• xmunk@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yea, pretty much every election up here in Canada.

      I’m amazed that Americans think four months “is like literally no time”.

      It’d take an ad spend but the DNC could name recognition pretty much anyone at this point.

      • Peppycito@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        The elections are short, but we’ve known the candidates a long time. De Dluca was elected leader shortly before the election and no one knew who he was and he totally tanked.

        *see, I even got his name wrong. Del Duca.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        You don’t elect a chief executive in Canada the way we do in the U.S.

        You can’t compare a parliamentary election to our constitutional presidential republic’s elections.

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

        *4 weeks, bud

        The convention is in 4 weeks. Mail-in-ballots get sent out at the end of September.

        There’s a lot of misinformation being shared due to the lack of proper context. Yes, the election is in November but it’s not that simple

        Honestly, if we ever think something is simple, we should pretty much assume we don’t know wtf we’re talking about

    • bostonbananarama@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Can you show an election where that strategy has worked this late in the game?

      To my knowledge the President and vice President haven’t stepped down from a political campaign. However, I can point to a situation in which a vice president took over for an unpopular president and lost. That would be Hubert Humphrey in 1968.

      Additionally, just based on logic alone, it is ridiculous to insinuate that it wouldn’t be better to have an unknown candidate than a disliked candidate.

      How could it be better to have a candidate that voters do not like, over a candidate that they haven’t come to an opinion on yet?

        • bostonbananarama@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          That would be tough, at this point in the calendar the only incumbent presidential candidates with a lower net job approval than Joe Biden were George HW Bush and Jimmy Carter. Both of whom lost the election. Trump was a few points better in 2020, he also lost.

    • Sanctus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Its not, last time we did this Reagan won by a fucking landslide. I am very nervous but voting D.

      • bostonbananarama@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        In 1980, Reagan beat an unpopular incumbent, Carter, by a huge margin. In 1984, Reagan was the incumbent and crushed Walter Mondale. I’m not sure which one is the, “last time we did this” though.

        If anything, Reagan shows us that unpopular incumbents do not have a high likelihood of reelection.