Biden / Harris Focused Discussion

[Nurasu]

The red backdrop cracked me up; who thought those shots would look flattering…

I appreciate him meeting fascism head on, but the timing seems weird to me with how much momentum Dems already have ahead of midterms.

[Edge-]

The red backdrop cracked me up; who thought those shots would look flattering…

I appreciate him meeting fascism head on, but the timing seems weird to me with how much momentum Dems already have ahead of midterms.

It's basically the first time he's coming out to go after this bullshit after being tepid as fuck the past two years. He hasn't discussed this topic at all, and now that there's some momentum going into the midterms I guess he feels that calling out the "semi-fascist" (it's just mostly outright fascist) behavior of the MAGA Republicans will help their efforts to retain/grow majorities in the House/Senate.

[Breccia]

I don’t consider any Trump supporter to be a threat to the country. I do think anyone who calls for the use of violence, fails to condemn violence when it’s used, refuses to acknowledge an election has been won, insists upon changing the way in which we rule and count votes, that is a threat to democracy.

People voted for Donald Trump and support him now, they weren’t voting for attacking the Capitol. They weren’t voting for overruling an election. They were voting for a philosophy he put forward

-- US President Joe Biden

[Paranoid Android]

Biden declared war on fascism. Republicans and most of the DC media took it as a personal attack.


Watching the entire DC media basically being like "Dark Brandon is out of control, we need a responsible elder statesman like Donald Trump to take the helm" which is how I know the speech was good.

Yes, horrible, horrible by the media. What is/was worse is they normalized most of these traitors almost immediately by having them back on their shows or giving them legitimacy in news articles. Especially you will see something crazy for instance like Josh Hawley in CNN, The Hill or whoever with a title "Hawley says our democracy is under attack by the Democrats".

[Endus]

-- US President Joe Biden

That phrasing's more than a little problematic. We need to have a serious discussion about the legitimacy of violence someday. Now's probably not the time, and Biden's right about his conclusions there, his framing, however, is pretty terrible.

[BeepBoo]

The only legitimacy of violence is when it's used in response to someone initiating violence or as a means to stop someone from causing you harm.

[Edge-]

That phrasing's more than a little problematic. We need to have a serious discussion about the legitimacy of violence someday. Now's probably not the time, and Biden's right about his conclusions there, his framing, however, is pretty terrible.

Not everything is an opportunity for an academic deep-dive into a topic with an hours-long speech getting into nuance and shades of grey.

I think most of the folks that understand that there are times when it appropriate - say when confronting a rising threat of actual Nazi's and shit, don't need this spelled out for them by Biden. And those that don't, wouldn't really understand the nuance. Plus, you know, "BIDEN ENDORSES POLITICAL VIOLENCE!" being plastered over every conservative outlet for the remainder of his term wouldn't be great.

[masterhorus8]

Yes, horrible, horrible by the media. What is/was worse is they normalized most of these traitors almost immediately by having them back on their shows or giving them legitimacy in news articles. Especially you will see something crazy for instance like Josh Hawley in CNN, The Hill or whoever with a title "Hawley says our democracy is under attack by the Democrats".

"nuh-uh, we're not attacking democracy, you are!"

Man, they're so childish....

[Endus]

The only legitimacy of violence is when it's used in response to someone initiating violence or as a means to stop someone from causing you harm.

As long as you're aware this applies to all uses of State violence as well, and thus you're arguing that police shouldn't be entitled to use force to effect an arrest for any non-violent crimes.

Is that your argument? Or are you holding a double standard, which was my whole point?

- - - Updated - - -

Not everything is an opportunity for an academic deep-dive into a topic with an hours-long speech getting into nuance and shades of grey.

I think most of the folks that understand that there are times when it appropriate - say when confronting a rising threat of actual Nazi's and shit, don't need this spelled out for them by Biden. And those that don't, wouldn't really understand the nuance. Plus, you know, "BIDEN ENDORSES POLITICAL VIOLENCE!" being plastered over every conservative outlet for the remainder of his term wouldn't be great.

Hence my "now's probably not the time". I've just seen a lot of similar phrasing lately, from both sides in the USA, and it's problematically authoritarian, even when it's coming from a Democrat.

Like, if you're supporting law enforcement, as Biden famously does, that is overt endorsement for political violence.

[Edge-]

and it's problematically authoritarian, even when it's coming from a Democrat.

Not everyone is an academic wonk, dude. I don't say that as any way of remotely insulting you, I find the more nuanced discussions interesting much of the time.

But this kind of shit of, "General platitude to attempt to discourage political violence at a moment when there's already political violence and the risk of much more is also somehow problematically authoritarian" is exhausting.

- - - Updated - - -

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...ld-have-given/

My fellow Americans. I am the president of the United States ... maybe!

To those of you who believe that although we have differences, we are still one nation, and to those of you who believe that I am spearheading a complicated, Satan-driven, child-snatching conspiracy with very detailed logistics that I can’t say I fully comprehend, I wish you equally a great Thursday! I am not here to give anybody a hard time.

To those of you who say that violence is never the answer, and to those of you who say that violence is the answer right now, I say, Yup!

This is a nation, after all, that honors the Constitution. Or doesn’t, if it doesn’t feel like it! Who am I to say who’s wrong and who is right? Maybe the president, but maybe just some guy!

There is an election coming up. I think, and a lot of Americans do too, that for our democracy to continue, we need to accept the results of that election, even if our side loses. Other Americans agree: They will accept the results of the election if my side loses. That’s common ground, I think! We can build on that. Or not, if people don’t want to.

I was planning to come out in favor of democracy and accepting the results of elections even when they don’t go our way, and to say that those MAGA Americans who want to install Donald Trump as some sort of consequence-free, god-king-for-life are doing something bad, but I was told that would alienate a lot of people, so, instead, I want to take that time to just stare intensely out at the audience for a solid minute.

...

Yay King Trump!

To those of you trying to take away people’s rights and those of you fighting to preserve them: Keep going! To those of you who want to treat some people in this country as less than full citizens, and to those who think that’s terrifyingly wrong, I see you both and celebrate you both equally!

So I say to everyone, to the people working to get out the vote and the people working to undermine the entire concept of voting, good work! We have had a democracy for a while, which I personally would like to keep, but some people seem to want us to try something new, and that could be ... fine! Maybe 235 years is a good stopping point.

I was going to criticize the people who are trying to thwart the will of the voters and who, earlier, wanted to stop the peaceful transfer of power, but then I thought, that would be needlessly divisive. Probably they are some very fine people! Indeed, I might go so far as to say, “I love you, and you’re very special!”

I am sorry I got mad that some of you tried to storm the Capitol. It was patriotic, actually. What is tearing this country apart is people who dare to criticize that sort of thing, not people who dare to do that sort of thing. I am sorry that I said your behavior was a little creepy and that it would be bad to have fascism here. That was made to sound like I oppose fascism, whereas in fact I am neutral about it, because I do not want to polarize or divide.

Off the subject of democracy, which I can see is polarizing and dividing a lot of you here, maybe there’s something else we can agree on. I think it would be good to work together to repair the infrastructure and build bridges! But in the interest of not being polarizing, maybe we should burn those bridges instead! Two equally valid things to do with a bridge, and not my place to choose.

In an alternate reality, Biden may have given this very non-polarizing speech instead of the polarizing speech he gave in this reality.

[Milchshake]

Basically copying the strategy of Jacobin - inventing a version of Biden that doesnt exist to argue with.

Just for the sake to market their Personal Brand of Leftism. Those contradictions won't heighten themselves!

[eschatological]

The placating is also in his use of "semi-fascist." The speech, which I've now watched, is basically Biden offering cover to Republicans to repent and put Trump behind them. To "come back into the fold" as they say. He wants to suggest that there's a way back from this rebellious experimentation by the American Right in fascism.

I think he's being overly optimistic, and the initials reactions seem to bear that out. Lots of digging in by the other side, and calling Biden Hitler or even better, "PedoHitler," once again projecting hard.

[Kaleredar]

Basically copying the strategy of Jacobin - inventing a version of Biden that doesnt exist to argue with.

Just for the sake to market their Personal Brand of Leftism. Those contradictions won't heighten themselves!

Are we going to get Clint Eastwood arguing with another empty stool that supposedly represents Biden now?

[Edge-]

Basically copying the strategy of Jacobin - inventing a version of Biden that doesnt exist to argue with.

Less to argue and more to mock the folks who are claiming the speech was partisan, IMO. But I guess we have our own takes.

- - - Updated - - -

https://apnews.com/article/abortion-...edeb5e53844992

The Republican candidate for governor in Wisconsin endorsed by Donald Trump is calling for people to take up “pitchforks and torches” in reaction to a story that detailed his giving to anti-abortion groups, churches and others — rhetoric that Democrats say amounts to threatening violence.

In case anyone was wondering what kind of "ultra-MAGA semi-fascists" that Biden is talking about...it's this. This is it.

Michels, a multimillionaire, this week reacted strongly to a story published by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel detailing charitable giving by he and his wife’s foundation, some of which went to anti-abortion groups and churches that have taken anti-gay positions.

Since the story’s publication, Michels has gone after not just Evers and Democrats, but also the Journal Sentinel and, more broadly, all reporters.

“I believe people should just, just be ready to get out on the streets with pitchforks and torches with how low the liberal media has become,” Michels said Thursday on a conservative talk radio show. “People need to decide ‘Am I going to put up with this? Am I going to tolerate this, taking somebody that gives money to churches or cancer research and use that as a hit piece in the media?’ I’m appalled. It’s disgusting.”

[Milchshake]

Are we going to get Clint Eastwood arguing with another empty stool that supposedly represents Biden now?

That and years of:

• yoU JUSt cant BE THe anti TrUmp!
• BiDeN iS goING To cANCeL SOCiAl seCuritY!
• biDEn IS GOIng to ApPoinT LArRy suMmeRS!
• bIdEn IsNT oNlinE enOUGH TO attract yOuNG voteRS!

I'm so over people sticking with their hipster theories of revolution. Look at how poorly John Stewart's schtick has aged. Contrarianism had it's moment .... ♬let it go ♬
Is it crazy that an old guy is constantly proving them wrong? Or is there something to having age and experience?

I'm loving that it's kind of accidental. Biden could only Meet the Moment at this particular age, after having the particular experience of 8 years as VP?
Would Obama and CLinton probably would have been way better had they been older and more experienced?
Makes one realize Al Gore was a real missed opportunity. Amazing that "progressives" like Ralph Nader and Michael did so much to hamstring him.

Sure, guys beefing with an imaginary Biden is topical. But then you realize some people are still beefing with Bill Clinton since they were teens.... Puberty is sure a ringer! Really primed some people for TYT and Jacobin.

Have a great weekend!

[eschatological]

I should note, Jon Stewart's schtick was "reasonableness." The whole rally he held in D.C. was about a return to reasonable politics, in response to the Tea Party's various racist conspiracies, like the birth certificate. I doubt, if you asked him, that he'd consider centrism between current Democrats and Republicans as the correct option.

[Ripster42]

I should note, Jon Stewart's schtick was "reasonableness." The whole rally he held in D.C. was about a return to reasonable politics, in response to the Tea Party's various racist conspiracies, like the birth certificate. I doubt, if you asked him, that he'd consider centrism between current Democrats and Republicans as the correct option.

He has a podcast. I've listened to some of it. He does not consider the current middle between D & R to be the correct option. IIRC, he's pretty explicit about that.

[Fugus]

He has a podcast. I've listened to some of it. He does not consider the current middle between D & R to be the correct option. IIRC, he's pretty explicit about that.

Then he is correct as the middle of the D and R is still a bad place to be overall.

Remember, America is a nation with 2 right wing parties and no left wing one where a centrist is consider an extremist.

[eschatological]

There was an initial point to be made, though. Stewart's ask for reasonableness, even in 2010, was not a good place to be. Conservatives in this country have been batshit insane since McCarthy.

[Kaleredar]

There was an initial point to be made, though. Stewart's ask for reasonableness, even in 2010, was not a good place to be. Conservatives in this country have been batshit insane since McCarthy.

I think the problem is that the necessity gets lost in an effort to sound "non-partisan." Because most conservatives, when you say "democrats and republicans need to move closer to one another politically" would agree... Because they think democrats need to move more towards them.

The concept that the right-wing in the United States is much too far to the right, and it, exclusively, has to move back towards the center needs to be normalized in the public conscious.