Biden / Harris Focused Discussion

[Nymrohd]

Easiest is Michelle Obama, she has the name regonition but thats a easy thing so solve in my opinion because the media attention will be massive if you have a new canidate. But to answer your question, Michelle Obama outright wins right now from Trump.

Also has absolutely no interest in being the candidate.

[Muzjhath]

Easiest is Michelle Obama, she has the name regonition but thats a easy thing so solve in my opinion because the media attention will be massive if you have a new canidate. But to answer your question, Michelle Obama outright wins right now from Trump.

https://www.ipsos.com/en-us/only-mic...ive-biden-2024


Vs Biden being the canidate? The fact that more then a week has gone by and Biden has litterealy done nothing to adress the fact that his debete perfomence proofed Trump right about his mental state is pretty much depressing potential voters.

All the polls show that Trump is going for a landslike victory right now, so yeah. Go argue that Biden still needs to be on the ticket because the altnerative is somehow worse? Biden is turning blue states into battleground states right now, let that sink in for a moment please.

You think the Media wouldn't crush the dnc under a torrent of "this is undemocratic" bullshit if they just declared Michelle Obama as the candidate?
Whom, as mentioned, has 0 interest in running.

[ati87]

Also has absolutely no interest in being the candidate.

That's not the question you asked.

[Nymrohd]

That's not the question you asked.

I don't think I asked a question.

[PACOX]

Trump really isn't. He is barely above Biden in the polls, even though Democrats have outperformed the polls by an average of 11 points since 2016.

Being barely above an incumbent is huge. Especially as a narcissistic lying felon. Biden barely won last time. Nothing is for granted.

[Edge-]

https://www.chron.com/news/article/b...r-19563172.php

Again, Joe Biden immediately responds to very Republican state that's openly hostile to his administration when the state is struck by a natural disaster and needs federal assistance.

No shit talking publicly. No "Will I or won't I?" bullshit. Nope, just assistance when it's needed.

Hopefully this will continue for another 4 years.

[Benggaul]

https://www.chron.com/news/article/b...r-19563172.php

Again, Joe Biden immediately responds to very Republican state that's openly hostile to his administration when the state is struck by a natural disaster and needs federal assistance.

No shit talking publicly. No "Will I or won't I?" bullshit. Nope, just assistance when it's needed.

Hopefully this will continue for another 4 years.

Sure would be nice if stuff like this was plastered all over the MSM when it happens instead of sticking to the, *ahem*, tired reaction to Biden's debate performance. 4 years of quiet competence being upstaged by faux outrage is pretty par for the course for the for-profit journalists.

[gondrin]

So, the far right is now eating each other.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...efddc711&ei=11

'Destroyed!' Right-wing meltdown as Trump ally's ouster puts Freedom Caucus in disarray

The future of a powerful far-right House caucus remains uncertain after one member's loyalty to former President Donald Trump triggered his ouster and raised the specter of departures to come.

The House Freedom Caucus Monday night voted to eject Rep. Warren Davidson (R-OH) — who supported the victorious Trump-endorsed candidate over the group's own chair Rep. Bob Goode in his failed primary last month — spurring pro-Trump Rep. Troy Nehls (R-TX) to resign and sources to warn of more departures to come.

"Their loss!" Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA), told Davidson Tuesday morning. "Back stabbing Bob Good and the Never Trump freedom caucus members are the problem."

Greene railed against the far-right group that booted her from the caucus last year for her outspoken attacks on fellow Republicans as they prepared to oust her House ally, former Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA).

"They have destroyed freedom caucus and have made it ineffective," Greene wrote. "In doing, so they have made our entire Republican majority ineffective."

Nehls — the Republican who swapped out his "stolen valor" military award for Trump's golden sneakers and a Trump-printed tie — apparently shared Greene's views on the Freedom caucus.

In a public statement, Nehls argued their decision to oust Davidson was a sign the group was about to falter.

"I want to grow the organization and encourage more members to join," Nehls told USA Today reporter Ken Tran. "With tonight's vote it was clear that is not their objective."

Davidson responded to the decision with a slap at Good, the incumbent who lost Trump's support after endorsing Gov. Ron DeSantis for Republican presidential nominee then lost his Virginia primary to the Trump-endorsed challenger John McGuire.

"Congress will soon be a better place without Bob Good, as will Freedom Caucus," said Davidson. "I am disappointed that some HFC members (a very narrow majority of those present) viewed my opposition to Bob and support for John McGuire as an attack on them or the group."

Axios' report on Davidson's ouster noted it reflected a "a broader schism within Congress' right flank."

"Some of former President Trump's most fervent supporters on Capitol Hill, like Greene and Rep. Jim Jordan," Axios notes, "have found themselves increasingly alienated from Freedom Caucus leaders like Good."

The decision also raised concerns from outsiders such as a foreign affairs public policy adviser in Washington D.C. who warned the group had lost a principled member.

"Incredibly disappointing move by half(?) of the House Freedom Caucus," replied Dan Caldwell, a policy adviser for the think tank Defense Priorities. "[Davidson] is one of the most thoughtful and principled members of Congress - especially on foreign affairs."

Daily Kos chief content officer Kalli Joy Gray took a less mournful and more sarcastic tone.

"Imagine getting kicked out of the Freedom Caucus," she quipped. "It’s like getting kicked out of hell."

[PfeffermintShake]

Ongoing in Haaland doing amazing things at Interior:
After decades of activism, Joe Biden’s administration finally was the one to ban USDA’s Wildlife Services division from deploying cyanide bombs on federal BLM lands. These things have killed pets and injured recreationists, and killing carnivores is bad policy anyway.

The U.S. Bureau of Land Management has halted the use of spring-loaded traps that disperse cyanide powder to kill coyotes and other livestock predators, a practice wildlife advocates have tried to outlaw for decades due to safety concerns.

The M-44 ejector-devices that critics call “cyanide bombs” have unintentionally killed thousands of pets and non-predator wildlife, including endangered species, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Wildlife Services. They have a scented bait and emit a poisonous cloud when triggered by a physical disturbance.

The Bureau of Land Management quietly posted a notice on its website last week that it no longer will use the devices across the 390,625 square miles (1,011,714 square kilometers) it manages nationally — an area twice the size of California — much of it where ranchers graze cattle and sheep.

Biden got it done.

[Benggaul]

Ongoing in Haaland doing amazing things at Interior:
After decades of activism, Joe Biden’s administration finally was the one to ban USDA’s Wildlife Services division from deploying cyanide bombs on federal BLM lands. These things have killed pets and injured recreationists, and killing carnivores is bad policy anyway.

The U.S. Bureau of Land Management has halted the use of spring-loaded traps that disperse cyanide powder to kill coyotes and other livestock predators, a practice wildlife advocates have tried to outlaw for decades due to safety concerns.

The M-44 ejector-devices that critics call “cyanide bombs” have unintentionally killed thousands of pets and non-predator wildlife, including endangered species, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Wildlife Services. They have a scented bait and emit a poisonous cloud when triggered by a physical disturbance.

The Bureau of Land Management quietly posted a notice on its website last week that it no longer will use the devices across the 390,625 square miles (1,011,714 square kilometers) it manages nationally — an area twice the size of California — much of it where ranchers graze cattle and sheep.

Biden got it done.

But he talks slow and milk is more expensive so fuck him.

[Skjaldborg]

Ongoing in Haaland doing amazing things at Interior:
After decades of activism, Joe Biden’s administration finally was the one to ban USDA’s Wildlife Services division from deploying cyanide bombs on federal BLM lands. These things have killed pets and injured recreationists, and killing carnivores is bad policy anyway.

The U.S. Bureau of Land Management has halted the use of spring-loaded traps that disperse cyanide powder to kill coyotes and other livestock predators, a practice wildlife advocates have tried to outlaw for decades due to safety concerns.

The M-44 ejector-devices that critics call “cyanide bombs” have unintentionally killed thousands of pets and non-predator wildlife, including endangered species, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Wildlife Services. They have a scented bait and emit a poisonous cloud when triggered by a physical disturbance.

The Bureau of Land Management quietly posted a notice on its website last week that it no longer will use the devices across the 390,625 square miles (1,011,714 square kilometers) it manages nationally — an area twice the size of California — much of it where ranchers graze cattle and sheep.

Biden got it done.

The DOI has quietly been on an insane winstreak since 2020. It really is a shame the things going on there barely make ripples, but other land management agencies have always gotten more attention (e.g., the EPA, which is enormous compared to any part of the DOI).

[Poopymonster]

The DOI has quietly been on an insane winstreak since 2020. It really is a shame the things going on there barely make ripples, but other land management agencies have always gotten more attention (e.g., the EPA, which is enormous compared to any part of the DOI).

Don't worry, with Chevron being destroyed they'll get fucked up again.

[Skjaldborg]

Don't worry, with Chevron being destroyed they'll get fucked up again.

You had to remind me. I get the feeling we will never truly grasp the scope of that decision because the only limit on those cases is human greed.

[Spectral]

Don't worry, with Chevron being destroyed they'll get fucked up again.

Why do you think Chevron deference is important to Department of Interior policies on federal land?

[shimerra]

Why do you think Chevron deference is important to Department of Interior policies on federal land?

Because it's literally important to every federal agency's policies pretty much since it became a thing. The deference in interpreting ambiguous parts of laws/statues impacts use of public lands for minerals/oil/etc, the creation of removal of national parks and wildlife refuges. It also upholds Federal trust responsibilities to Indian tribes and Native Alaskans and manages endangered specie conservation efforts.

DoI uses experts to set those policies to make decisions on things like approving leases to allow company's to drill for oil. DoI says you can't mine here because of endangered specie X? Welp now that company can sue again and a judge isn't allowed to use expert input in the same way. Chevron according to estimates has applied to something like 75-80% of regulatory disputes and the DoI definitely has regulatory disputes. I guess the real question is why do you think it's not important?

Was this a serious question? Because if it was did you just not know what Chevron is or did you not think that the DoI didn't use experts or have to interpret sometimes ambiguous statues based on said expert knowledge? This is going to create massive regulatory chaos as it effectively resets company's ability to sue on things that have been decided for decades and has opened the doors for a landslide of lawsuits and old cases to be relitigated. I hope every conservative judge hates their life as the courts are flooded with the law suits the Supreme Court just gave the go ahead for.

[Spectral]

DoI uses experts to set those policies to make decisions on things like approving leases to allow company's to drill for oil. DoI says you can't mine here because of endangered specie X? Welp now that company can sue again and a judge isn't allowed to use expert input in the same way.

Skidmore deference didn't go anywhere. If it's actually something covered by statute, DoI has the same authority that they have previously maintained, they're just not entitled to the presumption of authority when a litigant questions statutory authority.

[shimerra]

Skidmore deference didn't go anywhere. If it's actually something covered by statute, DoI has the same authority that they have previously maintained, they're just not entitled to the presumption of authority when a litigant questions statutory authority.

It's cool you're talking about statutes where there isn't ambiguity and things are explicitly stated covering all possible situations. That's not where the issue is. Because there is a metric fuck ton of cases, rulings, laws, and regulations that written under Chevron relied on the legal precent that the experts would have the flexibility. Not the courts.



The problem is the entirety of the of the federal regulatory authority, including DoI, has relied heavily on expert interpretations to make their rulings. That was the entire point of Chevron deference. Expert interpretations were deferred to over strict interpretations of the statue and a fuck ton of the regulatory frame work we've relied on for decades is pinned on rulings that used that deference.

Judges are no longer able to give that same deference to experts and must explicitly go off the statues frequently written by congressmen who lack the advanced expertise and knowledge to make the correct judgments. That means in any case where they did rely on expert interpretations can be relitigated and when it is will be under a completely different lenses by the judge.


A few estimates I've seen are showing around 18000-20000 legal decisions that this has the potential to impact and effectively have been given the okay to be relitigated. For the DoI specifically this can impact permits they've denied for things such as oil exploration, rules around protecting endangered species, and policies for Indian reservations. It's nice to see that you don't think this is a big deal. Basically every other legal professional and major organizations that work in these regulatory spaces think you're wrong not just for DoI, because the DoI rulings definitely relied on Chevron more than once, but from food safety to what drugs are approved to consumer protections. Basically fucking every aspect of American life.

It's cool you've figured out the part that things explicitly covered by statues aren't affected by this. If you don't mind I'd like to point out what we're actually discussing and the issue most of us have with this is the fuck ton of rulings that deal with ambiguous laws and statues that the previous legal framework relied on the interpretations of experts in the field is now gone. This wasn't some archaic legal feature that's going to impact a few odd corners of American life.

This is literally going to massively shake up the entire regulatory structure of the US of the past few decades on top of what it's going to do for future decisions because the part you seem to be missing is congress in drafting statues, the courts themselves, and the regulatory bodies all relied heavily on this statue to do their jobs. In other words no: they do not have the same level of authority they had before. They have less because they are no longer relied on in cases where the statue is ambiguous. Which is a lot.

[Kaleredar]

It's cool you're talking about statutes where there isn't ambiguity and things are explicitly stated covering all possible situations. That's not where the issue is. Because there is a metric fuck ton of cases, rulings, laws, and regulations that written under Chevron relied on the legal precent that the experts would have the flexibility. Not the courts.



The problem is the entirety of the of the federal regulatory authority, including DoI, has relied heavily on expert interpretations to make their rulings. That was the entire point of Chevron deference. Expert interpretations were deferred to over strict interpretations of the statue and a fuck ton of the regulatory frame work we've relied on for decades is pinned on rulings that used that deference.

Judges are no longer able to give that same deference to experts and must explicitly go off the statues frequently written by congressmen who lack the advanced expertise and knowledge to make the correct judgments. That means in any case where they did rely on expert interpretations can be relitigated and when it is will be under a completely different lenses by the judge.


A few estimates I've seen are showing around 18000-20000 legal decisions that this has the potential to impact and effectively have been given the okay to be relitigated. For the DoI specifically this can impact permits they've denied for things such as oil exploration, rules around protecting endangered species, and policies for Indian reservations. It's nice to see that you don't think this is a big deal. Basically every other legal professional and major organizations that work in these regulatory spaces think you're wrong not just for DoI, because the DoI rulings definitely relied on Chevron more than once, but from food safety to what drugs are approved to consumer protections. Basically fucking every aspect of American life.

It's cool you've figured out the part that things explicitly covered by statues aren't affected by this. If you don't mind I'd like to point out what we're actually discussing and the issue most of us have with this is the fuck ton of rulings that deal with ambiguous laws and statues that the previous legal framework relied on the interpretations of experts in the field is now gone. This wasn't some archaic legal feature that's going to impact a few odd corners of American life.

This is literally going to massively shake up the entire regulatory structure of the US of the past few decades on top of what it's going to do for future decisions because the part you seem to be missing is congress in drafting statues, the courts themselves, and the regulatory bodies all relied heavily on this statue to do their jobs. In other words no: they do not have the same level of authority they had before. They have less because they are no longer relied on in cases where the statue is ambiguous. Which is a lot.

Have you considered, however, that this action aligns with his political agenda, suits conservative goals, and helps empower the wealthy, and that any concern he has for the topic is feigned at best?

His argument makes a lot more sense through that lens.

[shimerra]

Have you considered, however, that this action aligns with his political agenda, suits conservative goals, and helps empower the wealthy, and that any concern he has for the topic is feigned at best?

His argument makes a lot more sense through that lens.

It's honestly even worse than most conservatives. Because most conservatives will openly admit the entire point of this was to further mass deregulation. That was the goal and their ecstatic to have achieved that goal. But this feigned ignorance over the significance is just hilarious. his lens has been obvious from the start. I'm more interested in seeing if he's too chicken shit to admit whether it's actual or feigned ignorance over the significance.

[Paranoid Android]

Biden, unable to read the teleprompter, stops, squints, leans in, and mangles his own major policy he's rolling out - telling the crowd he's capping rents at no more than $55. It's actually 5%.

https://x.com/BMarchetich/status/181...boGXphyOw&s=19

This guy can't do the job people. He is too frickin old. Biden is not why people will not show up.

So the proposal of a 5% rent increase tied to a tax sounds pretty good. Not up on my real estate if 5% is excessive considering what inflation and people's adjusted income. I'm guessing this might be some Neo-Liberal bullshit.