• reddig33@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    68
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    It amazes me that primaries are held this late in the year. It’s only four months or so until the election.

    • Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      90
      ·
      3 days ago

      Only in America. Other counties campaign for a few weeks. The US turns it into a 12 month fund raising and media spectacular, with primaries at the halfway point.

      • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 days ago

        A while back, HR 1 For the People Act promised to remedy much of the issue but it never got a vote in the senate because Republicans held the Senate Speaker until the next congress was formed.

        • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          2 days ago

          And because, having gotten back in power, Dem leadership didn’t take it up again as they too are getting rich from the current system.

          • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            2 days ago

            TBF, after the 2020 election they were faced with issues like budget reconciliation and debt limit (without which nothing would be voted on at all during a government shutdown) as well as reimplementing some of the many regulations taken down by the Trump admin and finally passing a 1.9 Trillion Dollar infrastructure deal alongside a new round of stimulus checks (which the receiving states decided how to use, sadly), and many congressional hearings about corruption of the former administration and federal judges (which ultimately hasn’t lead anywhere other than referrals to the DOJ).

            So in the 2 year span that they held 48 + 2 senate seats and house majority, they were pretty tied up I would say.

            EDIT: Plus, it would’ve been filibustered anyways.

          • DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            2 days ago

            Same reason Biden is talking about a potential tax on the rich but won’t ever be caught talking about repealing the Trump tax raise on the working class that actually happened.

            • TurtleJoe@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 days ago

              The Trump tax cut expires next year. Biden has promised not to renew it if he’s reelected.

              Get informed.

                • TurtleJoe@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  You should probably not be asking smug rhetorical questions when you don’t actually understand how the federal government works.

                  Use a search engine, educate yourself.

                • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  2 days ago

                  It was an act passed by congress and signed by a sitting president. Biden alone doesn’t have the authority to change it, and if he did try that then it would be caught up in courts for years.

    • alvvayson@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      44
      ·
      3 days ago

      Why make election season much longer than needed?

      Printing ballots can be done quite quickly.

      And is 6 months of campaigning really better than 2 months?

      • mosiacmango@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        3 days ago

        Ffffuuuuuuucccckkk no its not better. It’s just that our system predated most parliaments, and as such the founding fathers made some stupid choices that made it utterly impossible to amend basic quailty of life changes for our democracy.

        • Kellamity@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          2 days ago

          Just in the spirit of pedantry, its not really true to say that the US system predated most parliaments.

          Like, maybe its technically true now due to the expansion of democratic and republic systems in the post-colonial era, but parliaments in Western Europe were plentiful and long-established in 1776.

          The first American government was notable in that is was completely divorced from a hereditary Monarch, and I don’t wanna downplay that, but a system in which a representitive body of land-owners is elected by an enfranchised class to decide policy and even pass legislation existed in, for example, Iceland since the 10th Century, Catalonia since the 12th, England since the 13th. It was arguably the standard during the enlightenment in Europe.

          My two cents, the US system does seem to be remarkably inflexible. I guess it’s complicated to unpack why exactly, but a combination of myth-making, bad-faith originalists, and the sheer size of the country probably all play a part in it

          • mosiacmango@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            3 days ago

            The process to amend the constitution. It’s all but impossible given modern politics, and that’s largely been true for 50 years and counting.

              • mosiacmango@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                2 days ago

                Our election cycle cant be curtailed or shifted because our constitution can’t realistically be amended to match the saner policies in other countries. When our constitution is so antiqued that that “money is speech” becomes the law of the land, there is a core problem with the founding document itself.

                How it that not related to our election cycle?

                • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  Because a constitutional convention is so wildly unlikely it’s just distracting from any actually helpful suggestions.

                  • mosiacmango@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    2 days ago

                    I’m talking about our broken government system, not what’s helpful. The fact that a constitutional convention is impossible is exactly the problem. Its why many parts of our democracy are broken, and will likely ultimately be the downfall of our nation.

                    Thr founders called the Constitution a living document, with Jefferson specifically talking about how it must change to as American changes. To do that, they put in a wildly difficult mechanism that is nearly impossible to actually invoke, and added lifetime arbiter roles that can opt to unwind any law not written in pen and ink on that same paper.

                    Those are critical fuckups if you intend to have a living document and a shapeable democracy.

        • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 days ago

          Well no, it’s better for the politician’s campaign’s wallets. If people could spend campaign funds however they wanted then Donald Trump would have quite a few less pending felonies.

          • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            2 days ago

            First of all, there’s TONS of ways to enrich yourself by running for office without technically breaking any of the very flimsy campaign finance laws. That’s why people with literally no chance of winning keep running for public offices up to and including the presidency.

            Second of all, the FEC, which is ALREADY as toothless as a nonagenarian who never brushed his teeth due to chronic deliberate underfunding and understaffing, has an EXTREME backlog of cases from having lacked a quorum for the better part of a year.

            Third, even if the FEC was otherwise effective, this is TRUMP we’re talking about here. He’s getting away with TONS of campaign finance fraud and legal misuse of donations as is.

    • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      3 days ago

      The Dem presidential primary still has like two more months.

      Biden and his pick for DNC chair set the date, they could have made it whenever.

      They choose after the deadline to get on all 50 ballots for some reason.

    • TAG@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 days ago

      Massachusetts has not held its Senate primary yet either. I had to check, it will be on September 3rd it seems.