Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) went after former President Trump for his legal woes in an interview on MSNBC Saturday.

“I’ll take the individual who’s 81 over the guy who has 91 felony counts,” Swalwell said, making a reference to President Biden’s age in an interview on MSNBC’s “The Katie Phang Show” on Saturday.

“It’s not about two individuals,” Swalwell continued, speaking about the 2024 election. “It’s about the idea of competence versus chaos, or even greater, freedom versus fascism. If we make it about those ideas, and what they mean in our daily lives, we’re gonna win.”

Swalwell’s comments come after Trump was ordered to pay almost $355 million in penalties in a civil fraud case and amid increased scrutiny faced by the president on his age and memory in the wake of a special counsel report on Biden’s handling of classified documents. The report noted that Biden had problems with memory and recall.

  • BobGnarley@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    9 months ago

    Both instances are a huge fucking problem though. The first people who made the USA warned against a two party system.

    • jballs@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      9 months ago

      I agree, but the reality is that it’s the system we have right now. We can try to change it. But sitting this election out or voting for a third party will only help Trump get elected. I said in another comment (and got downvoted for it) but I would vote for a ham sandwich over Trump.

      • Signtist@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        9 months ago

        The issue is that we’re not in this situation accidentally. Every 4 years we say “I know it sucks, but for now we just have to vote out the lesser evil, then we can focus on change” then go 4 more years without making any changes. We’ll always just be voting for the lesser of 2 evils, whether for this election or the 2064 election. Everyone with any real say in the government loves how things are working out right now, and has no intention to allow us to truly vote for anyone other than 2 candidates that have been vetted by the oil companies.

        • Stovetop@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          20
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          Push for ranked choice voting for your state, and if we can get that implemented nationwide then we might be going somewhere.

          • merc@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            9 months ago

            Ranked choice voting is great because it enables votes to go to smaller parties. To get it passed, you’d need to get lawmakers to alter the laws. Those lawmakers are either Republicans or Democrats. Both benefit from first-past-the-post, and neither benefits from ranked choice. Good luck getting ranked choice passed.

      • HACKthePRISONS@kolektiva.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        9 months ago

        >But sitting this election out or voting for a third party will only help Trump get elected.

        only a vote for trump helps trupm get elected

    • Wiz@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      9 months ago

      Mathematically, the system they set up - the first past the post system - will always devolve into a 2-party contest.

      Strategically, it only counts for you to vote for one of the top two choices, and then only sometimes.

        • merc@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          The two party system is the “vote against” system.

          In a multi-party system, you have multiple options you can vote for who are not fascists. Unfortunately, true multi-party systems are rare. Even when there are other parties, there are often two dominant parties and then lots of other small parties who are brought into coalitions.

    • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      9 months ago

      Sorta. It was actually Washington who warned against a two party system, because one was already forming from everyone else.

      It’s more like the first people who made the US devolved into this same tribalism, and Washington tried to warn them it was bad.