Easy to understand all the freaking out that is going on. Gotta wonder how the Biden team ever thought this debate was a good idea.
Even with the choices put that way, the choice is clear still.Easy to understand all the freaking out that is going on. Gotta wonder how the Biden team ever thought this debate was a good idea.
Do I pick the old guy who has enacted some good policies, increased our respect around the world, gotten some good bills through a very narrow majority in congress, and cares about the country as a whole, or old guy who is a convicted felon, constant liar, actually seems to be suffering from dementia given the frequent word salads of made up words, and is verbally expressing revenge fantasies on his political enemies? Tough choice there /s.Even with the choices put that way, the choice is clear still.
MTG vs the orange monkeyIt would be really really really difficult to find an eligible person as an opponent to Trump that would cause me to vote for Trump.
It's not so much that Trump won, but that Biden lost. Joe actually did better than I expected, though it's apparent that he's declining. Why that's a surprise to anyone is beyond me.While I never watch debates because I think they are stupid it seems the consensus is that Trump won because while he was frequently incoherent and constantly lying he did so in a confident manner and Biden lost because he was truthful but also sometimes incoherent but not in a confident way.
And…this is why I don’t watch the debates.
Again though, the metrics he's being judged on are stupid. Apparently had he said the exact same things (only with more lies) but in a more confident voice then he would have been judged to have done well.It's not so much that Trump won, but that Biden lost. Joe actually did better than I expected, though it's apparent that he's declining. Why that's a surprise to anyone is beyond me.
The reason is the same reason I've been saying forever - it was never going to happen and any idea of a primary challenge to Biden was a fool's errand. The only way Biden wasn't going to be the nominee was if he chose not to be and that has always the case.I don't have any choice now. FFS why could they not put forward a better candidate?
To quote Joe himself " come on, man"
What is your assessment of Trump's performance?It's not so much that Trump won, but that Biden lost. Joe actually did better than I expected, though it's apparent that he's declining. Why that's a surprise to anyone is beyond me.
It would be 'was the debate rigged?'.I will note the honestly of the networks normally accused of schilling for Biden (MSNBC, CNN). They saw it like I did, a disaster for Biden.
If the roles were reversed, I can imagine the comical spin by Fox
Yes, that is what I am saying. Fucking hubris plus "Joe you're the only one who can beat him" put us in this box.The reason is the same reason I've been saying forever - it was never going to happen and any idea of a primary challenge to Biden was a fool's errand. The only way Biden wasn't going to be the nominee was if he chose not to be and that has always the case.
Very true, but I do worry about the low information voter.Even with the choices put that way, the choice is clear still.
It is just a shame there was no clear consensus candidate to take the reins.Yes, that is what I am saying. Fucking hubris plus "Joe you're the only one who can beat him" put us in this box.
He could have said one term only a while back while there was time. Oh fuck no.
Yes, that is what I am saying. Fucking hubris plus "Joe you're the only one who can beat him" put us in this box.
He could have said one term only a while back while there was time. Oh fuck no.
Debate moderators didn't even ask about 34 felony convictions in the first 20 minutes. WTF is up with that?Again though, the metrics he's being judged on are stupid. Apparently had he said the exact same things (only with more lies) but in a more confident voice then he would have been judged to have done well.
Also from what I heard the debate moderators were once again worthless. Like how is the first question asked not 'Trump, will you attempt another coup?'.
Debate moderators didn't even ask about 34 felony convictions in the first 20 minutes. WTF is up with that?
Harris would be the presumptive nominee in this universe and I'm not convinced that would go well.
"The Party" did pick a candidate via primary: Joe Biden. But if "The Party" chose a separate candidate via some backroom process, that would go over like a lead balloon. The Party isn't some all powerful entity that can replace people on a whim. They are largely prevented from doing that by rules enacted decades ago to reduce the backroom dealing and allow a more democratic process for nominating.IMO the Democratic party needs to pick a new candidate and persuade Biden to stand aside for the next election.
Yes, given the choice between Biden and Trump I would still vote Biden given that the VP can take over if need be (even though there might be some fall-out from such a move), but this is definitely a time for the Democratic party to take the high ground, and leave the low ground to the GQP who are happily being "led" by a candidate whose mental faculties are very much in question and whose ethics are non-existent. An ethically-minded party should not have someone at the helm who is in any way negatively comparable with the likes of Trump, let alone being ultimately responsible for the effective running of a country.
I've literally never heard the BBC say anything remotely positive about Trump, but Radio 4 News's account of the debate last night was a recording from Biden evidently having brain trouble (yes I am aware of the stutter) followed by "he made Trump look presidential by comparison" (while also acknowledging Trump's regular falsehoods).
Leaving Biden in play is just playing further into the GQP's hands: Like the "Reform" party in the UK, the GQP's platform with Trump is to say that the establishment is not fit for purpose and does not represent the will of the people. Trump is positioned as the anti-establishment candidate (as much of a joke that is). If the establishment continues to act like the status quo is fine whereby justice and policy-making strongly favour the powerful and that the politics of a situation are more important than doing the right thing, it ends up presenting itself as impotent in terms of being a force for positive change, at which point some people will "protest vote" for the "burnt it down" candidate.
Please note that I am not suggesting that Biden's administration has achieved nothing, but in terms of addressing the status quo and the impression it leaves on most of the populace, it's not done a great job. A million times better than the alternative, sure, but getting people to vote for the least shit candidate as opposed to the best candidate is a sure-fire way to continue to erode the public trust.
Remember the MiB quote: a person is smart, but people are dumb panicky animals. It would be utter insanity to leave this election entirely up to the hope that the people aren't dumb panicky animals who do stupid things like "protest vote" for the "burnt it down" candidate because they see little hope in voting for the establishment candidate. A political party needs to lead, to aspire, to inspire.
Let's look at what happens when yet another GQP person is exposed as a kiddie-fiddler or POS in some other fashion: If the GQP feels that the person is "too important" (e.g. Trump), they will happily stand by that person. The Democratic party on the other hand jettisons POS's. The same strategy should apply when one's mental faculties are justifiably in question.
Biden isn't going to get better in this respect, he's going to get worse.
Harris would lose. Because 1) vagina 2) non-white
It's almost like we, as culture, have a giant misogyny problem when it comes to this office.