Merged 2024 Election Thread

[dirtywick]

you just said energetic 3 times.

 

[Mike!]

I saw Biden today in what initially I thought was soooo fake. Frozen Biden.

He stood so very still, like those statue people painted metallic colors in city centers. Just completely frozen. All around him, people are dancing and clapping with the beat of the music just inches from him.
It looks more like someone inserted a cardboard cutout of him into the video.

He def won't make it. They were stupid to try. Rate of decline grows. It will only get worse.
No way this man will be allowed to debate Trump. They need a replacement STAT!

There won't be any debates. Trump will back out at the last moment claiming it's.... Rigged.

 

[carlosy]

you just said energetic 3 times.

No. I mentioned energy, energetic and energize.
A younger candidate has more energy, is likely to be more energetic in his presence and therefore has more potential to energize people for his cause.

I would like to see someone who can actually excite the people. But the Dems leave that to the other side, because they take the (sleepy) high road.
Someone who Trump would be afraid of to even shake his hands on a debate because he would squeeze his tiny ones into mashed potatoes. Someone who wipes the floor with Trumps stupidity. Someone who fires back three tweets for every dump stupid tweets of Trump. Someone sharp, almost vicious, but smart and truthfull.

 

[Delvo]

The idea that there is some perfect candidate that could handily beat Trump is laughably stupid.

Nobody has said any such thing. The problem is that Biden is uniquely terrible candidate among Democrats and being more likely to beat Trump than he is is not unique but very common, even just a minimal baseline. The entire rest of the party but Biden has done rather well lately against more challenging opponents than Trump. It's not on their own merit but because the Republicans at the poker table just started throwing their chips at them, but Biden manages to be the only one not even catching or picking up any chips.

It wouldn’t matter who the Democrats nominated.

There might be a way to somehow come up with crazier, more obviously counterreality & denialistic/delusional, more self-destructive nonsense than that, but right now I can't picture it. The fact that there are Democrats spouting something so obviously dredged up from the nether regions of an alternative universe as that is the perfect demonstration of how the Democrats manage to keep finding ways to do so much losing even when dealt winning hands. (Actually, I did just remember an example of something even farther out there in la-la land than this, and it was even on the same subject. Remember the last few times Democrats were admitting that candidates matter? It was while they were insisting on propping up the worst ones they could find while claiming that they were the best, because trying to lose is how to win and trying to win is how to lose! So congratulations; this particular zero-plausibility nonsense turns out to actually be an improvement from negative 100%!)

The propaganda machine that is the Republican Party and right wing media working in lock-step would focus all their energy on tearing down that person too. And millions of gullible people would uncritically accept it as truth

Right. Of course. People who would otherwise normally support Democrats are just mindless sponges of Republican talking points. And that claim is not at all a Democrat talking point used (by other mindless sponges) as an excuse.

He's old, he's not mentally agile, his short term memory is not great and his situational awareness is reduced. That's not senile.

It's what the word "senile" has always meant before in my experience. What else are you saying "senile" has to be instead? Diagnoses like Alzheimer's & Pick's diseases?

 

[sir drinks-a-lot]

He demonstrates again and again that he's not. He's old, he's not mentally agile, his short term memory is not great and his situational awareness is reduced. That's not senile. I have a relative going senile and he's nothing like that.

Merriam-Webster defines senile as:

of, relating to, exhibiting, or characteristic of old age

especially, : exhibiting a decline of cognitive abilities (such as memory) associated with old age

You pretty much checked all the boxes with your quote above. In other words, you agree that Joe Biden is senile.

 

[dirtywick]

No. I mentioned energy, energetic and energize.
A younger candidate has more energy, is likely to be more energetic in his presence and therefore has more potential to energize people for his cause.

I would like to see someone who can actually excite the people. But the Dems leave that to the other side, because they take the (sleepy) high road.
Someone who Trump would be afraid of to even shake his hands on a debate because he would squeeze his tiny ones into mashed potatoes. Someone who wipes the floor with Trumps stupidity. Someone who fires back three tweets for every dump stupid tweets of Trump. Someone sharp, almost vicious, but smart and truthfull.

oh sorry thanks for clearing that up

 

[sir drinks-a-lot]

And the press is partly to blame, because they put Biden under the microscope for every sign of old age while Trump's mental illness and dementia gets a pass, because it would be 'mean' to point it out or something.

This doesn't even pass the laugh test. What world are you living in where the press decides to give Trump "a pass" for fear of being mean?

 

[The Don]

No. I mentioned energy, energetic and energize.
A younger candidate has more energy, is likely to be more energetic in his presence and therefore has more potential to energize people for his cause.

I would like to see someone who can actually excite the people. But the Dems leave that to the other side, because they take the (sleepy) high road.
Someone who Trump would be afraid of to even shake his hands on a debate because he would squeeze his tiny ones into mashed potatoes. Someone who wipes the floor with Trumps stupidity. Someone who fires back three tweets for every dump stupid tweets of Trump. Someone sharp, almost vicious, but smart and truthfull.

I think it's a bit weird that there are some on the left who want someone who will out Trump Trump. For sure it may persuade some of the mythical left wing "lost tribe" to vote. The risk is that it may very well turn off a much larger number of potential voters who are heartily sick of Trump, his character and his lack of respect for the nation and its institutions.

 

[johnny karate]

I have no clue who I "tweeted" as I have never sent a tweet nor received one and didnt even think to check the background of the video provider. Hahahahahaha. IT WAS THE SAME VIDEO, WHAT DO I CARE?!
I just searched for a link to the video I had seen on YouTube but could not find again to embed (as I had stated).

Yes, Like I said: You uncritically accepted the tweet and posted it here. Thank you for confirming.

I just call it like I see it. I do not feel the end result of any perceived persecution. Give evidence to dispute or call names. I dont care. I do like being correct though, regardless if the side I want to win, can actually win or if they have some terribly stupid people they need to be rid of.
Words on this forum are a bit ridiculous when it comes to politics. All a person can do is laugh at some of the die hard "fans" of certain ideologies or politicians here. I do hold out some hope that some balanced views, with sanity and logic return.

I think most will die by then. Then a new generation might make more sense.

Nothing says "balanced views, with sanity and logic" like a tweet by an anti-vax, conspiracy theorist Trump supporter.

 

[carlosy]

I think it's a bit weird that there are some on the left who want someone who will out Trump Trump. For sure it may persuade some of the mythical left wing "lost tribe" to vote. The risk is that it may very well turn off a much larger number of potential voters who are heartily sick of Trump, his character and his lack of respect for the nation and its institutions.

Don't you think that it's possible to be tough and sharp and energetic against Trumps idiocy and demagogie, without being idiotic, crazy and bully as he is?

People are emotional animals. Don't leave the battlefield of emotions to just one side. We are not Mr. Spock, allthough we would like us to be.

 

[johnny karate]

No one is perfect. But please don't tell me that old grandpa is the best solution the US has against the biggest thread they ever faced.

So, if the REPs would focus all their energy on tearing down that candidate, then surely it would lead to some advantages for bringing someone that is:

- younger
- sharper
- has a lot more energy
- is energetic
- can activate and energize people
- can fully focus on the campaign and doesn't have to deal with being POTUS at the same time
- can punch back (verbally) on Trumps tweets
- etc.

But no, they chose the way that might even lead to the "Ruth Biden Ginsberg" dead end.

None of these qualities have anything to do with telling us if the candidate in question can competently discharge their duties as the president. I'm sorry that you don't feel inspired by the competent stewardship of the Biden presidency, but I would argue that prioritizing a desire for a candidate to adequately "wow" us is exactly how we ended up with Trump in the first place.

 

[johnny karate]

Nobody has said any such thing. The problem is that Biden is uniquely terrible candidate among Democrats and being more likely to beat Trump than he is is not unique but very common, even just a minimal baseline. The entire rest of the party but Biden has done rather well lately against more challenging opponents than Trump. It's not on their own merit but because the Republicans at the poker table just started throwing their chips at them, but Biden manages to be the only one not even catching or picking up any chips.

Who is the candidate then? Name the person who fits the bill for the Democrats.

There might be a way to somehow come up with crazier, more obviously counterreality & denialistic/delusional, more self-destructive nonsense than that, but right now I can't picture it. The fact that there are Democrats spouting something so obviously dredged up from the nether regions of an alternative universe as that is the perfect demonstration of how the Democrats manage to keep finding ways to do so much losing even when dealt winning hands. (Actually, I did just remember an example of something even farther out there in la-la land than this, and it was even on the same subject. Remember the last few times Democrats were admitting that candidates matter? It was while they were insisting on propping up the worst ones they could find while claiming that they were the best, because trying to lose is how to win and trying to win is how to lose! So congratulations; this particular zero-plausibility nonsense turns out to actually be an improvement from negative 100%!)

Okay then.

Right. Of course. People who would otherwise normally support Democrats are just mindless sponges of Republican talking points. And that claim is not at all a Democrat talking point used (by other mindless sponges) as an excuse.

I leveled this accusation at someone who had posted a tweet from an anti-vax conspiracy theorist Trump supporter in their attempt to bash Biden. If you want to feign righteous indignation, maybe pick a better moment.

 

[johnny karate]

I’m sorry but the blatant denial in posts like yours really get to me, what do they say “ Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it”.

Can I cast your mind back to 2016 when we were being told about Clinton’s terminal illness? How she wouldn’t if voted in even get to her inauguration, the videos showing her ill and unable to even walk and having to be practically carried everywhere, how she was being pumped full of drugs to keep her going. Yet many people - and I have to shamefully say I was one of them - hand waved all those warnings away, denied the evidence of our own eyes and the warnings the republicans were giving us all over their media. Well they had the last laugh didn’t they? Dead and buried before Trump’s inauguration. We should have listened back then to the right wingers’ warnings but we didn’t, shouldn’t we learn from history and this time treat these right wingers’ warnings as serious and evidence based?




/s

*chef's kiss* Perfection.

 

[Dr.Sid]

Funny fact: Bill Clinton is younger than Joe Biden. And he entered service over 30 years ago.
It simply looks like nobody wants the job.

 

[carlosy]

None of these qualities have anything to do with telling us if the candidate in question can competently discharge their duties as the president.

No, but they have to do with getting the candidate there.
A candidiate should have these qualities in addition to the other qualities which qualify him/her to be competent for being POTUS.
And since Trump is other choice, pretty much everything smarter than a lamppost is going to be more competent than him. So it's not like we need an uber genius.

I'm sorry that you don't feel inspired by the competent stewardship of the Biden presidency, but I would argue that prioritizing a desire for a candidate to adequately "wow" us is exactly how we ended up with Trump in the first place.

Competent stewardship is unlikely to kick up the arses of those who probably don't bother going to vote (for their team).

 

[stanfr]

No one is perfect. But please don't tell me that old grandpa is the best solution the US has against the biggest thread they ever faced.

So, if the REPs would focus all their energy on tearing down that candidate, then surely it would lead to some advantages for bringing someone that is:

- younger
- sharper
- has a lot more energy
- is energetic
- can activate and energize people
- can fully focus on the campaign and doesn't have to deal with being POTUS at the same time
- can punch back (verbally) on Trumps tweets
- etc.

But no, they chose the way that might even lead to the "Ruth Biden Ginsberg" dead end.

I honestly don't get it, but then again I have been anti 2 party for my entire life--I always voted for the most viable 3d party candidate until Bush-Gore, which then and more so now it is clear that systemic change will have to wait, because defeating a potential dictator is far more important right now than griping about the dominant stupidity demonstrated by both major parties. And it is unequivocally true that the Dems support of Biden, who at least is sane and is capable of empathy, and has bipartisan legislation under his belt, is far less stupid than the GOP's inane support of a complete lunatic who will drag the entire country along with his supporters to the grave if it suits his fragile ego. So I won't waste my breath right now complaining about poor old Joe, there are far more important issues at hand!

 

[stanfr]

This doesn't even pass the laugh test. What world are you living in where the press decides to give Trump "a pass" for fear of being mean?

They are catching on, but until recently could you find any major news articles describing Trumps clear signs of dementia? I couldn't

 

[stanfr]

I think it's a bit weird that there are some on the left who want someone who will out Trump Trump. For sure it may persuade some of the mythical left wing "lost tribe" to vote. The risk is that it may very well turn off a much larger number of potential voters who are heartily sick of Trump, his character and his lack of respect for the nation and its institutions.

That is a problem, and I think in part it is why the Democrat machine stuck with the tried and true. He won in 2020--why risk an unknown when they have the known? On paper, the economy (#1 predictor of election success) is doing well, and Joe is obviously old but he is only 4 years older than 4 years ago. Ultimately they care about winning and preserving the status quo (conservative!), not societal change. Bernie had better poll results in 2020 against Trump but they still went with Biden, because he was the status quo. It usually wins out!

 

[shemp]

Funny fact: Bill Clinton is younger than Joe Biden. And he entered service over 30 years ago.
It simply looks like nobody wants the job.

Nobody wants someone who wants the job.

 

[carlosy]

So I won't waste my breath right now complaining about poor old Joe, there are far more important issues at hand!

Isn't the most important issue that the democratic candidate wins against Trump? If so, then Bidens age is an issue. Not just because of his age on paper, but because he comes across as being actually old.

I remember having seen an interview with David Attenborough a few years ago. Actually it must have been 7 years ago since he is now 98 and back then he had just turned 91. I almost couldn't believe it back then because he did not come across as someone being that old, neither physically nor mentally. More like 70.
Someone like him (back then) would rip through both candidates in terms of 'not looking old'. So it's not only about the age on paper.