Dump Biden.
nan said:
They said senile, corrupt Joe Biden was a sharp fighter for justice who knew how to get things done.
People were fooled and Joe won
BS. Biden was framed as a genial, milquetoast, known-quantity moderate, who could beat Trump. And you know what? Biden beat Trump, which disproved your oft-stated prediction that Trump would eat Biden alive.
Sanders would have won the suburbanites and diverse urban voters that Biden did? Sanders would have won NV, AZ, WI, GA, PA, MI? No and no. He would have run up the score in CA, MA, HI, OR, etc and lost most of the swing states, because those voters weren't (and aren't) looking for radical left, free-stuff-for-everyone policies.
Speaking for myself, I wasn't fooled. I voted for Biden, but I had low expectations for his presidency from the beginning, and I've been saying he's lame-o-rama on here for ages now. But while Biden was wasn't my first choice for 2020, I supported him over the progressive candidates because he could beat Trump. And: he beat Trump.
Smedley said:
BS. Biden was framed as a genial, milquetoast, known-quantity moderate, who could beat Trump. And you know what? Biden beat Trump, which proved wrong your oft-made prediction that Trump would eat Biden alive.
Sanders would have won the suburbanites and diverse urban voters that Biden did? Sanders would have won NV, AZ, WI, GA, PA, MI? No and no. He would have run up the score in CA, MA, HI, OR, etc and lost most of the swing states, because those voters weren't (and aren't) looking for radical left, free-stuff-for-everyone policies.
Speaking for myself, I wasn't fooled. I had low expectations for a Biden presidency from the beginning, and I've been saying he's lame-o-rama on here for ages now. But while Biden was wasn't my first choice for 2020, I supported him over the progressive candidates because he could beat Trump. And: he beat Trump.
smedley the all-knowing prophet speaks! 
drummerboy said:
nan said:
ridski said:
nan said:
Even the mainstream media has turned on him. He is toast.
If the MSM doesn't like him, that's a good thing. They lie about everything and idiots who believe the MSM are brainwashed fools. Biden's gonna cruise this, all the podcasts say so.
You have it wrong.
The media narrative is controlled to benefit the ruling class. That may or may not involve lying but it is deeply dishonest. During the election they told people that Bernie Sanders, the only candidate that actually cared about doing something for the regulars was a rich Communist sexist loser who could not get anything done. They said senile, corrupt Joe Biden was a sharp fighter for justice who knew how to get things done.
People were fooled and Joe won, but now he has, predictably, done nothing, not even his minimal campaign promises and his ratings are in the dust bin and he can barely get a sentence out and probably could never make it through the demands of a campaign where you have to stay up past 9:00 PM. Many people have been asleep at the wheel since Trump left office so they think Joe is doing fine. They need to be gently informed.
So the media starts going harder on him and before you know it manufactured consent sets in and people are coming to the "conclusion" that Joe needs to go. He needed to have never been here, but even the media probably couldn't sell him for the next election once the campaigning started. Even they have their limits.
So, he will be replaced with someone less senile but with the same lame neoliberal policies and neocon views and people will come to the "conclusion" that person is what we need.
For those who are cynical as I am, I recommend the Monday version of the Useful Idiots podcast, where Katie Halper and Aaron Mate analyse clips from the Sunday mainstream news shows. I did not watch the one I'm posting yet, but I'm sure they are not saying that "Biden's gonna cruise this."
oh for a sarcasm tag
nan, you know, if not for Sinemanchin, Biden might have pulled off the biggest progressive legislation since I don't know when. maybe FDR.
your view of Washington politics and the power of the president is simplistic
I'd say yours is simplistic. The Democrats campaigned for Manchin over a progressive candidate. They campaign for anti-choice Democrats. The only Democrats they work hard to destroy are Progressives. The thing with the Parliamentarian was a total joke. They will use any excuse. There was no drive to get things done for ordinary people.
The Republicans don't have those kind of problems. When they get a majority, they manage to get stuff done.
And when it comes to war, both parties are unified--no one says, "we can't afford this."
nan said:
drummerboy said:
nan said:
ridski said:
nan said:
Even the mainstream media has turned on him. He is toast.
If the MSM doesn't like him, that's a good thing. They lie about everything and idiots who believe the MSM are brainwashed fools. Biden's gonna cruise this, all the podcasts say so.
You have it wrong.
The media narrative is controlled to benefit the ruling class. That may or may not involve lying but it is deeply dishonest. During the election they told people that Bernie Sanders, the only candidate that actually cared about doing something for the regulars was a rich Communist sexist loser who could not get anything done. They said senile, corrupt Joe Biden was a sharp fighter for justice who knew how to get things done.
People were fooled and Joe won, but now he has, predictably, done nothing, not even his minimal campaign promises and his ratings are in the dust bin and he can barely get a sentence out and probably could never make it through the demands of a campaign where you have to stay up past 9:00 PM. Many people have been asleep at the wheel since Trump left office so they think Joe is doing fine. They need to be gently informed.
So the media starts going harder on him and before you know it manufactured consent sets in and people are coming to the "conclusion" that Joe needs to go. He needed to have never been here, but even the media probably couldn't sell him for the next election once the campaigning started. Even they have their limits.
So, he will be replaced with someone less senile but with the same lame neoliberal policies and neocon views and people will come to the "conclusion" that person is what we need.
For those who are cynical as I am, I recommend the Monday version of the Useful Idiots podcast, where Katie Halper and Aaron Mate analyse clips from the Sunday mainstream news shows. I did not watch the one I'm posting yet, but I'm sure they are not saying that "Biden's gonna cruise this."
oh for a sarcasm tag
nan, you know, if not for Sinemanchin, Biden might have pulled off the biggest progressive legislation since I don't know when. maybe FDR.
your view of Washington politics and the power of the president is simplistic
I'd say yours is simplistic. The Democrats campaigned for Manchin over a progressive candidate. They campaign for anti-choice Democrats. The only Democrats they work hard to destroy are Progressives. The thing with the Parliamentarian was a total joke. They will use any excuse. There was no drive to get things done for ordinary people.
The Republicans don't have those kind of problems. When they get a majority, they manage to get stuff done.
And when it comes to war, both parties are unified--no one says, "we can't afford this."
apart from a tax cut and judgeships, exactly what did the Republicans get done with Trump?
could it be nothing?
yup.
Do you actually think that if a progressive ran in W. Va. he could have won?
As I said, simplistic.
The first rule is to do what you can to gain a majority, and sometimes in order to do that, you have to compromise. And the Dems did that successfully.
And if you think the drive to get BBB passed was not to "get things done for ordinary people. ", well that's just completely wrong. By a hundred miles.
But if you listen to Jimmy Dore for the news, I can see why you would get confused.
ridski said:
isn’t this the guy who started talking about critical race theory? Now he’s onto “gender ideology”… I guess the conservatives are finally “woken”… and political correctness is outdated? They used to use PC for every discussion… even MT has stopped using it.
Jaytee said:
ridski said:
isn’t this the guy who started talking about critical race theory? Now he’s onto “gender ideology”… I guess the conservatives are finally “woken”… and political correctness is outdated? They used to use PC for every discussion… even MT has stopped using it.
yeah, same guy, and one of the more dangerous individuals in politics. He created CRT out of nothing.
his "gender" push is going to very, very ugly. If it takes off among the base it will be as ugly as anything we've ever seen from those wackos..
Here's some essential reading on Rufo.
drummerboy said:
Jaytee said:
ridski said:
isn’t this the guy who started talking about critical race theory? Now he’s onto “gender ideology”… I guess the conservatives are finally “woken”… and political correctness is outdated? They used to use PC for every discussion… even MT has stopped using it.
yeah, same guy, and one of the more dangerous individuals in politics. He created CRT out of nothing.
his "gender" push is going to very, very ugly. If it takes off among the base it will be as ugly as anything we've ever seen from those wackos..
Here's some essential reading on Rufo.
The rise of the term "groomer" has been bad enough on my twitter feed, I expect to see it appear in the "awoke" and "pope" threads by the end of the summer. The seeds have already been sown, the chaos agents have been busy, the fall school board meetings will be catastrophic.
ridski said:
The rise of the term "groomer" has been bad enough on my twitter feed, I expect to see it appear in the "awoke" and "pope" threads by the end of the summer. The seeds have already been sown, the chaos agents have been busy, the fall school board meetings will be catastrophic.
If we think we're "safe" here in NJ, or even our little corner of NJ, from that kind of viciousness, we should not be so complacent about that.
We have got to be able to do better than Joe Biden. Nobody over the age of 70 should be allowed to run for or remain in high office including the Supreme Court and Congress.
Having said that, I don't think that any President without a cult following would be particularly popular right now given all that has happened in the last two years.
nohero said:
ridski said:
The rise of the term "groomer" has been bad enough on my twitter feed, I expect to see it appear in the "awoke" and "pope" threads by the end of the summer. The seeds have already been sown, the chaos agents have been busy, the fall school board meetings will be catastrophic.
If we think we're "safe" here in NJ, or even our little corner of NJ, from that kind of viciousness, we should not be so complacent about that.
There are plenty of people in Essex County who agree with Rufo.
As an aside, here's the bottom line on objections to teaching our true history (I don't want to call it CRT).
tjohn said:
We have got to be able to do better than Joe Biden. Nobody over the age of 70 should be allowed to run for or remain in high office including the Supreme Court and Congress.
Having said that, I don't think that any President without a cult following would be particularly popular right now given all that has happened in the last two years.
I don't know about a hard age limit - I don't like Bernie Sanders' policies, but he's older than Biden, and I gotta say, he's plenty vigorous, and sharp as a tack. So there's no reason someone like Sanders should be not allowed to run just because of his age.
That said, I don't know if Weekend at Biden's can go another 30 months in office, let alone 4 years beyond that, so the notion of him running again is absurd to me.
Interesting column. I think there's a legit chance of this happening this time around. Their kids are older now. And if you read Obama's book, he detailed how at first she didn't want him to run, but she warmed up to the notion on the premise of helping the country. Maybe she'd have those same thoughts for 2024.
Smedley said:
I don't know about a hard age limit - I don't like Bernie Sanders' policies, but he's older than Biden, and I gotta say, he's sharp as a tack. So there's no reason someone like Sanders should be not allowed to run just because of his age.
That said, I don't know if Weekend at Biden's can go another 30 months in office, let alone 4 years beyond that, so the notion of him running again is absurd to me.
Interesting column. I think there's a legit chance of this happening this time around. Their kids are older now. And if you read Obama's book, he detailed how at first she didn't want him to run, but she warmed up to the notion on the premise of helping the country. Maybe she'd have those same thoughts for 2024.
It's always been my understanding that Michelle Obama has no interest in running for office. Has she said or done anything to suggest this has changed?
PVW said:
Smedley said:
I don't know about a hard age limit - I don't like Bernie Sanders' policies, but he's older than Biden, and I gotta say, he's sharp as a tack. So there's no reason someone like Sanders should be not allowed to run just because of his age.
That said, I don't know if Weekend at Biden's can go another 30 months in office, let alone 4 years beyond that, so the notion of him running again is absurd to me.
Interesting column. I think there's a legit chance of this happening this time around. Their kids are older now. And if you read Obama's book, he detailed how at first she didn't want him to run, but she warmed up to the notion on the premise of helping the country. Maybe she'd have those same thoughts for 2024.
It's always been my understanding that Michelle Obama has no interest in running for office. Has she said or done anything to suggest this has changed?
not that I’m aware of. But historically I think non-politicians who run for office have no interest in running for office, until suddenly they’re running for office.
granted this is a long shot at best.
Smedley said:
not that I’m aware of. But historically I think non-politicians who run for office have no interest in running for office, until suddenly they’re running for office.
granted this is a long shot at best.
I don't mean to be picky, but "historically" can you name any non-politicans who've done what you said?
I can't even think of one.
drummerboy said:
I don't mean to be picky, but "historically" can you name any non-politicans who've done what you said?
Adm. James Stockdale.
drummerboy said:
I don't mean to be picky, but "historically" can you name any non-politicans who've done what you said?
I can't even think of one.
Ulysses S Grant. To a lesser extent Dwight D Eisenhower.
Bloomberg, Arnold, Ventura, Eisenhower, Fiorina.
Or how about Michele's husband
I remember when Illinois Sen. Barack Obama was interviewed by Tim Russert on “Meet the Press” on January 22, 2006.
“I will serve out my full six-year term,” said Obama, who was elected to the Senate in 2004. “You know, Tim, if you get asked enough, sooner or later, you get weary and you start looking for new ways of saying things. But my thinking has not changed.”
“So you will not run for president or vice president in 2008?” Russert clarified.
“I will not,” Obama concluded.
https://rollcall.com/2017/05/02/dont-trust-politicians-who-say-they-arent-running-for-president/
As I've said, Michele O running is a long shot. But do you accept her previously saying she's not interested in running for office, as gospel that she won't run for President in 2024? If so, I think you accept things at face value too readily.
If she is open to running, the last thing she'd want to do is say so, which would lead to a media circus/frenzy ,and hourly speculation about her status. Plus it would make Biden a de facto lame duck overnight.
Smedley said:
Bloomberg, Arnold, Ventura, Eisenhower, Fiorina.
Or how about Michele's husband
I remember when Illinois Sen. Barack Obama was interviewed by Tim Russert on “Meet the Press” on January 22, 2006.
“I will serve out my full six-year term,” said Obama, who was elected to the Senate in 2004. “You know, Tim, if you get asked enough, sooner or later, you get weary and you start looking for new ways of saying things. But my thinking has not changed.”
“So you will not run for president or vice president in 2008?” Russert clarified.
“I will not,” Obama concluded.
https://rollcall.com/2017/05/02/dont-trust-politicians-who-say-they-arent-running-for-president/
As I've said, Michele O running is a long shot. But do you accept her previously saying she's not interested in running for office, as gospel that she won't run for President in 2024? If so, I think you accept things at face value too readily.
If she is open to running, the last thing she'd want to do is say so, which would lead to a media circus/frenzy ,and hourly speculation about her status. Plus it would make Biden a de facto lame duck overnight.
Granted I don't know Obama personally, but she's never come across to me as someone with any interest in running for office. So unlike, say, her husband who has always seemed very politically ambitious (or the examples of Stockton and Grant, who held high government office even if not elected), her denials of interest align with what I understand as her temperament and personality. I could see her being on a local school board maybe; beyond that just doesn't align with my impression of her.
DaveSchmidt said:
drummerboy said:
I don't mean to be picky, but "historically" can you name any non-politicans who've done what you said?
Adm. James Stockdale.
Yes, I remember well all those times when Admiral "Who am I?" had to deny he was going to run for VP.
Not sure you guys understood the question.
Anyway, as ml1 said, denying you're going to run until you decide you're going to run is pretty standard behavior for all candidates. It's certainly not unique to non-politicians.
drummerboy said:
It's certainly not unique to non-politicians.
Maybe that's a better way to put it -- I see Michelle Obama as fundamentally a non-politician, as opposed to simply someone denying she's running, and I haven't seen anything to suggest either I've misread her or she's herself changed.
drummerboy said:
Yes, I remember well all those times when Admiral "Who am I?" had to deny he was going to run for VP.
Ah. That context occurred to me, but since neither the “historically” comment for which you sought examples nor your question mentioned denials, I put that context aside.
drummerboy said:
Not sure you guys understood the question.
Anyway, as ml1 said, denying you're going to run until you decide you're going to run is pretty standard behavior for all candidates. It's certainly not unique to non-politicians.
it's kind of a captain obvious sort of thing. People don't decide to pursue a course of action until they decide to do so. A person is not a job-seeker until they decide it's time to look for a new job.
ml1 said:
it's kind of a captain obvious sort of thing. People don't decide to pursue a course of action until they decide to do so. A person is not a job-seeker until they decide it's time to look for a new job.
Actually, in the age of “big data” the algorithms know that you’re ready for a new job before you do.
For Sale
Garage Sales
-
HUGE Rummage sale to benefit the Bloomfield High School Robotics Team Sale Date: Apr 27, 2024
More info
I can't understand why Biden can't get anything done. After all, he as 48 votes in the Senate plus 2 he can count on from time to time. With those numbers, he should be able to steamroll his agenda through.