Heck, I'd go even further and say that Biden is probably the BEST candidate the Democrats could have chosen to take on Stubby McBonespurs. (Note I said the best candidate, not the best person to actually BE president...)
- He's a moderate. Statistically/historically being a moderate usually gives an advantage to a candidate.
Maybe there was some era of history when that was true, but definitely not the one we're in.
Actually it is still true.
In 2016, Trump was actually seen as the more moderate candiate
From:
Gallup (from 2016)
Donald Trump's political views, in the eyes of U.S. registered voters, are the least conservative of GOP presidential candidates in recent history....with less than half of voters (47%) describing him as conservative or very conservative. ...U.S. voters are most likely to describe Clinton as liberal (31%) or very liberal (27%).
Remember, when Trump came on the scene, he claimed he was against the Iraq war, and was in favor of gay rights. He didn't talk about privatizing social security, but he did talk about closing tax loopholes. Now WE as skeptics can see the lies... but to the more gullible voter? He probably seemed like a moderate.
The only two recent Democrat winners campaigned about how much they were going to change things; the rest who went with the "I'm a competent manager who'll never rock the boat" theme all lost.
First of all, keep in mind that I said that a moderate has an
advantage, not that they will always win. Outside factors can still have an impact... scandals, a candidates personality, incumbency, etc.
Secondly, its not just a case of "how moderate is the democrat" but also "how moderate is the republican"... a moderate democrat doesn't really have much of an advantage against a moderate republican.
And as for the 2 recent democratic winners? Yes, Obama talked about "change", and yes, voters viewed him as "liberal", but he was up against McCain and Romney, who were seen as just as conservative as he was liberal, so there was no real advantage for him.
On top of that, the idea of how that's supposed to work in theory (nevermind the fact that we can't theorize our way out of the fact that it doesn't work anyway) is pulling votes from people who might otherwise have voted Republican. But he has a whopping 5% of self-identified Republicans saying they'll vote for him, which is less than Hillary.
First of all, not sure where you're getting your '5%' Republicans for Biden figure from... I've seen figures putting it at around 11%'. (See:
Newsweek)
Secondly, you need to look at more than just republicans supporting Biden... you also have independents (who might either be complete fence sitters, or who might lean republican but will entertain voting for Biden.)
Lastly, the issue is not just republicans switching sides... one of the major advantages in picking a moderate is that it is less likely to energize the opposing side's base. The current republican efforts to demonize Biden as a "tool of the left" is not necessarily to appeal to independents and moderates, its to encourage the MAGAchuds to actually get out and vote.
And aside from that, if Biden is a "moderate", then he's the kind of "moderate" whose most enthusiastic and forceful efforts have been to push for massive cuts to Social Security and literally every other assistance program...
Psst... I'm going to let you in on a little secret...
Sometimes, the political environment changes. Yeah, I know... shocking, isn't it.
Oh, and by the way... are you referring to This?
From:
Washington Post
Sanders cites a newspaper clip from Jan. 11, 1983, that says, “Biden suggested a gradual increase in the retirement age would help improve the Social Security system.” This was not a controversial position at the time....The broad outlines of the plan was recommended by the National Commission on Social Security Reform and is believed to have strengthened the long-term health of Social Security. Sanders, in 1999, praised the 1983 law an example of bipartisan cooperation.
Biden also at one point tried to freeze social security, but that was not targeted only at social security but also impacted things like the military as well.
...defend a Republican Supreme Court appointment against sexual harassment allegations...
yes he did... and he has actually gone on record indicating that it was a mistake. I doubt he would make the same mistake again.
...give us a "crime" bill that just harasses minorities
Actually Biden's actions as a senator also included funding for firearms background checks, anti-violence against women and addiction treatment.
Oh, and should I mention that Sanders was an eventual supporter of the bill?
See:
VOX
...openly promise Wall Street not to do anything they wouldn't like...
Ummmm... Biden has said that he's going to increase corporate taxes. Pretty sure that "wall street" won't like that.
I think I'll just skip the rest of your rants. Its nothing but empty rhetoric.
- He has strong support among minority voters.
That was the narrative the media made out of it based on South Carolina. But that was because of SC's older black population...
Actually he had wide-spread support from black voters across many states, not just south carolina.
From:
Politico
Biden neared or exceeded that mark in the South on Tuesday, in Texas (58 percent), Virginia (60 percent), North Carolina (62 percent) and Alabama (72 percent). The results in Texas and North Carolina were especially notable given the prevalence of early voting in those states, where hundreds of thousands of ballots were cast before Biden’s South Carolina surge.
That's not his worst problem. It's just the one that some of his defenders focus on the most because it's superficial. His biggest problem is that he doesn't stand for anything
That's only a problem for people like BernieBros who are detached from reality.
The fact is, Biden has a set of policies... he plans to raise taxes on corporations and the wealthy. He plans to spend more on infrastructure and green energy. He want to provide at least some free post-secondary education. The fact that he's not some foaming-at-the-mouth Sanders-type doesn't mean that he will not attempt to follow through with those plans.
What he marks is a return to the situation that produced Trump in the first place. That "of-by-for" thing makes a nifty quote but it doesn't describe how things really work or how people perceived them to work when they voted last time to get away from the status-quo.
You talk about how "things really work", ignoring the fact that all the wonderful plans put forward by someone like Sanders would never ever pass Congress.
