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

Right now your arguments involving Biden can be summed up as such:

Trump spends 4 years openly attacking unions and worker rights and Biden does 1 anti-union thing so both are the same.

Biden has consistently said as a Catholic he doesn't believe in abortion but recognizes and agrees to a woman's right to abortion access while Trump spends 4 years trying to make abortion illegal. Both are the same.

Rainmaker is many things, and some of them I strongly disagree with, but he's not an idiot or dumb.

You could fool me with the way he argues dumb crap.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

He took away their only leverage and fucked over 113,000 workers. Trump sucks on labor rights but that one action is worse than anything he did in office. All the other shit doesn't matter if union members are not legally allowed to strike.


Abortion is the only reason he and his party stand a chance right now. I'd probably shut the fuck up if I was him and stop using right-wing terminology like "abortion on demand".

lol at this link

Literally signed a bill that made it illegal for rail workers to strike and then threw them a bone of 4 sick days. A tiny fraction of what they were asking for.

Long term, rail companies now hold all the leverage. There's a reason the Teamsters begged him to stay out of the UPS labor dispute.

Glad you know more than the IBEW.

I'm sure Trump will be better for them.

A lot of the stuff I'm mentioning is bad and we've known Biden was a pretty bad politician for 40 years. But I voted for him last time and would vote for him now because Trump is worse.

But I won't vote for a war criminal who funds genocide. There's really nothing that can convince me to vote for someone who belongs at the Hague. There's a line that needs to be drawn at some point.

Hell yeah!

Also, wrong thread!

So I get this is fantasy, but bear with me.

What would happen if 15 GOPers in the Senate and 40-50 in the House all became Dems? I think they could swing the party far enough right that they would be something like UK Tories. There are already plenty of center folks among the Dems and if the far left broke off, as I think they would, it would only solidify the new Tory/Dems.

The GOPers would have to bend a bit on corporate regulations and climate, but I bet tax policy, foreign policy, judges, and a lot more would feel pretty comfortable for them.

Mike Johnson is now complaining that the Israel/Ukraine funding deal doesn't include anything for the border.

Nice. Sooner the better so we can go on to the next step.

Rest of the article talks about what could happen with the GOP House. But who the frak really knows nowadays.

Breaking down the House endgames for the Senate's foreign aid plan - Live Updates - POLITICO
If true, I don't mind having separate votes. But let's have the votes and get people on record.

Thanks George Santos-Dems win Special Election to replace him

Looks like the Dem, Suozzi, is going to win big.

And the far right is settling on never making the mistake of kicking out a guy like Santos again. The whole party just needs to be burnt to the ground.

dola

Pilip is a great example of how parties misunderstand identity politics. The GOP picked Pilip because she's a woman, black, and Jewish. They just assumed a lot of those groups would vote for her based on identity. She doesn't have any electoral experience, doesn't have a network, doesn't have name recognition, and it's identity politics are premised on a candidate being seen as a part of the group. In suburban NY, she wasn't seen as part of any of her identity groups and she doesn't have the history to have established herself as part of the group.

Dems do the same thing all the time thinking a candidate with military experience is enough to swing voters.

looks like Florida is sending permission slips home with their kids for the parents to sign because they are going to read and discuss a book written by an African-American.


https://twitter.com/ChuckWalterFL/st...20780373373048

Ha! The FBI just charged the informant in james comer's hunter and joe biden probe of making false statements and obstruction:


https://twitter.com/kyledcheney/stat...40350559240321

What in the fuck?!

I don't see why you're shocked. This kind of thing happens just as much under a Biden or Trump Administration. I mean, I'm sure a Trump Administration will ban books just as much as the Biden Administration has.

Holy shit.

Russian activist and Putin critic Alexei Navalny dies in prison | Alexei Navalny | The Guardian

I'm amazed he lived as long as he did.

Matt Gaetz has gone woke. He admits white privilege.

“It’s a black thing…Most black folks hide cash.” - Fani Willis Father

Maybe my privilege is showing but is this a thing?

— Matt Gaetz (@mattgaetz) February 16, 2024

Maybe Tucker can interview Putin about this and get mocked to his face some more.

Apparenty you missed this:

Tucker Carlson criticised for praising Putin before Navalny death: ‘Leadership requires killing people’ | The Independent

Of course, he's now scrambling to explain away these comments since Leader Putin, you know, killed someone.

Did anyone see the Tucker clip where he's just fascinated that Russia has shopping carts that are coin operated? Like the guy has never been in an Aldi before.

Didn't he grow up rich? Probably hasn't had to shop for himself in decades, if ever.

So are we going to get a mea culpa from our enlightened centrists about the whole Hunter Biden thing being BS, or will they continue to both sides it?

https://newrepublic.com/post/179163/...-epic-disaster

Meanwhile, James Comer will probably get re-elected at a 75-25% clip again.

Amazing that Dems don't even try to make anything out of the numerous examples of the GOP working with Russian intelligence.

i think that depends on who you are listening too-Rep Goldman, Swalwell, and others have been on TV and in congressional hearings talking about it and showing examples. They aren't just ignoring it

The problem is most of their supporters are perfectly OK with it and there's a lot of people that don't see Russia as a threat, which is unfortunate.

Comer also claims he has a lot of other evidence and doesn't need this guy, which we know is bullshit, but this more about the upcoming election than finding anything. They know there's nothing there but they're hoping the blur the lines with some voters on Trump and Biden both being corrupt. The more people that believe both sides are the same the better it is for the GOP.

No Senate hearings. No coordinated media strategy. No ad campaign.

Dems always wait for the news networks to do the work they need to be doing.

I think they've spoken up a lot about it. They blamed the 2016 election on it for years. It sticks with some people. Others won't care.

They're also kind of in a weird spot since Menendez is part of the foreign relations committee and he was essentially an employee of the Egyptian and Qatari government.

Potential new immigration policy. Nearly identical to Trump's that was shot down by the courts. Will be interesting if Democrat states fight this like the fought Trump's or if there position has changed now that a Democrat is doing it.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/21/u...um-border.html

As a moderate/independent and proponent of "both sides", I assume you are referring to me? If so, feel free to quote me on where you think I need to provide a mea culpa.

Just search on "Hunter" on this thread or others, and let me know if you find something.

Joe, don't spend too much effort getting her back right now. She should have known better, it's on her.

US-Russian citizen Ksenia Karelina ‘didn’t have a worry in a world’ when she went to Russia. Then she was arrested for treason | CNN

It's behind a paywall so assume similar to what CNN is reporting.

Biden considering executive action to close southern border, sources say | CNN Politics

The article did not mention it and is not clear. Is Joe wanting to push this in hopes the House will vote for his Ukraine-Israel-Taiwan bill?

If it's separate, I wouldn't think Joe would push for it as it would PO his base even more.

Front Office Football Central - View Single Post - The Biden Presidency - 2020

Front Office Football Central - View Single Post - The Biden Presidency - 2020

Front Office Football Central - View Single Post - The Biden Presidency - 2020

There's more about guns, taxes, children, but it's a weird obsession.

Thank you. Appreciate the opportunity to respond to my specific quotes. Let's go through each one because I like to go into details.

Per your newrepublic link, I believe this is the issue in question. If I'm incorrect, please provide the quote in the story you believe I missed.




Front Office Football Central - View Single Post - The Biden Presidency - 2020

Your newrepublic article said Hunter/Joe being bribed is a lie. What does that have anything to do with what I said about Joe above?

I have never said that Joe took a bribe. I have said Joe did meet with Hunter's business partners (including Burisma). Source: look at your 3rd link below where I highlighted.

Front Office Football Central

Same as above.

Front Office Football Central

Same as above.

Question to you: are you saying you do not believe Joe was in calls or meetings with Burisma representatives? Or are you saying he did participate in calls/meetings but there is no evidence Joe took bribes?

Looking forward to your response or clarification.

Dems haven't evver tried to weave everything together for the American public. Just the stuff we know now suggests the most successful intelligence operation in world history. The way the Russians have infiltrated conservative orgs and PACs, the money flowing through those groups to candidates, the social media manipulation, the direct contacts between Russian intelligence and GOP electeds, all point to a massive and successful effort to capture the conservative movement.

And fuck Menendez. Fetterman is dead right on him.

I think they've tried, their messaging is just shit.

First, they tried to blame Hillary losing on the Russians which I think many Americans rolled their eyes at. She was a shit candidate that was not likable. So dragging Russia into that made the rest of the stuff seem less impactful. Sure Russia wanted Trump to win but a lot of countries have preferences.

There was also the Mueller investigation which Democrats put way too much trust in. We had a year or more of crazy conspiracy theories about what he'd find and reveal to the public. In the end, while the report had some damaging stuff in it, it fell well short of what Democrats anticipated. They didn't have a plan after that.

It also doesn't help that the party doesn't have a lot of politicians that relate to the public. Letting this old guard of bought and paid for liberals like Pelosi steer the ship was a disaster. The party should have had a massive purge in 2016 and let younger talent on that wasn't already poison to the majority of the public.

The Biden Presidency - 2020
 

No offense to all but when the conversation turns into the dance with Edward about what he said or didn’t say that’s exactly when it’s supposed to go to the other thread so he can Bob and weave and all thus saving threads from devolving into the same.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So far the conversation has been neutral. No drama queen stuff yet.

re: social security mess and looming 2034-2035.

We had an earlier discussion on possible fixes like increasing/removing payroll tax limits, later retirement age etc. Below article mentioned another option that I don't remember reading about. Essentially, removing the tax benefits of 401k, IRAs.

To save Social Security, they may come for your 401(k)Â* - MarketWatch

The article doesn't present stats who are in the "mainly benefit very high earners" (or define it).

From what I remember how it was sold to the masses, 401k/IRA were in lieu of pension plans. If they remove 401k/IRA, what will replace it to encourage people to save?

The Biden Presidency - 2020
 

E

It has nothing and never had anything to do with neutral but instead the dominance and adultery of the point of the thread as you get called out and a tennis match begins. SMH


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Or they could increase the cap so people earning $500k pay SS taxes on $500k. But hey, end tax breaks for middle class instead.

You can view it as such I guess?

I view it as 2x2 exchanges so far. No big deal (so far at least) other than you wanting to insert yourself and make it into a drama. But you do you, little man.

I have to feel that getting rid of the tax benefits of 401ks would be an actual death sentence for whichever party tried to implement it, to say nothing of all the financial institutions that benefit from administering them that would lobby against this.