Biden/Harris Presidency Discussion Thread

Foxtrol

Water John wrote: »

Sanders writing on why the Dems need to win back the votes of the working class;
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/nov/24/bernie-sanders-working-class-win-back-from-donald-trump

'One side is for ending starvation wages and raising the minimum wage to $15 per hour. One side is not.

One side is for expanding unions. One side is not.

One side is for creating millions of good paying jobs by combating climate change and rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure. One side is not.

One side is for expanding healthcare. One side is not.

One side is for lowering the cost of prescription drugs. One side is not.

One side is for paid family and medical leave. One side is not.

One side is for universal pre-K for every three- and four-year-old in America. One side is not.

One side is for expanding social security. One side is not.

One side is for making public colleges and universities tuition-free for working families, and eliminating student debt. One side is not.

One side is for ending a broken and racist criminal justice system, and investing in our young people in jobs and education. One side is not.

One side is for reforming and making our immigration system fair and humane. One side is not.

Democrats’ job during the first 100 days of the Biden administration is to make it absolutely clear whose side they are on, and who is on the other side. That’s not only good public policy to strengthen our country. It’s how to win elections in the future.'

As being discussed in the Trump thread, the bold is an progressive pipedream that is bound to fail again.

I'm all for pushing those goals but Bernie is continuing his naivety if he thinks the majority or even a small proportion of the 'working class' want anything to do with the dems, no matter what beneficial policies they bring in for them. They are seen as being on the other side of the culture war and unless they change their stance on the likes of abortion, gun control, equality then they aren't coming back.

Manic Moran

Foxtrol wrote: »

As being discussed in the Trump thread, the bold is an progressive pipedream that is bound to fail again.

I'm all for pushing those goals but Bernie is continuing his naivety if he thinks the majority or even a small proportion of the 'working class' want anything to do with the dems, no matter what beneficial policies they bring in for them. They are seen as being on the other side of the culture war and unless they change their stance on the likes of abortion, gun control, equality then they aren't coming back.

I'm not sure that's necessarily the case. Take his home state as a case in point. They have repeatedly sent Bernie to the Senate, whilst at the same time being one of the most pro-gun States in the union. (Of course, as his debate with Clinton showed, Bernie is also not the most anti-gun person the Democrats could associate with, which may be why Vermonters keep voting him in.)

In fairness, mirror arguments are happening on the conservative side. There is a vocal group saying "For the love of God, leave off with gay marriage and the likes. It's their business, and just loses us votes".

There are two hurdles. The first hurdle is to get past the "why to not vote for someone" hurdle. Negative associations tend to take priority over positive promises. Once you can get past that barrier, to at least give consideration to a candidate, then you can dazzle them with all the good things you can do for them and differentiate yourself from the other candidates who also have gotten past the 'negative association' hurdle.

Of course, there is the difference between 'do at the state level' and 'do at the national level', which is another blocker in quite a few states.

Foxtrol

Manic Moran wrote: »

I'm not sure that's necessarily the case. Take his home state as a case in point. They have repeatedly sent Bernie to the Senate, whilst at the same time being one of the most pro-gun States in the union. (Of course, as his debate with Clinton showed, Bernie is also not the most anti-gun person the Democrats could associate with, which may be why Vermonters keep voting him in.)

Vermont is pro gun but relatively liberal in most other ways. It voted democrat for president every year since '92 and Leahy has been senator there since '74, both well before Bernie was elected.

Look at Florida passing minimum wage laws and shifting further away from dems, who supported that measure while the GOP are against it. Believing you can win voters over by ticking a handful of boxes while your other policies offend the same voters is naive.

In fairness, mirror arguments are happening on the conservative side. There is a vocal group saying "For the love of God, leave off with gay marriage and the likes. It's their business, and just loses us votes".

It is the balance that every candidate has to run to broaden their tent. The GOP under Trump has even more leaned into culture war attacks which has won them working class voters but lost them the suburbs.

There are two hurdles. The first hurdle is to get past the "why to not vote for someone" hurdle. Negative associations tend to take priority over positive promises. Once you can get past that barrier, to at least give consideration to a candidate, then you can dazzle them with all the good things you can do for them and differentiate yourself from the other candidates who also have gotten past the 'negative association' hurdle.

Of course, there is the difference between 'do at the state level' and 'do at the national level', which is another blocker in quite a few states.

I completely agree with you and the first hurdle is exactly what Bernie and his supporters seem to be blind to. All these things his lists are great but if voters are turned off by his other beliefs then they simply don't matter, especially as these are the same voters that didn't see anything Trump said or did as being a 'hurdle' for voting for him.

Water John

I don't think the list of actions proposed by BS count as, 'box ticking'. It's about a whole culture change within the upper echelons of the Democratic party.

Itssoeasy

Joe Biden has given a thanksgiving address and I’ve only heard part of it and it’s good to see someone with a bit of maturity back in the White House because I’m sure most of here grew up with a certain image of a US president was supposed to be and trump has completely wrecked that impression.

Headshot

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Joe Biden have given a thanksgiving address and I’ve only heard part of it and it’s good to see someone with a bit of maturity back in the White House because I’m sure most of here grew up with a certain image of a US president was supposed to be and trump has completely wrecked that impression.

It's really impressive and this is how a President should be acting

https://twitter.com/MSNBC/status/1331691546480087040

TomOnBoard

Water John wrote: »

I don't think the list of actions proposed by BS count as, 'box ticking'. It's about a whole culture change within the upper echelons of the Democratic party.

I think the list is fair enough in that Bernie is saying- here's a number of issues that I believe we all need to know where individual Dems stand. So, where do you (every Dem) actually stand on these? Its a straight-up request for clarity, to follow an election (and earlier primary) process where many pols presented alternative positions and now, as the process is completed, people need to know exactly what each of those pols stand for.

Once its clear where individual pols stand on each of the policies, then clarity around what the whole party stands for can be ascertained in time for 2022.

This is rightly part of the 'After Action Report' that both parties need to conduct following one of the most confusing and lie-filled elections in history.

Water John

This new administration needs to act on a number of issues that resonate with ordinary families. The result of the run offs in Georgia will influence what can be achieved, but a couple of GOP Senators could be brought across on certain issues, if the GOP retain those seats.

Rjd2

Bernie and his crew need to realise sadly that the Dem Party doesn't really need them, Biden won an election comfortably by attracting white Suburbanite Bush Republicans, Ivy Leaguers social liberals while been financed by silicon valley and Wall Street.

He's got corporate media in his pocket , a powerful Bluemaga presence online, so called progressives can rack up the retweets online, but I see nothing from them to indicate that any of their demands will be met.

Foxtrol

Water John wrote: »

This new administration needs to act on a number of issues that resonate with ordinary families. The result of the run offs in Georgia will influence what can be achieved, but a couple of GOP Senators could be brought across on certain issues, if the GOP retain those seats.

Again, like Bernie you're making the leap that those policies will make any significant difference to voters.

Just a few weeks ago the same 'ordinary families' were happy to vote for Trump despite his horrible actions as president and policies that ran opposite to many that Bernie & co support and are pushing for now.

Bernie's list is very admirable and the right thing to do but there needs to be recognition that they simply aren't swaying 'ordinary families' nor 'working class' voters due to other stances the democrat party takes

Water John

Maybe Joe Biden can emulate Nye Bevin, who also had a stammer, and reform the US health care, so that no GOP President would dare take it backwards.

pixelburp

I see Biden suffered a hairline fracture while playing with his dog; will require a medical boot for a couple of weeks. Had hoped that the GOP leaning press might have to wait a few weeks before it could dust off the "he's too old" narrative, but I guess we'll be starting early? And if not the press, then anyone with a Confirmation Bias in their pocket.

To be fair, my own brother broke his hip slipping while trying to corral his own dog, so it's remarkably easy to hurt yourself via one's pet. Still, if politics is more about perception than reality, it's not an ideal start IMO.

Timberrrrrrrr

pixelburp wrote: »

I see Biden suffered a hairline fracture while playing with his dog; will require a medical boot for a couple of weeks. Had hoped that the GOP leaning press might have to wait a few weeks before it could dust off the "he's too old" narrative, but I guess we'll be starting early? And if not the press, then anyone with a Confirmation Bias in their pocket.

To be fair, my own brother broke his hip slipping while trying to corral his own dog, so it's remarkably easy to hurt yourself via one's pet. Still, if politics is more about perception than reality, it's not an ideal start IMO.

Fecking cat walked in front of me yesterday and near sent me arse over end down the stairs, but yeah the Trump supporters will revel in this claimingbhe damaged himself while reading a book or some shìte

[Deleted User]

The dog thing is pretty tame particularly since he was rolling around on the floor with those behemoths.

ancapailldorcha

pixelburp wrote: »

I see Biden suffered a hairline fracture while playing with his dog; will require a medical boot for a couple of weeks. Had hoped that the GOP leaning press might have to wait a few weeks before it could dust off the "he's too old" narrative, but I guess we'll be starting early? And if not the press, then anyone with a Confirmation Bias in their pocket.

To be fair, my own brother broke his hip slipping while trying to corral his own dog, so it's remarkably easy to hurt yourself via one's pet. Still, if politics is more about perception than reality, it's not an ideal start IMO.

This is just how Politics is going to be now, sadly. The days of the likes of John McCain arguing that someone like Obama is as American as he is are long gone.

I found this pic the other day. Apparently, in 2009 George W. Bush invited Obama and all living former presidents over for lunch:



You just wouldn't have had that with #45 but hopefully under Biden some of the GOP might become a little more gentlemanly and less crude. I'm not hopeful though.

hotmail.com

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

This is just how Politics is going to be now, sadly. The days of the likes of John McCain arguing that someone like Obama is as American as he is are long gone.

I found this pic the other day. Apparently, in 2009 George W. Bush invited Obama and all living former presidents over for lunch:



You just wouldn't have had that with #45 but hopefully under Biden some of the GOP might become a little more gentlemanly and less crude. I'm not hopeful though.

Amazing how people overlook the damage and death caused by George Bush and think this kind of nonsense is great.

ancapailldorcha

hotmail.com wrote: »

Amazing how people overlook the damage and death caused by George Bush and think this kind of nonsense is great.

Can you quote the part of my post where I overlook anything Bush did?

Gbear

Biden is not going to be the President to bring the sort of self-reflection that takes a morally sane view of the horrors that the US has inflicted on the planet.

That doesn't mean he can't do a relatively good job, but it's not in his makeup to call the US to account for its massive foreign policy failures.

Despite the insane rhetoric from the right about the Democrats, Biden is every inch a patriot, with all the positive and negative baggage that comes with.

duploelabs

hotmail.com wrote: »

Amazing how people overlook the damage and death caused by George Bush and think this kind of nonsense is great.

At least GWB conducted himself with a semblance of dignity and maturity

hotmail.com

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Can you quote the part of my post where I overlook anything Bush did?

Your post clearly indicates admiration for him because he invited his predecessors over for lunch.

People are easily pleased.

hotmail.com

duploelabs wrote: »

At least GWB conducted himself with a semblance of dignity and maturity

I'm sure that means a lot to the people in Iraq and Afghanistan. Bombs being dropped on them but at least he acted with dignity. Eh ok.

pixelburp

hotmail.com wrote: »

Your post clearly indicates admiration for him because he invited his predecessors over for lunch.

People are easily pleased.

As America rips itself apart through deepening partisan posturing, I don't see the flaw or outrage at admiring the few occasions when civility was actually seen within its upper echelons.

It's not difficult to possess two opposing views here: admiration at the ability for competing "Sides" to sit down together - while recognising that Bush Jr. effectively detonated the Middle East. We're all mature enough to possess two competing thoughts here.

ancapailldorcha

hotmail.com wrote: »

Your post clearly indicates admiration for him because he invited his predecessors over for lunch.

People are easily pleased.

That wasn't remotely my point and I think you know that. These attempts to warp the truth to suit the Trump narrative have only gotten more desperate and transparent over time.

Biden isn't my ideal president by any metric but at the moment I'd settle for any man who can convincingly and instantly condemn white supremacists and come across as if he's read a book or two at some point.

hotmail.com

pixelburp wrote: »

As America rips itself apart through deepening partisan posturing, I don't see the flaw or outrage at admiring the few occasions when civility was actually seen within its upper echelons.

It's not difficult to possess two opposing views here: admiration at the ability for competing "Sides" to sit down together - while recognising that Bush Jr. effectively detonated the Middle East. We're all mature enough to possess two competing thoughts here.

America is not ripping itself apart. America is the same place it was 5 or 10 years ago.

Secondly, I just find stuff like this completely irrelevant. It's like the attention on the wife of the president or their children. No other country has this rubbish, but people apply different and weird standards to American politics, standards they don't have for European politicians.

hotmail.com

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

That wasn't remotely my point and I think you know that. These attempts to warp the truth to suit the Trump narrative have only gotten more desperate and transparent over time.

Biden isn't my ideal president by any metric but at the moment I'd settle for any man who can convincingly and instantly condemn white supremacists and come across as if he's read a book or two at some point.

My point has nothing to do with Trump or Biden or white supremacy.

I just mentioned the madness of admiring someone as bad as Bush just because he had lunch with his predecessors. He also made sure to get a nice photo of it. People are easily pleased.

ancapailldorcha

hotmail.com wrote: »

My point has nothing to do with Trump or Biden or white supremacy.

I just mentioned the madness of admiring someone as bad as Bush just because he had lunch with his predecessors. He also made sure to get a nice photo of it. People are easily pleased.

Mine had nothing to do with admiring Bush as was obvious. It was all to do with looking back at a time when parties at least pretended to be civil to each other.

I'm not going to engage with any more of your false claims so I'll leave it there.

duploelabs

hotmail.com wrote: »

I'm sure that means a lot to the people in Iraq and Afghanistan. Bombs being dropped on them but at least he acted with dignity. Eh ok.

You know exactly the point I'm making, but while we're at it Trump's ineptitude caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Americans, but who's keeping score

Brussels Sprout

pixelburp wrote: »

As America rips itself apart through deepening partisan posturing, I don't see the flaw or outrage at admiring the few occasions when civility was actually seen within its upper echelons.

It's not difficult to possess two opposing views here: admiration at the ability for competing "Sides" to sit down together - while recognising that Bush Jr. effectively detonated the Middle East. We're all mature enough to possess two competing thoughts here.

Unfortunately this sort of nuance is disappearing fast in the purity tests that are demanded too often by people these days. For example:

• Anyone wavering from Trumpism is labelled a RINO
• Any Labour MP dithering on elements of Corbynism was seen as a closet Tory
• Sinn Fein are all in the 'RA or Fine Gael are all cruel, sociopathic, robots - depending on which side you're coming from
• The only acceptable instance where you can mention particular people is to castigate them or praise them

It's becoming more akin to Religion or, god forbid, supporting a football team.

It's condescendingly reductive and depressingly, it seems like it's only getting worse.

ancapailldorcha

Back on topic please.

MadYaker

hotmail.com wrote: »

America is not ripping itself apart. America is the same place it was 5 or 10 years ago.

Secondly, I just find stuff like this completely irrelevant. It's like the attention on the wife of the president or their children. No other country has this rubbish, but people apply different and weird standards to American politics, standards they don't have for European politicians.

You spend a lot of time posting about things you think are irrelevant so, why is that? It’s like your posting style is deliberately designed to stifle discussion.