314
submitted 8 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

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 are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Sanctus@lemmy.world -1 points 8 months ago

Okay, enjoy the genocide of your lgbtq+ and immigrant neighbors. You won't vote but the MAGA crowd will appear in full force.

[-] transientDCer@lemdro.id 4 points 8 months ago

You're kind of helping his argument, no? His choice is support genocide of his LGBT+ neighbors or Palestinians? Neither option presented sounds worthy of a vote.

[-] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago

And republicans are going to end the Israel-Palestine conflict? I don't think so

[-] transientDCer@lemdro.id 2 points 8 months ago

You're so hell bent on making it a Republican vs Democrat thing. We should be primarying Biden out. They're both too old and need to go the fuck on.

[-] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

Whether you like it or not, until we get RCV, approval voting, STAR, or some other method better than first-past-the-post (we don't even have majority!), it is a Democrat vs. Republican thing. Which I should mention, is also how YOU framed it in your post. The only thing I'm pointing out is that if you choose the option that's bad for LGBTQ+, it's also just as bad for Palestinians as the other option is.

[-] transientDCer@lemdro.id 2 points 8 months ago

This skios the part where the Dems act like Biden is the only candidate that can beat Trump. He may beat him, he also may beat him to his grave. He's too old and should be primaried out.

[-] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

Who would run instead? Harris? I haven't seen a single article about her. Bernie? The DNC would never do that. Biden is the incumbent, and what other good options are there?

[-] NoIWontPickaName@kbin.social 0 points 8 months ago

Finally someone who gets it!

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (31 replies)
this post was submitted on 04 Jan 2024
314 points (98.2% liked)

politics

18888 readers
3247 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS