The guy was President. We all lived through it. I don't know why everyone is acting like this will end up being some big unknown.

You can do whatever you want if you think "democracy is at stake". I'd argue it would be a moral duty for the party to find an alternative to a guy who is not just wildly unpopular, but in a sharp cognitive decline. But their actions show they don't believe that a Trump win will be that bad.

This constant complaining about how there is nothing that the Democrats can ever do is getting old. Nothing was stopping them from running a competitive primary. Nothing stopped them from propping up younger, successful politicians over the past few years. And nothing that prevented them from pushing Biden not to run again. The party forced LBJ to step aside in '68 and coalesced around Biden in 2020 to prevent Bernie from getting the nomination.

They're running on "orange man bad" yet again. Biden doesn't even bother to list policies on his own campaign site. They're offering nothing to voters. Maybe there's enough juice in that strategy to run it back again. But it sure seems like important states like Michigan are slipping from his grasp.

If both parties are the same does it really make a difference who runs?

The proposed choices I've seen you throw out are someone more moderate the biden, someone that would be a younger, female version of Biden, and a corrupt governor that was caught on tape trying to buy his way into a political office.

There is something to be said about electing someone who has all their cognitive faculties and will make it through the next 4 years without their brain turning to complete mush. The idea of an 86-year old man commanding the military as we enter more and more conflicts is pretty scary.

And I do think leadership matters to an extent regardless of your positions. Putin is just dogwalking him and Netanyahu turned him into Reek. He doesn't have the public support to pass any sort of meaningful bills in his second term. His administration and justice department have been terrified of regulating business. He's one of the weakest Presidents in modern history and I think 4 more years of people walking all over him is bad for the country and the party.

So yes, someone like Mark Kelly might be a moderate I don't agree with on a lot of issues. But I don't think he's a doormat. I don't think it would be embarrassing to see him speak in front of people or meet with world leaders. And he can probably remember when he became Senator and when his wife was shot. Plus he'd win in a landslide.

I think the main things I see differently are:

- Replacing Biden on the ticket, esp. when he doesn't want to be replaced, does not equate to a landslide election for Democrats. Most of the negatives will remain; the party in power is typically - often unfairly, but again political reality - judged on what happened during their tenure.

- The benefits of having a better candidate are therefore fairly minimal in terms of winning the election - I'm not talking about who would be a better president here, just electability. I think they are outweighed by the damage that a messy primary would have on unity of the electorate/coalition, etc.

- I think Biden was being at least largely truthful when he said that one of the reasons he is running again is to defeat Trump, the opposite of the idea that they don't care if Trump wins. Maybe he's totally wrong about that or maybe it's a smokescreen, but it's not that there's nothing Democrats could have done, ever. It's that it's way too late to do any of those things now.

The main problem the Dems have is they don’t have anyone else who has a chance of delivering the Midwest states they need to win. They have plenty of people that would make Rainmaker happy who would win by more in places like California, Oregon and New York and then wouldn’t have a hope in Ohio, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania.

To be clear, after 4 years as a Libruhl maybe Biden doesn’t have a hope of winning those places this time either, lord knows the polling doesn’t look good for him. But the map is absolutely stacked against them and I’d love to hear an honest assessment of who else on the bench has a hope of winning the states that matter without some fantasy scenario that they are going to get 120% turnout among young people or something.

For those that say it's too late or unrealistic to replace Joe, I disagree. Bolded is the crux of the matter to me.

Joe can say tomorrow that he decided not to run for President and he will support Kamala (or Michelle :)). Sure, there'll be a lot of angst, recriminations etc. but there's enough time to build around Kamala. And arguably, depending on his "score on the test", would be better. I'm not saying he should do this, I don't believe he is near the "Admiral Stockdale" level yet (who was around 71 during his debate).

I currently still believe Joe is the best candidate to beat Trump. Occasions of failing to recollect things is not a big deal, the real question is "degree & severity". If it's the inevitable slow burn in decline, no problem. But if they are hiding the degree & severity, it'll probably come out during the debates, which will be too late then.

Bottom line to me. If the Dem leadership is concerned enough (e.g. let's say Joe takes the test and fails horribly), they should have private discussions with Joe and convince Joe to step aside for Kamala. Just say it's time for the younger generation. If they do it soon, still enough time to recover for Nov.

I agree with this. People will be more "prepared" for a Trump 2nd term. It'll still be negative, but it won't be as bad as the first and/or anyone will be surprised.

Everyone knows who Trump is now. Everyone knows who Joe is now. If Trump gets elected and there's no significant irregularities, so be it, the country has voted.

I think there's a non-trivial chance there won't be any debates.

Unfortunately, I agree.

Didn't the GOP already say they aren't participating in debate commission events?

Kamala would get destroyed. She couldn't even get 2% last time around and the perception is she has been a very ineffective VP.

There won't be debates. Neither party wants them. The Dems should challenge Trump then claim he is afraid, but they are so self sabotaging they won't do that.

I disagree about a second Trump term. I think it would be a disaster. The first time around there were people willing to serve in his cabinet that had ethics and morals. By all accounts they put up guardrails. Those people aren't out there any more so it will all be yes men required to pledge loyalty to him, not country, and that isn't hyperbole. Just look at the fact congress either passed or is discussing passing a bill congressional approval would be required to leave NATO to see what they thin it will be like.

yes and the dems need to message the hell out of that, but they wont.

They passed it. I don't know how much of a difference it makes, because I don't think Trump has any attention of obeying laws once he regains power. He knows that a MAGA Congress/Senate is never going to remove him so there will be no consequences for his actions.

I'm just listening to him and those close to him. They are the one saying:

He'll be a dictator on day one

He'll cheer on Russia to attack NATO allies

He'll use red state guardsmen to flood blue cities to round up immigrants and put them in deportation camps

He'll only let in people who support "our religion"

He'll deport any visa holder who has protested against Israel

He'll federalize the Washington DC government

And you can read for yourself all of the details in the 2025 Project book that's supported by the folks that will populate a second Trump administration.

More than what HE will do it is also what his followers will be emboldened to do. Just in the past couple of days we have a US citizen getting best up live on FOX news because he is brown and 3 dudes from Missouri arrested because they were planning on going to the border to kill agents that weren't "doing their job"

Hate crimes will be off the charts. It will be open season on anyone with brown skin who doesn't speak perfect English.

Then there is the foreign policy nightmare he will bring us.

Anyone who thinks Trump won't try to destroy the remaining bulkwarks of the country is either a fool or a supporter of Trump.

He talks complete nonsense to the point you don't know the truth or lie.

In the Supreme Court case it was inferred by one Justice if Trump plans a third term.

The man and his enablers need to be in prison.

You aren't voting for Biden or Trump, you are voting for the things they stand for. If you support an oligarchy like Russia, Trump's your man and be ready for the gulags.

Yeah, I don't see voting purely as an expression of what I believe. It's 100% a pragmatic thing.

I think Biden administration has been horrible the last couple of years after a promising start. I also have no choice but to vote for the guy.

Agreed and a lot of the failures are the obstructionism of the Republicans. The border bill is 100% their failure, they were going to get everything they wanted and they still shot it down because Trump.

That's not a supportive stance, they need to be voted out before they restrict the right of voting even more then they have.

Those are interesting and wildly inaccurate views of history.

While there are a number of other Democratic politicians I'd like to see as President, the Biden Administration has not been all bad, even if you aren't comparing it to what a second Trump Administration would have been.

For your (collective) reading pleasure, from an outlet not known for its favor to Democrats: 30 Things Joe Biden Did as President You Might Have Missed - POLITICO

I think people forget just how bad things were under Trump. We were literally having a 9-11 every day.

Literally? We had terrorists driving planes into American structures every day?

3000 + dead every day because of Covid.

COVID deaths didn't stop under Biden. They were in fact pretty high too. Just like with middle east wars, drone strikes, family separation, and a slew of other issues, some people stopped caring once the guy in office had a D next to their name.

Right, nothing like cleaning up the messes of the prior regime. Government moves at a glacial pace. It's why Trump is still capable of running instead of being in prison because the court system is so slow.

:deadhorse:

You're just flat out wrong on drone strikes. Look at the numbers for Obama, Trump, and Biden and there's a massive decrease for one of them.

We've bombed 5 different countries in just the last month. We're illegally funding the largest bombing campaign in modern history to ethnically cleanse a group of people. We are funneling billions into a regional proxy war in Eastern Europe.

Democrats became what they pretended to hate 20 years ago, neocons.

He's capable of running because Biden selected an enormous pussy to be Attorney General who was more concerned with locking up the QAnon shaman than anyone with actual power. Everyone knew Garland was soft on right-wing extremists. It's the reason Republicans didn't put up much of a fight when he was nominated.

That was an own goal by Biden.

So things that aren't drone strikes are now drone strikes.

I'd wager that many of our strikes on those countries were performed by drones. Regardless, does it change the scenario if we are bombing with manned aircraft instead of drones? Seems like in the end, you're just bombing people.

You're the one who said drone strikes. That's just factually incorrect.

This sums up my thoughts. If you really thought Trump would do all those things, you wouldn't be supporting Biden.

But as you've said with Biden, without 60 votes in the Senate, Trump won't be able to do much at all. So why so concerned? I don't foresee Democrats losing 9 seats in November.




I mean, that's kind of how we operate in the Middle East. They used bombers for some of the recent strikes in Yemen, but most of the time it's done by drones. These are just a couple examples below.

US drone strike kills senior Iran-backed militia leader in Baghdad - POLITICO



wsj.com

And yet there are still far fewer drone strikes under Biden than under Trump or Obama.

And in terms of not supporting Biden, what's my other choice? A kook like RFK Jr? A guy that can't even beat Williamson? For what seems like the millionth time, Biden isn't my perfect choice, but in this reality, the choice is Biden or Trump and that choice is so fucking obvious to me. Everything I care about gets worse under a Trump presidency.

You can always just not vote in that race.

Like what? Despite all the hyperbole, his Presidency was mostly just the same as any other conservative. Tax cuts for the rich and deregulation.

Do you care about the Supreme Court?

Do Democrats?

And even then I'd vote for the policies that were closer to my preference.

But foreign policy, immigration, economic policy, abortion access, SCOTUS, etc. will all be worse for me with Trump than with Biden.

And you still wouldn't vote for him so I don't understand why it matters so much to you.

Plus climate, union rights, protections for federal workers, social security, retirement age, etc.

Foreign policy seems quite bad under Biden. Maybe the one issue Trump would be better at considering there is a wing of that party that is isolationist.

What is it you like about Biden's immigration policy? He just proposed a bill that is farther to the right than anything Trump proposed.

And of course abortion access has dropped dramatically since Biden took office.

Without 60 Senate votes, I'm told nothing can change on those issues.

Also lol at union rights.

reuters.com

Come the fuck on. You aren't an idiot.

Meanwhile the NLRB under Trump established multiple rules that discouraged or flat out prevented workers from unionizing, allowed employers to prevent employees from using company email for workplace issues, allowed employers to prevent unions from meeting on company property, eliminated the fair share agreement, allowed employers to force employees to waive their right to class or collective suits/actions, eroded protections for workers who speak out about pay or work conditions, changed the rules on who can qualify for OT which saved employers about $1 billion a year in legal wage theft, and many more.

But hey, you have that one link.

You're the one claiming Biden in office increases abortion access. He has had options such as setting up clinics on federal land but passed. Don't think Democrats even brought a bill to vote.

Nominating anti-abortion judges, supporting ant-abotion candidates in primaries and stuff like this shows he's not the ally on abortion you think.

BIDEN tonight at a fundraiser in NYC: “I’m a practicing Catholic. I don’t want abortion on demand but I thought Roe v Wade was right.”

— AlexGangitano (@AlexGangitano) February 7, 2024

When push came to shove in the most significant labor battle of his administration, he sided with rail barons.

"Come the fuck on. You aren't an idiot."
You are giving him too much credit.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk