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.

  • doctorcrimson@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    A good first step would be to pass HR 1 For The People Act and then from there elect members of the party of progressive reform.

    A realistic way to never get out is to elect conservatives who by definition do not want reform, at least 34 or enough to stop any supermajority votes so they can filibuster nonstop for days, but for good measure enough for them to elect a majority leader who never calls things to vote such as Mitch “The Legislature Reaper” McConnell who let countless bills die on the senate floor having never been called to vote.

      • dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        As long as one of them is committed to electoral reform. But no, if not, you’re trying to vote for the least destructive person. Biden is the least destructive person. Best not let Trump have America just because you can’t get electoral reform this election cycle.

        • merc@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 months ago

          As long as one of them is committed to electoral reform.

          They’d have to be more committed to electoral reform than to their survival as a party. I don’t know of any cases where that has actually happened.

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

              Ok, that was a group that gave up power, but it wasn’t a political party that gave up power. IMO it’s going to be much harder to get a political party to give up power.