Cont: The Biden Presidency (3)

[Skeptic Ginger]

BTW, this is not 2016. It's a mistake to keep acting like it is. This is one of the big mistakes Clinton made, treating accusations against her like the Democrats learned to treat accusations against Bill: don't bring them up, it only amplifies them.

It's a lesson we should all take to heart, just because something was a truth in a past election doesn't mean it should be considered a truth with the next election. Clinton didn't do herself any favors treating the Goldman Sachs issue Bernie kept hitting her over the head with like the Democratic leadership's conviction such scandals are best ignored. Big mistake and I said so before it was hindsight.

Now we have the GOP trying to keep the voters focused on the false narrative Biden is too old. People age at different rates. I, for example, am not likely to reach the age of 90 and I definitely won't be reaching that age with my faculties in their current youthful condition. That's 20 years away. One of my cousins who recently emailed me is 81. Her mother (my aunt) was into her 90s before she died and her intellect was very much intact.

I'm not worried about inheriting Alzheimers, it doesn't run in my family. But my mom had vascular dementia and I can see that happening to me. Yet here is my cousin as intelligent as ever at 81.


Sorry, digressed a bit too much. Bottom line, no, Biden is not too old to get reelected or to keep acting as POTUS for 4 more years after that.. Quit buying that narrative. Ignore the news media that knows nothing else to report that sells the news except the 'Biden is too old story'.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

Compared to Trump?

Sure.


But there are plenty of people who would make for a better President.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Compared to Trump?

Sure.


But there are plenty of people who would make for a better President.

Are they running?

Are they running on the Democratic ticket?

You want we should all start worrying about this nebulous threat because people don't understand they are echoing the GOP talking point Biden is too old?

You think amplifying that threat now is going to get Biden to not run in 2024 or it's going to encourage the magic candidate to run?

What exactly is that point again?

 

[The Great Zaganza]

Look, FptP (First past the poll) elections are always about the lesser of two evils.

It's not wrong to wish for better candidates as long as you show up and vote for whoever is the better choice.

 

[Silly Green Monkey]

I think SG's point is that it's not helpful to tear down the better choice because the better candidates haven't presented themselves.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

I think SG's point is that it's not helpful to tear down the better choice because the better candidates haven't presented themselves.

If that had been what I was doing I would agree.

But just wishing for better candidates as long as you actually vote for the better of the two available is not the same as tearing him down.
It's perfectly legitimate, in this case, to complain that both candidates are way, WAAAY older than would be desirable in a POTUS.

 

[pgwenthold]

I think SG's point is that it's not helpful to tear down the better choice because the better candidates haven't presented themselves.

Hey, there are a couple of anti-vaxxers who have stepped up to run as democrats! So we got that...

 

[Segnosaur]

Hey, someone asked for evidence that voters were willing to abandon Biden for Trump. A poll showing greater support for Trump is evidence. (And since we won't be having an election for a while yet, its about the only thing we have to go on.)

I already admitted that a poll this far out doesn't mean "Biden will lose", only that its a cause for concern.

Here's my problem, what poll, how was it designed, who answered the questions, how were they selected, do we know there actually was a poll?

I believe 538 is a reputable source of information, so we can assume that yes, a poll was conducted if they were reporting on it. Furthermore, the poll was conducted on behalf of ABC, which is a fairly reputable news organization. (Its not like it came from Fox News or Newsmax, organizations known for pushing a right-wing agenda). There were 2 polls conducted in the same time frame... one of registered voters, one of likely voters, and both showed Trump with greater support than Biden.

Why the **** should anyone be concerned about this?

Biden won against Trump by 6 million votes in 2020. Are you suggesting 6 million plus voters are going to suddenly have a change of heart and vote for Trump because Biden is 4 years older?

No, but they could look at things like the spike in inflation at the start of his term (which Biden has little control over but might still get the blame) or the "border crisis" (which is a false crisis but the republicans are pushing hard on it).

Not every voter is rational. Some have short memories. Some give blame or praise where it is not deserved. This rule also applies to people who voted to "throw Trump out" in 2020. I would HOPE they would remember how destructive Trump was. I would HOPE they would recognize the successes that Biden has had (in infrastructure spending, in pushing semiconductor manufacture, etc.) But if a poll conducted by a reputable organization suggests otherwise, I will at least pay attention instead of relying only on my "hope".

 

[Solitaire]

Look at reality, Trump's base has been shrinking since he was elected.

I don't know where evidence for this position exists.

My first search turn up the big old python in a garden hose.
I don't think it has moved in years.

Support For Third U.S. Political Party At High Point

Sure they say they want out, but in the heat of the election back they go.
Just one look at third parties pretty well makes Trump look pretty good.


Oh! Here's a better one.

U.S. Party Preferences Evenly Split In 2022 After Shift To GOP

I see. It's that old hat trick again.

The party affiliation goes down for the Republican Party while at the same
time the number of people who will vote for the Republican Party goes up.

I think Biden wins in 2024 but by a smaller margin.


P. S. Oooh! Better break out the Bactine.

GOP Representative: Party Will ‘Blow Crap Up’ If Biden Takes 14th Amendment Route

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

I think SG's point is that it's not helpful to tear down the better choice because the better candidates haven't presented themselves.

Exactly. What's the goal of amplifying the GOP talking points for them. Is it supposed to make Biden reconsider? To make other candidates rise to the top?

It's not going to do that.

But it is going to make a trickle of Biden voters stay home if it keeps up. By a year and a half that trickle might fill a bucket.

The argument that folks have a right to post their opinions, yada yada... just like I'm posting my opinion yada yada ... is shortsighted. If you're going to vote for the Democrat regardless or if you're going to vote against Trump regardless why not consider it important what one posts about Biden now?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

If that had been what I was doing I would agree.

But just wishing for better candidates as long as you actually vote for the better of the two available is not the same as tearing him down.
It's perfectly legitimate, in this case, to complain that both candidates are way, WAAAY older than would be desirable in a POTUS.

It is what you and others were doing: amplifying the GOP talking point Biden is too old to be a competent POTUS.

In 2016 an army of bots flooded social media with the message Clinton was corrupt. People didn't know Trump at that time and he talks a good schtick. 2024 will be different in many ways. But don't overlook the fact forums are a part of the social media and the ageism message against Biden is already flowing out there.

 

[Delvo]

I think Biden wins in 2024 but by a smaller margin.

It could hardly get any smaller than the 40000 it was last time, without tipping to just a loss. If he does even slightly worse this time, that's pretty much a mathematically guaranteed loss. And a loss is what he was on course for last time anyway, until he got bailed out by a virus, and that virus isn't on his side anymore this time.

But there are bigger issues here than just one more election. Even if they manage to luck into a "win" with their losing approach to politics & elections, it'll still keep leading to more losses overall until the party's whole methodology changes. The sooner it does change, the better off the party will be, including if it were to start with Biden being out right now or tomorrow, and it would still be true even if the Old Guard's claims that an alternative candidate would lose were true, because one election is small potatoes compared to the party's entire future for many elections yet to come.

 

[Delvo]

the GOP talking point Biden is too old...

the ageism message against Biden...

Whatever's been happening to his mind is about 10% of the total problem with him.

 

[Stacyhs]

Then somehow I read the thread before without remembering I had.

My brain cells are definitely on the downward curve so if I come across the other post I'll let you know.

It could be interpreted different ways.

Not really as he specifically talks about the temporary replacement of Feinstein. From your link:

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said that Republicans would block an effort by Democrats to replace ailing California Sen. Dianne Feinstein on the Senate Judiciary Committee temporarily as she recovers from shingles at home.

McConnell said the bulk of President Biden's judicial nominees have bipartisan support and replacing Feinstein would allow Democrats to approve nominees he labeled "unqualified."

"So let's be clear: Senate Republicans will not take part in sidelining a temporary absent colleague off a committee just so Democrats can force through their very worst nominees," McConnell said Tuesday.

Has anyone posted the procedure for replacing a committee member when the legislator dies or resigns mid-legislative-session?

That would resolve this issue. Again, I have enough on my plate trying to keep the COVID origin debate out of the CT weeds.

I've looked and can find nothing except what I posted earlier. There seems to be no clear procedure for it. The only thing I could find is that if a member wants to resign from a committee (not from Congress), it takes a unanimous vote from the other committee members.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

I believe 538 is a reputable source of information, so we can assume that yes, a poll was conducted if they were reporting on it. Furthermore, the poll was conducted on behalf of ABC, which is a fairly reputable news organization. (Its not like it came from Fox News or Newsmax, organizations known for pushing a right-wing agenda). There were 2 polls conducted in the same time frame... one of registered voters, one of likely voters, and both showed Trump with greater support than Biden.


No, but they could look at things like the spike in inflation at the start of his term (which Biden has little control over but might still get the blame) or the "border crisis" (which is a false crisis but the republicans are pushing hard on it).

Not every voter is rational. Some have short memories. Some give blame or praise where it is not deserved. This rule also applies to people who voted to "throw Trump out" in 2020. I would HOPE they would remember how destructive Trump was. I would HOPE they would recognize the successes that Biden has had (in infrastructure spending, in pushing semiconductor manufacture, etc.) But if a poll conducted by a reputable organization suggests otherwise, I will at least pay attention instead of relying only on my "hope".

So no link to the actual poll you are talking about?

You can name drop all you want but don't expect me to take that as evidence.

Looks like you picked the only polls on this 538 page of most current polls that shows Trump and DeSantis surpass Biden. They are a ******* outliers. Color me not surprised you didn't want to post a link.

The polls were done or completed from Apr 28 to May 3rd. There is one other poll by Rasmussen at the bottom of the page that found Trump ahead by 7 points.

Going down the rabbit hole took too much time to find out the specifics of those outlier posts. I don't have access to WAPo and the one ABC news on the polls had a bunch of click bait headlines.
Broad doubts about Biden’s age and acuity spell Republican opportunity in 2024: POLL

They used this company AFAICT: Langer Research Associates if you want to go further.

I'm not concerned and still believe Trump is not a threat to Biden and neither is DeSantis.

I have better things to use my time on.

 

[Delvo]

"If I don't like it, it must not be real; only things I like can be real." Which current major political figure does that sound like?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

I don't know where evidence for this position exists.

My first search turn up the big old python in a garden hose.
I don't think it has moved in years.

Support For Third U.S. Political Party At High Point

Sure they say they want out, but in the heat of the election back they go.
Just one look at third parties pretty well makes Trump look pretty good.


Oh! Here's a better one.

U.S. Party Preferences Evenly Split In 2022 After Shift To GOP

I see. It's that old hat trick again.

The party affiliation goes down for the Republican Party while at the same
time the number of people who will vote for the Republican Party goes up.

I think Biden wins in 2024 but by a smaller margin.


P. S. Oooh! Better break out the Bactine.

GOP Representative: Party Will ‘Blow Crap Up’ If Biden Takes 14th Amendment Route

Board is slow for me at the moment.

The evidence is Trump lost to Biden in 2020, there was no Red Wave in 2022, if not for all the gerrymandering the GOP would not be holding the House by the slim margin they have, the # of registered Republicans is down, people are not flocking to Trump rallies in large numbers ...

You left out the url in your link to Party Preferences ...

If the GOP won't budge on the debt limit, history shows they will get the blame. I'm not sure Maddow is right about the public freaking out if Biden uses the 14th to ignore the debt ceiling. Unless it leads to massive inflation the general public won't give a rat's ass about it and if the country defaulted on its loans people would likely freak out more. That they would understand.

As for a 3rd party except as a spoiler it's not a concern anyone should have.

 

[Gulliver Foyle]

That doesn't prove me wrong.

Regardless of when she should have retired how were the Democrats supposed to have accomplished that? But more importantly, how was anyone supposed to have predicted McConnell would threaten to block her replacement on a committee?

Hindsight does not prove me wrong. You are welcome to try again.

There are plenty of ways 1) remove her access to central party funds, 2) remove her from preferrment for major committee roles, 3) announce that the party is backing a strong challenger the next election. And that's just for starters.

There's plenty of stuff that a party can do to railroad somebody out if they need to. But the Democrats never do it to the right of their party.

 

[Solitaire]

It could hardly get any smaller than the 40000 it was last time, without tipping
to just a loss. If he does even slightly worse this time, that's pretty much a
mathematically guaranteed loss. And a loss is what he was on course for last
time anyway, until he got bailed out by a virus, and that virus isn't on his side
anymore this time.

Perhaps another look at the historical data.

Year|Democratic|Republican|Other|Total|Party|Dem Delta|Rep Delta
2020|81,283,501|74,223,975| 2,922,155|158,429,631|D|15,429,985|11,239,150
2016|65,853,516|62,984,825| 7,830,896|136,669,237|R| -62,279| 2051,321
2012|65,915,795|60,933,504| 2,236,108|129,085,407|D|-3,582,721| 985,181
2008|69,498,516|59,948,323| 1,866,981|131,313,820|D| 7,457,906| 919,879
2004|62,040,610|59,028,444| 1,225,792|122,294,846|R|11,584,608| 8,028,547
2000|50,456,002|50,999,897| 3,949,201|105,405,100|R| 3,053,645|11,801,142
1996|47,402,357|39,198,755| 9,676,522| 96,277,634|D| 2,492,468| 94,210
1992|44,909,889|39,104,545|20,412,225|104,426,659|D| 3,100,413|-9,782,052
1988|41,809,476|48,886,597| 648,971| 91,345,044|R| 4,232,124|-5,568,875
1984|37,577,352|54,455,472| 228,111| 92,260,935|R| 2,097,237|10,552,242
1980|35,480,115|43,903,230| 6,640,978| 86,024,323|R|-5,351,766| 4,754,596

It's sort of inconclusive.

But there are bigger issues here than just one more election. Even if
they manage to luck into a "win" with their losing approach to politics
& elections, it'll still keep leading to more losses overall until the party's
whole methodology changes. The sooner it does change, the better off
the party will be, including if it were to start with Biden being out right
now or tomorrow, and it would still be true even if the Old Guard's claims
that an alternative candidate would lose were true, because one election
is small potatoes compared to the party's entire future for many elections
yet to come.

I'm not sure a Biden loss works for me given the recent past history
of the opposition party.

But I can clearly see changes in the Democratic Party in North Carolina
where they have an active schedule of monthly meetings unlike here in
Tennessee. So I guess I can be a little optimistic. But change often takes
decades for political parties.

The evidence is Trump lost to Biden in 2020, there was no Red Wave in 2022,
if not for all the gerrymandering the GOP would not be holding the House by
the slim margin they have, the # of registered Republicans is down, people
are not flocking to Trump rallies in large numbers...

Here's that poll that shows the changes that spooked me.

U.S. Party Preferences Evenly Split In 2022 After Shift To GOP

Still early though.

If the GOP won't budge on the debt limit, history shows they will get the
blame. I'm not sure Maddow is right about the public freaking out if Biden
uses the 14th to ignore the debt ceiling. Unless it leads to massive inflation
the general public won't give a rat's ass about it and if the country defaulted
on its loans people would likely freak out more. That they would understand.

I wonder if Biden will go to the Supreme Court and get the 1917 Liberty
Bond Act repealed? Or will the court rule against the 14th Amendment?

 

[Delphic Oracle]

I believe I have seen you post this before. I could be wrong but I don't see McConnell being any nicer with a new Senator as with a temporary one.



I admit I could be wrong but I know I did read that the problem doesn't go away if Feinstein resigns.



I could be misreading things like this:

McConnell says Republicans will block effort to replace Feinstein on Judiciary panel







McConnell can block the committee appointment, the vote would be 50:50. It then goes to the floor where 60 votes are required to approve the nominee.



Biden would need all his Democrats and the Independents to change the rule (and I believe that has to occur at the beginning of a session which is months away). That means Manchin could ask for any number of things to get his vote as could Sinema.



Besides the judicial nominee issue, the tradeoff could be Biden looks as weak as McCarthy.





I'll have to dig deeper ... later, the Sun is still out here.

Having to change the rules only at the beginning of the session is the only way to change the rules (by majority vote) by the rules.

The other option is that when you try and the chair sustains the objection raised, there can be a call to overrule the chair by majority vote.

Rather than make this laborious process happen repeatedly on a given point of order, it is simply taken to be an amendment of the rule.

But this opens the door to complaints of breaking rules, traditions, we'll hear the term "nuclear option" 800 times on the news...