The Defending Joe Biden Mega-Thread

[Dirty Hipsters]

Everyone in the democratic party knew that Joe Biden was too old to run a second term, and yet elites in the party kept pushing that everything was fine and that Biden was totally on the ball and capable. Every time that democrat voters brought up Biden's age prior to the debate they were shouted down. "Look what a great job Biden's been doing, it doesn't matter how old he is, what matters is results!"

Then the debate happened and everyone collectively shit themselves over Biden's terrible performance, and now those same elites who were pushing for everyone to shut up and stop talking about Biden's age were the ones pushing for him to drop out.

This was a known issue. This was a known issue before the primaries even started. This should have been dealt with a year ago.

Well now Biden's dropped out and who do we have to replace him? A bunch of untested candidates who no one voted for or Harris.

People are already getting offended by Harris being referred to as the DE&I candidate, but how exactly is that false? Would she have been Biden's VP if she wasn't a black woman? Doubtful given that Biden was specifically pressured by the Democratic party into choosing a black woman. Does she have specific credentials that make her a particularly effective politician? Not really. She was a district attorney, but that's not very high up the political ladder. She's never been a mayor, governor, senator, etc.

People are saying that Harris is qualified to be president because she was Biden's VP, and would have been president had Biden died. As far as I know VPs don't do much. They don't hold a lot of power or have a lot of responsibilities. I don't know that her being Biden's VP means she's learned everything she needs to be president. What exactly has Harris done as Biden's VP?

These are all shit choices.

 

[hanselthecaretaker2]

I still find the whole topic somewhat juvenile. Biden isn't Trump or someone like Bernie sanders. He wasn't nor would he be some kind of maverick. He has a team of 50+ advisors and committees that make all his decisions. I hate this whole narrative of "hes too old", too old for what? Literally all he would have done in his second term is show up for events and sign laws. Harris is the obvious nominee and she would be no different.

The argument could at least mildly be made that if you vote for Trump you're not strictly voting for the establishment. He did a few wild card dumb stunt bills that made him more of his "own" president, but even those ultimately fell apart. His legacy was ultimately just doing whatever the Christian Nationalist donors wanted to shit on immigrants and LGBTQ and to rollback consumer, environment, and worker protections, as designed by congressional citizens united sub-committees in the corporate pockets.

I hate that we play this dumb mascot game like we aren't just voting for donor fee return machines. "We vote for BIG STRONG MAN" fucking whatever.

Basically in a nutshell why this country’s fucked one way or another. Just opposites sides of the same fucked up coin at this point. It is pretty much an impossibility for a democracy to be truly united. Maybe someone like Arnold would have a shot with his governorship track record of bipartisanship, but he couldn’t run anyways.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

Everyone in the democratic party knew that Joe Biden was too old to run a second term, and yet elites in the party kept pushing that everything was fine and that Biden was totally on the ball and capable. Every time that democrats brought up Biden's age prior to the debate they were shouted down. "Look what a great job Biden's been doing, it doesn't matter how old he is, what matters is results!"

Then the debate happened and everyone collectively shit themselves over Biden's terrible performance, and now those same elites who were pushing for everyone to shut up and stop talking about Biden's age were the ones pushing for him to drop out.

This was a known issue. This was a known issue before the primaries even started. This should have been dealt with a year ago.

Well now Biden's dropped out and who do we have to replace him? A bunch of untested candidates who no one voted for or Harris.

People are already getting offended by Harris being referred to as the DE&I candidate, but how exactly is that false? Would she have been Biden's VP if she wasn't a black woman? Doubtful given that Biden was specifically pressured by the Democratic party into choosing a black woman. Does she have specific credentials that make her a particularly effective politician? Not really. She was a district attorney, but that's not very high up the political ladder. She's never been a mayor, governor, senator, etc.

People are saying that Harris is qualified to be president because she was Biden's VP, and would have been president had Biden died. As far as I know VPs don't do much. They don't hold a lot of power or have a lot of responsibilities. I don't know that her being Biden's VP means she's learned everything she needs to be president. What exactly has Harris done as Biden's VP?

These are all shit choices.

All this. If only we had a primary, but either the dems wanted Harris and this was how they got her past voting so they could hold a proverbial gun to voter's heads to pick her in the general, or they were seriously so incompetent that they thought nobody would notice Biden's brains falling out of his ears or just be okay with it. In either case they were blind to the fact people weren't going to buy the arguments they were making on his behalf because they flew in the face of their critique of Trump. I absolutely hate hearing about his cabinet and how good they are because 1) they aren't and 2) the biggest and main attack on Trump is on him as an individual. So pointing out someone's foibles as an individual has a very specific demarcation line of when it's acceptable. That line is "except for Biden".

 

[Seanchaidh]

Eh, at one point a female candidate got the most votes.

and that was despite her being completely awful!

She's never been a mayor, governor, senator, etc.

Kamala the cop was Senator from California for an apparently very forgettable four years

 

[Agema]

The impression that I get over American politics, is the Dems will vote for whatever democratic candidate is, the Republicans will vote for whatever Republican candidate there is,

Pretty much.

Here is a graph of Trump's approval ratings whilst president:


By contrast, here are the approval rating of contemporaneous UK PM, Boris Johnson:



Despite all the ups and downs, Trump's favourability rating is remarkably stable. No matter what he does about 40% of the population thinks he's doing a good job. Compare that to the responsiveness in the UK, where the public are much more responsive to the perceived performance of the PM, and where perceived successes and mistakes have a much greater impact on approval.

The USA seems to operate more like two cults than two political parties, where actual performance simply doesn't matter that much.

The Republicans with Trump we have seen very clearly. But the Democrats over Biden have shown the same tendencies. Just a few weeks-months ago, a host of Democrat great and good were telling us all about how Biden was fine, and frothing with fury at any apparent disloyalty and lack of faith. So much so that even when he stood on TV in front of millions and mumbled incoherently in a way that proved everyone's worst fears, they still refused to accept it.

The additional tragedy is that the ultimate reason Biden has pulled out is almost certainly that the donors started pulled their money. As long as they'd carried on throwing money at the party, the Democrats would have headed off to a defeat with a smile plastered on their collective faces.

 

[Agema]

Everyone in the democratic party knew that Joe Biden was too old to run a second term, and yet elites in the party kept pushing that everything was fine and that Biden was totally on the ball and capable.

I would suggest that even many of the party elites may not have realised how bad it was because the White House staff were carefully managing Biden to conceal the worst from them too.

People are saying that Harris is qualified to be president because she was Biden's VP, and would have been president had Biden died. As far as I know VPs don't do much. They don't hold a lot of power or have a lot of responsibilities. I don't know that her being Biden's VP means she's learned everything she needs to be president. What exactly has Harris done as Biden's VP?

Every time anyone gets a promotion they're doing a job beyond what they've done before. Being a governor, senator, etc. is suitable training and preparation, but even those roles won't give anyone everything they need to be president. Being VP counts for something. If she's simply sat in a room with the president on enough occasions, taken part in discussions, she should have learnt a heap of relevant stuff.

I'm not sure it really matters anyway. Presidents aren't elected on competence: consider that Trump was ever electable in the first place. To win an election, the candidate needs to go out there and put on a good performance to enthuse the grassroots and sway the small number of floating voters. That's all Harris really needs to do to win.

 

[Seanchaidh]

 

[meiam]

I absolutely hate hearing about his cabinet and how good they are because 1) they aren't and 2) the biggest and main attack on Trump is on him as an individual. So pointing out someone's foibles as an individual has a very specific demarcation line of when it's acceptable. That line is "except for Biden".

1) They were for the most part. Being able to reduce inflation without crashing into a recession is a feet that has rarely been done in history.
2) imo a bigger problem about Trump is that the people around him are all in on ruining the country so long as they can be king of the dumbsterfire with things like project 2025. That and his pick for judge (at all level) and causing permanent harm. If it was just Trump being an asshole but he'd pick sensible people at all level, it wouldn't be problem.

 

[tstorm823]

This was a known issue. This was a known issue before the primaries even started. This should have been dealt with a year ago.

Yes, but it was a known issue among Republicans too, so for the Democrats to do something about it, they'd have to admit that Republicans were right about something.

 

[Hades]

Yes, but it was a known issue among Republicans too, so for the Democrats to do something about it, they'd have to admit that Republicans were right about something.

on that note isn’t the Republican nominee a wee bit old to run? He’s pushing 80 and his word salads convey mental decline.

 

[hanselthecaretaker2]

It’s always interesting how journalists can paint such differing pictures.

It’s been easy to forget how bad Kamala Harris is

Harris the horrible campaigner and Harris the cop can be easy to forget if you're only considering what Harris has done lately.

reason.com

As President Joe Biden steps aside, is America ready for President Kamala Harris?

Vice President Kamala Harris may be the most logical replacement for Joe Biden but, despite Biden endorsement, will the Democratic Party embrace her?

www.usatoday.com

Her support of a law that would jail parents if their kids missed too much school sounds particularly outlandish, but it’s one thing I can see where she had good intentions and it had surprisingly good results in improving kids’ attendance. Basically an empty threat that’s apparently still in effect in Cali.

A Harris:Trump debate would warrant a big bucket of popcorn me thinks. Not sure about her ability to lead with any more integrity than Trump, but she could eviscerate him on that stage especially if when he pulls his usual bs antics.

 

[dreng3]

A Harris:Trump debate would warrant a big bucket of popcorn me thinks. Not sure about her ability to lead with any more integrity than Trump, but she could eviscerate him on that stage especially if when he pulls his usual bs antics.

Or the right will declare that she's being hysterical and point to it as a reason she shouldn't be president, remember, the left can do only wrong. Trump might have said things a hundred times worse than "basket of deplorables", but that soundbite was a central nail in the coffin of the 2016 Clinton campaign.

 

[dreng3]

And the right-wing scum continues to be right-wing scum.

Republicans could file challenges if Biden replaced, Speaker Johnson says

 

[Schadrach]

Harris is an obvious choice as she has VP experience and is already on the ballot, but I'm not sure she can stand up to Trump in a meaningful way and that's to say nothing of the misogyny and racism she'll undoubtedly have to deal with.

I'll stand by my previous spiteful comment: The best thing about a Harris presidency is that Hillary Clinton will live to see a woman become president, and that woman would not be a Clinton.

Biden saying that he'd be fine with losing to Trump as long as he knew he did his best because that's what it's all about

I interpreted this as Biden (and possibly some of the apparatus around him) not actually believing the "end of democracy"/"last election" spiel, and him saying the quiet part out loud on that front.

because anything he could say would be an uphill slog against the constant hum of concern about his age.

I mean, his age, his inability to string three coherent sentences together without a teleprompter, his getting his VP and opponent confused, his getting the President of Ukraine and the guy trying to conquer it confused, etc, etc.

Eh, at one point a female candidate got the most votes.

Unfortunately the election isn't decided by how large a margin you win California by. If you're wondering why I picked California instead of some other blue state, she literally won the national popular vote by fewer votes than she won California by.

Kamala the cop was Senator from California for an apparently very forgettable four years

To be fair, that's not even an entire Senate term.

but that soundbite was a central nail in the coffin of the 2016 Clinton campaign.

Here in Appalachia it was "I'm going to put a lot of coal companies and coal miners out of business". That's...not the way to sell yourself here.

Republicans could file challenges if Biden replaced, Speaker Johnson says

There's probably at least one state that has some kind of rule or deadline that at this stage swapping out candidates (or swapping out candidates for all but certain reasons) might violate. Like most things, elections are a matter of state law and thus every state is a bit different.

 

[dreng3]

There's probably at least one state that has some kind of rule or deadline that at this stage swapping out candidates (or swapping out candidates for all but certain reasons) might violate. Like most things, elections are a matter of state law and thus every state is a bit different.

Firstly, nobody is the nominee until they're named as such at the convention, so talking about nominee swapping is pointless.
Second, there are indeed rules about filing dates and those do tend to vary by state, they also haven't been enforced for, as far as I know, at least 50 years and both parties are granted a lot of leniency in terms of deadlines, though it seems the Republicans are aiming to weaponize the system this time, unsurprisingly.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

1) They were for the most part. Being able to reduce inflation without crashing into a recession is a feet that has rarely been done in history.
2) imo a bigger problem about Trump is that the people around him are all in on ruining the country so long as they can be king of the dumbsterfire with things like project 2025. That and his pick for judge (at all level) and causing permanent harm. If it was just Trump being an asshole but he'd pick sensible people at all level, it wouldn't be problem.

1. I look at John Kirby, Neera Tanden, and Pete Buttgeig and wonder about that.
2. This is the problem, neat, but it says absolutely nothing about the point of the complaint. We were supposed to ignore Biden having his brains fall out of his ears but we're supposed to criticize Trump for being deranged. It was always a massive vulnerability to the dem strategy to just ignore this obvious hypocrisy.

 

[dreng3]

2. This is the problem, neat, but it says absolutely nothing about the point of the complaint. We were supposed to ignore Biden having his brains fall out of his ears but we're supposed to criticize Trump for being deranged. It was always a massive vulnerability to the dem strategy to just ignore this obvious hypocrisy.

Case 1: Biden might be largely inept and unsuitable but has good intentions and respect governance, he surrounds himself with a capable and largely moral administration.
Case 2: Trump might be largely inept and unsuitable and has ill intentions and does not respect governance, he surrounds himself with an inept and largely amoral administration.

Now which case is better, regardless of the fact that both cases include an inept and unsuitable leader?

 

[Phoenixmgs]

Absolutely not. The Jan 6 peeps were way more violent than the BLM peeps. Its not even close. We already did the math

And this is from some who has REGULARLY stated that most of the Jan 6 protest was not violent

You just keep repeating false statements not matter what the actual reality is. No amount of videos or pictures will change it. I can bring up beaten up officers and shootings through barricades if you like. It's just got nothing to do with statistics

That was mainly my point is that you can say it was mostly peaceful, much like how BLM was called mostly peaceful by the media.

Did people protesting the election have to have cities bring in the national guard and set curfews? It's like when people cite crime statistics (that don't tell the whole story) and say crime is down but then you have stores locking products behind cases, not allowing teenagers in, and stores closing. If crime wasn't an issue, those things wouldn't be happening.

We had far more looting than you realize or that your stats will tell. It wasn't just like say Chicago, it was also suburbs.

https://www.nwitimes.com/business/local/update-river-oaks-trade-area-blocked-off-while-cal-city-hammond-extend-curfew/article_1f47d9cd-0414-557b-9cc6-221d3c792865.html

So how fast will the Republicans suddenly switch to the stance that criticizing Trump's age is ageist and that its unethical to speculate whether he's got dementia or not?

We've already went through that so did the republicans claim that back then?

Everyone in the democratic party knew that Joe Biden was too old to run a second term, and yet elites in the party kept pushing that everything was fine and that Biden was totally on the ball and capable. Every time that democrat voters brought up Biden's age prior to the debate they were shouted down. "Look what a great job Biden's been doing, it doesn't matter how old he is, what matters is results!"

Then the debate happened and everyone collectively shit themselves over Biden's terrible performance, and now those same elites who were pushing for everyone to shut up and stop talking about Biden's age were the ones pushing for him to drop out.

This was a known issue. This was a known issue before the primaries even started. This should have been dealt with a year ago.

Well now Biden's dropped out and who do we have to replace him? A bunch of untested candidates who no one voted for or Harris.

People are already getting offended by Harris being referred to as the DE&I candidate, but how exactly is that false? Would she have been Biden's VP if she wasn't a black woman? Doubtful given that Biden was specifically pressured by the Democratic party into choosing a black woman. Does she have specific credentials that make her a particularly effective politician? Not really. She was a district attorney, but that's not very high up the political ladder. She's never been a mayor, governor, senator, etc.

People are saying that Harris is qualified to be president because she was Biden's VP, and would have been president had Biden died. As far as I know VPs don't do much. They don't hold a lot of power or have a lot of responsibilities. I don't know that her being Biden's VP means she's learned everything she needs to be president. What exactly has Harris done as Biden's VP?

These are all shit choices.

Very true and if people actually look into what she did as DA, the democratic base would not be very happy with her.

And the right-wing scum continues to be right-wing scum.

Republicans could file challenges if Biden replaced, Speaker Johnson says

You mean they would be using proper legal means to do something? Unlike when blue states unconstitutionally removed Trump from the ballot.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

Case 1: Biden might be largely inept and unsuitable but has good intentions and respect governance, he surrounds himself with a capable and largely moral administration.

That isn't the point. The point is that the dems have made Trump's personal problems the main focus of their attacks against him, which is a good line of attack, but it opens up the mirror to looking at Joe Biden's personal problems.

We had dementia addled Genocide Joe. It's a bad look. And then deflecting away from that made it worse. The proof is that the race is really close with Donald Trump as the opponent.

 

[Hades]

The proof is that the race is really close with Donald Trump as the opponent.

Well, that being the cast mostly just proves that the American electorate is completely out of wack. It may be a political faux pass to say it out loud, but a proper electorate would never have such an obvious traitor and a felon be a viable candidate to begin with, let alone be the favorite. The American electorate is being downright irresponsible when they should know better.