The Case For Biden

He is saying 8 more years of republican rule after Bushes 8 years would have been a disaster.

I admit to kinda dreading the next democrat presidential debate. I imagine Biden is going to get clobbered by all ten of them.

Not to mention, he evidently told a story with so many incorrect statements, you can't tell if he can't remember or if he is simply making it up as he goes along.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/as-he-campaigns-for-president-joe-biden-tells-a-moving-but-false-war-story/2019/08/29/b5159676-c9aa-11e9-a1fe-ca46e8d573c0_story.html


I wish a petition was started asking, begging him to drop out for the good of what's left of his reputation and the democrat party.

It is indeed a sad, somewhat slow motion, collapse of the long political career of a likeable, if somewhat dense, professional politician, who ended up too enamored with his long term stature and a bit forgetful of the long-term venality that has attended his actions in public office. .

That was a "gaffe?"

When the truth becomes a political gaffe, we're in a lot of trouble.

Why did Biden's eye fill with blood when he mentioned reducing the number of cars as part of a climate-reform strategy?

Is it because he was lying and he knew it or because he's afraid of union wrath for suggesting production/sales cuts on automobiles?

Michael Tracey
‏
Verified account

@mtracey
4h4 hours ago
More
Biden's reluctance to launch a forceful defense over Ukraine -- which you'd think would make sense politically because it pits him directly against Trump -- suggests that he knows on some level it's a real liability

I've kind of already written Biden off. There is just no momentum, no forcefulness on the stump, no energy. If I'm a B tier candidate on the debate forum, I'm focused on Warren, not Biden.

Or maybe because an old, weak blood vessel in a 76 year old eye just burst because it’s, you know, an old weak blood vessel in a 76 year old eye?

Biden's several gaffes have hurt him. However that's nothing new or indicative of age related deterioration, merely the continuation of a decades old pattern of his loquacious behavior. As others above have noted, his status in the polls of Democrat contenders has been slowly deteriorating since early September, and the pace appears to have picked up in the last two weeks. Hard to know just what is behind it, but I suspect it's a combination of the failure of his slightly centrist positions to capture Democrat supporters, at least in comparison to the excitement created by the leading left wing contenders, chiefly Sanders and particularly Warren, and also the perhaps growing perception that he has been damaged by the growing, so far, circumstantial, evidence of corruption, and for that, and other, reasons he might not be their hoped for winning centrist candidate in the final election.

Now with Sander's candidacy in serious question, Warren appears to be the leading contender, and with her (or any of the remaining candidates) the Democrats will enter the final campaign with a party platform likely dominated by the programs advocated by the rising new far left wing of the party. This will generate a lot of excitement among the committed 25% or so of voters initially animated by Sanders in the 2016 primaries, however, in my view is very far from a winning strategy for the election itself. Union workers in the swing Midwest staunchly oppose Medicare for all and the loss of their treasured union worker & retiree medical benefits, and many of the voters in the swing House districts that got the Democrats a majority in 2018 are likely to have second thoughts.

The currently hot impeachment tempest is likely to run down and out of fuel in the months ahead while the results of ongoing investigations launched by AG Barr will soon enough emerge in the public debate. The intense, highly polarized debate will likely continue unabated but, the situation faced by centrist voters appears to me likely to tilt towards Trump and the Republicans.

O yes George. I would take your advise on a democrat almost as fast as I would take it on your hero Trump.

The liability is pretty obvious here. His son has most probably not been chosen as an board member by this Ukrainian company because of his competencies. Much more likely, the company wanted to use his name to project an impression of high-level connections and protection. Even though Biden junior has probably done nothing illegal, he nevertheless monetized his father's position as US VP.

The Obama era held real promise at the beginning when there was a lot of impetus to reform the economy to make it more sustainable.

Then what happened is that impetus got poached and hijacked by fiscal stimulus interests that just want to pump ever more liquidity into the economy to fund debt, which allows and even pushes all the status-quo industries to double-down on maintaining their historically-successful patterns of activity because they don't want to get left out of the economic growth.

Reform is stimulated when existing economic practices are faltering. The moment government pumps enough liquidity into the economy to stop the faltering, the impetus for reform fades.

Perhaps the best recent example of this is Obama's ill conceived program for Federally subsidized college student loans. The result is the most rapid inflation in university tuition in as century;no appreciable growth in university seats available; and a generation of graduates, many with economically useless degrees, burdened with debit they'll have a very hard time repaying.

What happened was we voted for democrats we thought were liberal but were conservative business orientated democrats to congress and they watered down everything Obama wanted.

And Obama wasn't able to stop them, which is why it makes no sense to vote for even the best candidate if they are affiliated with the Democratic party.

Anyone you vote for will end up getting co-opted by the party to effectuate rampant fiscal stimulus to juice up the economic status quo, which is going to undermine any hope of all but the most superficial reforms.

When you vote for the Democrats, it's basically just a vote for the fake left.

When you vote republican you vote for a known pack of thieves and crooks. Trump was born a thief and his daddy taught him how to be the perfect crook and Trump has passed his knowledge on to his kids.

Tax/spend government advocates tend to reverse the logic of ownership to justify intervention. When the GOP cuts taxes, they are not 'stealing' from entitlements, which are rightful property of those who receive the entitlement spending.

Now, I am not actually totally opposed to tax-spend government, but I do acknowledge that it amounts to theft, sort of like taking someone else's credit card and using it and then letting them get stuck with the bill.

If you understand it this way, you use the power of tax-spend government more conservatively. You don't, for example, take someone's credit card and use it to invest and fiscally-stimulate the economy so you can grow the economy to include others.

What you do instead is explain that you need certain basic necessities to survive, such as food and basic shelter; and you give property-holders the opportunity to come up with a less-costly means of providing those basic necessities. You don't let people starve or go homeless, but at the same time you also don't abuse social spending to enrich contractors/developers and grow GDP as a byproduct of waste-spending.

GOP may waste money in things like military budgets, so you may be right that voting for them is like voting for a thief as well, but traditionally they are the party of fiscal conservatism so it would be very difficult to vote for the party of the anti-Republican South and New Deal Socialism without supporting tax-spend growthism and the role it has come to fulfill within the global economy.

What we really need is an economic reform movement that's simultaneously a sustainability reform movement as well. Ironically, that is what Trump's tariffs are moving toward, insofar as reducing global shipping holds potential to reduce overall fuel waste (ocean shipping uses huge amounts of fuel/energy). Trump doesn't actively promote environmental restoration and reductions in industrial activity and infrastructure necessary for sustainability progress, but in a way he does by shifting the burden for infrastructure funding to the local level, where people are more cautious with their spending than when they are spending federal money that they perceive as coming from 'richer people elsewhere.'

He's toast and if by some miracle he limps across the finish line, Trump will crush him.

Hastening the exit of Mr. Biden from the race would simply be doing the Democratic Party a favor. With luck the GOP'll start going after some of the other pikers. Let's see the debate stage whittled down to three or four. Might not even have any need for primaries in '20. The Republican Party machine could get all of them to leave the race before the events are even held!

I just wish that a Democrat who didn't want to violate the Second Amendment for fun would run. They'd easily get my vote in the primary.