Joe Biden- why?

[Orbitus]

Or if your not a hyperpartisan you could say that Trump being a cunt in no way detracts from Biden being a creepy bastard? I can see that some people think that walking up behind a woman and putting your hand on her while you lean in and have a quick sniff of her hair before whispering into her ear is fine cause ya know.. blue. You can dislike them both. No one will take away your democratic membership card.

Biden may hug someone or kiss someone awkwardly, but at least he doesn't sexually assault almost 2 dozen women, was credibly accused of rape by his first wife, and has literally walked into a fucking dressing room filled with underage girls. Compared to Trump, Biden is a fucking saint.

[Deadite]

Biden may hug someone or kiss someone awkwardly, but at least he doesn't sexually assault almost 2 dozen women, was credibly accused of rape by his first wife, and has literally walked into a fucking dressing room filled with underage girls. Compared to Trump, Biden is a fucking saint.

What has what Biden done have to do with Trump? Does Trump being worse mean the what Biden does is fine in your head?

[Orbitus]

What has what Biden done have to do with Trump? Does Trump being worse mean the what Biden does is fine in your head?

Kissing someone in the back of the head is what? Because even the woman that was kissed in the back of the head didn't even say it was sexual assault. Meanwhile, you have spent a lot of time on this forum defending Trump, even in the post that I quoted.

[Deadite]

Kissing someone in the back of the head is what? Because even the woman that was kissed in the back of the head didn't even say it was sexual assault. Meanwhile, you have spent a lot of time on this forum defending Trump, even in the post that I quoted.

It is creepy as fuck. Don't you think it is inappropriate?

[PosPosPos]

-snip-

In short, you are saying it's more important to be popular than to be right, and it's better to cater to the worst humanity has to offer if it means winning.

[Themius]

It is creepy as fuck. Don't you think it is inappropriate?

So on one side we have people saying "grab em by the pussy you can do whatever you want" going behind stage with naked women shocking them. Sexual assault alligations

On the other side. We have Biden who publicly show affection which has been caught on cameras. I think the former is more pressing doesn't seem Biden is hiding anything rather he has no concept of personal space with people he is close to.

I know people like that it can be uncomfortable but it doesn't rise to the level of sexual assault.

[Deadite]

So on one side we have people saying "grab em by the pussy you can do whatever you want" going behind stage with naked women shocking them. Sexual assault alligations

On the other side. We have Biden who publicly show affection which has been caught on cameras. I think the former is more pressing doesn't seem Biden is hiding anything rather he has no concept of personal space with people he is close to.

I know people like that it can be uncomfortable but it doesn't rise to the level of sexual assault.

What sides? You can think both things are wrong. You don't have to pick a side. I never said anything about Biden and sexual assault. I said it is creepy and highly inappropriate. You don't?

[JohnBrown1917]

This is really the best BernieBros 2020 have?

Give me a fucking break.

Nice mid-week "thud" sound. Wish I was around for it earlier.

Its only bad when orange man does it.


lol, berniebros, that smear again.

[Elegiac]

If you want to beat Trump, Joe Biden is the safe pick. I don't see Bernie Sanders winning all of the states I named, and remember: if one is lost, then the Democrat in question has to win Ohio, North Carolina, or Florida.

This was said about Clinton as well, but look how that turned out.

Biden is a safe pick by pre-2008 metrics, sure. But America is different - it's become fundamentally clear from both 2016 and the elections that have happened since then that there is a mood in the country for a change; so presenting that desire with yet another legacy geriatric in the Third Way mold? Not so safe.

Policy aside, #metoo has also changed things regardless of your opinions on the subject, and Biden's conduct during the Anita Hill hearing is something that hasn't been fully tackled yet. If it doesn't get tackled prior to the primary, you can sure as hell bet it will be brought up in the GE.

And no, I'm not endorsing Bernie by saying Biden isn't a good idea. Bernie needs to stay in the Senate being a unicorn policy demagogue where he is most useful.

[downnola]

This was said about Clinton as well, but look how that turned out.

Biden is a safe pick by pre-2008 metrics, sure. But America is different - it's become fundamentally clear from both 2016 and the elections that have happened since then that there is a mood in the country for a change; so presenting that desire with yet another legacy geriatric in the Third Way mold? Not so safe.

Policy aside, #metoo has also changed things regardless of your opinions on the subject, and Biden's conduct during the Anita Hill hearing is something that hasn't been fully tackled yet. If it doesn't get tackled prior to the primary, you can sure as hell bet it will be brought up in the GE.

And no, I'm not endorsing Bernie by saying Biden isn't a good idea. Bernie needs to stay in the Senate being a unicorn policy demagogue where he is most useful.

I think #metoo has changed how the media feels about Anita Hill, but I don't think your average American cares at all. I don't think they give a shit about the Mueller investigation, either (sadly). Most people care about their Healthcare cost and job opportunities.

In other words, Sanders is probably the safe bet at this point. The only people who would consider "socialist" as a negative trait are people who watch Fox news. They called Obama a socialist too, for all the good that did them.

[Skroe]

This was said about Clinton as well, but look how that turned out.

Biden is a safe pick by pre-2008 metrics, sure. But America is different - it's become fundamentally clear from both 2016 and the elections that have happened since then that there is a mood in the country for a change; so presenting that desire with yet another legacy geriatric in the Third Way mold? Not so safe.

Policy aside, #metoo has also changed things regardless of your opinions on the subject, and Biden's conduct during the Anita Hill hearing is something that hasn't been fully tackled yet. If it doesn't get tackled prior to the primary, you can sure as hell bet it will be brought up in the GE.

And no, I'm not endorsing Bernie by saying Biden isn't a good idea. Bernie needs to stay in the Senate being a unicorn policy demagogue where he is most useful.

It's also not the reason Hillary lost. Hillary lost because the Democratic ground game in Florida was non-existent and farmed out to contractors who sat on their hands, simultaneously with her campaign forgetting to actually campaign for votes in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania.

If Hillary Clinton had done that, she'd be President, and it would have been a blow out when paired with her popular vote tally. Her loss in 2016 has been wrongly pushed by progressives as an argument that her center-left platform is a loser and that the next candidate needs to tack to the left. That is, hilariously, the exact argument (but with respect to the right) that the right wing made after McCain in 2008 and Romney in 2012... "we lost because we didn't excite the base enough". It's bullshit. Obama won twice because he broadened his voting pool. Trump won for much the same reason, in places Republicans expected to lose.

So in fact, Trump's presidency is the argument against a more progressive General Election platform.

The Anita Hill thing is irrelevant and it's bizarre people think it matters. Did folks forget who the Democratic nominee will be running against? Donald-fucking-Trump.

Donald Trump must be defeated. For the sake of the American Way as we know it, he must be. And his flaws and weaknesses have only grown in the past 2 years. All that is true, and yet, Democrats want to engage in some kind of litmus test for their champion? Are they joking? It doesn't fucking matter. The goal has to be to win. However. In the minimum number of moves. Not to anoint some fucking saint.

Why? Because the next Democratic President is in for four really boring years. What I said about the fate of whoever gets elected is entirely valid. President Trump 2.0 would sign the exact same budget as President Sanders and President Biden. Folks need to walk up and pay attention to how sausage his made. In 2019, the President isn't even in the room. Precisely zero presidential policy positions will make it into law, after 2020, regardless of who is elected. We are voting mostly for regulatory fiddling and supreme court nominees (which will be irrelevant too, if McConnell stays majority leader, as has probably will until at least 2022).


We have now crossed so much off the list of Presidential "usefulness". Will they help write a budget? No. Will they transform america? HAHAHA No. Will they massively change the American regulatory state? Not a chance. Will they change the courts? Only if Democrats win the Senate, which will be tough thanks to 2018 losses.

Therefore the purpose of a Democratic President in 2021 is to basically "not be Donald Trump" and repair the institutional damage he did, largely by simply not being Donald Trump.

So who can win best in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania? That's the only relevant metric. Not Anita Hill. Not Progressive cred. This is about electoral math, not coastal progressive feelings.

Let's go to 270 to win just to drive the point home.
https://www.270towin.com/

Let's assume Donald Trump wins Florida because the Democratic operation in Florida is such a shit show.
Let's also assume he wins North Carolina, because Democrats can't seem to win there with any consistency.
I will say, he will also win Arizona, which is still generally more Red than blue.



Start pissing yourself. We're looking at Trump's second term being 10 electoral votes away, before we even get to Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin.

Which means in order for a Democrat to win, they need to win all 3.

Winning North Carolina and Arizona opens up m ore options.



Winning Florida makes it hugely easier for Democrats.



Can "Socialist" Sanders win in Florida over Mr. MAGA? Doubtful. Obama barely pulled off a win in 2012, beating Romney by less than 0.9%. Hillary lost by 2.2%.

Can Sanders win in Arizona over Trump? Doubtful. Obama lost to Romney by 9%. Hillary lost by about 3.5%.

Can Sanders in in North Carolina? Doubtful. Romney beat Obama by 2% in 2012. In 2016, Hillary lost by over 3.5%.

A lot less has changed than progressives like to think. #MeToo is mostly a media and big city thing. It's not a thing that will get Democrats votes in places they need to win.

How does a Democrat become President? Appealing to voters in New York City? Fuck no. They can stay home for all it matters. It's getting a few more of the backwards post-industrial blue collar deplorables who voted for Trump in 2016 to vote for the Democrat. Both Sanders and Biden will have to basically lie to their faces in order to achieve that. Who will sell it better? I'd say Biden, who is one of them... whose son was in the military for cripes sake. I'd say "Socialist" Sanders, also Jewish (which matters to the paranoid hicks) will have a far harder time.

[Elegiac]

How does a Democrat become President? Appealing to voters in New York City? Fuck no. They can stay home for all it matters. It's getting a few more of the backwards post-industrial blue collar deplorables who voted for Trump in 2016 to vote for the Democrat. Both Sanders and Biden will have to basically lie to their faces in order to achieve that. Who will sell it better? I'd say Biden, who is one of them... whose son was in the military for cripes sake. I'd say "Socialist" Sanders, also Jewish (which matters to the paranoid hicks) will have a far harder time.

Don't mistake my distaste of Biden for support of Sanders; I think both are ultimately inappropriate choices for the 2020 candidate for one simple reason - Congress.

When I say Anita Hill is concerning or that Biden is representative of a paradigm of government that Americans on both sides of the spectrum are increasingly rejecting, I'm less talking about his inability to actually achieve an electoral ability because I don't think the DNC is stupid enough to let the sitting candidate ignore key areas like Clinton did. My concern has more to do with the ability of the candidate to pull down ticket votes since, as you have correctly pointed out, any meaningful change ultimately has to start at the legislative level.

It would be a different matter if Biden were yet another milquetoast neoliberal politician, but as said; his previous conduct and tendency to put his foot in his mouth make him inappropriate as "stock photo public face of the nation" President.

[Orbitus]

What sides? You can think both things are wrong. You don't have to pick a side. I never said anything about Biden and sexual assault. I said it is creepy and highly inappropriate. You don't?

But you have been defending the side with the rape and sexual assault allegations, while you think Biden is creepy, you literally defend Trump with every post. Just like you bullshit whataboutism here.

[Somewhatconcerned]

I'll tell you why.

Because America is racist as fuck and there are far too many dudes who have a problem with a women in power, which means cross Kamala Harris off your list. Through no fault of her own. The middle of country, which she will need to win, is so antediluvian in their predilections she's intrinsically disqualifying.

Because Bernie Sanders is unelectable outside progressive circles. Sanders did the stupidest thing ever in, for some fucking reason, deciding in 2015/2016 to introduce "Democratic Socialism" into this immature country's immature lexicon. Which has since been shortened and weaponized to just 'Socialism', a word that was functionally extinct in American political language before he decided to run for President. And now Bernie Sanders, Socialist (except not really), has made what is actually pretty run of the mill progressive policy items next of kin to the communist manifesto in the eyes of middle America. All because he had to use those two fucking words for some fucking reason. So typical of a progressive... having to make a point while trying to win, rather than just trying to win. Whatever. Sanders won't find 270 electoral votes.

Everyone else is an also ran. Don't get me started on Beto, aka Astroturf Obama.

That means boring white male in 70s who is conventional and safe and can win in middle America, Joe Biden. By default. I wish we had a better option. But we don't.

Don't get me wrong. Not a thing I've said is changed. I'll vote for Bernie Sanders over Trump if it comes to that. Bernie Sanders is just a buffoon who like Trump, writes checks he can't cash and has a weird cult of personality around him. Bernie Sanders, unlike Trump, is not a threat to the future of the United States, our national security, and the liberal international order. President Bernie Sanders, President Harris, President Biden and President Trump 2.0 will all, invariably, be reduced to signing the same budget Trump signed last year and the same two year deal that is pending now, written by McConnell and Pelosi. They will all make their Presidential Budget Requests. Congress won't care. And it'll be business as usual as far as the budget is concerned.

So yeah, I'll vote for Sanders, and then chuckle a bit at the poetic justice when he signs four every increasing defense budgets that buy 20 B-21 Raider stealth bombers a year, rather than pay for free college for all. Because though Democrats will likely keep the House in 2020 and 2022, Democrats will have a hard time winning the Senate in 2020 thanks to their losses in purple states / red states 2018, and if they manage to take it back in either 2020 or 2022, it'll be by a 1-2 vote majority, and no where near 60 votes. And the inverse is true of Republicans. It will be hard for them to take the House in 2020, and harder still in 2022 and so forth, post census redistricting.

That means the Bernie agenda, the Harris Agenda, the Biden agenda and the Trump agenda are all meaningless distractions, and McConnell and Pelosi upscale the same compromise budget that's been in effect since 2015, every year, as far as the eye can see.

So why Biden? Because Biden can't be tagged as a "socialist", which will hurt Bernie in country bumpkin land that he needs to win. Because Biden is a white male who can win people who don't like "the blacks" and don't like a woman in charge. Because the worst of Biden - being overly tactile and with a proclivity to put his foot in his mouth - is zero'd out by Donald Trump, sexual Predator and friend of White Supremacists, who has spent years saying things so supremely bad a bit of innocent faux pas from Uncle Joe would be refreshing.

I know the Bernie Crowd, only a few strands of DNA removed from the Trumpkin deplorables in terms of there "I'm mad as hell and I'm not gonna take it anymore" deplorable-like rage, think there is appetite for a "revolutionary" President who will be all dramatic. I disagree. I think, and this will be especially true by election day, there is and will be even a greater longing for a President who will frankly, be quiet, and de-escalate the political noise. Quiet harmless, lowkey Grandad Joe, back from the farm for a tour of duty, looks rather good compared to Captain Drama, Donald Trump. Trading the Trump drama show for the Sanders drama show ain't exactly a great sell line.

But most of all remember, the Democratic nominee doesn't need to excite progressives in Massachusetts. Their votes don't matter. He or she doesn't need to excite progressives in New York. Their votes don't matter. They need to win in Central Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Minnesota and Michigan. If they can do that, and win Virginia and Colorodo, Trump mathematically cannot win.

So tell me, who stands a better job doing that if I were some idiot blue collar backwards hick that sometimes votes Democrat? Harmless Grandad Joe or Socialist Bernie? Oh and let's be clear, they'll both run on pretty much the same platform, which is Healthcare.

If you want to beat Trump, Joe Biden is the safe pick. I don't see Bernie Sanders winning all of the states I named, and remember: if one is lost, then the Democrat in question has to win Ohio, North Carolina, or Florida.

This is a solid take, and good advice. Which is why the Dems will utterly mess it up.

What's your take on who comes after Trump for the GOP? Someone even more extreme?

[jeezusisacasual]

This is a solid take, and good advice. Which is why the Dems will utterly mess it up.

What's your take on who comes after Trump for the GOP? Someone even more extreme?

I think populism is here to stay for a very decent period afterwards and why would either party stop it? I know from the left the idea is to get another FDR or move the overton window to the left similar to Reagan moving it to the right.

[Deadite]

I say

You can think both things are wrong.

and you say

But you have been defending the side with the rape and sexual assault allegations

This is why you are a hyperpartisan joke. I am the one who has been saying Trump is a cunt and Biden is a creepy fucker. I can call out both side while you dodge a simple question on whether Biden has been creepy and inappropriate. You are the king of whataboutism. No matter the thread in you pop with MUH TRUMP! Can you explain how in your lunatic left mind that i am defending Trump in any way? I can only assume when your a hyperpartisan you twist any criticism of your side into me being on the other side or some shit?

Just to fill you in. I am Scottish so Trump is irrelevant to me. I don't like him. As you seem to have glossed over the fact that i have said he is a cunt several times in this thread. I assume calling some one a cunt mean something different from where you come from? In Scotland Cunt = Bad.

[Mormolyce]

I feel like the left wing fearing the "socialist" label so much that they choose milquetoast centrist candidates over and over again is precisely how we got to this point in the first place.

[Skroe]

I think populism is here to stay for a very decent period afterwards and why would either party stop it? I know from the left the idea is to get another FDR or move the overton window to the left similar to Reagan moving it to the right.

Populism has probably peaked. Trump's victory in 2016 was one of the last populist victories in the Western world there was. The 2018 midterms of reflective of that. It's progressives like AOC that make the noise, but remember, all she did was replace another Democrat in a place Democrats always win. Nancy Pelosi only has her majority, and 2018 was a defeat for Trump, because Democrats ran centrists in places Trump won, and most of all won the socially liberal/fiscally conservative suburban vote.

One of the most warped things about the Democrat's historic and important victory in 2018 - historic in scale and important because they'll now be able to blockade Trump from changing laws basically forever - is this fairy tale progressives tell that it was some kind of progressive coming of age moment. Bullshit. It was a triumph, rather than a disaster because Pelosi found centrist New Democrats and Blue Dogs who could win, not progressives.



This is of course, how it always works. There are not enough progessives or movement conservatives in places that either party needs to gain a house majority. The only way to do it is to expand the majority by picking up centrists. The current Republican minority, for example, is far more ideologically coherent than their last majority, and will be far more than their next majority, whenever that shows up. Similarly, this is a much more ideologically diverse and center-left caucus than the one Pelosi had in the 115th Congress (which was the prior one).

- - - Updated - - -

I feel like the left wing fearing the "socialist" label so much that they choose milquetoast centrist candidates over and over again is precisely how we got to this point in the first place.

It's manifestly strategy-stupid.

- - - Updated - - -

In short, you are saying it's more important to be popular than to be right, and it's better to cater to the worst humanity has to offer if it means winning.

Do you want to win or not? I've told you how to win. The question is, what's more important: winning or feeling righteous.

For Democrats to win, you're going to have to somehow con (and let's be clear, it is a con, on both sides) some scum of the earth thoroughly stupid people who think "democratic socialism" is the same thing as what Stalin wanted, to vote for your man, because there are not enough progressives in places that are needed to win, thanks to electoral college.

That is how you get President Sanders, not "failed 2020 Democratic nominee" Sanders.

Republicans figured this out litterally decades ago, and its one reason they've kept winning despite being in a decades long demographic decline. They're much better at getting *just* enough people in *just* the right places, to win while Democrats focus on vision building. Consider Bush' 2004 election campaign: "I'm a war President, we're in a war, don't change the horse midstream, and would you really even like Diet-me in John Kerry anyway?". Lousy message for California. Great message for Florida, Virginia, North Carolina and Ohio, all of which were toss ups that Bush won a respectable amount.

Donald Trump is going to run on the "devil you know" platform versus "the socialist" (and he will paint Biden as that too). If you want a progressive President, you have to find a way to win hearts and minds in places where progressive ideals have little currency.

The way to do it is to basically make people scared to death that 4 more years of Trump will mean they'll lose their healthcare. Entirely accurate. No. But it will win.

But as I said, do you want to defeat Trump or not?

[jeezusisacasual]

Wait until we see a economic slowdown that will bring out more populism, that is why you see trump attacking fed rate hikes. Social media has made the ease of forming mobs to either shutdown sections of the roadways etc. The left needs someone like Mitch McConnell to just grind everything to a halt and be disruptive until they get what they want, burn the fields as they retreat kind of style. I would say if the next crash hits hard you will see an upswing in populism again and with more desperation comes more extremes, the nation is not fixing the problems that elected Trump to begin with, i would say come to Wyoming and talk to people to get an idea why they voted the way they did.

[Gestopft]

Populism has probably peaked. Trump's victory in 2016 was one of the last populist victories in the Western world there was.

I'd wait until after the next economic downturn before making that prediction.

As a reminder, the Millennial generation is financially about 20% behind Baby Boomers at a comparable age, and even farther behind Gen X. Income inequality is at Gilded-age levels. Trump is doing nothing to fix this, nor to bring down the costs of healthcare, housing, college, etc. So while the 'populism' of financially secure and culturally insecure older whites may die down, the populist economic agenda isn't going anywhere. Only in 15-20 years it won't be called populism anymore.

- - - Updated - - -

That means boring white male in 70s who is conventional and safe and can win in middle America, Joe Biden. By default. I wish we had a better option. But we don't.

So why Biden? Because Biden can't be tagged as a "socialist", which will hurt Bernie in country bumpkin land that he needs to win. Because Biden is a white male who can win people who don't like "the blacks" and don't like a woman in charge. Because the worst of Biden - being overly tactile and with a proclivity to put his foot in his mouth - is zero'd out by Donald Trump, sexual Predator and friend of White Supremacists, who has spent years saying things so supremely bad a bit of innocent faux pas from Uncle Joe would be refreshing.

You don't think any of his record that I outlined is going to hurt him in 'Bumpkin Land'? The same attacks that Trump (however hypocritically) made against Clinton won't land against Biden?

So tell me, who stands a better job doing that if I were some idiot blue collar backwards hick that sometimes votes Democrat? Harmless Grandad Joe or Socialist Bernie?

Whichever one wants to take on the 'elite' and shuts the hell up about controversial social issues, probably. We haven't seen Biden campaign for himself for a long time now, so I don't know what he would look like.

- - - Updated - - -

Can "Socialist" Sanders win in Florida over Mr. MAGA? Doubtful. Obama barely pulled off a win in 2012, beating Romney by less than 0.9%. Hillary lost by 2.2%.

Speaking of Florida- Andrew Gillum (a Sanders-backed Progressive) and Bill Nelson (a boring white male and not a Progressive) lost by basically the same margin. Where were all of those 'middle voters' that found Nelson palatable but Gillum too Progressive?

- - - Updated - - -

I know the Bernie Crowd, only a few strands of DNA removed from the Trumpkin deplorables in terms of there "I'm mad as hell and I'm not gonna take it anymore" deplorable-like rage, think there is appetite for a "revolutionary" President who will be all dramatic. I disagree. I think, and this will be especially true by election day, there is and will be even a greater longing for a President who will frankly, be quiet, and de-escalate the political noise. Quiet harmless, lowkey Grandad Joe, back from the farm for a tour of duty, looks rather good compared to Captain Drama, Donald Trump. Trading the Trump drama show for the Sanders drama show ain't exactly a great sell line.

In terms of tone and style, sure. But I think that outside of cosmopolitan Conservatives and well-to-do Liberals, the "back to normal" approach may limited in its appeal. It was "normal" that got us Donald Trump- and what worries me, from a messaging standpoint about "back to normal" is that it treats Trump as "oops, we tripped and fell into this dark alley" instead of "we were heading this way to begin with." Course correction requires a deep reckoning with where we have come from.

There's the old saying "Democrats fall in love; Republicans fall in line." Who was the last low-key Democratic president?