't count and that both sides are equally bad.

What Honeysuckle said^^
Also, Trump is so damaging to all he comes into contact with that any Dem candidate will be tainted by just going up against the crazy. We’ve seen time and time again that rational arguments and genuinely good intentions and sensible policies just get trashed by lies, insults, name-calling and deranged tweeting. Biden is right at the end of his career so is safe. In fact presenting himself as the kindly, empathetic elder statesman he shows up Trump in a way no one else can. Harris is probably - I hope - strong enough to survive.
There seem to be a number of seriously credible younger Democrat politicians coming up. Pete Buttegieg (spelling?) seems exceptionally good. Better for them to wait until the Trumpian madness is out of the way.

What's with the astroturfing? You guys know this is a UK based board? And that Trump is wildly unpopular in the UK? We at least like our fools to be erudite, and Trump is a barely literate moron. He has damaged your country and your reputation, overseen the deaths of ~170,000 people in the last few months and openly admits he plans to interfere in your democracy to ensure he stays in power. I mean, there's no way Biden could be anything other than an improvement. Shit is shit, but a small shit is preferable to a large one.

It was logical to conjure Reagan's legacy to refute your assertion.

Fireunder
I reiterate
November 3rd is a binary choice
which one gives the best hope of taking the USA to where you want it to be?
Other options are NOT available

chewing over 40 year old legislation is looking backwards
it serves no purpose
you have to start from where you are

@ListeningQuietly

Fireunder Re swearing in - another poster seemed to be predicting civil insurrection and Trump staying around. I merely pointed out that there is a protocol for if the Pres dies before being inaugurated

I think Biden will be another Reagan - a happy bumbling old bloke who lets the system regroup in a positive way

Reagan was a mess of contradictions between his assertions, his intentions, and his actions.

• Reaganomics (trickle down) bolstered income inequality

• War on Drugs; spotlight beginning of mass incarceration for nonviolent offenses (most notably of the socio-economically challenged)

• Disability Amendments Act of 1980, Reagan ordered SSA to tighten restrictions (so much my Aunt with brain damage from having brain cancer removed... who can't work or drive or remember much of anything was denied Disability as she can walk and hold a conversation and seem 'fine'... she doesn't 'look disabled' so she gets nothing after working and paying into the system for 40yrs)

• Contributed to SSAs continued decline (still ongoing) by taxing annuities (even though bipartisan it was signed into law by Reagan and it is a shit thing to do to retirees... super long topic so I won't expand)

• Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981 (ERTA), lower earners effectively pay higher taxes while businesses and high earners pay less (and still do)

• Nat'l debt increase of 186%... took federal debt held by the public from $738 billion to $2.1T... triggering the greatest recession since WW2.

• Altered political perspectives so much that the Democrats became more conservative (that is how we ended up with what happened in the 90s - a conservative decade)

• increased military spending (lending so much to the build up that a crazy amount is still wasted on manufacturing of tanks/Hummers/planes/etc that sit in warehouses unused until pieced out, discarded, or given to US 'allies' to form new governments that are more often than not corrupt); overseas missions 16 times in a total of 12 countries over his 8yrs in office... US involvement in Iraq/Iran war propped up al-Qaeda and bin Laden (outside of ISI payments connected with CIA); put Habre in power in Chad via CIA support, etc., etc., etc.

So please explain to me how Biden will be 'a happy bumbling old bloke [like Reagan] who lets the system regroup in a positive way'.

Wejustdisagree
November 3rd is a binary choice
coming out of a divided polarised country
Sanders would (like Corbyn) have repelled the middle and handed it back to Trump.

Trump is the wrong direction
anything other than Trump is an improvement

Biden is a baby step

In the wrong direction.

Fireunder
Re swearing in - another poster seemed to be predicting civil insurrection and Trump staying around.
I merely pointed out that there is a protocol for if the Pres dies before being inaugurated

I think Biden will be another Reagan - a happy bumbling old bloke who lets the system regroup in a positive way

100% agree with you there

Ditto anybody who thinks that US forces and civil servants who pledge allegiance to the flag rather than the president will stand by a former president

100% agree with you there as well

If they kill Biden between November and January then Harris gets sworn in I can live with that

That is disturbing... so you are pushing to vote someone in as POTUS that you are totally okay with being assassinated? I don't like Biden but I would never be okay with him being assassinated. Your logic is um... interesting.

wejust
Tulsi Gabbard - indeed looks very very interesting
but still much too young (as in what would she do with herself after the 8 years were up)
and I'm not at all sure about her abortion and gay rights views this being a feminist forum

Sanders is IMHO the US Corbyn - and would be just as useless when push came to shove.

I guess the cool thing is that the Democrats have some really rather good people coming along
and the GOP do not

Biden is very much a stopgap stop Trump
as I said way up thread
baby steps - Biden is a baby step

ed.ted.com/lessons/does-your-vote-count-the-electoral-college-explained-christina-greer

If they keep electing Bidens and Bushes, there will be another Trump. The next guy who pushes the same buttons in the population though, may be very competent, he may have a real political philosophy of his own and it could be far nastier, and he may even be charming.

This is my primary concern. I am more worried about who or what comes next rather than the current goofballs in play.

“If you always do what you’ve always done, you always get what you’ve always gotten.”

@ListeningQuietly
You didn’t ask me, but here are (were) my picks:
Pres - Bernie Sanders
VP - Tulsi Gabbard
SoS - Tulsi Gabbard. VPs don’t do much, so she’ll probably have the time. Basically, I want someone non-interventionist, and willing to stand up to hawks. Of the contenders, she was as close as they come.

Biden is horrid. Harris isn't as horrid as Biden, but give her time.

Why would you compare the US constitution to the Weimar?

Sorry (not sorry) to remind you that the land the US inhabits was ravaged by UK castoffs. Your most uptight religious hateful people came here and burnt cities, raped, and forced my indigenous ancestors from their lands because they were sad about not being free to be total solipsists in the UK. Huh?

Our soldiers and your soldiers fought side by side to bring Nazi Germany down so why are you looking to put the US in the Nazi box and not the UK?

Bottom line, the UK and the US have done awful things in their history but neither are Nazis, well because fucking reality.

Yeah you lost all credibility there.

So reserve your judgement, you guys voted the UK version of Trump in - Johnson and Trump are bedfellows. Perhaps look in the mirror before you call us names as any names you would call us equally apply to you.

Goosefoot
If you think Biden is the problem,
out of interest (and as FireUnder gave really interesting answers up thread)
Who would be your picks for
Pres
VP
Sec of State
(any party) ?

Trump's election didn't come out of the blue. It's a reaction to the kinds of governance that happens under people like Biden. There has been 40 years of uninterrupted globalist, free-trade, banker positive governance in the US, with zero break. The closest the Democrats have come to offering anything else has been Sanders and he was suppressed vigourously.

If they keep electing Bidens and Bushes, there will be another Trump. The next guy who pushes the same buttons in the population though, may be very competent, he may have a real political philosophy of his own and it could be far nastier, and he may even be charming.

Electing Biden now may be the only real option, but it will just confirm for the Democrats that such people are electable. And so that is what they will keep offering.

Fireunder
Nobody else on this thread has discussed the UK's laws and flaws.
Its a thread about the US system
and the major issues for all voters
and for women voters
have been outlined.

Yes, the electoral college choose the president.

FWIW 75000 elderly Tory Party members made Johnson the leader of their party and thus Prime minister last summer without the rest of the country even getting a polling card.

US forces and Government officials pledge allegiance to the flag.
If Trump loses in November he is no longer Commander in Chief.
Biden will be Commander in Chief
and the forces and officials will stand by him
because that is what they are legally required to do.

Anybody who thinks that the top brass in the Forces and the independent members of the Government and Judiciary would throw away all of the checks and balances
for a flake like Trump
should get out more.

Our votes do not really count for POTUS as the electors (while expected to follow popular vote) have autonomy in who they elect as POTUS

In some states this is allowed, yes. However, if enough electors actually voted for someone who hadn’t won (as was seriously mooted in 2016), I do believe all hell would break loose.

And for the billionth time...

Our votes do not really count for POTUS as the electors (while expected to follow popular vote) have autonomy in who they elect as POTUS... let that sink in - 538 people decide who will be elected as POTUS on behalf of 328M people. That is a fact. Disputing this is as disingenuous as saying that the sky is green and red tartan.

The electoral college elects POTUS, not the citizens.

So all the 'can you live with this' shit is just manipulative. I know my vote is meaningless because I understand our system. Regardless of what the citizens want POTUS will be chosen for us.

Those of you attempting to apply UK election standards - it doesn't work that way here - see below for contrast for illustration....

UK:

• 66.65M population
• True FPTP (has its flaws)
• 650 voting counties, each with an MP elected by popular vote
• Party with most MPs forms ruling government
• Ruling government (party) leader becomes PM executive branch (no voting)
• Parliament based on ruling party, vote for MP is a vote for PM is a vote for Parliament legislative body (650 MPs)
• Beyond that each of the 4 countries (states for the US readers) have their own constitutions and govern accordingly

US:

• 328.2M population
• Hybrid FPTP (so many flaws and manipulations)
• 538 electors (electoral college), nominated by a party (Rep or Dem)
• Electoral college (electors) select POTUS on their own... they have votes to look at but the decision is theirs alone
• 270+ electoral college votes (half or more) wins POTUS executive branch
• Plurality voting (in most cases) Congress's representatives are 2 Senators for each state (Senate) + differing number of Members of House (House) based on each state's population and make up the legislative body; Congress election is not determined by POTUS
• Beyond all that, each of the 50 states has its own constitution, governor, and congress which are voted in using various methods (multi-winner, single-winner)

So it is much easier to contrast than to compare as there are many more differences than similarities. Asserting that UK electoral perspective is remotely impactful in regards to US elections demonstrates a grave misunderstanding of how the two systems work.