Biden for President?

[Belz...]

Securing the Democratic regulars, the pissed off lefties, and disaffected independents and moderate cons that are not happy with Trump with a message of left-wing populism and the ending of status quo politics.

No I mean, to ensure that moderates vote for him after telling them off?

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Yeah I heard that from the Trumpers in '16. We all deserved Trump for being uppity liberals. It was our own fault then too.

Complaining about it probably isn't a solution.

Lots of people are very angry with the political establishment, not just MAGA CHUDs. probably something worth finding a solution to.

No I mean, to ensure that moderates vote for him after telling them off?

He's not Trump, that's probably enough for most of them.

 

[Belz...]

Complaining about it probably isn't a solution.

Sauce for the good is NOT sauce for the gander, it seems.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Sauce for the good is NOT sauce for the gander, it seems.

They aren't complaining they just telling us we don't live up to their standards and why we deserve to be punished because of it. Totally different.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

They aren't complaining they just telling us we don't live up to their standards and why we deserve to be punished because of it. Totally different.

Did someone tell you that politics was fair?

 

[Beelzebuddy]

No I mean, to ensure that moderates vote for him after telling them off?

I'd have said he should pick Buttigieg or Klobuchar as VP. Someone young and reasonably moderate. Same as I'm saying Biden should pick a young progressive.

Equally, if Bernie had won and there were supporters crowing and insulting boomers for not keeping up with the times, I'd have been telling them to knock it off too.

He's not Trump, that's probably enough for most of them.

As it's enough for most of Bernie's supporters.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Did someone tell you that politics was fair?

Anything but glib truisms between bites of veal?

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Anything but glib truisms between bites of veal?

I want Biden to win. I'll vote for him. Hell, the guy that wrote this essay is going out to volunteer for Biden.

Just thought that some insight into the minds of disillusioned young Democrats could be valuable.

you can stomp your feet and cry about how unfair that these people aren't going to turn out to vote for Biden, but that won't change anything. Even acknowledging that progressive voter turnout will be poor for Biden is met with intense anger and petty insults. It smacks of denialism.

These people that voted for Biden better put on their big-boy boots and get out to canvas for him. They are going to need every Biden vote they can get, I suspect. They won the primary, this is their guy.

 

[theprestige]

I think Biden plans to be "done" the day after winning the general election.
Whomever he picks for VP will, I suspect, for all intents and purposes be the President.

I'm trying to envision how that would work.

The VP isn't in the military chain of command. He can't sign bills into law. He can't inform Congress of the state of the Union. He can't nominate federal judges or other high officials. He can't issue executive orders, nor direct the operations of the federal government.

There are huge, important chunks of the job, where authority rests solely with the president, or bypasses the office of the vice president entirely.

The VP could meet with foreign dignitaries and other VIPs, as a sort of ambassador. But any agreements he reached in such meetings would still have to be ratified by the president.

Is it your idea that the VP would do all of these things, and also direct policy, and that where the President was needed, Biden would passively apply a rubber stamp?

 

[theprestige]

Securing the Democratic regulars, the pissed off lefties, and disaffected independents and moderate cons that are not happy with Trump with a message of left-wing populism and the ending of status quo politics.

We'll never know if it would have worked, such is life. Maybe he would have had an easier time than Biden, maybe it was impossible. That's neither here nor there. Biden has to make it happen.

Of course we'll know if it would have worked. In fact we already know. It didn't work.

It needed to work twice: Once in the primaries, and again in the general. If his plan was to secure "the Democratic regulars, the pissed off lefties... with a message of left-wing populism and the ending of status quo politics" then his plan has failed. It didn't work the first time. You can tell yourself we'll never know if it would have worked the second time, but if it failed the first time...

 

[Mike!]

I'm trying to envision how that would work.

The VP isn't in the military chain of command. He can't sign bills into law. He can't inform Congress of the state of the Union. He can't nominate federal judges or other high officials. He can't issue executive orders, nor direct the operations of the federal government.

There are huge, important chunks of the job, where authority rests solely with the president, or bypasses the office of the vice president entirely.

The VP could meet with foreign dignitaries and other VIPs, as a sort of ambassador. But any agreements he reached in such meetings would still have to be ratified by the president.

Is it your idea that the VP would do all of these things, and also direct policy, and that where the President was needed, Biden would passively apply a rubber stamp?

I could see a way...

https://i.imgflip.com/3r6o9u.jpg

 

[pgwenthold]

I'm trying to envision how that would work.

The VP isn't in the military chain of command. He can't sign bills into law. He can't inform Congress of the state of the Union. He can't nominate federal judges or other high officials. He can't issue executive orders, nor direct the operations of the federal government.

There are huge, important chunks of the job, where authority rests solely with the president, or bypasses the office of the vice president entirely.

The VP could meet with foreign dignitaries and other VIPs, as a sort of ambassador. But any agreements he reached in such meetings would still have to be ratified by the president.

Is it your idea that the VP would do all of these things, and also direct policy, and that where the President was needed, Biden would passively apply a rubber stamp?

I think that is the suggestion, yes. Yes, the President has to sign the bill to make it a law, but he signs what the VP tells him to sign.

Seriously, why do you think it is complicated?

 

[theprestige]

I think that is the suggestion, yes. Yes, the President has to sign the bill to make it a law, but he signs what the VP tells him to sign.

Seriously, why do you think it is complicated?

I just don't think there's any reason to expect Biden would run his presidency that way.

Aside from rubber-stamping documents behind the scenes, there's a lot of other stuff the VP simply can't do. The SOTU, for one thing.

And I think the Joint Chiefs would raise hell if they were told to get their orders from the VP. Or if their orders from the President had to wait for the VP to weigh in and sign off.

And I think that ultimately, it wouldn't actually reduce President Biden's workload in any meaningful way.

And I think that if it did, everyone would notice, would see it as an abdication of responsibility, and he'd end up impeached and removed from office.

And I think that it's highly unlikely that Biden's sense of himself is such that he'd take a back seat when it came to signing legislation and directing the operations of the federal government.

And I think that "a vote for me is really a vote for whoever my VP is going to be" is an absurd campaign slogan on its face. If the whole point of electing Biden is so that someone other than Biden can be president, why should Biden run at all? Why not just keep his Senate seat, and endorse whoever his VP pick would be, in their own presidential campaign?

After all, the assumption here is that whoever he picked as VP must be pretty damn electable themselves, otherwise, what's the selling point for picking them? "You wouldn't vote for them for president, but if you vote for me you'll get them as president" doesn't make any sense.

And I think this raises serious questions about his capacity as Senator. If he's not up for the presidency, how can he be trusted as a Senator? How much of his recent Senate career is actually being run by his staff without his close attention?

If he lacks the capacity to be president, doesn't he also lack the capacity to be a senator? If he had abstained from running for president, pleading incapacity, wouldn't that be the same as telling his constituents it was time to replace him as Senator, as well?

I don't know where this rumor started, or how seriously people are taking it. But I doubt it's true, and I doubt it would work even if they tried it. And I doubt the people who elected Biden for President would put up with it for a moment if he did try it.

 

[pgwenthold]

I just don't think there's any reason to expect Biden would run his presidency that way.

But that's not the issue. You were confused about how it could work, not about would Biden do it.

If you want to change the topic from "But how can the VP be in charge, the President is the only one who can sign bills into law" to "Would Biden really want to be a puppet like GWBush was?" then go there, but that's not the topic I was addressing.

 

[Bob001]

But that's not the issue. You were confused about how it could work, not about would Biden do it.
.....

Why wouid anyone think he would? One of the president's most important responsibilities is to appoint competent, qualified people to run the government. Why would anyone think he wouldn't or couldn't do that? Another is to maintain good relations with our allies. Another is to work with Congress, where he was a senator for SIX terms. Another is to appoint federal judges. Another is to set a tone for public discourse and debate.

Why wouldn't Biden be equipped to do these things?

 

[Stacyhs]

I'm sure Stacy Abrams is a nice person, but she has only held state legislative office and lost her race for governor. Never a mayor or governor, never a congressperson or senator, not really an established national figure. Much more likely to go with Klobuchar or Harris, maybe Kirsten Gillibrand or a governor.

Tammy Duckworth, a senator and former congressperson who lost both legs in combat in Iraq, would be a compelling choice.

Of course there's always Michelle Obama.

Being a 'nice person' has nothing to do with it. Having eleven years of experience in the state legislature gives her more experience in government than Duckworth (who has only served since 2017).

If you're serious about M Obama (I don't know if you're being facetious or not), she only has experience being First Lady. Abrams' experience far outweighs MO's.

 

[Dr. Keith]

I'm trying to envision how that would work.

Ask President Cheney.

 

[Stacyhs]

There's a rumor going around that Biden is going in intending to do only a single term, and, in fact, will be resigning with a year left in order to provide a leg up for the VP.

You should have stopped at the word "rumor".

 

[pgwenthold]

You should have stopped at the word "rumor".

That's why I called it a rumor.

 

[theprestige]

But that's not the issue. You were confused about how it could work, not about would Biden do it.

Not confused, dubious.

The reason I think Biden wouldn't do it is because the ways that might be tried to make it work don't strike me as particularly workable.