Joe Biden Was NOT running the country

  • Thread starter Thread starter GuyFree
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 375
  • Views: 11K
  • Politics 
gtyellowjacket said:
Maybe. Couldn't have done worse than Kamala.

I actually think that wouldn't have been a horrible idea. Someone could have come to her and say Joe is not going to make it through another campaign. Let's put you in a primary where you are basically the incumbent, and go for it. That preserves Joe's legacy and we have a primary process to see if she (and Kamala) can stand up to Trump.

She's not a politician but she has been a politician's wife for decades. It might have worked.
Click to expand...

Icky Mettle said:
The Dems went for Republicans’ bait in that one. When Gore was running for president, before he picked his running mate, many Pubs said they feared Kerry the most as a potential running mate. So Dems bit in the next election and put Kerry up there.

One of Kerry’s problems was that he was incredibly timid and overly cautious. He was frightened to say anything that could be deemed as bold and was scared to come out of his shell.

Also, to this day… or at least as of very recently… Dems have made the error of assuming that a Dem candidate’s military service will matter to voters.
Click to expand...
and yet, if Ken Blackwell had not suppressed the Democratic vote in Ohio using several methods, then Kerry would have won the election.

I still remember how Tucker Carlson was so depressed when the Crossfire Show was going over the Ohio exit polls. Little did he know at the time that Blackwell had successfully saved GWB
 
gtyellowjacket said:
Maybe. Couldn't have done worse than Kamala.

I actually think that wouldn't have been a horrible idea. Someone could have come to her and say Joe is not going to make it through another campaign. Let's put you in a primary where you are basically the incumbent, and go for it. That preserves Joe's legacy and we have a primary process to see if she (and Kamala) can stand up to Trump.

She's not a politician but she has been a politician's wife for decades. It might have worked.
Click to expand...
The process by which she was coronated as the Dem candidate rubbed a lot of people the wrong way, I believe. However, if you're going to coronate someone, why would you pick Harris? I know she was VP, but she was also awkward, not a good public speaker and had a lot of baggage in her past that someone, or many someones, on the Dem side had to have called out.
 
I think her biggest baggage was that she is a woman of color. Frankly, I was impressed by her work in the impeachment proceedings where she showed sharpness of mind and eloquence in her language. If anything from my point of view she was too centrist but I never figure that is a negative because I understand that I will seldom if ever be able to vote for a winning candidate that is far enough to the left for my thinking.
 
gtyellowjacket said:
A primary might have told us quite a bit.
Click to expand...

A primary told us all we needed to know about Trump and morons still clamored to vote for him.

Jill Biden might have been awesome. That's not really the point. The point is that Harris was a more than qualified candidate. People who cast their vote for Donald Trump, while saying stupid shit like Harris slept her way to the top of elected positions, told on themselves. And maybe every Trump voter isn't a racist piece of shit. But he couldn't have won without the racist piece of shit portion of the electorate. And those people will never vote for a black woman. No matter what her qualifications are/were.
 
dukeman92 said:
A primary told us all we needed to know about Trump and morons still clamored to vote for him.

Jill Biden might have been awesome. That's not really the point. The point is that Harris was a more than qualified candidate. People who cast their vote for Donald Trump, while saying stupid shit like Harris slept her way to the top of elected positions, told on themselves. And maybe every Trump voter isn't a racist piece of shit. But he couldn't have won without the racist piece of shit portion of the electorate. And those people will never vote for a black woman. No matter what her qualifications are/were.
Click to expand...
racism and misogyny FTW.
 
Icky Mettle said:
The Dems went for Republicans’ bait in that one. When Gore was running for president, before he picked his running mate, many Pubs said they feared Kerry the most as a potential running mate. So Dems bit in the next election and put Kerry up there.

One of Kerry’s problems was that he was incredibly timid and overly cautious. He was frightened to say anything that could be deemed as bold and was scared to come out of his shell.

Also, to this day… or at least as of very recently… Dems have made the error of assuming that a Dem candidate’s military service will matter to voters.
Click to expand...
True. It's one of the main reasons why NC and DC Democrats backed Cal Cunningham for US Senate in 2020.
 
dukeman92 said:
A primary told us all we needed to know about Trump and morons still clamored to vote for him.

Jill Biden might have been awesome. That's not really the point. The point is that Harris was a more than qualified candidate. People who cast their vote for Donald Trump, while saying stupid shit like Harris slept her way to the top of elected positions, told on themselves. And maybe every Trump voter isn't a racist piece of shit. But he couldn't have won without the racist piece of shit portion of the electorate. And those people will never vote for a black woman. No matter what her qualifications are/were.
Click to expand...
The notion that Harris & Trump were somehow equally unqualified or noxious candidates is one of the biggest lies Trumpers tell themselves (and the same goes with Hillary). By nearly every objective, real-world metric Harris was vastly more qualified than Donald Freaking Trump to be POTUS. Of course she wasn't perfect (who is?) but Trump is so much worse by nearly every standard that it is a joke to argue otherwise.

If Harris had been elected none of the shit we're going through right now would be happening, period. Trumpers can claim whatever the hell they want regarding their vote, but she lost because first, she's a woman of color, second, she's from California, a state Trumpers love to hate, and third, she was a vice-president in an unpopular administration. Things like inflation were nothing more than an excuse for them to do what they were already going to do. The fact that her opponent had a failed first-term presidency, that nearly every leading member of his first administration openly said he wasn't qualified or possessed the character and temperament to be president again, that he openly said he would raise tariffs and spent most of his campaign rambling incoherently like a drooling fool at rallies didn't matter a whit to his adoring cult supporters, because the Donald Trump they believe they support doesn't exist and never has.

All they knew - based on Dear Leader's insults and Fox News and other right-wing media (including much of legacy media), and word of mouth they likely heard at their church - was that Kamala Harris was a feminist woman of color from that liberal hellhole of California who slept her way to the top and had a weird first name and supported kids changing their gender like that Trump TV commercial they saw and she symbolized all of those snooty overeducated blue-state snobs who look down on people like them. And, conversely, that Dear Leader really cared about people like them (lol) and he wouldn't do anything too stupid if he got elected and he surely wouldn't do anything that would hurt them personally. And so here we are.
 
ZenMode said:
The process by which she was coronated as the Dem candidate rubbed a lot of people the wrong way, I believe. However, if you're going to coronate someone, why would you pick Harris? I know she was VP, but she was also awkward, not a good public speaker and had a lot of baggage in her past that someone, or many someones, on the Dem side had to have called out.
Click to expand...
Are you two serious?

Considering the timing, who else was a viable choice?

I don't believe anyone else was risking their political career for a short rushed candidacy.
Please like these call outs from Dems regarding her baggage. No one perfect, she didn't have any baggage that would have been disqualified, in my opinion.

Also, while you are at it, provide a list of potential candidates that were chomping at the bit for the opportunity

Also, how would you have avoided the "corination"? How would you have negotiated the obstacles to have a national vote in that short a period of time?
 
Mulberry Heel said:
The notion that Harris & Trump were somehow equally unqualified or noxious candidates is one of the biggest lies Trumpers tell themselves (and the same goes with Hillary). By nearly every objective, real-world metric Harris was vastly more qualified than Donald Freaking Trump to be POTUS. Of course she wasn't perfect (who is?) but Trump is so much worse by nearly every standard that it is a joke to argue otherwise.

If Harris had been elected none of the shit we're going through right now would be happening, period. Trumpers can claim whatever the hell they want regarding their vote, but she lost because first, she's a woman of color, second, she's from California, a state Trumpers love to hate, and third, she was a vice-president in an unpopular administration. Things like inflation were nothing more than an excuse for them to do what they were already going to do. The fact that her opponent had a failed first-term presidency, that nearly every leading member of his first administration openly said he wasn't qualified or possessed the character and temperament to be president again, that he openly said he would raise tariffs and spent most of his campaign rambling incoherently like a drooling fool at rallies didn't matter a whit to his adoring cult supporters, because the Donald Trump they believe they support doesn't exist and never has.

All they knew - based on Dear Leader's insults and Fox News and other right-wing media (including much of legacy media), and word of mouth they likely heard at their church - was that Kamala Harris was a feminist woman of color from that liberal hellhole of California who slept her way to the top and had a weird first name and supported kids changing their gender like that Trump TV commercial they saw and she symbolized all of those snooty overeducated blue-state snobs who look down on people like them. And, conversely, that Dear Leader really cared about people like them (lol) and he wouldn't do anything too stupid if he got elected and he surely wouldn't do anything that would hurt them personally. And so here we are.
Click to expand...
Yes, they have proven, with their acceptance of Trump's hard times are required, that the economy want the issue.
 
ZenMode said:
The process by which she was coronated as the Dem candidate rubbed a lot of people the wrong way, I believe. However, if you're going to coronate someone, why would you pick Harris? I know she was VP, but she was also awkward, not a good public speaker and had a lot of baggage in her past that someone, or many someones, on the Dem side had to have called out.
Click to expand...
I just don't think there was any other option. It was either going to be a major fight within the Democratic party apparatus or Harris or I suppose Jill Biden.

At that late stage, I don't think primary is logistically feasible. The States run those things and they aren't particularly fast.

I think Harris was as close to a consensus candidate as you were going to get for the Democratic base to rally around. But yeah, she was a terrible candidate.
 
dukeman92 said:
A primary told us all we needed to know about Trump and morons still clamored to vote for him.

Jill Biden might have been awesome. That's not really the point. The point is that Harris was a more than qualified candidate. People who cast their vote for Donald Trump, while saying stupid shit like Harris slept her way to the top of elected positions, told on themselves. And maybe every Trump voter isn't a racist piece of shit. But he couldn't have won without the racist piece of shit portion of the electorate. And those people will never vote for a black woman. No matter what her qualifications are/were.
Click to expand...
Great. We get to call some Republicans racist. That makes some people feel really good but it still means Trump is in office.

I'm sure there are people that are never going to vote for a black person, but Obama showed you don't need those people. You do need the people that will vote for a black person and Kamala didn't get as many of those as she needed to.

Maybe no Democrat could have. Inflation was a pretty big issue with the electorate so the incumbent party was going to take a hit. But Harris did okay out of the gate as the anti-trump candidate. She really faltered as the Harris candidate which a whole lot of people didn't really like as the campaign went on and people got more exposed to her.
 
gtyellowjacket said:
Great. We get to call some Republicans racist. That makes some people feel really good but it still means Trump is in office.

I'm sure there are people that are never going to vote for a black person, but Obama showed you don't need those people. You do need the people that will vote for a black person and Kamala didn't get as many of those as she needed to.

Maybe no Democrat could have. Inflation was a pretty big issue with the electorate so the incumbent party was going to take a hit. But Harris did okay out of the gate as the anti-trump candidate. She really faltered as the Harris candidate which a whole lot of people didn't really like as the campaign went on and people got more exposed to her.
Click to expand...
It. Was. All. About. The. Racism.

Just look at where Trump has gone truly hog wild: DEI. They are blowing everything up trying to stamp out DEI. His base largely approves of him -- despite the terrible economy and tariffs -- for that reason. It's the racism, stupid.

Obama was neck and neck with McCain until the financial crisis, even though McCain was an awful candidate, picked the biggest mockery for VP probably ever, the war effort in Iraq was a travesty and the economy was in bad shape.

Obama went on to a huge victory after McCain shut down his campaign and Congress focused on the TARP bailout and the economy headed for the worst recession since the Depression and the financial system completely shut down. If Obama was white, it probably would have a 1984 style blowout. No incumbent party has ever had a worse track record to run on, that I can remember.

In 2012, he won narrowly as an incumbent.

Obama's election does not tell you very much about racism in American politics.
 
ZenMode said:
The process by which she was coronated as the Dem candidate rubbed a lot of people the wrong way, I believe. However, if you're going to coronate someone, why would you pick Harris? I know she was VP, but she was also awkward, not a good public speaker and had a lot of baggage in her past that someone, or many someones, on the Dem side had to have called out.
Click to expand...

Oh how I remember the demands that someone like Big Gretch had to have the chance at the nomination. Well, she couldn't own up to doing business at the White House and covered her face when the cameras came out. And to follow that one up, she was caught unprepared when she was asked to speak when Trump came to her state to do business. Now we know she couldn't have pulled it off. Fact is, it takes a two year process to really find out.
 
gtyellowjacket said:
I think Harris was as close to a consensus candidate as you were going to get for the Democratic base to rally around. But yeah, she was a terrible candidate.
Click to expand...
Terrible candidate only in the sense she lost, but even that doesn't necessarily mean she was a terrible candidate. But if that's your criterion, that means Trump was the worst candidate of all time in 2020, and he was even closer to a consensus candidate in 2020 than Kamala was in 2024...
 
hedge said:
Terrible candidate only in the sense she lost, but even that doesn't necessarily mean she was a terrible candidate. But if that's your criterion, that means Trump was the worst candidate of all time in 2020, and he was even closer to a consensus candidate in 2020 than Kamala was in 2024...
Click to expand...
You know as much as we dog Trump for kind of being an idiot and not really understand the issues and being an absolutely lunatic, he was actually a really good candidate.

He's a weak president but he is a really good candidate. He is as media savvy as anybody since Reagan. He has Obama/Bill Clinton level charisma. And more than anything, he knew how to keep the attention focused on him at the expense of the other candidates.
 
gtyellowjacket said:
Great. We get to call some Republicans racist. That makes some people feel really good but it still means Trump is in office.

I'm sure there are people that are never going to vote for a black person, but Obama showed you don't need those people. You do need the people that will vote for a black person and Kamala didn't get as many of those as she needed to.

Maybe no Democrat could have. Inflation was a pretty big issue with the electorate so the incumbent party was going to take a hit. But Harris did okay out of the gate as the anti-trump candidate. She really faltered as the Harris candidate which a whole lot of people didn't really like as the campaign went on and people got more exposed to her.
Click to expand...

We don't get to call some republicans racist. Republicans ARE racist. Inflation was a big issue the world over. And it was well on it's way to torpedoing our economy long before Joe Biden spanked Trumps fat orange ass. We all know this... I have no desire to rehash those details, which have been repeated all over this forum for the last six months.

There were things I found myself wanting to hear from Harris that I never heard. And quite frankly, towards the end, her answers, which remained pretty constant, grew stale. That didn't deter me from voting for her one iota. And none of that makes Jill Biden a better candidate. If you actually listened to both candidates during the election cycle, this choice was a layup. Undecided? give me a break.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top