Gretchen Whitmer responds to calls by some Democrats to vote ā€˜uncommittedā€™ in Michiganā€™s primary on Tuesday

Gretchen Whitmer responds to calls by some Democrats to vote ā€˜uncommittedā€™ in Michiganā€™s primary on Tuesday

Gretchen Whitmer, the Michigan governor, pushed back on calls to not vote for Joe Biden over his handling of the Israel-Gaza conflict, saying on Sunday that could help Trump get re-elected.

ā€œItā€™s important not to lose sight of the fact that any vote thatā€™s not cast for Joe Biden supports a second Trump term,ā€ she said on Sunday during an interview on CNNā€™s State of the Union. ā€œA second Trump term would be devastating. Not just on fundamental rights, not just on our democracy here at home, but also when it comes to foreign policy. This was a man who promoted a Muslim ban.ā€

Whitmer, who is a co-chair of Bidenā€™s 2024 campaign, also said she wasnā€™t sure what to expect when it came to the protest vote.

Rashida Tlaib, a Democrat who is the only Palestinian-American serving in Congress, urged Democrats last week to vote ā€œuncommittedā€ in Michiganā€™s 27 February primary.

  • Doc Avid Mornington@midwest.socialEnglish
    291Ā·
    9 months ago

    Every time people are saying they will vote third party in the general, I argue that itā€™s important to vote for the best viable candidate, and the time to vote against a Democrat they donā€™t like is in the primaries. When people start saying no, you canā€™t even vote against the party leadershipā€™s chosen candidate in a primary, what do you think theyā€™re going to do? BS antidemocratic rhetoric like that is exactly what is most likely to get us another Trump presidency. We start down that road and we can kiss democracy goodbye for good.

    • Socsa@sh.itjust.works
      720Ā·
      9 months ago

      Anyone still spouting ā€œthe DNC picked Hillary/Bidenā€ removes the agency of millions of voters who voted for Hillary/Biden in favor of their own preferences and perceived enlightenment. Honestly at this point itā€™s legitimately just right wing trolls who are still harping on this as far as I can tell.

      • I_Fart_Glitter@lemmy.world
        143Ā·
        9 months ago

        The DNC admitted on record in court that they cheated and that it was their right to cheat to get their own choices elected. Your endless boot sucking wonā€™t change the fact that we donā€™t get to choose our leaders in the primary. No, there isnā€™t a better option, but we donā€™t have to pretend itā€™s a decent org.

        • Socsa@sh.itjust.works
          38Ā·
          9 months ago

          Man, if the DNC can just brainwash voters youā€™d think theyā€™d win more reliably.

          • Doc Avid Mornington@midwest.socialEnglish
            113Ā·
            9 months ago

            Pretending that thereā€™s no way for the Democratic leadership to put their thumb on the scale, other than ā€œbrainwashingā€, when itā€™s been proven that they did just that, is disingenuous at best. Doing so in defense of the fundamentally antidemocratic proposition that people shouldnā€™t be able to vote their conscience in the primary is shady as anything. You basically accused me of being a ā€œright wing trollā€ in a previous comment. Protest too much?

                • Socsa@sh.itjust.works
                  11Ā·
                  9 months ago

                  How do you figure? I was there and remember the primary very well. Bernie was in no way excluded from participating. How is that statement not in good faith? Because I merely disagree with your conspiracy laden conclusions about the role and behavior of a particular political party?

                  Like it or not, political parties are associations of private individuals. Bernie didnā€™t have to seek their nomination but he did. The DNC definitely had a preference, but in terms of historical black-dog primary candidates, 2016 was hardly unfair. Bernie knew that he had to beat an imposing superdelegate disadvantage. This was not hidden from him. And even then it didnā€™t matter because he lost by 8 million votes. Call me old fashioned, but removing the agency of 8M people because you donā€™t like the way they voted doesnā€™t strike me as ā€œgood faith.ā€

                  But the thing which really gets me is that after 2016, the DNC took the feedback to heart and made a bunch of sweeping changes to the nominating process intended to boost transparency, reduce the possibility of corruption by individuals (eg, DWS), and double the delegate allocation for voters. They did all the stuff ā€œgood faithā€ votergroups wanted, yet somehow, none of the ā€œgood faithā€ conversations about the DNC want to talk about that.

                  • Tinidril@midwest.socialEnglish
                    21Ā·
                    9 months ago

                    To this statement,

                    The DNC admitted on record in court that they cheated and that it was their right to cheat to get their own choices elected.

                    You replied withā€¦

                    if the DNC can just brainwash voters youā€™d think theyā€™d win more reliably.

                    Your response was clearly a straw man. But maybe you just misunderstood and you were restating what you understood to be their point. But thenā€¦

                    Pretending that thereā€™s no way for the Democratic leadership to put their thumb on the scale, other than ā€œbrainwashingā€, when itā€™s been proven that they did just that, is disingenuous at best.

                    got the responseā€¦

                    So they took Bernie off the ballot then?

                    Now we have a pattern. Low effort straw man arguments are done in bad faith, unless you want to plead to just being an imbecile.

                    BTW: They werenā€™t my ā€œconspiracy laden conclusionsā€. That is (I assume) a mistaken attribution, and it is also a mischaracterization of what was said. I just came into the conversation to call you out for your bad faith arguments.