Things seem to be going quite well for Joe Biden

[Hank Kingsley 21,006]

Biden proposes decriminalization of marijuana and expunging prior convictions, which is good. But he needs to stop talking about the drug like it's still the 80s or something. He should propose full legalization at the federal level, and I hope he's pushed on it. 

 

[Hank Kingsley 21,006]

I'd like a definition on "Green New Deal". Are we talking about Sanders/AOC's specific plan? Warren's? 

Where is the line drawn for what's considered acceptable or unacceptable action on climate change by a Biden administration? 

 

[Pam Cummings 9,653]

14 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Biden proposes decriminalization of marijuana and expunging prior convictions, which is good. But he needs to stop talking about the drug like it's still the 80s or something. He should propose full legalization at the federal level, and I hope he's pushed on it. 

 

Yeah we have people openly smoking weed on TV now. It's time to let that one go.

[Hank Kingsley 21,006]

I understand the defeatist attitudes from Bernie progressives when it comes to Biden's past record and using that as a prediction for what his administration will do.  They use Bernie's consistent track record as a reason to vote for him, so it's natural to use an opponent's record against them.

But the optimist in me doesn't really believe Biden is running for President to enact his longtime, personal beliefs. He would effectively be a placeholder president. He only ran because he felt like he was the best option to get Trump out of office. 

If Joe wins the election, I think he becomes a proxy for what the rest of the Dem party wants to enact. And while a lot of progressives argue that Dems are the same establishment, conservative party they have been for decades, I don't agree.  

[tantric superman 4,667]

1 hour ago, bad_teammate said:

Bidenism is going to hurt a lot of people.

Of course it is.   Governments hurt people.  Always.

Biden is going to hurt a lot of people less than Trumpism.

If you don't believe that, do whatever you fucking want.  Assuming he doesn't die between now and the election, all criticisms of his proposals certainly should be discussed.  If they are hysterical, or made in a way that helps Trump, well, fuck them. 

Edited April 11, 2020 by tantric superman

[bad_teammate 13,222]

3 hours ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

“Bidenism.” That’s rich. 

Why? Do you think Joe Biden doesn't have a worldview? After decades in politics he's just an empty vessel?

1 hour ago, Hank Kingsley said:

I understand the defeatist attitudes from Bernie progressives when it comes to Biden's past record and using that as a prediction for what his administration will do.  They use Bernie's consistent track record as a reason to vote for him, so it's natural to use an opponent's record against them.

But the optimist in me doesn't really believe Biden is running for President to enact his longtime, personal beliefs. He would effectively be a placeholder president. He only ran because he felt like he was the best option to get Trump out of office. 

If Joe wins the election, I think he becomes a proxy for what the rest of the Dem party wants to enact. And while a lot of progressives argue that Dems are the same establishment, conservative party they have been for decades, I don't agree.  

I respect optimism.

My view of Biden is of old dogs and new tricks. And if he's a placeholder, he's a placeholder for what?

I'd like to understand your reasoning here. Why do you think the Democratic Party has changed significantly?

1 hour ago, tantric superman said:

Assuming he doesn't die between now and the election, all criticisms of his proposals certainly should be discussed.  If they are hysterical, or made in a way that helps Trump, well, fuck them. 

Yep, we are fully in the stage where even criticizing Joe Biden means you love Donald Trump.

Brains as smooth as bowling balls.

[workswithseed 2,109]

5 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Why? Do you think Joe Biden doesn't have a worldview? After decades in politics he's just an empty vessel?

I respect optimism.

My view of Biden is of old dogs and new tricks. And if he's a placeholder, he's a placeholder for what?

I'd like to understand your reasoning here. Why do you think the Democratic Party has changed significantly?

Yep, we are fully in the stage where even criticizing Joe Biden means you love Donald Trump.

Brains as smooth as bowling balls.

Yeah, kinda

[bad_teammate 13,222]

I mean if someone is going to go into a thing and say, "I know I'm ignoring all of history and I'm just buying a sales pitch. I know I'm probably being lied to, but I want to believe" then I respect that, absolutely.

The problem I have is with, "I know I'm ignoring all of history and I'm just buying a sales pitch. I know I'm probably being lied to, but I want to believe and fuck you if you choose to remain skeptical based on evidence and reason. You're an enemy."

[DixonHur 11,349]

12 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

After decades in politics he's just an empty vessel?

He's always been an empty vessel, but at this stage an empty vessel sounds like paradise

[bad_teammate 13,222]

1 minute ago, DixonHur said:

He's always been an empty vessel...

This is just ahistorical. You're just wrong. Joe Biden has had a discernible worldview that he actively fought for for decades and decades.

Obama worked as an empty vessel because he had virtually zero history. The same for Trump.

The only way you think Joe Biden is an empty vessel is if you are outright lying to yourself and others. Which I know is a popular thing to do in the face of the unrelenting hell that comes from openly acknowledging the truth of the situation we're in, but come on. Maybe we should have a "Biden 2020 - Boosterism Only" thread where people can tell themselves Joe Biden is a really thick-skinned egoless guy who just goes along with whatever the mainstream of the party wants. I'd stay out of it, I swear.

But that is the precise opposite of his record. He has strong beliefs and he's happy to fight against the power structures and mainstream of his party in their advocacy. Which isn't a bad trait for a politician to even have!

And winning a primary resoundingly isn't going to make him less confident in himself.

[DixonHur 11,349]

I'm not talking about his worldview... perhaps I should have said his head is an empty vessel.

But we have two real choices...a likable idiot, or an evil, lying, self-serving, egomaniacal idiot.  I will pull the lever for the former 10 out of 10 times.

[Hank Kingsley 21,006]

1 hour ago, bad_teammate said:

My view of Biden is of old dogs and new tricks. And if he's a placeholder, he's a placeholder for what?

I'd like to understand your reasoning here. Why do you think the Democratic Party has changed significantly?

I'd say he's a placeholder until there's a younger, more progressive Democratic candidate that can build a broad and winning coalition. Whether we like it or not, there are people that only care about getting Trump out of office in 2020. I think the candidate should be more than that, and so do you. But Biden has at least shown the willingness to listen to the younger generations and possibly adopt more progressive policies. 

Why do I think the Democratic Party has changed significantly?  Every major candidate in this race is to the left of Obama's policies. Just because leftists call Pete, Beto, Kamala, etc.  "neolibs" and "Republicans" doesn't mean it's true. Acting like the party hasn't changed sure seems like a slap in the face to Bernie. Has he or has he not moved the party left? I think he has. And very quickly I might add.

If Biden wins the general election, I don't think the Democratic Party or the majority of voters are going to fall asleep and let Biden turn back the clock. There's no going back and he will be held accountable. The question becomes how quickly can we actually enact the change needed. 

[Bozo_Casanova 26,520]

1 hour ago, bad_teammate said:

Why? Do you think Joe Biden doesn't have a worldview? After decades in politics he's just an empty vessel?

I think everybody has a worldview. I just don't think they matter much.  But to your second question, yes, he's pretty much an empty vessel. He's running to restore boring normalcy. If he's got a majority in both houses he'll sign what they give him. I have high hopes that will include a real version of Universal Healthcare and marijuana legalization at the Federal level and maybe even a job guarantee. And even if the GOP holds the Senate we'll see a restoration of Obama era  regulatory posture on most things. 
That was the real problem with Bernie Sanders, you know - the damage he would do to House and Senate races, not because of ideological bullshit, but because it would have been all about him (this was an issue with Obama also). Biden gives Democratic candidates the space to drive a locally resonant message. An MJ Hagar or  Amy McGrath can define their own brand with Biden. With Bernie they couldn't, because he's (or rather, many of his supporters are)  at war with what they represent. 

Edited April 11, 2020 by Bozo_Casanova

[bad_teammate 13,222]

4 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

I'd say he's a placeholder until there's a younger, more progressive Democratic candidate that can build a broad and winning coalition.

I don't get this. I'm not trying to be obtuse here, but I don't understand the mechanics of how this works.

So in order to hold a place for other Democrats he... ran against other Democrats? Bernie runs pretty much as strong as Joe against Trump, so why not just endorse Bernie in May 2019 and say, "Come on, guys, let's bring this one home!"? Why not get behind Liz or Pete super early in the process and work to build their campaigns?

I get that Trump is this supposedly unique threat but think about this: What was the last election that wasn't sold as "the most important election of our lives"?

So 2024 is coming round... does Joe just not run again?

Of course he does, so 2028 is here and the Republicans are building up someone like Josh Hawley. Is NOW the time for the Democratic establishment to get full-in behind a young progressive like AOC? Or would they just say, "Hawley will reverse all the gains of the Biden era! We have to unite behind a moderate like Joe because we know it works!"?

The Democratic establishment will never accede power willingly to anyone who threatens to loosen the purse strings of the billionaire class. It will never, ever happen.

Think about this, as well: When have you ever heard Joe Biden himself talk about how he's just an empty placeholder? Or anyone in his campaign? It's not even like we're basing this on his own position on his own candidacy, but anonymous speculation meant to appease us. It's a sales job, and an obvious one.

Quote

But Biden has at least shown the willingness to listen to the younger generations and possibly adopt more progressive policies. 

Has he shown a willingness to listen to younger generations? Because from what I've seen he's very openly hostile to youth and young people that challenge him.

Quote

If Biden wins the general election, I don't think the Democratic Party or the majority of voters are going to fall asleep and let Biden turn back the clock. There's no going back and he will be held accountable. The question becomes how quickly can we actually enact the change needed. 

Isn't that the entire point of a Biden candidacy? Just beat Trump so we can go back to brunch?

While it is undoubtedly true that Bernie has moved the party left, that can be undone. All of the policy progress spurred on by the left from 2015 to today can be annihilated. It's not like leftward progress is just some undeniable fact of history.

If we have a Democratic president who is openly hostile to left-progressive policy and threatens to veto it even if it gets to him, that could kill progress very easily.

The only way we avoid killing that movement is by keeping it alive. Unfortunately, centrists and even liberals are bizarrely demanding that the movement die; that activists stop complaining and demanding things Joe doesn't want. If we're not supposed to demand progressive change and criticize anti-progressive energy, what are we supposed to be doing?

10 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

If he's got a majority in both houses he'll sign what they give him.

You're asking me to not believe his words.

That's not acceptable. I will never be a Trumper, not even a center-left flavored one.

Quote

That was the real problem with Bernie Sanders, you know - the damage he would do to House and Senate races, not because of ideological bullshit, but because it would have been all about him (this was an issue with Obama also). Biden gives Democratic candidates the space to drive a locally resonant message. An MJ Hagar and a Amy McGrath can define their own brand with Biden. With Bernie they couldn't, because he's at war with what they represent. 

What about progressive down-ballot candidates that are hung out to dry by a right-leaning presidential candidate? Do they not matter?

This is only ever an argument for Democrats to turn into Republicans. I reject this horseshit.

[bad_teammate 13,222]

What would clarify a lot of this is having a candidate who regularly made substantive speeches that were easy to listen to and follow, but a key component of the Hidin' Biden strategy is creating just an empty space you can project your hopes into.

[Hank Kingsley 21,006]

15 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

I don't get this. I'm not trying to be obtuse here, but I don't understand the mechanics of how this works.

So in order to hold a place for other Democrats he... ran against other Democrats? Bernie runs pretty much as strong as Joe against Trump

It's exhausting trying to converse with you, but I'll go ahead and respond but stop right at the above. 

Getting real tired of the "Bernie beats Trump" talking point over and over again. I don't give a shit about what head to head polls say in a theoretical matchup.  Bernie people amplify every single poll that makes Bernie look good and completely ignore any that make him look weak as a candidate. It's a tactic that every candidate supporter uses, but Bernie actually campaigned off polling numbers. I'm over it. 

As for the rest of your response to my post, fine, you don't get it. Let's move on. 

Edited April 11, 2020 by Hank Kingsley

[GRHorn 105]

Who’s actually going to be making the decisions for Biden? His cabinet? The Vp?

And if your answer is doesn’t matter, they’ll be better than Trump, that’s fine. But im curious how that’ll be addressed. 

Edited April 11, 2020 by GRHorn

[Lurch 5,931]

Who’s actually going to be making the decisions for Biden? His cabinet? The Vp?

Ivanka and Jared will be available

[bad_teammate 13,222]

5 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Getting real tired of the "Bernie beats Trump" talking point over and over again. I don't give a shit about what head to head polls say in a theoretical matchup.  Bernie people amplify every single poll that makes Bernie look good and completely ignore any that make him look weak as a candidate. It's a tactic that every candidate supporter uses, but Bernie actually campaigned off polling numbers. I'm over it. 

How should a candidate tell people he's a good candidate to beat Trump? Casting animal bones into the ashes of an evening campfire? Spreading tea leaves across a chipped porcelain plate?

[GRHorn 105]

4 minutes ago, Lurch said:

 

Ivanka and Jared will be available

 

So Hunter then. Got it. 

[Hank Kingsley 21,006]

4 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

How should a candidate tell people he's a good candidate to beat Trump?

Definitely not by promising a "revolution" and attacking/hating the Democratic Party and base, but that's a different discussion. 

 

 

[Lurch 5,931]

So Hunter then. Got it. 

I am 100% confident that he’d never be so incredibly stupid to put his children in charge of Mid East Peace talks, China trade, and a global pandemic response.

[bad_teammate 13,222]

27 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Definitely not by promising a "revolution" and attacking/hating the Democratic Party and base, but that's a different discussion. 

Given how much success he had over candidates running more traditional and appeasing campaigns, I can't fault him too much. He definitely built a nationwide and diverse movement, even if it wasn't big enough to overcome the institutional and cultural depth of Biden's support.

But him touting his poll #s against Trump is a very very weird thing to get mad about. If he'd made ads about how he had higher favorables than Pete or something I could see getting irritated about that. But against Trump?

And I'm the crypto-MAGA?

 

[Hank Kingsley 21,006]

Just now, bad_teammate said:

Given how much success he had over candidates running more traditional and appeasing campaigns, I can't fault him too much. He definitely built a nationwide and diverse movement, even if it wasn't big enough to overcome the institutional and cultural depth of Biden's support.

But him touting his poll #s against Trump is a very very weird thing to get mad about. If he'd made ads about how he had higher favorables than Pete or something I could see getting irritated about that. But against Trump?

And I'm the crypto-MAGA?

 

I'm not mad about it, BT. I think it's stupid. And I think it's stupid for you to parrot that "Bernie beats Trump" argument at this point as well. 

 

[henrygandorf 29,194]

3 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

"Bernie beats Trump"

i believe the correct response to this type of polling is, "how confident were you in 2016?"

did i do that right?

[bad_teammate 13,222]

2 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

I'm not mad about it, BT. I think it's stupid. And I think it's stupid for you to parrot that "Bernie beats Trump" argument at this point as well. 

First off, yes you are. You ignored the entire rest of that long post to only respond to that one (fairly incidental) point.

We were talking about the concept of Joe being a "placeholder", an argument that involves making the point that only Biden could beat Trump so Biden needed to step in to get that job done so others could come in and actually make the necessary changes. Right?

The only reason I brought up other candidates (Bernie wasn't the only one I brought up, just the one that you decided to focus on when responding) was to dig into that concept of Joe as a "placeholder", a concept that Joe himself has not articulated or promoted, oddly enough.

Do you believe that Joe Biden sees himself as a "placeholder"?

1 minute ago, henrygandorf said:

i believe the correct response to this type of polling is, "how confident were you in 2016?"

did i do that right?

Sure!

An analysis of how to beat Trump needs to go a whole lot deeper than just national head-to-head polling. It should involve a lot more things: enthusiasm, GOTV, grassroots efforts, diversity of outreach/response (geographic, age, ethnic, social, and economic diversity), swing state polling, etc...

[Hank Kingsley 21,006]

Just now, bad_teammate said:

First off, yes you are.

Thanks for the laugh. 

 

 

[henrygandorf 29,194]

2 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

We were talking about the concept of Joe being a "placeholder"

ignoring everything else you wrote, because i wasn't involved in this back and forth...

joe wasn't/isn't running as a "placeholder".  but many of us here (and around the country) are content with joe being a "placeholder" because the top priority is "beating trump".  and if you're supporting somebody for that reason (which a lot of us are), then the argument is that an old, boring joe biden who's promising the country "a return to normalcy" is a good approach to beating someone like trump.  and since joe doesn't have many signature issues he's pushing, many see a biden presidency (depending on the senate) as a simple unwinding of "trump-damage" both inflicted literally in legislature, and emotionally in citizens.  also many see him as a way to restore some international integrity, since that kind of american pride is important to some. 

just to clarify - i'm not saying any of the above is a completely accurate depiction, or a "good-or-bad" rationalization, or that it's healthy or productive or anything that i would personally have recommended a year ago.  i don't like to speak for other people just because i think they agree with me.  but my opinion is that this ^^ is what's happening, and why.  nobody around here has been championing biden or his policies over the course of the past 12-14 months.  but now that we're stuck with him as our chance to beat trump, then it's up to us how we rationalize supporting him.  it's a chance to stop the bleeding and regroup.

[bad_teammate 13,222]

Fantastic post, henry.

4 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

but now that we're stuck with him as our chance to beat trump, then it's up to us how we rationalize supporting him.  it's a chance to stop the bleeding and regroup.

In your mind, when is the "regroup" part of this intended to kick in?

My concern (which I don't put in italics and alternating caps ironically, because it actually does concern me) is that much of the progressive energy that existed in the Warren/Buttigieg camps that has become Biden-advocating energy will simply become beaten down, the focus on structural change will die, and whatever vision of a wildly different future was articulated just disappears.

The left is obviously going to hold the flame, but if the more moderate progressives allow their flames to temporarily extinguish for the sake of electoral victory (if that would even work), why would it re-light? Do you understand what I mean?

[Hank Kingsley 21,006]

3 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

My concern (which I don't put in italics and alternating caps ironically, because it actually does concern me) is that much of the progressive energy that existed in the Warren/Buttigieg camps that has become Biden-advocating energy will simply become beaten down, the focus on structural change will die, and whatever vision of a wildly different future was articulated just disappears.

Your concern is noted. And poorly considered. 

 

 

 

 

 

[henrygandorf 29,194]

18 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

In your mind, when is the "regroup" part of this intended to kick in?

ideally, it's happening already.  but it's aspirational.  the dems had 8 years to come up with obama's successor and gave us hillary fucking clinton, so anything is possible.  i don't hold out hope that "lessons have been learned".  i also fully expect the 'minor' victory of "beating trump" to distract the people we'll need to be architects of the future.  that's a big reason why the vp pick is so important.  we don't even know if joe has the desire or capacity to be a candidate for reelection in 2024.

22 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

My concern (which I don't put in italics and alternating caps ironically, because it actually does concern me) is that much of the progressive energy that existed in the Warren/Buttigieg camps that has become Biden-advocating energy will simply become beaten down, the focus on structural change will die, and whatever vision of a wildly different future was articulated just disappears.

channeling my inner-bt here, but if the "progressive energy" possessed by the warren/buttigieg camps was worth a shit to begin with, then we shouldn't have to worry about it being beaten down or distinguished simply by advocating for biden in the 2020 general election.  it's actually a good thing (in this specific instance) that biden doesn't stand for any type of strong, specific policy-change, because it doesn't force the pete/liz types to change who they are while they're supporting him.

[Bozo_Casanova 26,520]

3 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

 

You're asking me to not believe his words.

That's not acceptable. I will never be a Trumper, not even a center-left flavored one.

 

You're acting exactly like a Trumper.  Joe Biden says healthcare is a right. He's just skeptical of the specific plan you don't care about the details of for the same reasons I am. 

Edited April 11, 2020 by Bozo_Casanova

[bad_teammate 13,222]

2 hours ago, henrygandorf said:

channeling my inner-bt here, but if the "progressive energy" possessed by the warren/buttigieg camps was worth a shit to begin with, then we shouldn't have to worry about it being beaten down or distinguished simply by advocating for biden in the 2020 general election.  it's actually a good thing (in this specific instance) that biden doesn't stand for any type of strong, specific policy-change, because it doesn't force the pete/liz types to change who they are while they're supporting him.

This is kind of a bitter pill to swallow, honestly.

The idea that progressivism only ever being some kind of credibility booster for more-naturally-centrist white people is discouraging.

Damn, man

1 hour ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

You're acting exactly like a Trumper.  Joe Biden says healthcare is a right. He's just skeptical of the specific plan you don't care about the details of for the same reasons I am. 

The industry of fact-checking is hilariously stupid when it ventures into interpretation instead of dealing with... actual fucking facts. It's for people who have given up reading extended pieces of text and thinking for themselves. That version of "fact"-checking is just opinion-column writing put in the frame of objective evaluation.

Watch and think for yourself. It's extremely clear what he means and intends.

Save fact-checking for actual facts, not politically-motivated interpretations.

[Bozo_Casanova 26,520]

17 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

The industry of fact-checking is hilariously stupid when it ventures into interpretation instead of dealing with... actual fucking facts. It's for people who have given up reading extended pieces of text and thinking for themselves. That version of "fact"-checking is just opinion-column writing put in the frame of objective evaluation.

Watch and think for yourself. It's extremely clear what he means and intends.

Save fact-checking for actual facts, not politically-motivated interpretations.

Sounds like you've got a problem with the biased lamestream media. Sad!

Again, you sound exactly like a Trumper. Except for Bernie. 

Edited April 12, 2020 by Bozo_Casanova

[tantric superman 4,667]

7 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

Yep, we are fully in the stage where even criticizing Joe Biden means you love Donald Trump.

No, we are at a stage where you are putting them as equally dangerous to America.

 

[bad_teammate 13,222]

2 hours ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Sounds like you've got a problem with the biased lamestream media.

Yes, as any critically thinking person should. Do you think major news outlets in America are above critique?

2 hours ago, tantric superman said:

No, we are at a stage where you are putting them as equally dangerous to America.

Joe Biden is less dangerous than Donald Trump.

[JimmyJames 12,271]

So is BT still railing against joe Biden even though Bernie has dropped out? I’m not gonna bother reading this thread to figure out why but seriously what’s the fucking point?

[bad_teammate 13,222]

2 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

So is BT still railing against joe Biden even though Bernie has dropped out? I’m not gonna bother reading this thread to figure out why but seriously what’s the fucking point?

Why would Bernie being in or out impact my analysis of Joe Biden?

I know many of you are personality-driven and don't actually have beliefs, but that's not true of everyone. It's not hard to understand if you try.

[JimmyJames 12,271]

1 minute ago, bad_teammate said:

Why would Bernie being in or out impact my analysis of Joe Biden?

I know many of you are personality-driven and don't actually have beliefs, but that's not true of everyone. It's not hard to understand if you try.

Well I guess if you want trump to continue his presidency your anti Biden remarks have validity.

[bad_teammate 13,222]

lol the next 7 months are going to be fucking awesome

You guys should turn on each other and dare each other to say increasingly insane things to praise Biden to prove that you don't want Trump to win.

[JimmyJames 12,271]

Just now, bad_teammate said:

lol the next 7 months are going to be fucking awesome

You guys should turn on each other and dare each other to say increasingly insane things to praise Biden to prove that you don't want Trump to win.

I said nothing to praise Biden. I simply pointed out that your criticism of him seemingly supports trump. 

Show me how I’m wrong shithead.

[bad_teammate 13,222]

1 minute ago, JimmyJames said:

I said nothing to praise Biden.

So you want Trump to win?

I mean, what if someone is reading this and they see people like you shouting angrily at any criticism of Joe Biden and then not even be able to offer praise? Wouldn't that communicate a troubling message to that undecided and swingable voter?

I mean, don't you want Trump to lose?

 

[JimmyJames 12,271]

Just now, bad_teammate said:

So you want Trump to win?

I mean, what if someone is reading this and they see people like you shouting angrily at any criticism of Joe Biden and then not even be able to offer praise? Wouldn't that communicate a troubling message to that undecided and swingable voter?

I mean, don't you want Trump to lose?

 

Ok now you are at the making zero sense point. Maybe it’s the late Saturday night scotch. Catcha later. 

[Ted Lange 16,113]

9 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

An analysis of how to beat Trump needs to go a whole lot deeper than just national head-to-head polling. It should involve a lot more things: enthusiasm, GOTV, grassroots efforts, diversity of outreach/response (geographic, age, ethnic, social, and economic diversity), swing state polling, etc...

Well Bernies analysis lead him to get trounced by Hillary and Biden. He refuses to be a Democrat and relies on young voters.   He can get people to show up to rallies, at polling locations obviously not so much. 

[bad_teammate 13,222]

9 hours ago, JimmyJames said:

Ok now you are at the making zero sense point. Maybe it’s the late Saturday night scotch. Catcha later. 

We're all very worried about the impressionable swing voters here who are going to base their decisions on our posts, right? That's why my not voting for Biden unless he promises to not actively veto progressive legislation is as good as a vote for Trump, right?

If that's the case, then surely the unwillingness of basically everyone here to either not praise Joe at all or couch all Biden praise in a cocoon of qualifications and negativity sends bad signals to those impressionable swing voters.

What's good for the goose is good for the gander, right?

[Message Board User 12,395]

 

[GW Hayduke 1,953]

[bad_teammate 13,222]

I like this line:
No other allegation about sexual assault surfaced in the course of our reporting, nor did any former Biden staff corroborate Reade’s allegation. We found no pattern of sexual misconduct by Biden, beyond hugs, kisses and touching that women previously said made them uncomfortable.

"Other than the pattern we found, we didn't find a pattern."

The aspect that makes it the most concrete is the contemporaneous accounts. The idea that she told a friend about it in 1993 to set up a hit job 3 decades later is just QAnon stuff.

Also, NYT not being even slightly subtle with this line...

Filing a false police report may be punishable by a fine and imprisonment.

[BradInATX 9,208]

We're all very worried about the impressionable swing voters here who are going to base their decisions on our posts, right? That's why my not voting for Biden unless he promises to not actively veto progressive legislation is as good as a vote for Trump, right?
If that's the case, then surely the unwillingness of basically everyone here to either not praise Joe at all or couch all Biden praise in a cocoon of qualifications and negativity sends bad signals to those impressionable swing voters.
What's good for the goose is good for the gander, right?

If your contention is that your posts and the conversations you have with people don't matter in the grand scheme of things, therefore your little anti-Joe tantrum is morally acceptable, then why even vote? Why even participate at all?

[bad_teammate 13,222]

Just now, BradInATX said:

If your contention is that your posts and the conversations you have with people don't matter in the grand scheme of things, therefore your little anti-Joe tantrum is morally acceptable, then why even vote? Why even participate at all?

lol what?
Someone help me out here, but is Brad saying that if there's no point in posting then there's no point in voting?

I think conversations can be really important. I've had hundreds of really great conversations over the years knocking doors, making calls, attending events. I've even had great conversations on the Internet, but I think everyone would acknowledge there's a fairly large difference between real life and the Internet. That's a pretty common understanding, right?

Scroll through this and the 2020 Nominee thread and look at the usernames. It's just sparring between the same participants that have been sparring for a year.

I'm 0% likely to vote for Trump and 90% likely to vote for Biden (I am assuming that, at some point, he will at least lie to me and say he won't actually veto M4A). You and the usual suspects already know this, so the harangue isn't about votes, it's about wanting some kind of weird submission or admission of a deeper level of defeat. It's not business, it's personal.