US Presidential Election 2020

hotmail.com

sid waddell wrote: »

90% of something that's said is who's saying it, as they say. That's one thing Biden has to his advantage, the ability to make gaffes and for them to somehow seem endearing rather than excruciating.

Like if, say, Hillary Clinton had made the exact same gaffe, it would have been excruciating, but it wasn't Hillary Clinton.

It seems that a lot of people are questioning if Biden has dementia. There is has gone passed gaffes at this stage.

BonnieSituation

hotmail.com wrote: »

It seems that a lot of people are questioning if Biden has dementia. There is has gone passed gaffes at this stage.

A lot of people say Trump has dementia.A lot of people are saying that, I don't know...

hotmail.com

BonnieSituation wrote: »

A lot of people say Trump has dementia.A lot of people are saying that, I don't know...

All the more reason not to pick someone with even worse symptoms of dementia surely.

one world order

The debates will be a car wreckage for Biden. Trump is clued in and gets people, while Biden struggles to put sentences together. We all remember Hillary falling down and needing people to help her up steps or into her car, those videos of Biden look just as bad.

Water John

Anyone who is familiar with dementia in the family , will quickly tell you the Biden isn't showing signs of that.
Strange that GOP supporters found George W Bush's gaffes endearing but Biden's tendency isn't looked on in a similar fashion.

hotmail.com

Water John wrote: »

Anyone who is familiar with dementia in the family , will quickly tell you the Biden isn't showing signs of that.
Strange that GOP supporters found George W Bush's gaffes endearing but Biden's tendency isn't looked on in a similar fashion.

Whether he has or has not, this is what people are saying.

It's a massive problem.

The Phantom Jipper

hotmail.com wrote: »

All the more reason not to pick someone with even worse symptoms of dementia surely.

"Look, having nuclear—my uncle was a great professor and scientist and engineer, Dr. John Trump at MIT; good genes, very good genes, OK, very smart, the Wharton School of Finance, very good, very smart—you know, if you’re a conservative Republican, if I were a liberal, if, like, OK, if I ran as a liberal Democrat, they would say I'm one of the smartest people anywhere in the world—it’s true!—but when you're a conservative Republican they try—oh, do they do a number—that’s why I always start off: Went to Wharton, was a good student, went there, went there, did this, built a fortune—you know I have to give my like credentials all the time, because we’re a little disadvantaged—but you look at the nuclear deal, the thing that really bothers me—it would have been so easy, and it’s not as important as these lives are (nuclear is powerful; my uncle explained that to me many, many years ago, the power and that was 35 years ago; he would explain the power of what's going to happen and he was right—who would have thought?), but when you look at what's going on with the four prisoners—now it used to be three, now it’s four—but when it was three and even now, I would have said it's all in the messenger; fellas, and it is fellas because, you know, they don't, they haven’t figured that the women are smarter right now than the men, so, you know, it’s gonna take them about another 150 years—but the Persians are great negotiators, the Iranians are great negotiators, so, and they, they just killed, they just killed us."

briany

one world order wrote: »

The debates will be a car wreckage for Biden. Trump is clued in and gets people

It's true that Trump is no moron. When you look at his old interviews from the 80s and 90s, he is way, way more articulate and calm. Almost like a different person entirely. Whether his current personality is just a carefully constructed facade to play the rubes and rise to power is debatable, but his political success hasn't been a solo effort. Bringing in Steve Bannon for his 2016 run was crucial.

Anyway, you can't really debate Trump. He's not coming with prepared facts and figures. He's coming with bluster and ignorance. It's not like you're going to expose Trump in a debate as he's figuratively walking into it buck naked, doing a war whoop. In the post-truth era, facts don't matter like they used to. They still do to many people, but there are many others who've just decided to go down Facebook & Twitter rabbit-holes and end up as anti-vaxxers, flat-earthers and, yes, Trump supporters.

peddlelies

Water John wrote: »

Anyone who is familiar with dementia in the family , will quickly tell you the Biden isn't showing signs of that.
Strange that GOP supporters found George W Bush's gaffes endearing but Biden's tendency isn't looked on in a similar fashion.

Whatever it is, it's not good. The second clip

https://twitter.com/bubbaprog/status/1234573252221120513

hotmail.com

The Phantom Jipper wrote: »

"Look, having nuclear—my uncle was a great professor and scientist and engineer, Dr. John Trump at MIT; good genes, very good genes, OK, very smart, the Wharton School of Finance, very good, very smart—you know, if you’re a conservative Republican, if I were a liberal, if, like, OK, if I ran as a liberal Democrat, they would say I'm one of the smartest people anywhere in the world—it’s true!—but when you're a conservative Republican they try—oh, do they do a number—that’s why I always start off: Went to Wharton, was a good student, went there, went there, did this, built a fortune—you know I have to give my like credentials all the time, because we’re a little disadvantaged—but you look at the nuclear deal, the thing that really bothers me—it would have been so easy, and it’s not as important as these lives are (nuclear is powerful; my uncle explained that to me many, many years ago, the power and that was 35 years ago; he would explain the power of what's going to happen and he was right—who would have thought?), but when you look at what's going on with the four prisoners—now it used to be three, now it’s four—but when it was three and even now, I would have said it's all in the messenger; fellas, and it is fellas because, you know, they don't, they haven’t figured that the women are smarter right now than the men, so, you know, it’s gonna take them about another 150 years—but the Persians are great negotiators, the Iranians are great negotiators, so, and they, they just killed, they just killed us."

Stuff likes this makes me laugh. He's crazy.

But the Democrats present themselves as serious professional and noble and all the that rubbish. And yet they want Americans to vote for an elderly man with genuine memory problems. This is the sort of stuff you'd expect to see from the Republican party.

It must be a depressing time for Democrat supporters in America.

hotmail.com

briany wrote: »

It's true that Trump is no moron. When you look at his old interviews from the 80s and 90s, he is way, way more articulate and calm. Almost like a different person entirely. Whether his current personality is just a carefully constructed facade to play the rubes and rise to power is debatable, but his political success hasn't been a solo effort. Bringing in Steve Bannon for his 2016 run was crucial.

Anyway, you can't really debate Trump. He's not coming with prepared facts and figures. He's coming with bluster and ignorance. It's not like you're going to expose Trump in a debate as he's figuratively walking into it buck naked, doing a war whoop. In the post-truth era, facts don't matter like they used to. They still do to many people, but there are many others who've just decided to go down Facebook & Twitter rabbit-holes and end up as anti-vaxxers, flat-earthers and, yes, Trump supporters.

The post truth era is a total myth. American governments have been lying about wars and bombing for generations. And yet, now people seem to think we're in a post truth era. We've always been living in a non truth era.

Itssoeasy

hotmail.com wrote: »

Whether he has or has not, this is what people are saying.

It's a massive problem.

People as a rule say loads of ****e. Just because people are saying it doesn't make it true. He is not polished at speaking at times but that's not an indication to me he's diminished mentally.

briany

hotmail.com wrote: »

The post truth era is a total myth. American governments have been lying about wars and bombing for generations. And yet, now people seem to think we're in a post truth era. We've always been living in a non truth era.

No, this is something a bit different. We're living in a time where things that are demonstrably true and verifiable (i.e. with video evidence) are still being questioned or, at times, poo-pooed altogether. A time where the public is no longer counting on established sources of information to have a common point of understanding but instead are too often going into their own little information fiefdoms causing what Barack Obama described as a 'balkanisation' of thought. A time where the POTUS is disputing the turnout at his inauguration despite clear evidence against his assertions, and his campaign manager mentioned some alternative facts. A time where the general public is lapping up conspiracy theories and through this getting entertainment hopelessly confused with information. In short, a time where what's true is very much up for grabs.

hotmail.com

hotmail.com wrote: »

All the more reason not to pick someone with even worse symptoms of dementia surely.

This literally stinks of the effort to push the claim Clinton has Multiple Sclerosis or that she was dying... Weirdly alive and well still! Meanwhile Trump's mental competence is genuinely up for debate due to his day to day decisions.

hotmail.com

briany wrote: »

No, this is something a bit different. We're living in a time where things that are demonstrably true and verifiable (i.e. with video evidence) are still being questioned or, at times, poo-pooed altogether. A time where the public is no longer counting on established sources of information to have a common point of understanding but instead are too often going into their own little information fiefdoms causing what Barack Obama described as a 'balkanisation' of thought. A time where the POTUS is disputing the turnout at his inauguration despite clear evidence against his assertions, and his campaign manager mentioned some alternative facts. A time where the general public is lapping up conspiracy theories and through this getting entertainment hopelessly confused with information. In short, a time where what's true is very much up for grabs.

I would think as an outsider that lying about wars and bombings is far more serious than the many largely trivial lies of Trump. The inauguration story was just for a laugh for the domestic audience. I'd be more worried about US foreign policy.

Obama himself wasn't immune from lying. He just couched it in pretty language and with a boring speech.

hotmail.com

[Deleted User] wrote: »

This literally stinks of the effort to push the claim Clinton has Multiple Sclerosis or that she was dying... Weirdly alive and well still! Meanwhile Trump's mental competence is genuinely up for debate due to his day to day decisions.

A lot of the comments on Biden's mental state is coming from Democrats in America.

American Democrats are concerned about this.

Foxtrol

The Phantom Jipper wrote: »

I've watched many of the debates in full, rather than watching the highlights. The highlights can make for essential viewing but she's a consistently good debater outside of those aswell. Trump may have some qualities but debating isn't one of them. It's a moot point at this stage but it goes without saying that a Harvard law professor would have little trouble taking Trump apart over the course of a 2 hour debate.

Warren is a good debater but she got terrible advice (or ignored good advice). I'm guessing she went time and again at Bloomberg as an example of what she could do to Trump, when she would have been much better off splitting her attacks to be also target Bernie, who was frontrunner at the time. It would have annoyed the rabid heart of his base but would have positioned her as an alternative to him.

Given her lack of support from people of colour I don't think it would have saved her chances it could have helped her more

sid waddell

hotmail.com wrote: »

The post truth era is a total myth. American governments have been lying about wars and bombing for generations. And yet, now people seem to think we're in a post truth era. We've always been living in a non truth era.

The difference is previous governments didn't want you to know when they were lying.

The Trump regime does - and when they are lying is literally all the time.

Russia playbook 101.

hotmail.com

sid waddell wrote: »

The difference is previous governments didn't want you to know when they were lying.

The Trump regime does - and when they are lying is literally all the time.

Russia playbook 101.

So it's all lying?

America doesn't need any tips from Russia about lying.

hotmail.com

sid waddell wrote: »

The difference is previous governments didn't want you to know when they were lying.

The Trump regime does - and when they are lying is literally all the time.

Russia playbook 101.

Duplicate.

BonnieSituation

hotmail.com wrote: »

All the more reason not to pick someone with even worse symptoms of dementia surely.

The whoosh is strong in you.

Itssoeasy

hotmail.com wrote: »

I would think as an outsider that lying about wars and bombings is far more serious than the many largely trivial lies of Trump. The inauguration story was just for a laugh for the domestic audience. I'd be more worried about US foreign policy.

Obama himself wasn't immune from lying. He just couched it in pretty language and with a boring speech.

Trivial lies ? Ah this is a piss take surely. Was adding a misleading track of a hurricane trivial so ? Yeah a laugh that was brought up by his press secretary at the time and trump for over a year after.

Fr Tod Umptious

briany wrote: »

No, this is something a bit different. We're living in a time where things that are demonstrably true and verifiable (i.e. with video evidence) are still being questioned or, at times, poo-pooed altogether. A time where the public is no longer counting on established sources of information to have a common point of understanding but instead are too often going into their own little information fiefdoms causing what Barack Obama described as a 'balkanisation' of thought. A time where the POTUS is disputing the turnout at his inauguration despite clear evidence against his assertions, and his campaign manager mentioned some alternative facts. A time where the general public is lapping up conspiracy theories and through this getting entertainment hopelessly confused with information. In short, a time where what's true is very much up for grabs.

But even if everything is demonstrably and verifiably, using such techniques as video evidence, it all depends on who is supplying the video evidence as to whether we get the truth or not.

Take the Covington KY school situation for example.

Based on a subset of the video evidence we the public believed one thing to be the truth.

But when a larger subset of video evidence became available it was clear that what we had previously thought to be the truth was no longer the case.

markodaly

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

But even if everything is demonstrably and verifiably, using such techniques as video evidence, it all depends on who is supplying the video evidence as to whether we get the truth or not.

Take the Covington KY school situation for example.

Based on a subset of the video evidence we the public believed one thing to be the truth.

But when a larger subset of video evidence became available it was clear that what we had previously thought to be the truth was no longer the case.

Ah the Covington case.
It appears the kid in question stands to make a lot of money from the mass media outlets.

On Biden, his latest gaffes make George W Bush appear like a Rhodes Scholar.
I cannot actually believe that the Democrats are going for him.

everlast75

Incredible that all those posters making derogatory remarks and voicing concern about Biden's mental capacity have been weirdly quiet on Trump's four years of blatant cognitive decline.

It's the same posters who complain about Hunter Biden but have said nothing about Ivanka and Don Junior directly profiting of their dad's position for the last four years.

It's almost as if these comments are completely disingenuous...

x43r0

everlast75 wrote: »

Incredible that all those posters making derogatory remarks and voicing concern about Biden's mental capacity have been weirdly quiet on Trump's four years of blatant cognitive decline.

It's the same posters who complain about Hunter Biden but have said nothing about Ivanka and Don Junior directly profiting of their dad's position for the last four years.

It's almost as if these comments are completely disingenuous...

I would have said it's more the acknowledgment that Biden & Trump are not judged by the same standards. All of the things you mention about Trump have already been proven to not matter one iota to the conservatives that voted him in. Trump could toss a bag of kittens into a river and still retain most of his base

Any Dem candidate needs to be as close to bulletproof as possible going into the **** slinging matches we'll see in the lead up to the general in order to pry away any potential swing voters

Not trying to "one-up" Sanders in any way here just trying to say that Trump's actions a largely irrelevant in the grand scheme of things now

everlast75

x43r0 wrote: »

I would have said it's more the acknowledgment that Biden & Trump are not judged by the same standards. All of the things you mention about Trump have already been proven to not matter one iota to the conservatives that voted him in. Trump could toss a bag of kittens into a river and still retain most of his base

Any Dem candidate needs to be as close to bulletproof as possible going into the **** slinging matches we'll see in the lead up to the general in order to pry away any potential swing voters

Not trying to "one-up" Sanders in any way here just trying to say that Trump's actions a largely irrelevant in the grand scheme of things now

I see your point, but you're not going to get a near bulletproof candidate.

If its Biden, he's establishment/prone to gaffs
Bernie - a socialist.
Pete - inexperienced
Warren - used to be a Republican

Etc etc.

But we have to focus upon who the Dems are trying to win over. They have their "base", so what they are trying do is

A) win over the independents.
win over any wavering Reps.

Without losing any "Left Dems".

So, the argument is whether Bernie is more likely to do that, or is Biden.

That's the risk, but on balance I think it's Biden.

x43r0

everlast75 wrote: »

But we have to focus upon who the Dems are trying to win over. They have their "base", so what they are trying do is

A) win over the independents.
win over any wavering Reps.

Without losing any "Left Dems".

So, the argument is whether Bernie is more likely to do that, or is Biden.

That's the risk, but on balance I think it's Biden.

I agree with most of this but the counter point is in a Biden/Sanders comparison, Joe is far and away the weaker orator and there's a hell of a lot of talking/debating to be done between now and the general so it doesn't inspire huge confidence in terms of winning anyone over on the mic

I agree though, there's obvious risks to both guys

everlast75

x43r0 wrote: »

I agree with most of this but the counter point is in a Biden/Sanders comparison, Joe is far and away the weaker orator and there's a hell of a lot of talking/debating to be done between now and the general so it doesn't inspire huge confidence in terms of winning anyone over on the mic

I agree though, there's obvious risks to both guys

Joe might be a weaker orator, but counter that with Obama batting for him on the stump, versus the likelihood that middle of the road voters would vote for Bernie.

Whether Trump agrees to a debate or not is another thing. The man is a coward so if he can get out of it he will.

Trump et al certainly fear Biden more than they do Bernie. Whether that's a mistake on their part or not, it's their political calculation.

hotmail.com

x43r0 wrote: »

I would have said it's more the acknowledgment that Biden & Trump are not judged by the same standards. All of the things you mention about Trump have already been proven to not matter one iota to the conservatives that voted him in. Trump could toss a bag of kittens into a river and still retain most of his base

If anything, it seems that Democrat supporters here (even though they don't vote in America) are hyper sensitive to any criticism of their candidates, past presidents etc.

Even pointing out the elephant in the room - Biden being senile has ignited fierce responses on here.

everlast75

hotmail.com wrote: »

If anything, it seems that Democrat supporters here (even though they don't vote in America) are hyper sensitive to any criticism of their candidates, past presidents etc.

Even pointing out the elephant in the room - Biden being senile has ignited fierce responses on here.

Not hyper sesative at all. Just responsive to hypocrisy and false equivalency.

hotmail.com

everlast75 wrote: »

Not hyper sesative at all. Just responsive to hypocrisy and false equivalency.

But this doesn't apply to observers that don't vote in the elections.

droidus

hotmail.com wrote: »

If anything, it seems that Democrat supporters here (even though they don't vote in America) are hyper sensitive to any criticism of their candidates, past presidents etc.

Even pointing out the elephant in the room - Biden being senile has ignited fierce responses on here.

Biden is clearly in cognitive decline. Hillary was a terrible candidate, but I don't think you could say that she wasnt in full possession of her faculties. It would be irresponsible to ask Joe to babysit a 6 year old, putting him onto a debate stage with a monster like Trump would just be cruel, he'll be ripped to shreds. Just look at him FFS

And to be clear, Its also obvious that Trump has serious mental difficulties, and I want him destroyed and locked up for the rest of his life, but sending a frail and confused old man against him is insane.

hotmail.com

droidus wrote: »

Biden is clearly in cognitive decline. Hillary was a terrible candidate, but I don't think you could say that she wasnt in full possession of her faculties. It would be irresponsible to ask Joe to babysit a 6 year old, putting him onto a debate stage with a monster like Trump would just be cruel, he'll be ripped to shreds. Just look at him FFS

And to be clear, Its also obvious that Trump has serious mental difficulties, and I want him destroyed and locked up for the rest of his life, but sending a frail and confused old man against him is insane.

Well said.

It will be an embarrassing affair, the whole campaign if these are the two candidates.

I predict an even lower turnout than normal if these are the choices for Americans.

Red for Danger

everlast75 wrote: »

Incredible that all those posters making derogatory remarks and voicing concern about Biden's mental capacity have been weirdly quiet on Trump's four years of blatant cognitive decline.

Trump and Bloomberg have been going at it over the past few weeks.
Who won that battle? If thats cognitive decline, where was he four years ago?
Who else could do what trump did to bloomberg, bidan, don jr, hannity, obama?
Having the ability to ridicule powerful people it seems, is a rare skill. It has nothing to do with abality to run a country but right now has a lot to do with getting elected.
Trump will prove beyond doubt that he could make a total fool of Bidan then he'll decide to act or not depending on which way the wind is blowing.

BonnieSituation

hotmail.com wrote: »

A lot of the comments on Biden's mental state is coming from Democrats in America.

American Democrats are concerned about this.

You pay an awful lot of attention to American politics for someone who doesn't care about American politics.

everlast75

Red for Danger wrote: »

Trump and Bloomberg have been going at it over the past few weeks.
Who won that battle? If thats cognitive decline, where was he four years ago?
Who else could do what trump did to bloomberg, bidan, don jr, hannity, obama?
Having the ability to ridicule powerful people it seems, is a rare skill. It has nothing to do with abality to run a country but right now has a lot to do with getting elected.
Trump will prove beyond doubt that he could make a total fool of Bidan then he'll decide to act or not depending on which way the wind is blowing.

So, according to you, those who insult the other the most "wins" the debate? Says a lot about your perspective.

Secondly, it is very easy to do something like that. It doesn't take a genius.

Thirdly, this is Trump's mental acumen at play..

https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1235411751950221312?s=20

Fr Tod Umptious

everlast75 wrote: »

Incredible that all those posters making derogatory remarks and voicing concern about Biden's mental capacity have been weirdly quiet on Trump's four years of blatant cognitive decline.

It's the same posters who complain about Hunter Biden but have said nothing about Ivanka and Don Junior directly profiting of their dad's position for the last four years.

It's almost as if these comments are completely disingenuous...

I think people posting about Biden's mental state in some sort of frustration about Bernie losing ground, this has nothing to do with Trump right now, it's coming from people here who want to see Bernie secure the nomination.

Rjd2

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

I think people posting about Biden's mental state in some sort of frustration about Bernie losing ground, this has nothing to do with Trump right now, it's coming from people here who want to see Bernie secure the nomination.

Their is plenty of material there to suggest he is in serious mental decline. However its a tricky thing for other Dem candidates to discuss as they are not exactly young either. I think the Dems have been hands off with him during the campaign especially Bernie and Warren ,,but heh that's why the left loses quite a lot.

Before someone says TRUMP~!!, yeah he has declined also,,if either of them win expect the VP and both their team to do the heavy lifting. Heck I wouldn't be shocked if neither of them served the full 4 year term.

Biden if he wins won't run in 2024 no matter what he says.

everlast75

Warren is out.

Pity she didn't get further.

This tweet sums it up for her now.

https://twitter.com/CMSeeberger/status/1235289358732857345?s=19

vetinari

I'd say Warren's valid options are to not endorse or endorse Sanders.
Endorsing Biden would (rightly imo) reflect badly on her given that she was trying to win as a progressive candidate.

AbusesToilets

Shame, I still think she was the best candidate by a mile. If the Democratic bigwigs had a lick of sense they would've forced Biden to **** off and backed her.

Rjd2

warren's base were mainly affluent white educated suburban people and she never really was able to bring in other groups especially when you look at how badly she performed in her home state with various demographics.

Her fans will blame the media and sexism which is rather naive as most of traditional media which is largely white, educated loved her and propped her up.

Interesting to see if her going to bat for Bernie will matter now, at least she has some pull with suburban whites a demo Bernie is struggling with atm.

pixelburp

Kinda feel sorry for Warren; the stats did initially show a helluva surge, past what had been a lagging Sanders, to the point it was fair to wonder if it might be her V Biden. She definitely made a few miscalculations though, and perhaps trying to split the difference between the progressives and centrists in the party meant she lost support from all sides. The attempt at a smear against Sanders also backfired on her spectacularly. And as said in that Tweet, who she supports may yet erode the goodwill towards her.

Obviously stuff like her native American "heritage" was a big black mark, but overall has often seemed like the kind of political that does the maths and tries to put figures on the table. A rare enough quality from the flimflam merchants that normally populate this stage.

Well that's life. When every issue is binary then half the people are gonna hate ya no matter what ya do.

Dytalus

pixelburp wrote: »

Kinda feel sorry for Warren; the stats did initially show a helluva surge, past what had been a lagging Sanders, to the point it was fair to wonder if it might be her V Biden. She definitely made a few miscalculations though, and perhaps trying to split the difference between the progressives and centrists in the party meant she lost support from all sides. The attempt at a smear against Sanders also backfired on her spectacularly. And as said in that Tweet, who she supports may yet erode the goodwill towards her.

Obviously stuff like her native American "heritage" was a big black mark, but overall has often seemed like the kind of political that does the maths and tries to put figures on the table. A rare enough quality from the flimflam merchants that normally populate this stage.

Yeah, I'd always been hoping Warren would come out on top (or near it). Definitely she made a few mistakes running her campaign, but she's an extremely intelligent politician and has some impressive achievements under her belt. She didn't make it this time, but I'd wager her political career is far from over.

With that in mind, she's in a pickle for endorsing anyone. Endorse Sanders (who she seems to agree with policy wise) and the DNC won't take kindly to it, potentially stalling her career. Endorsing Biden could alienate her existing support given her status as a progressive and Biden's battle cry is pretty close "change nothing".

Hande hoche!

On the one hand she was clearly smart candidate and good debater. She certainly put considerable effort into drafting policy and was far meatier on the details of her plans versus others running. On the other hand personality still counts. Quite a few comparisons to the unlikable faculty members one encounters didn't seem too far fetched.

pixelburp

Dytalus wrote: »

Yeah, I'd always been hoping Warren would come out on top (or near it). Definitely she made a few mistakes running her campaign, but she's an extremely intelligent politician and has some impressive achievements under her belt. She didn't make it this time, but I'd wager her political career is far from over.

With that in mind, she's in a pickle for endorsing anyone. Endorse Sanders (who she seems to agree with policy wise) and the DNC won't take kindly to it, potentially stalling her career. Endorsing Biden could alienate her existing support given her status as a progressive and Biden's battle cry is pretty close "change nothing".

I dunno, she's 70 now, and while she wears it well, she could be 78 before she gets another chance at the White House. 74 at a minimum if Trump gets a second term. I'm sure she'll continue to work as a senator or State level, but you'd imagine that's that for any Presidential aspirations.

Englo

vetinari wrote: »

I'd say Warren's valid options are to not endorse or endorse Sanders.
Endorsing Biden would (rightly imo) reflect badly on her given that she was trying to win as a progressive candidate.

Exactly this, if Buttigieg or Klobuchar endorsed Sanders they wouldn't have got much beyond initial praise for them and would be cast aside by the corporate wing somewhat. If Warren endorsed Biden you would see similar most likely, just with the sides reversed. It would be a bad move both in terms of career prospects, and in terms of long term agenda.

It was also good gp see sanders give out to his supporters for hostility towards her, I much prefer Sanders but Biden will likely win it, and a unified front is important. Trump is aware too, hence why Russia are so eager to sow further discord and why sanders has already wanted them to stay away from US elections and his campaign.

Hande hoche!

pixelburp wrote: »

I dunno, she's 70 now, and while she wears it well, she could be 78 before she gets another chance at the White House. 74 at a minimum if Trump gets a second term. I'm sure she'll continue to work as a senator or State level, but you'd imagine that's that for any Presidential aspirations.

Fair point. Between Trump, Blomberg and Biden she can seem like a whippersnapper at times.