Will Biden run for the presidency in 2024?

[Tero]

Can you gold plate wax?

It's going to be spray on gold. Any areas not covered use a brush.



https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00CIOR20...&pd_rd_r=22dbb29c-fdd1-47eb-88de-d2747f1103fb

 

[Mongrel]

Can you gold plate wax?

I've seen tea lights covered with gold foil at a wedding once, so sort of I suppose...

 

[Suddenly]

Do you expect Biden to crash and burn like Feinstein and the people around him will take his car keys away?

There is no evidence either of those 2 things will occur.

There is plenty of evidence out there about aging and likelyhood of decline even were we to assume he's in good mental condition for his age.

The lack of other candidates is one of the varied ways the Democratic Party has been incompetent. The GOP not so much better, really. The Boomer generation has had no interest in bringing along younger replacements. Since Obama ruined their plans in 2008 it's only gotten worse. The party should have fallen over itself the last four years to raise the profile of younger prospects. It's almost like they do the opposite because they fear the result of the party drifting left.

That's how you wind up in 2024 being resigned to running a guy who first tried to run in 1988.

It's getting to be like the early 80s USSR when they were scraping the bottom of the barrel to find people who were there in the good old days. I can't wait for 2028 when Dick Gephardt is battling Al Gore for the nomination.

 

[Gulliver Foyle]

There is plenty of evidence out there about aging and likelyhood of decline even were we to assume he's in good mental condition for his age.

The lack of other candidates is one of the varied ways the Democratic Party has been incompetent. The GOP not so much better, really. The Boomer generation has had no interest in bringing along younger replacements. Since Obama ruined their plans in 2008 it's only gotten worse. The party should have fallen over itself the last four years to raise the profile of younger prospects. It's almost like they do the opposite because they fear the result of the party drifting left.

That's how you wind up in 2024 being resigned to running a guy who first tried to run in 1988.

It's getting to be like the early 80s USSR when they were scraping the bottom of the barrel to find people who were there in the good old days. I can't wait for 2028 when Dick Gephardt is battling Al Gore for the nomination.

Problem for the Dems is that all the younger prospects are well to the left of where the party leadership wants to be (i.e. the peospects are mostly barely left of centre). Hence the clinging onto the old guard.

What the party needs is another Roosevelt, somebody with enough right wing credentials to get through screening, but enough sense to swing left.

 

[angrysoba]

There is plenty of evidence out there about aging and likelyhood of decline even were we to assume he's in good mental condition for his age.

The lack of other candidates is one of the varied ways the Democratic Party has been incompetent. The GOP not so much better, really. The Boomer generation has had no interest in bringing along younger replacements. Since Obama ruined their plans in 2008 it's only gotten worse. The party should have fallen over itself the last four years to raise the profile of younger prospects. It's almost like they do the opposite because they fear the result of the party drifting left.

That's how you wind up in 2024 being resigned to running a guy who first tried to run in 1988.

It's getting to be like the early 80s USSR when they were scraping the bottom of the barrel to find people who were there in the good old days. I can't wait for 2028 when Dick Gephardt is battling Al Gore for the nomination.

Biden is pre-Boomer!

But yeah, the Democrats seem to have done a terrible job of bringing in any exciting candidates with ideas. There is, I suppose, the so-called Squad, but they tend to have little appeal outside of Democratic strongholds in CA and NY.

The Republicans, I suppose, in some way have done a better job of getting a new generation of politicians. Many are, of course, bat **** insane, or at the very least have to pretend to be to appeal to the base, but they do have popular candidates, unfortunately.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Biden is pre-Boomer!

But yeah, the Democrats seem to have done a terrible job of bringing in any exciting candidates with ideas. ....

Meanwhile Biden makes headlines sneaking in and out of Ukraine after an eventful SOTU address ...

 

[wareyin]

Just as the Republican Party can't prevent candidates from entering the primaries as Republicans (so the racists that get elected are who the voters chose in the primaries), neither can the Democratic Party. And so...the "boring old guard" candidates that keep winning the Dem primaries are who the Dem voters want.
All this whining that "the establishment" isn't bringing in new blood just seems to keep missing that central point. New blood does keep entering the primaries, but voters don't seem to want them as much as a handful of loud anonymous internet posters think they should.

 

[Suddenly]

Just as the Republican Party can't prevent candidates from entering the primaries as Republicans (so the racists that get elected are who the voters chose in the primaries), neither can the Democratic Party. And so...the "boring old guard" candidates that keep winning the Dem primaries are who the Dem voters want.
All this whining that "the establishment" isn't bringing in new blood just seems to keep missing that central point. New blood does keep entering the primaries, but voters don't seem to want them as much as a handful of loud anonymous internet posters think they should.

It's not a justification. It's the problem. The whole point of politics is to control one's environment. Biden running in 2024 is probably the best choice. It's that we live in an environment where it is the best choice is the problem and it's one that needs solved.

It's amazing how little people learned from the RGB debacle and the potential price of individual hubris. If the old guard cares at all about the future of the party and what that party stands for they need to remedy this state of affairs.

It's a mixture of stepping aside and using their power to help shape narratives to cast positive light on promising younger prospects.

 

[wareyin]

It's not a justification. It's the problem. The whole point of politics is to control one's environment. Biden running in 2024 is probably the best choice. It's that we live in an environment where it is the best choice is the problem and it's one that needs solved.

It's amazing how little people learned from the RGB debacle and the potential price of individual hubris. If the old guard cares at all about the future of the party and what that party stands for they need to remedy this state of affairs.

It's a mixture of stepping aside and using their power to help shape narratives to cast positive light on promising younger prospects.

And again, let's just ignore that the voters are not picking the people you want in the primaries and claim that this is some nefarious plot by "the old guard."

If the public wanted the young blood that you want, then the public would be picking them in the primaries. This whole "the people in power keep being chosen over my preferred candidates, so the people who keep getting chosen should step down so my candidates can win" plan just seems like sour grapes.

 

[Suddenly]

And again, let's just ignore that the voters are not picking the people you want in the primaries and claim that this is some nefarious plot by "the old guard."

Not a plot. It's just a general failure of leadership brought on by the very natural human tendency to not want to let go.

If the public wanted the young blood that you want, then the public would be picking them in the primaries.

Again, there is no claim that the public wants young blood. It's that the public not wanting young blood is an obvious problem for the present and future of the party. The idea that the party can't shape the preference of the voting public requires such a naive and narrow view of the nature of politics that it is hard to take seriously.

This whole "the people in power keep being chosen over my preferred candidates, so the people who keep getting chosen should step down so my candidates can win" plan just seems like sour grapes.

Fair doesn't enter into it. The lack of viable younger candidates is a problem that needs solved. Policy doesn't enter into it either except that the party needs to keep an eye as to what the younger end of their demographic will want.

There is some projection going on here as if this is some sort of leftist point or something. It isn't. If there were a generation of politically viable young Biden acolytes out there ready and able to step in then this criticism wouldn't hold.

 

[wareyin]

Not a plot. It's just a general failure of leadership brought on by the very natural human tendency to not want to let go.

How is this a failure, other than it being a failure in your eyes that the people you want are not being chosen by everyone else?

Again, there is no claim that the public wants young blood. It's that the public not wanting young blood is an obvious problem for the present and future of the party. The idea that the party can't shape the preference of the voting public requires such a naive and narrow view of the nature of politics that it is hard to take seriously.

Hold on, now "the old guard" should not only stop running so your preferred candidates won't lose to them, but "the old guard" should actively work to shape the preference of the voting public to align with your preference for...some reason?

Fair doesn't enter into it. The lack of viable younger candidates is a problem that needs solved. Policy doesn't enter into it either except that the party needs to keep an eye as to what the younger end of their demographic will want.

There is some projection going on here as if this is some sort of leftist point or something. It isn't. If there were a generation of politically viable young Biden acolytes out there ready and able to step in then this criticism wouldn't hold.

There is definitely some projection going on here. The lack of viable younger candidates is (apparently) the fault of "the old guard" for not working to shape public preference to agree with that of Suddenly, but it isn't the job of the younger candidates that Suddenly would prefer to make themselves viable or appealing, and it isn't the job of the Suddenly's of the country to either work to find common ground or to convert other voters to his way of thinking.

Got it.

 

[Suddenly]

How is this a failure, other than it being a failure in your eyes that the people you want are not being chosen by everyone else?

"People I want" doesn't enter into it. Is it or is it not a problem for the party going forward that they don't have much youth in their ranks?

Hold on, now "the old guard" should not only stop running so your preferred candidates won't lose to them, but "the old guard" should actively work to shape the preference of the voting public to align with your preference for...some reason?

Making this about my preference is silly deflection. As to this topic I've never stated a preference and in fact keep stating the opposite. They can develop whatever centrist yahoos they can find and this criticism disappears completely. I'm not criticizing their policy. I'm criticizing their competence.

There is definitely some projection going on here. The lack of viable younger candidates is (apparently) the fault of "the old guard" for not working to shape public preference to agree with that of Suddenly, but it isn't the job of the younger candidates that Suddenly would prefer to make themselves viable or appealing, and it isn't the job of the Suddenly's of the country to either work to find common ground or to convert other voters to his way of thinking.

Got it.

It is the responsibility of those with power to work towards making sure their legacy endures their inevitable absence. RGB had I guess every right to refuse to retire despite a terminal diagnosis because she felt she was that important. How's that working out?

 

[wareyin]

"People I want" doesn't enter into it. Is it or is it not a problem for the party going forward that they don't have much youth in their ranks?

You're the one complaining that the people you want aren't getting elected, so yes, "people you want" is the central point.

Making this about my preference is silly deflection. As to this topic I've never stated a preference and in fact keep stating the opposite. They can develop whatever centrist yahoos they can find and this criticism disappears completely. I'm not criticizing their policy. I'm criticizing their competence.

I'm not making this about your preference, your complaint about not getting your preferred candidates is doing that just fine.

It is the responsibility of those with power to work towards making sure their legacy endures their inevitable absence. RGB had I guess every right to refuse to retire despite a terminal diagnosis because she felt she was that important. How's that working out?

Wait, now you're not complaining that your preferred candidates need the old guard to step down so they have a chance to be elected, but rather that someone who isn't elected and who has zero ability to influence who their successor will be didn't step down?

Well, I guess it doesn't matter, so long as we never blame the people you wish were more viable for not doing anything to become viable.

 

[Suddenly]

Well, I guess it doesn't matter, so long as we never blame the people you wish were more viable for not doing anything to become viable.

Is the lack of youth a problem that needs addressed or isn't it?

If so, then I guess you share my "preferences" in this matter. If not, well, good luck with that. Political history has generally not smiled upon entities who ignore sustainability.

 

[wareyin]

Is the lack of youth a problem that needs addressed or isn't it?

If so, then I guess you share my "preferences" in this matter. If not, well, good luck with that. Political history has generally not smiled upon entities who ignore sustainability.

Have you even established that there are no young people in the Democratic Party? Jon Ossof, AOC, Maxwell Frost, Greg Casar, Sara Jacobs and more are all Democrats in Congress under the age of 35.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

.... It's amazing how little people learned from the RGB debacle and the potential price of individual hubris. ....

... It is the responsibility of those with power to work towards making sure their legacy endures their inevitable absence. RGB had I guess every right to refuse to retire despite a terminal diagnosis because she felt she was that important. How's that working out?

I don't know, how did Scalia's death work out for us when McConnell blocked Obama's nomination of Garland? Think he wouldn't have also blocked an Obama nomination to replace RBG had she retired during his term?

You need to direct your ire toward McConnell and the flaws in the system that continue to allow the minority to dominate the majority. It has gotten significantly worse now that the inmates have significant control of the asylum.

One thing that comes with an older seasoned candidate like Biden is he has proven skills when it comes to dealing with the **** that continues to hit the fan. A nice young fresh face might seem like a good idea until it takes them the first 4 years just to get the hang of things.

Is the lack of youth a problem that needs addressed or isn't it? ...

This reminds me of the Green Party complaining that a third party doesn't have a chance in our 2 party dominated system. Yes but the problem isn't 3rd parties having no chance. The problem is their expectation they can start at the top.

No, they need to build their party from the ground up. The best option would be to build it in multiple states. It doesn't have to be in all 50. But they need a number of Representatives and Senators demonstrating they are a viable 3rd party before they put one of them forward to run for POTUS.

Bringing that back to the current situation, you are advocating for some magical candidate to simply appear. You seem to think it takes Biden declining to run before said magical candidate appears. If you have a candidate or 2 in mind you'd have a much stronger argument even if said potential candidate was waiting in the wings before starting to court donors and PACs and getting a ground swell going.
Start with the potential candidate(s), not with whining Biden is too old.

 

[Suddenly]

I don't know, how did Scalia's death work out for us when McConnell blocked Obama's nomination of Garland? Think he wouldn't have also blocked an Obama nomination to replace RBG had she retired during his term?

She was diagnosed well before that and approached before Democrats lost the Senate.

One thing that comes with an older seasoned candidate like Biden is he has proven skills when it comes to dealing with the **** that continues to hit the fan. A nice young fresh face might seem like a good idea until it takes them the first 4 years just to get the hang of things.

Okay, granted. Like I said, I have no problem saying that as we stand here Biden is the natural choice. It's reasonable to say he's doing a good job.

(My whole opinion as to the courts and the train strike response aside)

It's just that when in 2024 your only plausible candidate is going to be just shy of 82 and there isn't even a clear next person this isn't a sign of a healthy party. Whether it's the Democrats, the Republicans, or the early 80s USSR communist party for that matter.

This reminds me of the Green Party complaining that a third party doesn't have a chance in our 2 party dominated system. Yes but the problem isn't 3rd parties having no chance. The problem is their expectation they can start at the top.

They absolutely need to start at the top. The closest a third party came to relevance was Perot's Reform Party born out of his 1992 bid. Had he won that election and then formed the Reform Party it has a chance of crowding out one of the other parties. There will never be a sustainable third party absent radical structural changes.

But that's really has nothing to do with any of this. Given that I'm talking about past failure in developing candidates within a party, this does, of course, require development.

Bringing that back to the current situation, you are advocating for some magical candidate to simply appear.

The exact opposite, really. It's that it would have to be magical that's the problem. This is about the long game and looking back at mistakes in order to not continue making them going forward.

 

[Suddenly]

Have you even established that there are no young people in the Democratic Party? Jon Ossof, AOC, Maxwell Frost, Greg Casar, Sara Jacobs and more are all Democrats in Congress under the age of 35.

The party as it is would rather push Mitt Romney than AOC. Naming her is a bit of a joke. She's one of those progressives that are to blame for Trump, right?

Past that, people under 35 are where to start now and that's what needs to be done. It's not the age for now.

Hypothetical: Biden for some reason pulls an LBJ and will not seek or accept.

What now? Off the top of my head you've got a cop VP who has been consistently underwhelming and a transportation secretary with Bernie Sanders level poc issues.

Someone magically appears? Some billionaire with authoritarian tendencies who maybe this time didn't harass a bunch of women employees?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

[snip]

[snip]

So no potential candidates then?

 

[wareyin]

It's just that when in 2024 your only plausible candidate is going to be just shy of 82 and there isn't even a clear next person this isn't a sign of a healthy party. Whether it's the Democrats, the Republicans, or the early 80s USSR communist party for that matter.

1) the "plausible" candidate is always the incumbent when it's their first term and (as you say) they're doing a good job.
2) Other than a VP, there is almost never a "clear next person". That's why they have primaries.

They absolutely need to start at the top. The closest a third party came to relevance was Perot's Reform Party born out of his 1992 bid. Had he won that election and then formed the Reform Party it has a chance of crowding out one of the other parties. There will never be a sustainable third party absent radical structural changes.

Attempting to start at the top is a guaranteed fail. You aren't going to get a Green Party (or Libertarian, or The-Rent-Is-Too-Damn-High, or whatever) President when there isn't one in Congress or even a local dog-catcher position that gets elected.

But that's really has nothing to do with any of this. Given that I'm talking about past failure in developing candidates within a party, this does, of course, require development. The exact opposite, really. It's that it would have to be magical that's the problem. This is about the long game and looking back at mistakes in order to not continue making them going forward.

Obama wasn't being groomed for the Presidency. Trump wasn't being groomed for the Presidency. Bill Clinton wasn't being groomed for the Presidency. In fact, unless they were a VP it seems like no President in living memory has ever been the "clear next person".