Democracy may be on the ballot. Less clear is what was on the menu.
President Joe Biden hosted a small group of scholars and historians for lunch on Wednesday as he gears up for a speech framing the upcoming election as a battle for the nation’s democracy.
The discussion revolved around “ongoing threats to democracy and democratic institutions both here in America and around the world, as well as the opportunities we face as a nation,” the White House said in a statement.
Princeton’s Eddie Glaude Jr. and Sean Wilentz, Harvard’s Annette Gordon-Reed, Yale’s Beverly Gage and Boston College’s Heather Cox Richardson were among the attendees, as well as presidential biographer — and occasional Biden speech writer — Jon Meacham.
Attendees were tight-lipped about what was discussed at the gathering. One would only go so far as to say they “talked about American history and its bearing on the present — a lively exchange of ideas.”
Another person in the room, who like the others was not authorized to speak publicly about a private meeting, said the historians urged the president “to call out the moment for what it is.” In blunt terms, the academics discussed looming threats to the nation’s democracy and warned about the slow crawl of authoritarianism around the globe.
You know what’s a really big threat to democracy? Only getting two terrible choices for president, for Senator, for representatives, for governors, and for every other elected position above dog catcher.
People become disillusioned and hopeless because they don’t see any meaningful change and check out. And they stop voting.
But this speech is gonna be about Trump and not that.
There will always be another bigger threat, the fash voter base, police and military presence, and judicial presence doesn't go away when Trump does. Biden needed to clean house, not tiptoe and allow these people to sit on the sidelines like Clarence Thomas until they activate like a sleeper cel.
Not likely. Alternative voting is a threat to both the RNC and DNC hegemony.
Libertarian and Green candidates are routinely decried as ‘false flag vote siphons’ despite having materially different policy stances from both main parties. It’s easier to keep your team in line with national level funding and intra-party discipline than to actually compromise and work on bi/tri-partisan legislation or a coalition government.
people should concentrate third party at local levels as there is a real chance there also vetting the candidates at the primary level. We have greens at various local positions around me but we have also had insincere candidates try and run as the party canidate (they think getting on a third party will be easier)