U.S. Democratic Primary

[MigL]

Is he still alive ?
Haven't heard from him in a while.

[CharonY]

37 minutes ago, MigL said:

Is he still alive ?
Haven't heard from him in a while.

I think he is (like most folks) videoconferencing. I suspect it is just not exciting and does not draw the same attention as, say, rallies. 

[iNow]

He's also been working as a Senator pushing to get more for citizens in the massive several trillion dollar bills they've been crafting and passing... reminding us we actually CAN afford the things people have been telling him and his supporters for months and years that we CAN'T afford.

[MigL]

Yeah, too bad D Trump removed the appointed overseer of the couple trillion dollars government bailouts, and appointed one of his cronies. That's how he can make REAL money; not by promoting the use of Hydroxycloroquine.

I thought for sure, he would have run out of a*s-kissers by now, but he keeps finding unscrupulous people to do his bidding/dirty work, like the Secretary of the Navy, who fired the USS Theodore Roosevelt carrier commander who was concerned about the Covid-19 outbreak on his ship, and has now resigned himself.

[J.C.MacSwell]

7 hours ago, MigL said:

Is he still alive ?
Haven't heard from him in a while.

I think Bernie's still alive. Not too sure about Biden...but politically he is doing better than ever...

[MigL]

Looks like B Sanders has endorsed J Biden for President.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/13/politics/bernie-sanders-endorses-joe-biden/index.html

Let's see what happens with his Bernie Bros. supporters.

[iNow]

2 hours ago, MigL said:

Looks like B Sanders has endorsed J Biden for President.

Indeed, he did. Early and clearly, on a joint zoom meeting, no less. Way to go, Bernie. They also announced a joint task force to keep momentum on progressive agenda and ideas. Way to go, Joe. 

Bernies supporters are a mixed bunch. I suspect the good majority know how important it is to beat Trump, but there are a marginal group of extremes who will get more media coverage and who will be incensed by Russian trolls and bots to stay extreme and enforce purity tests for their votes. They’ll stay home but hopefully will be few in number... tho over represented in the conversation. 

[MigL]

So I guess now we start discussing/obsessing about his VP pick.
I believe he has already stated he'd prefer a woman.
Warren, Klobuchar, Abrams, Harris ( bad blood from debates ? ), Whitmer ( petition to remove her from office ), or long shots like Gabbard or even Michelle Obama. Who have I missed, INow ?

So would I ( prefer women, but politically Warren, although she may be too 'left'  to fit), but 'uncle Joe' had better watch what he says about women. This election could turn out to be about who is less abusive towards women.
( yes, Republicans are obviously hypocrites )

[iNow]

32 minutes ago, MigL said:

Who have I missed, INow ?

Your list is solid. I agree with it. In terms of dark horses, you might add Catherine Masto (Senator from Nevada) and Michelle Grisham (governor from New Mexico) to your radar. My own long-shot pick that nobody’s talking about is Jennifer Granholm (former governor of Michigan), but even I see that as extra unlikely. 

[J.C.MacSwell]

I would be on board with Gabbard, but I don't see it happening.

Klobuchar would be a good fit for him, but not sure what she brings votes wise, partly for that reason.

[MigL]

T Gabbard is a veeery long shot.
Klobuchar seems kind of 'dull' ( to put it as nicely as possible )
J Biden might need some 'excitement' in his platform, going up against the hyperbole of D Trump.

[iNow]

1 hour ago, MigL said:

Klobuchar seems kind of 'dull' ( to put it as nicely as possible )

She also doesn't really help him with the portion of the electorate he needs to energize. Biden already encompasses the mid-west white vote that Klobuchar could add. Chances are good the female he chooses won't be white (and definitely won't be Gabbard IMO), but we'll see. 

[J.C.MacSwell]

11 hours ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

I would be on board with Gabbard, but I don't see it happening

 

7 hours ago, MigL said:

T Gabbard is a veeery long shot.

 

6 hours ago, iNow said:

(and definitely won't be Gabbard IMO)

I think we are all in agreement and see why this won't happen.

But I think they'd win...

Both Biden and Gabbard both appeal to the centre in different ways, the DNC crowd would reluctantly get behind it and Tulsi has backed Bernie...

Also Tulsi is tough as nails. 

 

[MigL]

I have a feeling it'll be Warren.
He has to throw a bone to the 'progressive' part of the Democratic party, and base.
Probably not a bad compromise, at all,
( Gabbard might be too tempting for 'touchy-feely' Joe )

Keep in mind, whoever he chooses has a good shot at becoming the 'replacement' President.
J Biden is 77, and will be 81 at the end of his first term, and 85 at the end of his possible second.
( If he makes it that long, o doesn't go senile )

[iNow]

12 hours ago, MigL said:

I have a feeling it'll be Warren.

I'm not convinced on this. I also wonder if she could do more good as a Senator, or even a key member of a Biden presidential cabinet. 

That said, she did just endorse him. She was one of the last holdouts, but she's on board now.

[J.C.MacSwell]

Biden seems to be in a bit of political trouble with regard to sexual assault allegations.

https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-us-canada-52499900

There's noone to corroborate the allegation with the accuser, except some have supported her claim that she made it known to them back when she claimed it happened in 1993.

This would of course be the death knell for Biden's campaign if enough Democrats used the same standards they advocated when Brett Kavanaugh was being vetted by the Senate for Supreme Court nomination. Of course it won't be, nor should it (we should hear them out). But it could hurt him.

 

[iNow]

18 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

This would of course be the death knell for Biden's campaign if enough Democrats used the same standards they advocated when Brett Kavanaugh was being vetted by the Senate for Supreme Court nomination.

I disagree. Democrats called for investigations. They called for witnesses. Republicans tried to and did shutdown investigations. They cancelled the FBI probe. Democrats didn’t want to give Kavenaugh a lifetime seat on the bench because of the way he responded to the claims and how he comported himself. 

What are Democrats doing with Biden? Saying the claim must be taken seriously. They’re asking for it to be investigated. They’re watching how Biden responds to the allegations. 

Its an easy talking point, sure, but I’m not seeing the hypocrisy and double standard you seem to see. 

[J.C.MacSwell]

12 minutes ago, iNow said:

I disagree. Democrats called for investigations. They called for witnesses. Republicans tried to and did shutdown investigations. They cancelled the FBI probe. Democrats didn’t want to give Kavenaugh a lifetime seat on the bench because of the way he responded to the claims and how he comported himself. 

What are Democrats doing with Biden? Saying the claim must be taken seriously. They’re asking for it to be investigated. They’re watching how Biden responds to the allegations. 

Its an easy talking point, sure, but I’m not seeing the hypocrisy and double standard you seem to see. 

Prior to his responding to claims, many Democrats were insisting Kavanaugh should not be nominated, simply due to the allegations.

The fact that many Democrats are finally taking Reade's accusations seriously doesn't change that.

[iNow]

30 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Prior to his responding to claims, many Democrats were insisting Kavanaugh should not be nominated, simply due to the allegations.

Many were also saying he shouldn’t be nominated because of his judicial record.

You’re suggesting hypocrisy. Double standards. I think that’s a stretch, but you’re welcome to your opinion.

I instead see how Democrats consistently treat the claims of these women seriously even when they’re levied against one of their own, unlike their opponents on the other side of the aisle. 

We’ll also never know who’s lying or who’s telling the truth. I accept that uncle joe is handsy and has issues respecting personal space, but the idea he’d force a woman against a wall and shove his fingers inside her seems out of character (unlike our current POTUS who has to pay dozens of women off to keep them quiet). 

[J.C.MacSwell]

8 minutes ago, iNow said:

Many were also saying he shouldn’t be nominated because of his judicial record.

You’re suggesting hypocrisy. Double standards. I think that’s a stretch, but you’re welcome to your opinion.

I instead see how Democrats consistently treat the claims of these women seriously even when they’re levied against one of their own, unlike their opponents on the other side of the aisle. 

We’ll also never know who’s lying or who’s telling the truth. I accept that uncle joe is handsy and has issues respecting personal space, but the idea he’d force a woman against a wall and shove his fingers inside her seems out of character (unlike our current POTUS who has to pay dozens of women off to keep them quiet). 

I'm suggesting that if enough Democrats followed the same standards for Biden as they suggested for Kavanaugh, this would hurt him politically. It would pretty much kill his chances, short of enough Republicans doing the same for Trump.

[iNow]

6 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

I'm suggesting that if enough Democrats followed the same standards for Biden as they suggested for Kavanaugh, this would hurt him politically. It would pretty much kill his chances, short of enough Republicans doing the same for Trump.

Thanks for clarifying. My guess is that Biden wasn’t the top choice anyway for the folks who are bothered by this story. They were on the side of Warren or Klobuchar (or even Buttigieg).

The strategy I see playing out here is the right bangs on about this story with Biden as hard as they can (even though their own candidate is far worse), and that they’ll do so specifically to drive apathy among suburban woman (a core voting bloc for Dems) and keep them home during the election / to suppress turnout.

The right knows all too well they do better when fewer people vote. 

[StringJunky]

5 minutes ago, iNow said:

Thanks for clarifying. My guess is that Biden wasn’t the top choice anyway for the folks who are bothered by this story. They were on the side of Warren or Klobuchar (or even Buttigieg).

The strategy I see playing out here is the right bangs on about this story with Biden as hard as they can (even though their own candidate is far worse), and that they’ll do so specifically to drive apathy among suburban woman (a core voting bloc for Dems) and keep them home during the election / to suppress turnout.

The right knows all too well they do better when fewer people vote. 

They are doing their best to bury bad news... which is everything Trump says and does.

[iNow]

24 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

They are doing their best to bury bad news... which is everything Trump says and does.

And yet for 40-45% of the American electorate, those things are a feature, not a bug. 

His son in law Kushner said the other day that their response to this pandemic has been a great American success story. You can’t make this stuff up.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/29/us/politics/trump-kushner-coronavirus-revisionist-history.html

[StringJunky]

19 minutes ago, iNow said:

And yet for 40-45% of the American electorate, those things are a feature, not a bug. 

His son in law Kushner said the other day that their response to this pandemic has been a great American success story. You can’t make this stuff up.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/29/us/politics/trump-kushner-coronavirus-revisionist-history.html

Well, this November we'll see how many gullible Americans there really are, even though they've seen and heard him these last 4 years. Does their animosity towards Democrats outweigh Trump's incompetence and deceit... is that the real motivation?

Edited May 2, 2020 by StringJunky

[MigL]

Don't you Americans have any politicians with a clean conscience ?
( just kidding, neither do we  Canadians )

J Biden seems like the type who would commit an infraction unwittingly, and if told the action wasn't welcome, would stop.
I really can't see him doing what he's been accused of.
Then again, I have been wrong about things many times, nd Joe is getting old; maybe he forgets when he's told to stop.

D Trump has paid people ( S Daniels ) to keep quiet, so as not to ruin his chances for election.
What would stop him from paying people to lie ( and ruin his opponent's chance for election ), to secure his own re-election ?