Biden / Harris Focused Discussion

[Endus]

@cubby

What you think on this?

Not cubby, but what's going on with that is that Biden is a nationalist and a neoliberal conservative. He might support it for different reasons, but it shouldn't be shocking he won't rush to overturn such policies; he doesn't diverge that strongly from Republican positions of the '90s and early aughts.

[Tyris Flare]

Has anyone watched The Problem with Jon Stewart? The magic's basically gone. It shows how much of the Daily Show wasn't Stewart, it was the writers/research team. I was a massive fan and really wanted to love the show and then Stewart had some really sketchy opinions. You may be wanting "I annihilated Tucker Carlson live on Tucker's own show" Stewart, and that guy's not around any more.

Yeah totally disagree, I was super pleased he didn't get the same brain rot as most of the liberal establishment in the trump era. Not going in on cancelling, keeping the eye on things that are actually important and how power really works. I like the broader cynicism and recognition that TDS style was completely useless at affecting any type of real change.

Like honestly, I remember watching that stuff in the 00s and actually thinking (like a lot of viewers, probably) that THIS TIME WE GOT 'EM, BOYS!

Except that never happened, at all. Fox remains a juggernaut. The right is as powerful (and the left as incompetent and incoherent) as ever.

He's much more like Carlin now, which is great. You can see it on his face like a grizzled veteran and I personally appreciate it. I can't even watch Oliver or Colbert anymore, which is really sad since the Colbert Report was easily the best show of the era. But they are basically both just annoying normie libs now

[Ripster42]

Not cubby, but what's going on with that is that Biden is a nationalist and a neoliberal conservative.

Why would neolibs be in favor of tariffs? That's the exact opposite of what a neolib is.

[Fugus]

Not cubby, but what's going on with that is that Biden is a nationalist and a neoliberal conservative. He might support it for different reasons, but it shouldn't be shocking he won't rush to overturn such policies; he doesn't diverge that strongly from Republican positions of the '90s and early aughts.

So basically Biden is screwing up intentionally on it, what I was afraid of.

[Ripster42]

So basically Biden is screwing up intentionally on it, what I was afraid of.

Not surprising that's your take. You just took the opinion of a person who thinks neolibs are pro-tariff as wrote, when the core of neoliberalism is free trade and deregulation. The real answer is likely closer to the fact that china continues to not fulfill their part in trade agreements for the chinese tariffs, and the fact that they have been getting rid of or reducing other tariffs the whole time to little newsfare.

[Endus]

Yeah totally disagree, I was super pleased he didn't get the same brain rot as most of the liberal establishment in the trump era. Not going in on cancelling

Pretty much nobody has ever been "cancelled".

That entire concept boils down to "rich, famous people don't like public criticism and whine about being called to account for being awful people".

Anyone bitching about "cancel culture" doesn't actually have a point, and can be safely dismissed.

[Ivanstone]

Yeah totally disagree, I was super pleased he didn't get the same brain rot as most of the liberal establishment in the trump era. Not going in on cancelling, keeping the eye on things that are actually important and how power really works. I like the broader cynicism and recognition that TDS style was completely useless at affecting any type of real change.

Like honestly, I remember watching that stuff in the 00s and actually thinking (like a lot of viewers, probably) that THIS TIME WE GOT 'EM, BOYS!

Except that never happened, at all. Fox remains a juggernaut. The right is as powerful (and the left as incompetent and incoherent) as ever.

He's much more like Carlin now, which is great. You can see it on his face like a grizzled veteran and I personally appreciate it. I can't even watch Oliver or Colbert anymore, which is really sad since the Colbert Report was easily the best show of the era. But they are basically both just annoying normie libs now

Let’s see here. He quit his show and then mostly retired for many years. That’s not keeping your eye on important things. That’s doing nothing at all. Cancel culture is also a myth.

Yes, Fox is still around. They fill a niche. That niche isn’t going away. It would be nice I if that niche was smaller.

Now he’s back trying to tread the same ground as John Oliver, Hasan Minhaj and Wyatt Cenac. Especially Wyatt Cenac. And what’s the result? He’s got some ideas, he’s got a few laughs and right wing cranks are calling for his head because he’s too woke.

If Carlin was still alive today he would probably get the same treatment. He might’ve took shots at anyone but he has definitely not an equal opportunity offender:


I don’t ever recall Jon being this blatantly pissy about something.

[Endus]

Why would neolibs be in favor of tariffs? That's the exact opposite of what a neolib is.

I also said he was a nationalist.

Sometimes, ideologies don't mesh particularly well and you make choices that favor one rather than the other.

[Mekh]

https://www.reuters.com/business/ene...source=twitter

These extorting mother bleepers. Reading the article it seems that they are not giving any reason, if only they want to pollute. This company is saying let us pollute or we shut down right now in time of an energy crisis.

Gotta love it.

The villains in Captain Planet were more subtle than this.

[gondrin]

Yeah totally disagree, I was super pleased he didn't get the same brain rot as most of the liberal establishment in the trump era. Not going in on cancelling, keeping the eye on things that are actually important and how power really works. I like the broader cynicism and recognition that TDS style was completely useless at affecting any type of real change.

Like honestly, I remember watching that stuff in the 00s and actually thinking (like a lot of viewers, probably) that THIS TIME WE GOT 'EM, BOYS!

Except that never happened, at all. Fox remains a juggernaut. The right is as powerful (and the left as incompetent and incoherent) as ever.

He's much more like Carlin now, which is great. You can see it on his face like a grizzled veteran and I personally appreciate it. I can't even watch Oliver or Colbert anymore, which is really sad since the Colbert Report was easily the best show of the era. But they are basically both just annoying normie libs now

I have a little secret to tell you, Colbert was always a liberal mocking republican conservatism in Colbert Report.

[Endus]

I have a little secret to tell you, Colbert was always a liberal mocking republican conservatism in Colbert Report.

The number of people who seemingly don't get that the Colbert Report was a liberal satirizing the stupidity and ridiculousness of conservative media is really kind of shocking.

Likely the same people losing their shit that Homelander on The Boys is being revealed as a "bad guy". Halfway through Season 3. If you didn't get that he's literally always been a bad guy, there's seriously something wrong with you.

I'm not putting that shit in spoiler tags because if you think it's a spoiler, because again, it's like wondering why people are saying Sauron's the "bad guy" in LotR.

[Ripster42]

I also said he was a nationalist.

Sometimes, ideologies don't mesh particularly well and you make choices that favor one rather than the other.

Oh please. You don't like biden. You'd blame him no matter what. If he doesn't lower tariffs, it's because of nationalism. If he does lower tariffs, he's a neolib. Real easy to claim to be right when you ignore reality and assign your opponent beliefs that are completely contradictory.

The reality is, not everything trump did was bad. The tariffs on china were largely a good thing, that also come with a downside. The tariffs on countries that were actually upholding trade deals were bad things, with no upside. Biden has been acting accordingly.

- - - Updated - - -

I have a little secret to tell you, Colbert was always a liberal mocking republican conservatism in Colbert Report.

The way I read that post was that they liked cobert's parody better than the 1/2 parody 1/2 bald faced pronunciations he does now. I don't think the poster was confused about colbert's real stances at all.

[tehdang]

Yeah totally disagree, I was super pleased he didn't get the same brain rot as most of the liberal establishment in the trump era. Not going in on cancelling, keeping the eye on things that are actually important and how power really works. I like the broader cynicism and recognition that TDS style was completely useless at affecting any type of real change.

Like honestly, I remember watching that stuff in the 00s and actually thinking (like a lot of viewers, probably) that THIS TIME WE GOT 'EM, BOYS!

Except that never happened, at all. Fox remains a juggernaut. The right is as powerful (and the left as incompetent and incoherent) as ever.

He's much more like Carlin now, which is great. You can see it on his face like a grizzled veteran and I personally appreciate it. I can't even watch Oliver or Colbert anymore, which is really sad since the Colbert Report was easily the best show of the era. But they are basically both just annoying normie libs now

He didn't buy into the same degree of brain rot as most of the liberal establishment. That's true enough.

But then he made a shitty Apple TV+ show. And man did he look out of touch. Required reading on this should be The Atlantic's article: What Happened To Jon Stewart? He is comedy royalty. But the world has changed since he was at the height of his powers.It's even got some circumspection on Tucker vs Stewart. But here's a taste:

And as The Problem With Jon Stewart makes clear, funny one-liners and five-minute chats with pliant celebrities aren’t particularly good practice for roundtable conversations with policy experts and extended interrogations of polished CEOs. An early episode that described the U.S. armed services’ continued use of toxic burn pits near military bases culminated in a tense, misbegotten interview with President Biden’s VA secretary, Denis McDonough. Stewart spent 10 minutes repeating himself, grandstanding in circles, arguing with a broken system, and blaming it on the guy who was mere months into the job and was patiently trying to explain the obstacles in his path. If Stewart’s goal was to make his audience feel sympathy for a federal bureaucrat, he nailed it.

More than once already, Stewart has dedicated an entire episode to a subject, only to have an actual expert on that subject call him out for getting it wrong. The first time, a Wall Street Journal editor took exception to the mess Stewart made trying to summarize the GameStop saga—and, seriously, go watch the episode if you want to understand it less than before you watched—and to his portrayal of Redditors as folk heroes schooling the elites. Days later, Stewart got aired out by a Gimlet Media climate-change reporter for having argued, incorrectly, that recycling doesn’t work (plastic recycling doesn’t work; paper and metal recycling work great) and for going too easy on oil companies.

Because this is 2022, Stewart responded by inviting both reporters onto his podcast to hash it out some more. He seemed to bridle against the Journal editor’s suggestion that he was being naive about GameStop, so he doubled down, ranted about the need for more transparency around extremely private financial transactions, then did the Tucker Carlson thing where he accused the journalist of being the naive one. At least with the climate reporter, Stewart conceded his mistakes and wound up having the kind of detailed, enlightening conversation that it sure would’ve been nice to see on his new television show.

He's a political non-starter, and Politico's writer engaged in some absolutely absurd wish-casting. He's the absolute bottom of the bucket candidate prospect for 2024. And I might be disparaging other bottom of the bucket candidates by making the comparison.

[uuuhname]

boy, it's almost like no one should take opinion columnists seriously.

[Endus]

Oh please. You don't like biden. You'd blame him no matter what.

If he does something laudable, I'll laud him. He largely doesn't, and I'm not gonna applaud empty half-assed promises he doesn't follow through on as "laudable". He's said some good things regarding Roe. I care a hell of a lot more about what he does. Empty complaints and promises that fail to achieve meaningful change are just pablum meant to appease the masses; they change nothing. That's a generic truth regardless of whose pablum it is.

If he doesn't lower tariffs, it's because of nationalism. If he does lower tariffs, he's a neolib. Real easy to claim to be right when you ignore reality and assign your opponent beliefs that are completely contradictory.

They're not always contradictory, is the thing. But sometimes they are. Are you claiming Biden is always 100% super ideologically consistent at all times? Why'd he push the racist crime bill in the '90s that is so much of the basis of the current issues in policing across the USA, then?

And to be clear; I'm allowing that the man can change, and not saying he's the same man today as he was then. But his views today aren't consistent with his views then. That is my point.

[Ripster42]

If he does something laudable, I'll laud him. He largely doesn't, and I'm not gonna applaud empty half-assed promises he doesn't follow through on as "laudable". He's said some good things regarding Roe. I care a hell of a lot more about what he does. Empty complaints and promises that fail to achieve meaningful change are just pablum meant to appease the masses; they change nothing. That's a generic truth regardless of whose pablum it is.

Weird then, that I had links actually talking about what he's doing wrt tariffs, and all you had was was crying about him not removing tariffs (which he's been addressing) and assigning motives that explain some nonsense that doesn't reflect reality. I have no belief that you'd praise him if you think he actually did something laudable, especially when I see you living in your own reality where he hasn't been addressing trump's tariffs. You took fugus' comment as true and ran with it without actually looking at the realities of the situation.

They're not always contradictory, is the thing. But sometimes they are. Are you claiming Biden is always 100% super ideologically consistent at all times? Why'd he push the racist crime bill in the '90s that is so much of the basis of the current issues in policing across the USA, then?

What I'm saying is that if you paint with a broad enough brush you're going to paint everything with your strokes. Which is exactly what you're doing here. Biden is so middle of the road, and you're so far outside even canada's left, that your framing is preposterous. It's weird seeing the dichotomy of your rhetoric on this forum. An acknowledgement that strategic voting is needed in your country, then smearing the current flagbearer for strategic votes in our country with rhetoric based on false givens. Talk about pablum.

[Endus]

Weird then, that I had links actually talking about what he's doing wrt tariffs, and all you had was was crying about him not removing tariffs (which he's been addressing) and assigning motives that explain some nonsense that doesn't reflect reality. I have no belief that you'd praise him if you think he actually did something laudable, especially when I see you living in your own reality where he hasn't been addressing trump's tariffs. You took fugus' comment as true and ran with it without actually looking at the realities of the situation.

My point was that Biden's not actually that distant on economic factors from where Trump and Republicans stand.

That was the point.

That proximity.

What I'm saying is that if you paint with a broad enough brush you're going to paint everything with your strokes. Which is exactly what you're doing here. Biden is so middle of the road, and you're so far outside even canada's left, that your framing is preposterous.

Biden's center-right, and I wouldn't frame him as "middle of the road". He'd be considered akin to Stephen Harper, up here, who was by no means a moderate.

My own views aren't really outside of Canada's left wing. I line up pretty comfortably with the NDP on most things, and it was Wynne's Liberal provincial government here in Ontario that was testing Basic Income, which is something I talk about a lot.

I'm not nearly as extremist as some folks think.

It's weird seeing the dichotomy of your rhetoric on this forum. An acknowledgement that strategic voting is needed in your country, then smearing the current flagbearer for strategic votes in our country with rhetoric based on false givens. Talk about pablum.

I've literally argued extensively with Americans for refusing to vote strategically.

You're not talking about me at all, you're talking about Imaginary Leftist and stapling my avatar to your straw man.

[Fugus]

Not surprising that's your take. You just took the opinion of a person who thinks neolibs are pro-tariff as wrote, when the core of neoliberalism is free trade and deregulation. The real answer is likely closer to the fact that china continues to not fulfill their part in trade agreements for the chinese tariffs, and the fact that they have been getting rid of or reducing other tariffs the whole time to little newsfare.

Point still remains, that Trump screwed up with the Tariff crap and Biden left them on knowing the overall impact. Glad to see the them reducing them. But if they wanted to move more production back, Tarrifs aren't the answer. Investing in local stuff is with the big problem with that is the people complaining about how it would interfere with the free market like one actually exists in much of this when one government is investing in it locally while the other has a party making sure they don't.

[Ripster42]

My point was that Biden's not actually that distant on economic factors from where Trump and Republicans stand.

That was the point.

That proximity.

Trump didn't have a stance on economics besides "harm my political opponents" and the GOP's stance is just "deregulate everything" and "no taxes for rich people and corporations". There isn't really a whole lot more on that side of the fence. If you think that's close to biden's positions, you're living in a fantasy. There's no proximity there.

Biden's center-right, and I wouldn't frame him as "middle of the road". He'd be considered akin to Stephen Harper, up here, who was by no means a moderate.

If you think harper is close to biden, I don't know what to say. One wants to expand gov't medical coverage, the other wants to shrink it. One wants to further regulate polluting industries, the other wants to get rid of regulations. They're fairly close on free trade, but aside from that, keep dreaming. Harper is basically an 80s republican with the tax cuts (while biden has proposed several tax increases!). It's weird you think you're knowledgeable about this stuff. What follows is why you think they're close:

My own views aren't really outside of Canada's left wing. I line up pretty comfortably with the NDP on most things, and it was Wynne's Liberal provincial government here in Ontario that was testing Basic Income, which is something I talk about a lot.

I'm not nearly as extremist as some folks think.

I've seen your past comments where you complain that no one in canada's gov't shares your views so you have to vote strategically. How there's no market-socialist candidates with a chance. Revisionist BS isn't a great look.

I've literally argued extensively with Americans for refusing to vote strategically.

You're not talking about me at all, you're talking about Imaginary Leftist and stapling my avatar to your straw man.

Oh man! It's almost like I can still see your past comments to see the hypocrisy:

Not cubby, but what's going on with that is that Biden is a nationalist and a neoliberal conservative. He might support it for different reasons, but it shouldn't be shocking he won't rush to overturn such policies; he doesn't diverge that strongly from Republican positions of the '90s and early aughts.

You're smearing the person the strategic vote is currently centered around based on something made up. Talk all you want about voting strategically, when you're talking out the other side of your mouth like this it doesn't mean a damn thing.

Point still remains, that Trump screwed up with the Tariff crap and Biden left them on knowing the overall impact. Glad to see the them reducing them. But if they wanted to move more production back, Tarrifs aren't the answer. Investing in local stuff is with the big problem with that is the people complaining about how it would interfere with the free market like one actually exists in much of this when one government is investing in it locally while the other has a party making sure they don't.

So you mean how the gov't is partnering with some companies to build manufactories? Your takes are just not great. They're built on this worldview that seems to ignore anything positive dems do so you can complain about establishment dems.

[Endus]

I've seen your past comments where you complain that no one in canada's gov't shares your views so you have to vote strategically. How there's no market-socialist candidates with a chance. Revisionist BS isn't a great look.

That's a single issue, dude. Who ever said I was a single-issue voter, or that I think economic conversion is the most-critical issue facing the nation today?

Thinking I should make all my choices based on that one particular viewpoint is such a bafflingly irrational point of view I have no idea where you could have gotten the idea for it.

Oh man! It's almost like I can still see your past comments to see the hypocrisy:

And cherry-pick those comments to build the straw man you like, apparently.

IIt's about judging people for declaring they see no functional difference and had no preference between the two actual representatives on the table. That's where the argument loses ground. Democracy isn't about voting for your ideal candidate. It's about making the best out of the dog's dinner that's actually on offer.

I'm probably voting Liberal, but it's more because my riding is Conservative and the Liberal MIGHT flip the district right now, and the actual rep is a better candidate. I vote about 40% on the local candidate, 40% strategically, and 20% ideologically; the NDP get the latter but it's not enough by itself to draw a vote from me. Numbers made up, obviously.

The general election, that's where strategic voting comes into play. Not the primaries. If you're gonna refuse to vote for Bernie Sanders because he's "too far left", you're implicitly stating you think he's as bad an option as Trump, and thus cannot decide. If you don't think that, even if Bernie Sanders isn't who you want as President, you vote Bernie.

Elections work through participation. Not bothering to vote is an implicit statement that you support both candidates equally. If you find one more objectionable than the other, democratic principle states you vote for the least bad option. Democracy is not about "getting your way", and throwing an ideological tantrum and refusing to participate because you didn't get the option you prefer, that's how democracies die. Because you let fringe groups control the entire election process, despite not having majority support.

There is no "hypocrisy". You've made up a story that doesn't fit my actual views, and you don't care about the truth of what I believe, you'd rather just make up falsehoods to slander me.