Biden / Harris Focused Discussion

[Skjaldborg]

I'm using it because there's no real reason to replace him. Why would I entertain the argument when there's no actual, legitimate reason?



Gotta tell ya, if you didn't know Biden was old and has long had a stutter before the debate, you're not very well-informed in the first place. Why are these reasons for concern, again?



Then maybe focus on the actual problem, incompetent Democratic voters, rather than what's not a problem, Biden?

It's the "but her emails" all over again. Republicans found a nothingburger point, drove it home, and dumbasses fall for it. That was never a problem with Clinton, it's a problem with Democrat voters being gullible idiots.

Put literally anyone else in the spot and there'll be a new "problem". AOC? Too young and inexperienced. Bernie? Too old and socialist. Warren? Too female and socialist. Harris? Not white enough, though they'll phrase it more carefully, but it's what they'll mean. Buttigieg? Too gay, same deal as Harris. And so on. This was all off the top of my head, it's all dumb as fuck, and Democrats will fall for it all over again, because they're not paying attention. The electorate is more of a problem than the candidates.

1. The reason to replace him is that he’s not doing great in the polls and the pet issue plaguing him went on full display. And it’d be trivial to get a candidate that doesn’t share his one practical issue.

2. Of course I knew Biden was old. Meanwhile, my great-grandpa was building grape arbors and digging trenches at 96, and my wife’s grandpa is still enjoying a life as professor emeritus of photojournalism at 94. I know (knew) people way older than Biden who had way more vitality. Age alone isn’t the issue.

3. Biden’s optics are clearly a problem, even if his admin has been great. You can have more than one problem simultaneously.

4. a) you’re dangerously close to just name-calling and I gotta say that I don’t appreciate it. b) Sort of back to (3), it’s almost certainly not an issue with Democratic voters, but rather the unfortunately apathetic and under-informed independent/unregistered voters.

5. AOC and Bernie I agree with you on those two (though personally I’d vote for Sanders on policy and am hopeful AOC becomes a heavyweight in a few years as she continues to gain achievments). But there’s a huge difference between what «plagues» Biden and what «plagues» Harris and Buttigieg. You can’t be too black, female, or gay to be President in any practical sense.

[unfilteredJW]

I see it's time to fall back on tone policing.

[shimerra]

5. AOC and Bernie I agree with you on those two. But there’s a huge difference between what «plagues» Biden and what «plagues» Harris and Buttigieg. You can’t be too black, female, or gay to be President in any practical sense.

You are profoundly ignorant if you don't think one of all of those things aren't significant issues for some voters. Especially the people already prone to voting for Trump over Biden. Should they be? Nope. You clearly must have forgotten just about everything around Obama and Clinton's campaigns if you think otherwise.

I'll let others handle the rest of the dribble.

[unfilteredJW]

5. AOC and Bernie I agree with you on those two. But there’s a huge difference between what «plagues» Biden and what «plagues» Harris and Buttigieg. You can’t be too black, female, or gay to be President in any practical sense.

You can't be serious with this statement with regards to the US.

[PhaelixWW]

1. The reason to replace him is that he’s not doing great in the polls...

So let's replace him with someone who's doing worse?

Good grief.

[Blur4stuff]

I guarantee that whoever replaced Biden, most of the people wanting him replaced would complain it wasn't the right person. It's a clusterfuck waiting to happen.

I'm also looking forward to the replacement not being Harris and then watching dems explain how a black woman can't get the job done so they need to bring in another white guy/white lady.

[PhaelixWW]

I guarantee that whoever replaced Biden, most of the people wanting him replaced would complain it wasn't the right person. It's a clusterfuck waiting to happen.

I'm also looking forward to the replacement not being Harris and then watching dems explain how a black woman can't get the job done so they need to bring in another white guy/white lady.

There's a reason why a switch at this stage (even for something relatively benign, like medical reasons) tends to shake the faith of the support base. It's a stupid knee-jerk response, and most people resist it, but again, even if only 5% lose their resolve and stay home on election day, that can be enough to flip the election results.

If the replacing candidate is not head-and-shoulders a better candidate, then it's simply not worth it. And polling numbers don't support that in this case.

[Skjaldborg]

I said «in a practical sense.» Yes, there are mongoloids for whom being gay or black is a problem philosophically. They are fundamentally unserious. What, would Harris be too busy eating fried chicken and menstruating to be President? Would Buttigieg be too busy dressing in drag or fellating dudes to be President? No.

But depending on how gracefully you age, you absolutely can be too old to effectively perform presidential duties. I listed two people in my family tree who are/were very active and lucid into their mid-90s. Meanwhile my grandpa, bless him, is not doing so well at 89 and barely remembers the last 20 years.

[Strange One]

Trump is going to win. It sucks, but that's what will happen.

[shimerra]

I said «in a practical sense.» Yes, there are mongoloids for whom being gay or black is a problem philosophically. They are fundamentally unserious. What, would Harris be too busy eating fried chicken and menstruating to be President? Would Buttigieg be too busy dressing in drag or fellating dudes to be President? No.

But depending on how gracefully you age, you absolutely can be too old to effectively perform presidential duties. I listed two people in my family tree who are/were very active and lucid into their mid-90s. Meanwhile my grandpa, bless him, is not doing so well at 89 and barely remembers the last 20 years.

Then you choose your words poorly. Because practically speaking we're talking about the reality of running in the USA and who would be a good idea to replace biden with. And in the USA if you are trying to run being black, gay, or a woman are in a practical sense very much real things that can impact a candidates changes to win and not for the better for national races like President.

Because just like the whole sleepy biden narrative has been 99% a Republican construct with no actual evidence he's incapable of doing the job because of his age they'll definitely be harping on race, gender, and especially sexuality in similar fashion and you've yet to give any compelling arguments or evidence that any of your suggestions are significantly more likely to win in the general. Because they all lost to him in the primary.

I don’t know about you but when I share a common goal with a team of people I don’t start berating them.

Save that for the genocide-apologists, AI-abusing concern trolls, and genuine fascists around here, imo.

Stupid is stupid sometimes regardless of whether or not you have common cause with someone. And as Endus said people who bought the massive nothing-burger that was Hillary's emails were gullible and they were idiots at least on that issue. If we're in a row boat trying to get to shore and you're rowing the wrong direction despite multiple requests not to I'm going to call it like it is.

You taking personal offense at that definitely is tone policing unless you're assuming he's calling you an idiot directly.

[Skjaldborg]

I see it's time to fall back on tone policing.

I don’t know about you but when I share a common goal with a team of people I don’t start berating them.

Save that for the genocide-apologists, AI-abusing concern trolls, and genuine fascists around here, imo.

- - - Updated - - -

Then you choose your words poorly. Because practically speaking we're talking about the reality of running in the USA and who would be a good idea to replace biden with. And in the USA if you are trying to run being black, gay, or a woman are in a practical sense very much real things that can impact a candidates changes to win and not for the better for national races like President.

I stand by what I said: being black, gay, or a woman does not effect your ability to be President in a practical sense. That is a true statement.

Become President? Yes. Unfortunately. But I’m not arguing the case for people like that. Nor do I think this is a place where we’re likely to be debating whether or not being in a minority equates to being less valuable.

[shimerra]

I stand by what I said: being black, gay, or a woman does not effect your ability to be President in a practical sense. That is a true statement.

Become President? Yes. Unfortunately. But I’m not arguing the case for people like that. Nor do I think this is a place where we’re likely to be debating whether or not being in a minority equates to being less valuable.

You don't get to be president unless you become president first. So again in a "practical sense" it is still an issue. Either way I'll chock it up to semantic and just point out that you're in the minority as far as understanding goes with the way you used the phrase given the context of this discussion.


You're arguing that Biden should be replaced because there are replacements who are more likely to actually become president. You then admit those factors might be issues in those candidates becoming president. You don't get to hand waive away the voters any more than you get to hand waive away the issues people might not have for voting for them considering that's the entire fucking point of these last few pages of discussion is that you think Biden is less likely to win than other options.

And the fact of the matter the exact people who are eating up the sleepy biden bullshit are exactly the kind of people who are more likely to have issues with one or more of those things which undermines your claim that they'd be better candidates to become president.

[Skjaldborg]

You don't get to be president unless you become president first. So again in a "practical sense" it is still an issue. Either way I'll chock it up to semantic and just point out that you're in the minority as far as understanding goes with the way you used the phrase.


You're arguing that Biden should be replaced because there are better replacements. You don't get to hand waive away the voters any more than you get to hand waive away the issues people might not have for voting for them considering that's the entire fucking point of these last few pages of discussion.

You’re right. Not that you were seeking my approval, but still - you got me there.

[Sunseeker]

Talk of replacing Biden is entirely contextual to who we are trying to pick up, who isnt already stuck in the same pickle with Biden than without.

If we pick Harris, who does Harris bring to the table that Biden doesnt? Harris is surprisingly unpopular with minorities(I know, its like being a hard on crime, by the book DA makes you unpopular with some groups!). But she IS a minority and a woman. But will those demographics vote for her on those merits alone? Biden is surprisingly popular with older blacks. Does actually, physically being black add enough to make it worth the tradeoff?

Gavin newsome is a slick young(relatively speaking) white guy. Hes Californian though and actively pushing policies which are easy to rile up the red, white and stupid base.

Hakeem is black, and male, but fairly dull. Supposedly he works with "across the isle" well, but do we want a guy whose biggest claim is being good at working with fascists?

Fundamentally, "polling better than Biden" exists in limited polls, and the numbers are not strikingly different. 2-3 percentage points is often within the margin of error on many polls. So Biden being down 3 and Harris up 3 could very well mean theyre both actually polling the same.

It all depends on who we are trying to court. RINOs? "Independants"? "Moderates"? Biden is your man. True left wingers are unreliable. The youth are unreliable. You want minorities and lefties, but fuck everyone else? AOC.

Quite frankly, the "other options" dont draw in the same broad crowd as Biden. Youll pick up a few outliers with any one of them. Those women who wont vote for anyone but a woman. Those minorities who wont vote for a white man. But itll cost you members of solid, reliable voting groups.

Right now we want to get people we KNOW arw going to vote. We dont need to attract people who may not show up anyway because we didnt tickle all their boxes.

[Kaleredar]

Talk of replacing Biden is entirely contextual to who we are trying to pick up, who isnt already stuck in the same pickle with Biden than without.

If we pick Harris, who does Harris bring to the table that Biden doesnt? Harris is surprisingly unpopular with minorities(I know, its like being a hard on crime, by the book DA makes you unpopular with some groups!). But she IS a minority and a woman. But will those demographics vote for her on those merits alone? Biden is surprisingly popular with older blacks. Does actually, physically being black add enough to make it worth the tradeoff?

Gavin newsome is a slick young(relatively speaking) white guy. Hes Californian though and actively pushing policies which are easy to rile up the red, white and stupid base.

Hakeem is black, and male, but fairly dull. Supposedly he works with "across the isle" well, but do we want a guy whose biggest claim is being good at working with fascists?

Fundamentally, "polling better than Biden" exists in limited polls, and the numbers are not strikingly different. 2-3 percentage points is often within the margin of error on many polls. So Biden being down 3 and Harris up 3 could very well mean theyre both actually polling the same.

It all depends on who we are trying to court. RINOs? "Independants"? "Moderates"? Biden is your man. True left wingers are unreliable. The youth are unreliable. You want minorities and lefties, but fuck everyone else? AOC.

Quite frankly, the "other options" dont draw in the same broad crowd as Biden. Youll pick up a few outliers with any one of them. Those women who wont vote for anyone but a woman. Those minorities who wont vote for a white man. But itll cost you members of solid, reliable voting groups.

Right now we want to get people we KNOW arw going to vote. We dont need to attract people who may not show up anyway because we didnt tickle all their boxes.

The problem with "electing Biden" around here, at least, seems to have absolutely nothing to do with policy. Which is... good, I guess, because I expect absolutely zero qualitative policy making decision differences between Biden and any of the other democratic... uh, "write ins," I guess.

The issue seems to be purely one of optics. And not that he is to old to do the job, but that he appears too old to be elected.

Unfortunately, by constantly harping on how old Biden looks and that he should step down because he looks old and the democrats will lose if he doesn't, they unfortunately help spread the talking point that Biden looks to old to be president.


If Biden steps down willingly, so be it. Same with some grievous health issue taking him out of the running. But baring that, I doubt some adroit and swift democrat-lead ouster to not only 1) create some system in which *insert candidate here* is put in a position to be chosen instead of Biden but to 2) ALSO have that candidate actually succeed in whatever dreamt-up vote takes place in which they unseat Biden, instead of Biden just defeating them in that vote, as he's done in every other democratic nominee election.

[Shadowferal]

People need to understand that voting for Biden is the same as voting for Harris.

[Endus]

1. The reason to replace him is that he’s not doing great in the polls and the pet issue plaguing him went on full display. And it’d be trivial to get a candidate that doesn’t share his one practical issue.

None of the other options are trending any better. The issue is not Biden.

2. Of course I knew Biden was old. Meanwhile, my great-grandpa was building grape arbors and digging trenches at 96, and my wife’s grandpa is still enjoying a life as professor emeritus of photojournalism at 94. I know (knew) people way older than Biden who had way more vitality. Age alone isn’t the issue.

"Vitality" is nonsense bullshit. You're talking about aesthetics. The President doesn't have to win foot races and boxing matches. He has to draft policy and provide leadership. It shouldn't matter how "vital" he seems, and I will condescend against anyone who thinks that shit's actually relevant.

3. Biden’s optics are clearly a problem, even if his admin has been great. You can have more than one problem simultaneously.

Again, deflecting to empty aesthetics rather than anything meaningful. This is what Republicans want you to do. Why are you falling for their propaganda?

4. a) you’re dangerously close to just name-calling and I gotta say that I don’t appreciate it. b) Sort of back to (3), it’s almost certainly not an issue with Democratic voters, but rather the unfortunately apathetic and under-informed independent/unregistered voters.

Oh no, tone policing. You continue to deflect.

Some things earn being insulted. Being so gullible as to fall for Republican propaganda efforts and work to worsen Democrats' chances in November qualifies as being insult-worthy, unless you're doing it on purpose, and then you're just lying to our faces, and that's worse. How do you think any of this is helping? You're pushing Biden, the primary winner and leading Democratic candidate in the polls, to step down for a worse-performing candidate. How does that make sense?

5. AOC and Bernie I agree with you on those two (though personally I’d vote for Sanders on policy and am hopeful AOC becomes a heavyweight in a few years as she continues to gain achievments). But there’s a huge difference between what «plagues» Biden and what «plagues» Harris and Buttigieg. You can’t be too black, female, or gay to be President in any practical sense.

How many black, female, or (openly) gay Presidents has the USA had? (I only add "openly" out of caution; that's not an accusation against anyone in specific)

I'll grant you Obama as an outlier, but let's not pretend it's shockingly out of scale with their demographic prevalence.

[Skjaldborg]

None of the other options are trending any better. The issue is not Biden.

"Vitality" is nonsense bullshit. You're talking about aesthetics. The President doesn't have to win foot races and boxing matches. He has to draft policy and provide leadership. It shouldn't matter how "vital" he seems, and I will condescend against anyone who thinks that shit's actually relevant.

Again, deflecting to empty aesthetics rather than anything meaningful. This is what Republicans want you to do. Why are you falling for their propaganda?

Oh no, tone policing. You continue to deflect.

Some things earn being insulted. Being so gullible as to fall for Republican propaganda efforts and work to worsen Democrats' chances in November qualifies as being insult-worthy, unless you're doing it on purpose, and then you're just lying to our faces, and that's worse. How do you think any of this is helping? You're pushing Biden, the primary winner and leading Democratic candidate in the polls, to step down for a worse-performing candidate. How does that make sense?

How many black, female, or (openly) gay Presidents has the USA had? (I only add "openly" out of caution; that's not an accusation against anyone in specific)

I'll grant you Obama as an outlier, but let's not pretend it's shockingly out of scale with their demographic prevalence.

1) Biden is the candidate who's actually got a poor showing that we can objectively see, so yeah he's the problem.

2) It shouldn't matter, but it does. Sorry about that.

3) Why are you assuming I fell for propaganda instead of watching an awful debate performance with my own two eyes? Was Biden's appearance at the debate a Republican scheme? Turns out that some people can disagree with you based on their own experiences and opinions.

4) And you continue to be overly incendiary to strangers on the internet. How do you think you're winning hearts and minds? I was already voting for Biden, or whoever else shows up against Trump (hey, remember that part?) And I'm coming to the Politics forum on MMO-Champ that I've been visiting for nearly 8 years. Do you think I don't know this place is hella anti-conservative? Have I not seen troll after sock puppet after bad actor dismantled here? How do you think you're helping? We're both shouting in an echo chamber. What we say here isn't convincing the Jacks and Jills of Ohio to vote blue or shift against fascism.

This is starkly similar to a friend-of-a-friend I knew back in 2015/2016. We used to hang out and play ultimate frisbee and go to beer/pizza/trivia nights in grad school in the same group. Then Trump declared his candidacy and we all agreed he was a danger and a fool, and would vote against him.

Except this guy went way further. Suddenly all the friends he'd known for years were carrying water for Nazis and we were never anti-Trump or anti-fascist enough for him because we weren't constantly talking about it. It wasn't enough that we went to Clinton and Sanders rallies or voted in primaries or were dissecting the ways Trump's candidacy was dangerous - if we weren't vandalizing cars with Trump stickers or physically protesting Trump rallies, we were the enemy. Obviously we all fell out of touch with the guy.

That's how you sound to me. Sorry for the "tone-policing." If you could actually vote in the USA I'd hope to see you next to me on election day, going against the Republican ticket. But since you can't do that, have fun labeling random civilians, that will never know we existed, as fascists. It's sure moving the needle over here. Despite the USA's two-party system and "winner take all" failure of an election, it's not enough that people are simply anti-Trump - they have to be the right kind of anti-Trump. A "with me or against me" ultimatum is only effective if you're a god or a cult leader.

[Endus]

1) Biden is the candidate who's actually got a poor showing that we can objectively see, so yeah he's the problem.

So who's doing better in the polls that you want to replace him with? You've got that data, right? Because you're the one who claimed his poll rate was the problem. If you don't have that data, I guess I can write that off as a non-argument.

3) Why are you assuming I fell for propaganda instead of watching an awful debate performance with my own two eyes? Was Biden's appearance at the debate a Republican scheme? Turns out that some people can disagree with you based on their own experiences and opinions.

Because his performance at the debate was such a minimal factor that the only reason people are obsessing about it is Republican efforts to find anything to fling at Biden. He sounded tired? Are you kidding me?

4) And you continue to be overly incendiary to strangers on the internet. How do you think you're winning hearts and minds? I was already voting for Biden, or whoever else shows up against Trump (hey, remember that part?) And I'm coming to the Politics forum on MMO-Champ that I've been visiting for nearly 8 years. Do you think I don't know this place is hella anti-conservative? Have I not seen troll after sock puppet after bad actor dismantled here? How do you think you're helping? We're both shouting in an echo chamber. What we say here isn't convincing the Jacks and Jills of Ohio to vote blue or shift against fascism.

I hope I'm getting people emotional and upset. I hope they're gonna try and justify their views to me, and fail. And then question those positions, because of that failure. Playing nice is what led the USA down into the pit you're in. If people are being bigoted fascists, you need to call them out as bigoted fascists, to their faces. You need to confront those shitty views, as publicly as possible. Every time they come up. Or they'll sneak back into society under new coded language and continue to prosper.

I don't care if people like me. Why should I care in the least about that? If you're being shitty and abusive to random innocent people, i'm gonna call that out. If that makes me the "bad guy" to you, you're just standing up for the feelings of those bigots. Be better.

I also dispute that his place is "hella anti-conservative". There's an attitude of little patience towards nonsense, and if conservative positions consistently get presented as abject nonsense, that's not on us. I keep asking conservatives to justify their positions, and they keep failing to have anything like an actual justification. That's not on me.

This is starkly similar to a friend-of-a-friend I knew back in 2015/2016. We used to hang out and play ultimate frisbee and go to beer/pizza/trivia nights in grad school in the same group. Then Trump declared his candidacy and we all agreed he was a danger and a fool, and would vote against him.

Except this guy went way further. Suddenly all the friends he'd known for years were carrying water for Nazis and we were never anti-Trump or anti-fascist enough for him because we weren't constantly talking about it. It wasn't enough that we went to Clinton and Sanders rallies or voted in primaries or were dissecting the ways Trump's candidacy was dangerous - if we weren't vandalizing cars with Trump stickers or physically protesting Trump rallies, we were the enemy. Obviously we all fell out of touch with the guy.

That's how you sound to me. Sorry for the "tone-policing." If you could actually vote in the USA I'd hope to see you next to me on election day, going against the Republican ticket. But since you can't do that, have fun labeling random civilians, that will never know we existed, as fascists. It's sure moving the needle over here. Despite the USA's two-party system and "winner take all" failure of an election, it's not enough that people are simply anti-Trump - they have to be the right kind of anti-Trump. A "with me or against me" ultimatum is only effective if you're a god or a cult leader.

You're literally whinging that people are being critical of your positions and views. And that's it. Perhaps I'm not sufficiently obsequious and sycophantic for you, but frankly, I'm not being particularly over-the-top, either. This exchange has, overall, been pretty polite. Believe me, I could be a lot more unpleasant. I just don't have any patience for protecting people's feelings when they're the ones behaving badly. If being told you're behaving badly makes you uncomfortable, take some ownership of that feeling, because it's not the person accusing you of bad behaviour's fault you're being taken to task. It's yours, for behaving badly in the first place.

This isn't about "with me or against me". I'm not saying you have to vote a certain way in primaries or whatever. I'm saying your choices express who you are, and that's grounds for criticism if those choices aren't defensible. And here, you're casting largely irrelevant aspersions on Biden to make him appear as a worse candidate, which is behaviour that only benefits Republicans and Trump specifically, by convincing Democrats to not turn out. There is no other benefit. You don't want Biden to be the candidate? Congrats, neither do I. But it's a democracy, and voters picked Biden, and that's how the system works.

[Sunseeker]

People need to understand that voting for Biden is the same as voting for Harris.

I disagree strongly. Policy wise? Yes, but short of AOC, Warren or Sanders, theyre all basically the same.

Biden however has political street cred with a number of groups Harris just doesnt, by no fault of her own. Biden has been around long enough to A: get things done, and B: befriend folks. Harris just hasnt had that time.

Harris also is not the Head of State currently. Shes close, but it is NOT the same. Theres been a lot of talk on the Right that, if Harris steps up, this was all just proof the Democrats were running a sham the whole time. Im not saying this is going to cost us anyone who would have voted Democrat anyway, but therea no need to feed then fire.

As to who she WILL cost, she will cost the Democrats the middle. Those kind racist, kinda sexist, might vote Trump if given the inclination. Yeah I mean it sucks to need or even want those groups, but hey, right now, winning is more important.