• CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    The US “election cycle” is insane. You don’t need to be running a candidate over a year before the election. 3 months is more than enough time to tell people who your candidate is and what they are running on, and you have more than 3 months.

    Yes, it would have been better to announce earlier, but jesus christ he is too fucking old for this shit. Stepping back now is still better than pushing through.

    • Tryptaminev@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 months ago

      The longer the cycle is made, the more people can be distracted from the actual politics and the more it matters who gets the most money.

    • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      Especially with how calcified the voting population is. Each candidate has something like a 44% floor of people who already know they’re going to vote for “the Democratic candidate” and the only question is how many of them actually go to the polls and what the remaining randos decide. And only in a handful of swing states. Most of the system is already predetermined.

    • localme@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      I agree the timeframe isn’t the main issue. It’s more concerning that the nominee isn’t getting selected through the primaries/caucuses where actual voters are involved in choosing the nominee.

    • tburkhol@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      You can’t just launder $2B of campaign contributions overnight. You need a year or two to filter it credibly through pundits, consultants, pollsters, and advertisers.