Joe Biden Announces Candidacy With Video
Joe Biden becomes 20th Democratic candidate.
*click to watch
I think the content of the video was a smart move.
GAMr. Biden clearly speaks of where Trump has poured salt on open wounds within this society. But what he considers an aberration, I see as for more systemic, requiring a reorientation of the "system" that conservatives want to maintain at all costs even if Trump is not representing its face.
Biden returns us to a Staus Quo whose boundaries were exceeded by Trump. But for me and more activist Democratic voters, advocating the "status Quo" before Trump is now not good enough.
The problem is more than just Donald Trump, it is the "system", itself. Joe may not have enough momentum to deal with the factions of the party who want much more change. After 4 years of Trump moderation, as defined as the desire of "fundamental" conservatives, won't do.
But before I risk more Trump beyond 2020, I will support Biden. I don't think that he is our best choice, but he won't rock the apple cart, so the bogeymen are OK with him.psst ... that's "rock the boat" or "upset the apple cart," pick one ;-)
Biden is just out of the gate, and relative to his party, he faces the problem you have mentioned; old white man status quo. As yet he hasn't expressed any other positions. It will be interesting to hear what his policy ideas are and see if there are enough moderates in the party to pull him through the primary.
If he wins the primary, I think there are enough anti-Trump voters to make it a race.
GAYou could be an "old white man" and still be viable with an activist attitude, Bernie Sanders is such a man.
While he may not be politically palatable for a number of reasons I would take him over Joe, any day.
It is not your color, but your position, are you willing to "upset the apple cart", or continue to placate the same villians that are at the root of our problems?I didn't mean to "rock the boat" Cred. That "old white man" and "status quo" was just an observation of a party hurdle I expect he will face.
I would prefer to see Sanders tripped-up by it than Biden.
GA
This video is a disgrace. He used race to start a presidential campaign and it can only go down from here. He is as out of touch as his 20 other companions...running on the Democratic side. The only person with some common sense and no baggage is Howard Schultz. He is running as an independent.
CNN just announce their poll that shows Biden surging with only Sanders hanging in there. All but Mayor Pete are losing percentage points.
Now wouldn't that be a kicker to watch ... a primary race between Biden and Sanders. It will be young Democrats against old Democrats. I wonder which is the larger segment.
GASanders will win by a landslide...assumingthe DNC doesn’t tip the scale.
"This video is a disgrace. He used race to start a presidential campaign and it can only go down from here..."
Almost like Deja vu' all over again isn't it jackclee.
GA
- Dont Tase Me Broposted 4 years ago
0Yes, we need a president with TDS!
For sure other TDS Democrats will vote for him but ...
But no unaflicted person wants a third term of Barack Obama - that’s why Hillary lost!I suppose his primary race statements will tell us if he is an Obama clone, but I don't think he is.
Do you have some Biden TDS quotes to share?
GAI was referring to his video, a false presentation of our president and wreaking of Trump Derangement Syndrome which I guess he thinks that TDS is what motivates the base he wants to get behind him.
Every time he’s spoken of Trump it’s been a false representation of him or his policies, wreaking of hatred for the man.
And which one of the Obama/Biden policies of that administration do you think he won’t advocate for? After all it was an Obama/Biden administration, was it not? He did Obama's bidding on everything Obama did, now he’s going to walk away from it? I don’t think so and if he does it will just make him look like the unprincipled opportunist he is.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/poli … lack-pride
He voted for DOMA, the Defense Against Marriage Act. But then remember the Obama team sent him out there to announce their change of heart on gay marriage. People have forgotten this. Everybody thinks Obama took the lead on that, but he didn’t. He sent Biden out there to do it.
But originally Biden voted for the Defense of Marriage Act and against gay marriage.
He opposed desegregation and busing to integrate the schools. He has a long history of harassing women, sniffing their hair and all of that.
He voted against Anita Hill. Did you know that? He voted for Clarence Thomas. He voted for Scalia to be on the Supreme Court.
He bragged about Delaware’s history as a slave state. Remember, he was walking into a 7-Eleven one day and started cracking jokes (imitating Biden), “Yeah, you can’t own one of these or even work in one of these unless you’re Indian.” Remember that? “Aw, that’s just old Joe.”
He plagiarized everything Neil Kinnock ever said, wrote, or thought.
Oh, and of course, remember Joe Biden, he’s in Missouri, some kind of a fundraiser, famous Missouri politician there is a paraplegic, sitting in a wheelchair. And Joe’s just going on flapping his gums, “Hey, let’s give it up for Chuck. Chuck, stand up, man, stand up there and let us get — oh, my God. Oh, oh, my, oh, my, oh, God. Chuck can’t stand up. Oh, my God. Let’s all stand up for Chuck!"
Joe Biden voted for the crime bill. He voted for the Iraq war.
And you, GA think this video is some sort of great start for Biden?
He’s doing a Hillary Clinton here. After this exhaustive announcement today in the video, he’s taking three days off to rest and recuperate and rejuvenate, and his first event is gonna be Monday in Pittsburgh.
GA, maybe you should rethink your position. Candace Owens couldn't disagree with you more
https://twitter.com/RealCandaceO/status … 7955403776I can see you feel strongly about Biden, Dont taze me bro, but I think you misunderstand my comment.
Regardless of whether I agree or contest your points, I still think his opening salvo--the video--was a smart move that will appeal to many moderate and Independent voters.
That you think it was a false representation of Pres. Trump is your choice, my perspective is that he was pretty much correct. Of course, we are talking about appearances here, not policies, so you are welcome to your opinion, but it is incredulous to me that you can deny the gist of the point.
With that in mind, I see little gain from expanding on that thought.
I will look at your Candice Owens link, but I remind you that my comment was relative to the announcement video, which may or may not reflect my opinion of Biden the candidate.
GAYeah, you may learn something from Candace but I doubt it.
However point taken GA, but I don't think my opinion of the video is my choice, it's factual.
To take the position that you can choose what the truth is, that you or I can choose what we want to be the truth is to forsake reality.
If Joe Biden was going to pick anything in the world as his reason to run for the Democratic presidential nomination, you would think he’d get creative. But no, he chose a well-known lie the media have been spreading since 2017.
His primary motivation to run for president was apparently not so much a belief he had the right ideas on healthcare or immigration or the judiciary, but a blatantly out-of-context quote from Trump that the media played out years ago.
After the violent clash in Charlottesville, where protests against the taking down of an historical statue of Confederate general Robert E. Lee morphed into an alt-right rally, Trump held a press conference wherein he was repeatedly asked about the incident.
Out of more than 15 minutes of questions and answers, the press glommed onto the three seconds where Trump said “You also had people that were very fine people on both sides.” It was made to look as though Trump had equated white supremacists who hijacked the event and liberals who were there to counterprotest.
This is precisely the opposite of what Trump said.
Trump made clear several times during the conference that he was referring specifically to those who had showed up to demonstrate against the statue’s removal and that he otherwise condemned the white supremacists.
What Trump said, as transcribed by the Los Angeles Times:
“I’ve condemned neo-Nazis. I've condemned many different groups. But not all of [the people at the rally] were neo-Nazis, believe me. Not all of those people were white supremacists, by any stretch. Those people were also there because they wanted to protest the taking down of a statue, Robert E. Lee.”
A reporter yelled out, “Both sides, sir?”
Referring to the so-called “antifa,” which was also present at the rally wearing masks, throwing paint and spraying urine, Trump said, “Well, I do think there's blame — yes, I think there's blame on both sides.”
But Trump also said, “You have some very bad people in that group. But you also had people that were very fine people, on both sides.”
He again specified that he was not referring to white supremacists, saying, “You had people, and I'm not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists, because they should be condemned totally. But you had many people in that group other than neo-Nazis and white nationalists” [emphasis added].
Later, he said, “If you look, they were people protesting very quietly the taking down of the statue of Robert E. Lee. I'm sure in that group there were some bad ones.”
What inspired Biden to run is a tired, old media lie and people can choose to think otherwise, like you, but if they do they are denying the truth, and why? The only reason I can think of is to feed their own TDS.That explanation of the "fine people" sound bite was well done Dont Taze Me Bro.
I am a firm believer in context, so although you might not have thought it obvious, I agree with you.
However, that does nothing to change my opinion that the entire context of the video was a strong and smart move to appeal to the moderates and Independents that view Trump exactly as the entire context of the video portrayed. Even though I agree with you about the "fine people" point, I agree with the point of Biden's video.
We are not choosing which truth to believe, but rather what we think is the truth. That is what an opinion is. Biden is going to run as the anti-Trump candidate, and that was the message of his announcement video,
GAWrong, it amazes me how people's ego won't allow them to concede their opinion is wrong when all the facts dictate it's wrong - using a lie to kick off, as the centerpiece, of a campaign only appeals to immoral, lying hateful people - that's who he is appealing to, the Democrats whose hatred of Trump is all that matters, and that's why he didn't make his pitch on any policy other than TDS!
I used to think a lie is a lie and truth is truth, no matter the perspective.
Would you humor me and quote verbatim one lie Biden told in the video? I will not debate it. I am simply curious what you perceive as "using a lie to kick off, as the centerpiece, of a campaign...."Pretty Panther,
I explained that in detail two replies ago, but if you didn't read it here is what I said:
Biden chose a well-known lie the media have been spreading since 2017.
His primary motivation to run for president was apparently not so much a belief he had the right ideas on healthcare or immigration or the judiciary, but a blatantly out-of-context quote from Trump that the media played out years ago.
After the violent clash in Charlottesville, where protests against the taking down of an historical statue of Confederate general Robert E. Lee morphed into an alt-right rally, Trump held a press conference wherein he was repeatedly asked about the incident.
Out of more than 15 minutes of questions and answers, the press glommed onto the three seconds where Trump said “You also had people that were very fine people on both sides.” It was made to look as though Trump had equated white supremacists who hijacked the event and liberals who were there to counterprotest.
This is precisely the opposite of what Trump said.
Trump made clear several times during the conference that he was referring specifically to those who had showed up to demonstrate against the statue’s removal and that he otherwise condemned the white supremacists.
What Trump said, as transcribed by the Los Angeles Times:
“I’ve condemned neo-Nazis. I've condemned many different groups. But not all of [the people at the rally] were neo-Nazis, believe me. Not all of those people were white supremacists, by any stretch. Those people were also there because they wanted to protest the taking down of a statue, Robert E. Lee.”
A reporter yelled out, “Both sides, sir?”
Referring to the so-called “antifa,” which was also present at the rally wearing masks, throwing paint and spraying urine, Trump said, “Well, I do think there's blame — yes, I think there's blame on both sides.”
But Trump also said, “You have some very bad people in that group. But you also had people that were very fine people, on both sides.”
He again specified that he was not referring to white supremacists, saying, “You had people, and I'm not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists, because they should be condemned totally. But you had many people in that group other than neo-Nazis and white nationalists” [emphasis added].
Later, he said, “If you look, they were people protesting very quietly the taking down of the statue of Robert E. Lee. I'm sure in that group there were some bad ones.”
Biden chose to make a well known media lie the launch of his candidacy, which says all you need to know about this charlatan!
"Bro" your comment about egos not allowing people to admit they are wrong is spot on.
We just disagree on whose opinion is wrong. Do you really not believe the sentiment Biden is appealing to is out there? I can only hope your answer is "no", whether you agree with that sentiment or not. Because I think everything from the news media to these forums proves you wrong.
And lies to kick off a campaign? That is the standard operating procedure for both parties, do you really think this time is any different, or even that it is a lie?
You may be confident in your opinion, but I think to deny that there are valid counter opinions is the epitome of ego. To deny there is any other possible opinion is too frequently a sign of a closed mind.
ps. I don't think I have an ego problem, but if you have "facts" to show otherwise I will try to incorporate them into my thinking.
GAGA, you are totally mischaracterizing my comment. You and people can have all the opinions you want, i am not advocating denying anyone their opinion. I’m simply dayong when shown youf opinion is wrong, and everyone’s different opinion can’t be right, to stivk to it is ddfinitely anbego problem and you have it. Once you express your opinion you can’t bring yourself yo admit it may be wring. I mean you say his video appeals to miderates? So what you are saying is a bold face known media created lie is what is necessary to “appeal to moderate and independant voters”
Then you either don’t have a very higb opinion of moderate and independent voters or else you are confusing them with rabid TDS democrat and anti Trump people.Since I don't do sarcasm very well, the only reply I can offer is that I think you are wrong on several accounts.
Which part of my opinion have you shown to be wrong?
To clarify the statement you attributed to me; I said I think the message of his video will appeal to many moderate and independent voters. And that "message" wasn't that he made that statement about Charlottesville. It was what that statement represented to many folks.
And speaking of ego ... you don't like the vehicle carrying the message so you deny the message. Do you think it is only Democrats that don't like Pres. Trump?
You also wrong about me not being able to change my opinion. I have frequently mentioned that it happened once before back in '78. ;-)
GA
Creepy Joe? Hmm... where have I heard that before?
GAIf that's going to be your line, you should find another photo.
Ex-Defense secretary’s wife says photo of her with Biden misleading
As Joe Biden faces intense scrutiny of his behavior toward women, the wife of former defense secretary Ash Carter has dismissed claims a picture of her with the former vice-president is an example of unwanted touching.
The #MeToo Story That Wasn’t Me by Stephanie Carter
- RTalloniposted 4 years ago0
Creepy does sum it up. When he thinks the sound is off his mouth is foul, but when caught out about it he tries to pull off a little boy who goofed act. Most women know how creepy that is, but there's creepier stuff than that to investigate.
Give hate no safe harbor? Too late, he's made his personal hatred for our president clear. He means give selective hatred safe harbor. His record of portraying himself as supporting Israel's ability to defend itself while cuddling with the previous president, B.O., is suspicious no matter which side of the aisle one stands on.
What he thinks the average voter is and what reality is are two very different things. He presents as being all about a round of pats on the back and everybody toasting good will together while maintaining a dismissiveness about the truth of each sides' motives/goals.
Joe's record speaks for itself, but reading his own words about his current positions indicates democratic debates are going to be interesting stuff. "No ordinary American cares about Constitutional rights." All one can say is ?
Besides everything else, including current lies, there's Benghazi. Heh, that pickpocket Sanders shot is SO on target.
Except that the only representation here that is based on reality is the Trump one.
I can agree with you that the Trump photo is based on reality.
Based on what Sanders has SAID, based on the vast sums of money Sanders' policies would cost Americans, I'm convinced that the Sanders photo is equally accurate.Sure you are, because any policy, program, or project that is enacted and funded by duly elected legislators using taxpayer money is theft, right? Or does that apply only to those you don't like?
When money is taken above and beyond what is legitimately needed for constitutionally authorized functions and is used to provide services for free that our government isn't authorized to provide, yeah, I've got a huge problem with that.
It always comes down to "who's got the deep pockets"? Who can we tax more heavily so that everyone can have free stuff? For the love of Pete, I'm surprised someone hasn't taken the position that the Federal government should provide everyone's food for free. Why not? We all need to eat.
Why not pay for everyone's electric bill, or mortgage? There's no reason to stop....."When money is taken above and beyond what is legitimately needed for constitutionally authorized functions and is used to provide services for free that our government isn't authorized to provide, ...."
Wow, has this happened before?Feeling your oats today aren't you PrettyPanther.
I was going to say something about the increased taxation that would be needed to fund Sander's, (or Warran's), ideas, but as I can see you are loaded for bear, I will just hunker down in the underbrush until it is safe to come out.
GA ;-)Yep. It's just being taken to new levels. Smaller government please, not larger.
Really? '"....provide services for free that our government isn't authorized to provide, ...."
"Isn't authorized" sounds like you mean unconstitutional, especially given your preceding phrase, "when money is taken above and beyond what is legitimately needed for constitutionally authorized functions."
So, if this has happened before, I assume it was declared unconstitutional. If not, then it is " authorized. "
So, if Bernie picks your pocket "above and beyond what is legitimately needed for constitutionally authorized functions" I'm sure the courts will remedy that, eh?"I'm sure the courts will remedy that, eh?"
It's always good to see the courts remedy such things. However, the cases must first go to the SCOTUS...am I right?
Really, the sarcasm is unnecessary. Okay?Sorry for the sarcasm. I'm just trying to get at how a future Bernie policy or program or project, enacted by a duly elected Congress (since they control the purse strings), would be the equivalent of picking your pockets.
Edit: I hate memes, especially dishonest ones. Can you tell?Thanks.
I'm being genuine when I say that my position on the constitution is this: It was designed as a small government document, which gave the state governments MANY powers and the federal government few powers, powers which are listed.
I understand that the SCOTUS has, through interpretation, has given the federal government powers that aren't listed there; it probably should have some of those powers, and 'shouldn't' have some of the others. The litmus as I look at SCOTUS decisions is this - how far from a small government, handling designated powers, does this decision take us?
The pickpocket thing is attached to my understanding of government noted here. A larger government MUST take more money from taxpayers, and does so primarily on the backs of those who have alot of money. Just like you and me, they've earned that money, and there's no 'legitimate' reason why they should have more taken from them than anyone else does. Yes, their tax rates are already higher, but should those rates go higher yet to fund federal activities that are large government, for which there is at least a STRONG constitutional argument against?
The states can do these things. Massachusetts has statewide healthcare. I'm all for individual states taking on these kinds of programs if voters in that state so choose - the programs will be closer to home and more easily monitored by voters! The money will, almost certainly, be spent much better than by the feds.
In terms of those memes, one is factual and one is paranoia. Kind of like the various screams from the right-wing about the left taking away everyone's gun. That was non-stop paranoia during the Obama administration and something that never happened and never could happen. It's a great scare tactic though. Scare everyone into thinking they'll lose their guns or their money.
That said, I'm tired of the Democrats promising free stuff as an incentive to vote for them, but at least they're open about it. Republicans given money away as well, but try to pretend that they don't.
- PrettyPantherposted 4 years ago0
Um, I thought we no longer care about a potential President's behavior toward women, only his policies. Hasn't that been the message for the last three years?
Biden wants us to believe that we are divided. He wants us to be against each other. That is not democracy that is conflict. He is twisting Trump's words and making it sound like Trump is a bad guy. I am not saying I am for Trump, but I know propaganda when I see it. Biden is spinning and spinning whole cloth lies. I never buy into this crap about we are divided. If we do, then we are divided. I am not in conflict with my neighbors nor my community. We work together, and we are united.
This simple minded 72 year old should really stick to his nonsensical babble about windmills causing cancer, or any number of other ridiculous claims until he's finally tossed out of our oval office on his ears, at least that retardation can be written off for what it is, but his ignorant Confusion, Delusion and or Hallucination about equating Nazis with those who Resist Nazis as he does on the following film, is just plain Dark and EVIL and of course unacceptable here in the USA:
He needs to pack his racist, nationalist loving bags and LEAVE this country if that's what his tiny little mind believes and of course there will be "Nationalists" around here who will desperately try and convince everyone that he never said that, or said something different than what every news organization caught on film: But that's just a LIE:
A total DISGRACE to the USA and what it stands for: Military Veterans Bravely died while fighting "Nationalists" in WW2, Guts and Strength a Yellow Coward like Donald would obviously have no CLUE about:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmaZR8E12bs
There are almost a MILLION different reasons why Joe Biden or any of the other intelligent, STRONG & Attractive Democratic Candidates will DESTROY Weakling Donny Trump in 2020 if of course he's not serving a prison sentence by then:
This Large Margin of VICTORY for Joe B will only GROW as we near 2020:
Biden 42%
Trump 34%Biden vs Trump? What a race. A polished used car salesman running against a multi level marketing wiz. Two sleazy old guys duking it out for the highest office in the free world.
American politics 101.
Actually, Donny should be GONE very soon either by Impeachment, Indictment, Institutionalized or RESIGNATION because of the future ramifications of INACTION, the latter probably being the least likely scenario considering he'll be INDICTED the second he does resign and NO: despite his little fantasy hallucinations where his little mind believes OUR Military will somehow come to his rescue when he's bounced out of OUR oval office, or "BIKERS" getting on their bikes and riding for him is just another symptom of his clear proclivity toward delusional episodes, an apparent result of mental illness:
Furthermore, Un-Indicted Co-Conspirators which legal experts say Donny Boy is, are PROHIBITED from running for president as far as I can tell:
In case you haven't noticed, the oval office clown charade has collapsed long ago, the only question now is how this whole pathetic yet destructive Circus of Hate comes to a conclusion:I'd be very appreciative if you never tapped reply on a post of mine.
Hi GA....Here's something I think we agree on. It does happen occasionally, lol.
I agree that the context of the Constitution is a great way to open up his campaign. This is due to Trump's continual praise for dictators, his attempts to obstruct justice, as outlined in the Mueller Report, and his verbal attacks on the judicial branch and attempts at ignoring the legislative branch. With the Republicans in Washington unwilling to stand up to Trump, It seems Democrats have the advantage when it comes to protecting the Constitution. I think this will help the Dems when the inevitable, "they're coming for your guns" line of attack arises. Republicans are going to have a difficult time convincing people they really care about the Constitution, no matter how they frame the gun debate.
As far as Charlottesville, I think this also makes sense. A big part of the narrative was how Trump was going to bring the country together, after the divisive Obama. The video highlights just how untrue that turned out to be, and I think that line of thought can win over some on-the-fence voters.
Ultimately, we could debate all day as to whether this appeals to moderates (or independents), but the only real evidence we will have is our opinions and any polling that may be done on this specific matter. I do think it's obvious that it will appeal to some and not to others.
I did just get done talking to a 2016 Trump voter-- not a fanatical Trump fan-- who stated this video, and narrative, was a "good idea" for Biden that could play out well for him.Thanks for the expansion of my message hard sun. You nailed it.
I think that since our first introduction here we have agreed more times than not on non-personality Trump issues.
GANow that you state it, we do seem to agree on the basics of many topics here. I'm sure we could find many things to debate though.
You got me thinking on this one, and I wanted to bring together my thoughts in what I hoped was a cohesive manner, lol.
I don't think any person who leaned conservative could have brought the country together. I think Obama, through maybe no real fault of his own, led the far left to think they were fairly close to main stream. Pandora's box was opened for any far left ideology. I don't know why anyone thought Obama's election was revolutionary or was going to usher in the golden age of far left ideals being implemented without angst. He was a well spoken guy who was running against a couple of idiots. You or I could probably have faired well against that Republican ticket.
Trump's election was indicative of too much, too fast, with Hillary not representing brakes to the process.
Biden will cause the democrats to fail in this election. How different is he from Trump, personality wise? He comes off as a sexual harasser, prone to verbal gaffs and a guy who takes zero responsibly for his behavior.
I'm hoping some middle of the road Republicans join the fray and attempt to wrest the helm from Trump and we get blindsided by a real contender in the other side. Nothing has emerged on the democratic side yet that appears to be experienced enough or presidential enough to make me look twice.Hmm..your assessment on Obama and the Pandora's box seems mostly accurate to me. I think the "revolutionary" label was in part due to him being so well-spoken. He was adept with the slogans such as "Yes we can" and "change we can believe in." I saw him in person at a big 2007 primary rally, and the energy he generated was conducive to the people thinking something revolutionary was happening, even without many specifics.
I do recall thinking that he took the tax the uber-rich and curb the corporate power type rhetoric further than other candidates had in the past. This could have fueled the "revolutionary" feeling and helped open the "Pandora's box" as well. Of course, we also have his race, though that has nothing to do with policy. Oh yes, and your no conservative-leaning politician could do it comment seems true and may be a reflection of the biggest reason behind the thought that Obama was revolutionary....He sure wasn't George Bush.
I agree that Trump represented too much too fast, and I would ad that it was too much of nothing but chaos, rabble rousing, and fear mongering. As did Obama, Trump tapped into an undercurrent of frustration. However, Trump is using that energy to deliberately divide IMO, while Obama did have a genuine knack for governing, an understanding of the Constitution, and was at least able to represent the US with some dignity.
Yes, Hillary was more of the same, and Biden may be as well. However, "How different is he from Trump, personality wise?" Well, I can see where you're coming from a bit on this, but I genuinely think a bit of bravado--if that's what you're referring to--will only help defeat Trump in the general. But, I'm not sure his personality is good for a primary with an energized far left.
I'm not sure, at all, who I'll vote for in the Dem primary, or the general. Of course, I am sure I will not vote for Trump. There could be a middle-of-the-road Republican able to garner my support, but he or she would have to differ from several of the party platform tenants."... There could be a middle-of-the-road Republican able to garner my support ...
And there lies our problem hard sun. No matter the wishes of 'the masses' of the Republican Party, the party will put its support behind the incumbent. A renegade Republican candidate will have no party support. They might as well run as an Independent.
But, if we were to indulge in wishful thinking, wouldn't that be a great thing, (for the electorate), if an Independent was strong enough to force either party to consider them? Sander's almost did it - and we see the party's reaction to that.
Prior to Biden's announcement, when it was just 'what if' thinking, I was considering that if the choice were between Biden or Trump I would be a Biden voter. Now, after Biden's first campaign stop, I am not so sure.
GA
Live to Learn, the rest of your comment just vanished when I read this...
"... indicative of too much, too fast..."
That is a point that I truly believe is salient and pertinent to where we are today. And, it is a point I have made before.
I do not think Conservatives are against all change. I think it is the rate of change that is important. I am reminded of the old expression; "I gave you an inch and you took a mile"
Contrary to your thought about a Conservative bringing the nation together I would disagree. I think a Reagan, (wait for the explanation), or a Kennedy, (ok, not really a conservative, but by today's Democrat standards?), might be up to the task.
My point is not the mechanics of what either would do, policy-wise, but what either would do as appealing to the best in us - which I think is the only way to unite our country.
I see neither of those presidents as wizards of the mechanics of government. Neither as policy wonks or brainiacs of details, but both knew what our country needed and how to portray that need to the citizens.
In other words, how to bring our country together.
GAWhat is best in us? Do you think people agree on that anymore? I hate to sound jaded but the left has started their purges. Right doesn't matter as long as you can convince enough on Twitter that you should represent the moral high ground. They are like a bunch of old church ladies on crack.
I know the question wasn't meant for me, but here's my answer anyway. What's best in us? I think this could start by not calling an entire group of people known as "the left" names such as "a bunch of old church ladies on crack." I definitely lean left and share your view that some of those on the left are going way too far. I've also, in the past, referred to Trump supporters with the same type of name-calling. However, we are not helping our country by labeling entire groups of people with hateful terminology. We are helping those who want to see the US torn apart.
I'm not talking about you, or the average Democrat. I honestly don't believe the average Democrat is far left. I think most of us are middle of the road, leaning a little more one way or the other.
Church ladies on crack refer to those who appear to believe they own the moral high ground and refuse dialogue, choosing instead to condemn any who disagree as Nazi or racist.I understand the sentiment.The two extremes feed off one another. I think Trump wants people to think all potential Democrat voters are these "ladies" you refer to. It does seem this narrative helps him in an election, though I think it also serves to divide us further. Of course, the Dems often use the same tactic.
I think it is a valid point, to some extent. Although, I see a trend now where the madness may be scaring enough democrats to step up and get a handle on the craziness in an attempt to force the angle of descent to the far left into a controllable decline. Although, I don't see a well planned runaway truck ramp in near view. I think of Obama's warning democrats needed to avoid being a circular firing squad. That, to me, implies unity of idea if not unity of vision of the path to achieve it.
I honestly think many moderates who lean Democrat are deluding themselves by not seeing the threat posed by the far left they attempt to tolerate and embrace as brethren. Basically, the far left are ideologues, in my opinion, who don't see these moderates as equals. They've already laid out their battle plan to push them to the back of the bus."I think of Obama's warning democrats needed to avoid being a circular firing squad. That, to me, implies unity of idea if not unity of vision of the path to achieve it."
I see this as Obama asking the far left to slow its roll for the sake of the 2020 elections and the party. Of course, my interpretation could be a bit off.
"Basically, the far left are ideologues, in my opinion, who don't see these moderates as equals. "
I can't really argue this. I think the question comes in as to exactly how we describe the far left and far left policies. One thing indicative of the far left, IMO, is that it absolutely wants nothing to do with controlling illegal immigration. I also think there is a faction that would go further with gun control laws than the centrist Democrats would like. At this point, I don't think some form of universal healthcare (which I am for) is that far left of center.
However, your point about not seeing moderates as equals is one aspect that makes me pause before casting votes for a candidate simply because they are a Democrat. There is an attitude that, if you're not lock-step in line with the far left agenda, then you're a morally inferior racist, misogynist, capitalist scum, etc. If they push us to the back of the bus, I think the Dems are in big trouble come 2020. As you likely know, I could never vote for Trump, assuming he will be the Republican nominee, but I could vote for an independent or refrain from voting for President altogether. I doubt I'm the only anti-Trumper to feel the same way.Trump only got my vote because the alternative was, for me, unpalatable. I'd love to see an independent or third party candidate enter the race.
I think moderate democrats and moderate Republicans are probably more alike than different. I would support national heath care if a clear plan for cost were outlined and it wouldn't bankrupt us.
Studies I've seen show many Republicans supportive of social programs so I doubt I'm alone. We just want to see that coupled with fiscal responsibility."I see this as Obama asking the far left to slow its roll for the sake of the 2020 elections and the party. Of course, my interpretation could be a bit off."
This is a major problem in my eyes. Our politicians and "leaders" are far more concerned with the strength of the party, and what is good for it, than they are with the good of the country. The party, and their own job security, have a much higher priority than the country does, and it shows.
And I do not limit the "problem" to one party or the other; both parties are equally guilty of working towards increasing party power more than the needs of our nation.Yes..I agree to an extent; especially when it comes to caring more about job security than the country's needs. But, Obama doesn't have to worry about that. We could also see this as Obama thinking that the Dem party's platform is better for the nation than the other parties'.
We could see it that way, yes. Or we could see it as the party paying Obama to support the platform and the people on it.
Hard to believe even of an idealist like Obama, that never did like his country, actually believes that the socialism offered by Dem's is good for the country. One has only to look at other socialistic countries to see the long term effect, after all.You already saw it that way. Well, he was a Democrat after all so I don't see how him supporting moderate Democrats would be hard to believe???
We could bend over backwards to justify anything thing Trump does and says and do the opposite for Obama. We could say I'm rubber and you're glue, it would be about as productive. Take careWhy are you spewing this nonsense, Wilderness? It is the rubbish on the Right that said "Obama" does not like his country just because the Rightwinger did not care for his policies?
It is this kind of stuff that turns me away from the Rightwinger specifically and from conservatives in general.
As for the level of socialism in this society and such, did we not say that we all have differing tolerances on the subject? Why is it that your point of view or standard is the absolute? I don't buy it. People with this approach and attitude always gather my suspicion right away.
You are too cynical Live to Learn. Nationally we saw "the best in us" after 9/11. And we see it locally after every major tragedy.
GAAnd it is that fact I fall back on for hope.
I watched part of Biden's first campaign stop today. In Pittsburg, I think.
It was not impressive. He was vague but seems to be taking pieces of all the other candidate's issues; $15 minimum wage, healthcare for all, affordable, (free?), college/trade education/training, tax the rich, etc.
As a first impression, I think it was disappointing.
GAI'll have to watch some of his campaign speech soon. He will have to separate himself, in some way other than I was Obama's VP, in order to win the primary IMO.
His past statements on marijuana lead me to believe he will have to change that stance or he won't have chance in Hades.I think, if you had hopes for Biden, you will be disappointed hard sun. I was.
I didn't get the impression he was riding on Obama's coattails, I got the impression he is an anti-Trump Pinata - full of Progressive Left candy, but no meat for substance.
GAC'mon, GA, seriously?
Leaning left is always the tactic during the primaries and then the candidate swings back to the middle. It's very predictable.
I was not particularly impressed by what Joe had to say, but it was interesting that he seemed to have the presence of a man who assumed he would win the primary and was going after Trump rather than the 20 or so people he needs to beat.
If I was Biden, I would take Trump's "Sleepy Joe" vitriol and use it at every campaign stop - make it mine. Everything out of Trump's mouth, I would try to turn to my advantage and own it.Good point Crankalicious. However, if GA's perception is the perception of Democrat voters, going into the booth, will it be enough to win a primary? After all, Joe does have to overcome his race, gender, and age with a faction of the Democrat voters.
That might be good advice "Bro" Pres. Trump certainly does seem easy to goad. I wonder if all the news talk about the president's aides telling him to lay off the twitter attacks is true. It would support your point.
GA
Got to love seeing so much hypocrisy here.
So we're upset now when a candidate mischaracterizes another one? Did Trump supporters jump onstage to correct him when he spewed that false narrative pertaining to abortion laws he made in Green Bay a few days ago? No? Didn't think so. Partisan outrage.
Biden gets into people's personal space, but conservatives believe it makes him come off as 'a sexual harasser.' Talk about a mischaracterization. Maybe we should just go back to ignoring the 23 accusations against Trump of sexual misconduct.
And the kicker is that conservatives here are outraged Biden used race to kick off his campaign. Considering the xenophobia that Trump uses on a daily basis, to convince the base that foreigners are criminals, rapists, and terrorists, I find that so rich.
When you hold your own candidate to such standards, we might take you a little more seriously when you poor little Trumpflakes need to whine.If you voted for and continue to support Trump, don't be surprised if we laugh in your face when you mention any of the following:
Lying
Sexual harassment
Sexual assault
Incivility
Cowardice and subservience to our enemies.
Pitting people against each other through fear mongering about race, ethnicity, religion, sexuality, or gender.
When y'all boarded the Trump Train, and stayed on despite repeated instances of the above behaviors, you abdicated any legitimacy or moral ground to disqualify any candidate or elected official for any of those behaviors or characteristics.
Of course, you can criticize, and I'm sure you will, but you will all look and sound like pathetic, whining hypocrites, because none of the current candidates will ever remotely come close to the disgusting lying and depravity that is Donald Trump.
- PrettyPantherposted 4 years ago0
Joe Biden, addressing the first crowd of his official campaign on April 29th, in Pittsburgh, promised to overcome the mistakes made by the Democrats in 2016. Three years ago his party failed to fire up blue-collar workers, especially in the Midwest. Mr Biden said he would focus on the power of organised labour and ordinary, middle-class folk—the backbone of America, he said, from teachers to health-workers to plumbers—who do extraordinary things. “I am a union man, period”, he vowed, earning cheers of “We want Joe!” He stood in a union hall, before a “Biden Workers for America” poster, amid members of a firefighters’ union that had just endorsed him.
He also said his campaign would focus on the small towns and struggling parts of Pennsylvania that Democrats neglected so badly in 2016. Democrats tend to do well in cities and suburbs, but Mr Trump fired up large numbers of rural voters, turning Pennsylvania Republican in the first presidential race since 1988. Mr Biden had chosen Pittsburgh to launch his campaign, he said, because: “If I’m gonna beat Donald Trump in 2020, it’s going to happen here”.
https://www.economist.com/democracy-in- … king-class Well, 60+ tweets and retweets about Biden in less than 24hrs. I think someone is worried.
I predict that Sanders will come out on top of this heap of democratic dunces/candidates.
I hope so anyway.
He is the top demodunce in my view!
I would love to see Trump put him on the stool in the corner with his dunce cap on.Disgusting. Highly inappropriate.
I'm embarrassed to admit I laughed heartily.So an analogous meme for Trump would show normal people shaking hands and Trump grabbing their genitals. Right?
The thing that's nice about Trump is that we now don't have to worry about a candidate's sexual proclivities or really discuss them. Trump supporters can certainly, and perhaps legitimately, take issue with Biden's touchiness, but I'm not sure it works to their advantage or disadvantage. In fact, it seems like rather a dumb issue to hang one's hat on.I'm not a Trump supporter. And your candidate's still creepy. So it's okay for your guy to be a creeper as long as the opposing guy is a creeper too.
Everything Biden does has been in plain sight while Trump is grabbing pu**y and having sex with porn stars as a private citizen. While I don't think you should be putting your hands on anyone for any reason, doing so out in the open is quite a bit different than doing so in private.
Has Biden been accused of anything? Not to my knowledge. There was definitely one woman who came forward who said his touching was unwanted, so Biden needs to learn times have changed. The two situations are simply not equal.
That said, to answer your question, Biden's "creepiness" is negated by Trump's, realistically speaking.
And I was just using "Trump supporter" generically, not accusing you of being one, though such memes suggest support for Trump. I would also not say that Biden is my candidate. He's just one of many.If it's these two running against each other, Anericans will be "groping" for answers.....
I'm much more put off by how Biden treated Anita Hill and how he's handled that since.
What are you talking about. If it is a choice between Trump and Biden, there is no contest.
We'll be "groping" for answers.....I'll leave you to figure out what I mean!
If the economy remains strong, it will be hard for the Dems to unseat Trump. They will need to make the point that the middle class has not benefitted from the economy or that the gains are artificial. I'm not saying either one of those things is necessarily true, but that will have to be their argument.
No, there is no argument on the economic front. If there is a choice between free market capitalism and democratic socialism...Trump will win by a landslide.
Even the average worker with their 401k or IRA can see the benefits under Trump that last 2.5 years.
The only person not profiting from this economic boom are the underclass, the people who receive government entitlements on fixed income, and don’t pay any taxes.The same could be said for Obama at the end of his first term. The economy was chugging along and everyone was seeing significant improvements in their 401k and IRA.
However, Trump may be undone by other factors of his own making. All he needs to do between now and the election is run on the economy and ignore everything else.
And your choice: between democratic socialism and free market capitalism is a false dichotomy continuously pushed by the fear-mongering right. Sure, the Dems talk about government benefits on the campaign trail, but when it comes time for the election, they move firmly to the center. Every Democratic president for the last nearly 100 years has been an economic centrist.
I think if Bernie wins the nomination, a right-winger could legitimately worry about democratic socialism, but not really with anyone else.Perhaps not. Right now though, it SEEMS like the others are trying to out-Bernie Bernie. Fear mongering won't work so well if there's a moderate Democrat. We'll see how th he others shape up, but at the moment they LOOK like far leftist wackos.
If you've been following politics for the last thirty or so years, probably more, this isn't a surprise. The Dems start by trying to figure out how many presents they can give people and then, once they settle on a candidate, work their way back to the middle for the general election.
That said, no Democrat since FDR has been anything other than an economic centrist.I can go with most of what you've said. Only thing I'll readily contend with is economic centrist aspect. Well okay, centrist, but I assert that the economic "center" has nudged left. Clinton was primarily economic center, but he went further left with universal healthcare. Arguably, Obama also moved left with Obamacare, though the takeover wasn't complete.
Related Discussions
- 81
Biden Is He In The Early Stages Of Dementia?
by Sharlee 2 years ago
An Albatross In The Room.Many spent the last four years criticizing President Donald Trump in no small part for his mental state. At this juncture it is necessary we take a serious look at Biden's frequently, confused, irritability, and inability to complete a coherent thought. it's very clear that...
- 21
Looks Like Joe Biden is Going to Run for President
by ga anderson 5 years ago
In a recent interview, Joe Biden says his family wants him to run for the presidency.As a non-affiliated conservative-minded fella, I would vote for him.As a Maryland resident that had meetings with him when he was just a Delaware Representative, (beers and Elk's Club Boy Scout dinners), I would...
- 110
Is Joe Biden coming off as a "pusillanimous"?
by Credence2 21 months ago
Conservatives were quick to blame President Biden for our rather awkward exit from Afghanistan, I don't blame him as his predecessor set the stage and props that Biden had no choice except to follow through.I do not blame Biden for the inflation that we are experiencing as most of the...
- 104
Joe Biden Accused of Sexually Assaulting Aide in 1993
by Allen Donald 4 years ago
I had to post this since it appeared in a reputable left-wing source:https://www.huffpost.com/entry/joe-bide … 6a7a2a88f2This is serious stuff and I don't care how long ago the accusation happened. It will be worth every Democrat's time to follow this issue and then decide if they can...
- 51
Trump's documented lies chronicled by the New York Times. A report.
by Kathleen Cochran 6 days ago
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/202 … ruths.htmlDocumentation of Trump's lies written as a news article - not opinion. (I know. It's NYT - highly suspicious in spite of its multiple Pulitzers) Still. Your thoughts? By Angelo Fichera April 7, 2024Since the beginning of his political...
- 121
Will Joe Biden Debate President Trump Before the Upcoming Election?
by savvydating 3 years ago
Will Biden's Party choose to keep him out of the debates rather than have him go through the rigors of elucidating his public policy proposals, etc., in a formal debate against Trump, in lieu of recent polls in which up to 55% of Democrat voters believe Joe Biden may be in the early stages of...