As many Republicans continue to buck their party’s nominee and nominate Vice President Harris for the White House, calls are mounting for former President George W. Bush to denounce former President Trump.

The Harris campaign has touted that more than 200 Republicans have endorsed the vice president, including former Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) and many former Trump insiders. It also includes former vice president to Bush, Dick Cheney.

He noted that Bush is “apparently above such petty concerns,” pointing to recent reports that said he is not endorsing anyone in the race for the White House. Multiple outlets reported that Bush’s office released a statement that said: “President Bush retired from presidential politics years ago.”

But it doesn’t work that way. When your country calls, you can’t just roll it over to voicemail because you don’t want to deal with it, especially when you are an elder statesman like an ex-president. Patriotism is for life,” Truax wrote, noting that former President Jimmy Carter said he hopes he can live to cast his vote for Harris.


Register to vote: https://vote.gov/

  • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    2 months ago

    We don’t need republican votes if we give Dem voters what they want to vote for.

    The elector college is based on States, not population.

    • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      2 months ago

      Right…

      And if you want to see someone flip red states more than Obama, you have to go back to FDR…

      Progressive campaigns flip red states

      We have literally over a century of election data. We know what works.

      It’s just not what the wealthy do saying to both parties want.

      Are you still confused about anything

      • Kecessa
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        People actually on the left only have one choice, people in-between have two, no matter how progressive you go young people (who tend to be on the left) don’t vote (we also have data from other countries to prove that they don’t vote even when there’s parties that actually want to work for them).

        So, where do you think there’s more votes to be gained?

        • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          People actually on the left only have one choice,

          If they vote…

          You know the most common reason?

          Both parties are too similar.

          If the party moves left, that disappears and Dems donate, up and down the ballots.

          But we don’t do that, when it happens the party fights it as much as possible

          So, where do you think there’s more votes to be gained?

          The incredibly large segment of possible voters who think both parties are shit and don’t fight thru red state voter suppression regularly…

          But will turn out for a charismatic dem who runs a progressive campaign…

          Neoliberal moderates tho. Can barely beat trump…

          You legitimately don’t understand the difference between a campaign like Obama’s to Biden and Hillary’s?

          • If they vote…

            This is a good lesson. My understanding is that the fewest people ever voted in 2016, when the GOP won, and the most in 2020, when the GOP lost.

            So definitely need to encourage eligible folks to get out and vote, and it goes without saying that a platform that attracts voters is a must.

            You legitimately don’t understand the difference between a campaign like Obama’s to Biden and Hillary’s?

            One key difference is that Obama was first elected in 2008, before the GOP’s plan in 2010 with redistricting was able to take effect - https://billmoyers.com/story/in-2010-republicans-weaponized-gerrymandering-heres-how-they-did-it/

            (I know he did win re-election 2012, but he had the incumbent advantage back then and the GOP had only had two years to take advantage at that point, instead of the six years of experience they had later in 2016.)

            Neoliberal moderates tho. Can barely beat trump…

            Obama was one of these. Remember how in 2008 he wasn’t for gay marriage, but he eventually supported it after his views “evolved” while he was in office?

            https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/evolution-obamas-stance-gay-marriage-flna763350

            Obama’s Wednesday announcement was a reversal of his 2004 view that “marriage is something sanctified between a man and a woman."

            The other thing worth pointing out, is that while record numbers voted in 2020, there were some who voted an otherwise straight GOP ticket but for Biden-Harris, as per https://www.texastribune.org/2020/11/16/split-ticket-voting-texas-republicans/

            Also check out these charts https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2020/10/PP_2020.10.21_split-icket-voting_0-01.png from https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2020/10/21/large-shares-of-voters-plan-to-vote-a-straight-party-ticket-for-president-senate-and-house/

            4% of voters split R/D. I can’t imagine anything more than a negligible amount were from Dems who voted for orange voldermort. Therefore, that 4% can be attributed to Republicans who voted for Biden.

            So even with record turnout, the difference was small. 42 vs 38? Give that 4% back to the GOP and, with their Electoral College advantage, they’d have won in 2020.

            All this goes to show that while you are correct about needing to encourage turnout, and keep ahold of the Dem voters, you’re wrong about not needing Republican votes.

          • Kecessa
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            I understand that the people you want the party to cater to don’t vote no matter the options presented to them (as is proven by every free elections in other countries, I know some people have a hard time understanding that other countries exist, but make an effort here) and that even if they did, gerrymandering and voter suppression makes it so they can’t flip their State.

            A lot has changed since Roosevelt believe it or not.

            • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              8
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              2 months ago

              Wait…

              So you think we should ignore voters on the left unless they already want to vote D?

              gerrymandering makes it so they can’t flip their State.

              What does gerrymandering have to do with the electoral college?

              Do you think they’re redrawing state lines?

              Or do you just not know what that word means?

              • What does gerrymandering have to do with the electoral college?

                Nothing directly, but it’d be naive to say it has no effect whatsoever.

                Do you think they’re redrawing state lines?

                I believe OC is talking about gerrymandering within a State to ensure all of that’s State’s electoral college votes go to the GOP.

                Or do you just not know what that word means?

                So normally gerrymandering doesn’t apply since the electoral votes in a State are awarded based on the popular vote within the State - so if the GOP wins Texas 51% to 49% for Dems, all of Texas’s votes go to the GOP.

                Gerrymandering could only has a direct effect in States like Nebraska and Maine, who distribute part of their votes by congressional district.

                Where it might have an indirect effect is when people get confused and end up voting in the wrong place because of redistricting. Combine that with stricter rules on voter id and voting in general, and it’s easy to see how some votes can be justified as being thrown away.

        • pumpkinseedoil
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          What are they expecting out of not voting? Do they not care if Trump or Harris win? I just really don’t get why you wouldn’t vote here.

          There also were enough people who didn’t vote for or against the NSDAP because they also disagreed with the other parties… It’s not about voting for a party you agree with, it’s about voting for the party with which you agree more / disagree less than with the other parties.

    • Nougat@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Well, it’s roughly based on population, but the inclusion of two electoral votes for each state “just for being a state” tips the scale in favor of voters in less urban, more rural states.