|
He'll be 82 in 2024. Hopefully he has enough sense not to run again.
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2021 18:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 19:47 |
|
|
Lester Shy posted:He'll be 82 in 2024. Hopefully he has enough sense not to run again. https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/21/politics/biden-2024-2nd-term/index.html Headline: Why Joe Biden is already thinking about a 2nd term
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2021 18:13
|
|
|
I think that, going forward, folks and activists are going to have to hope that the fact that Biden was running against Trump was a more unique situation, and that Democrats will be more likely to take 'risks' in the future with regards to kicking out a candidate late in a cycle if credible allegations surface. I was curious about polling on this issue, so some quick Googling seems to show the last time it was polled (that I could find) was May of 2020. https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/06/politics/joe-biden-tara-reade-monmouth-poll/index.html quote:In a new Monmouth University national poll, almost 9 in 10 people (86%) said they have heard about the allegation, which is not terribly surprising, given that Biden's denial last Friday -- he said the alleged incident "never happened" -- drove news coverage of the allegations made by Reade throughout the weekend. If that ~30% of the public at large that believes Reade but didn't care w/r/t their commitment to vote Trump out change their minds in a hypothetical future similar situation, then we would have gotten a new candidate. Here's the Monmouth poll crosstabs themselves: https://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/documents/monmouthpoll_us_050620.pdf/ The party ID breakdowns are on pages 7 and 8.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2021 18:14
|
|
|
I wasn't old enough to remember the first Clinton election. Was his sex allegation stuff brought up at the time?
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2021 18:23
|
|
|
Whoever the GOP nominee is is going to be as bad or worse than Trump in the minds of that 32%. See how quickly they sanitized GWB. Every election will always be "the most important election of our lives," so any blemishes on Biden's record can be swept under the rug. Of course, there's also a strong possibility that Trump will be the nominee in 2024 anyway.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2021 18:25
|
|
|
Biden will certainly run again, and if the GOP nominates Trump, or one of his empty suit acolytes, they're going to make it again a very easy choice for most people.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2021 18:30
|
|
|
Sodomy Hussein posted:Biden will certainly run again, and if the GOP nominates Trump, or one of his empty suit acolytes, they're going to make it again a very easy choice for most people. Yeah, the republicans will win., because surprise surprise, the Dems are already walking back on: - Minimum wage - college loan forgiveness - $2000 stimulus checks They are already ramping up to act like the Obama administration which lead to Trump, much like Carter lead to Regan and Clinton led to Bush. Centrism always disenfranchises the voters into voting for the other party.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2021 18:34
|
|
|
DoomTrainPhD posted:Yeah, the republicans will win., because surprise surprise, the Dems are already walking back on: Or honestly just not voting at all because whats the point? Like seriously, not to sound doomer but if one party is offering you runny dog poo poo and the other is offering you stinky cat poo poo then why bother? At the presidential level anyway. Like clearly I volunteer on campaigns and I put my time in and make a huge effort but my entire adult life worth of presidents have been absolutely awful human beings. I've voted in every single election and i've volunteered in the primary for almost every primary I could and I dont feel better for it. As I get older and watch these sexual predators get to continue being shitheads in power just because "well the other guy is a worse sexual predator" all I can do is scream PICK NEITHER SEXUAL PREDATOR HOW loving HARD IS THAT but I cant blame people for not voting when 500,000 votes got thrown out in this last primary and an insanely high amount for the 2016 primary too.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2021 18:42
|
|
|
Sodomy Hussein posted:Biden will certainly run again, and if the GOP nominates Trump, or one of his empty suit acolytes, they're going to make it again a very easy choice for most people. For Trump or one of his empty suit acolytes you mean, right? I should make it clear that I don't want a second Trump term, but Biden has, realistically, less than two years to start delivering on some actual material concessions to broad swathes of the working class (like $2k checks and loan forgiveness, not wonkbait EOs and epic IFL science psaki bombs) or Trump is going to be able to walk in to the office in 2024.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2021 19:15
|
|
|
Biden still has a lot to deliver on and it's incredibly frustrating when the Democrats are publicly negotiating their own positions with themselves, as it's at minimum bad politics. There's a lot to unpack when Biden wants to sign $10,000 of student debt away but begins hemming and hawing about the constitutionality of $50,000, the position of noted progressive firebrand... *checks notes* Chuck Schumer? I guess what I'm saying is that Biden mismanaging the crises in front of us is his only path to defeat, since it was Trump's path to defeat and people in aggregate have weighed the Reade allegations against the situation and voted Biden.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2021 19:32
|
|
|
DoomTrainPhD posted:Yeah, the republicans will win., because surprise surprise, the Dems are already walking back on: is your shtick going around to unrelated threads to harp about stimulus checks after you got booted out of uspol? because while it was irritating in the impeachment thread, its totally ridiculous to do it in a serious thread about tara reade.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2021 19:41
|
|
|
Aruan posted:is your shtick going around to unrelated threads to harp about stimulus checks after you got booted out of uspol? because while it was irritating in the impeachment thread, its totally ridiculous to do it in a serious thread about tara reade. Is your shtick to ignore context in every situation? Or are you just purposefully ignoring the context in an effort to stir up poo poo? Because while it was irritating in the impeachment thread, it's totally ridiculous to do it in a serious thread about Tara Reade.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2021 19:45
|
|
|
DoomTrainPhD posted:Is your shtick to ignore context in every situation? Or are you just purposefully ignoring the context in an effort to stir up poo poo? Because while it was irritating in the impeachment thread, it's totally ridiculous to do it in a serious thread about Tara Reade. this is a thread about tara reade, not about stimulus checks or student loan forgiveness. do you think there is a level of progressive policy which would lead you to support biden? if not, then why the gently caress are you talking about it? and even in the context of "well i hope biden doesn't run again", that decision doesn't have anything to do with stimulus payments or student loans, it has far more to do with "is biden alive in four years" can ONE thread not be about student loans and stimulus checks, goddamn
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2021 19:48
|
|
|
to contribute: someone asked the question, "where do we go from here", and i don't think there's an easy answer - my hope is that once we eventually start moving towards the next generation of politicians they are less terrible people who care more about human dignity and rights
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2021 19:51
|
|
|
Aruan posted:this is a thread about Tara Reade, not about stimulus checks or student loan forgiveness. Do you think there is a level of progressive policy which would lead you to support Biden? and even in the context of "well I hope Biden doesn't run again," that decision doesn't have anything to do with stimulus payments or student loans; it has far more to do with "is Biden alive in four years." Ah, OK, I got it. You are just ignoring context. You have a bone to pick with me, even though I was responding to a post about the DNC reelection chances in both threads, which you seem unwilling to acknowledge. But hey, keep telling me I don't take these allegations seriously when I have been advocating for Tara FROM THE BEGINNING of this thread, have a family member who was sexually assaulted, I refused to vote for Biden. I lambast anybody who doesn't believe her. FlapYoJacks fucked around with this message at 19:56 on Feb 18, 2021 |
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2021 19:53
|
|
|
The "context" is Tara Reade. It definitely isn't stimulus checks, or student loan forgiveness, or any other perceived or real failing of Biden and his policies. If someone has started a derail, try to not contribute to it with your hot takes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2021 20:10
|
|
|
Thorn Wishes Talon posted:The "context" is Tara Reade. It definitely isn't stimulus checks, or student loan forgiveness, or any other perceived or real failing of Biden and his policies. Speaking of which, did you ever figure out what goal the Purity Crew would be harming, if democrats called out rape apologia as rape apologia?
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2021 21:21
|
|
|
Given that people are not only still defending Biden being a predator, but also stuff like Neera Tanden outing an employee who experienced sexual harassment, it is pretty hard for me to take the "it's just Biden specifically that gets a pass/people only ignored the Reade allegations because of the threat of more Trump" arguments seriously; Tanden is blatantly awful, completely useless, and not even particularly well-known or liked, and yet an unfortunate amount of people who support the Democrats cover their ears whenever it comes up and try to pretend that she's just being criticized for mean tweets and not being sufficiently left for those mean Internet socialists. Just being the Biden administration's pick for a position is enough for people to rally around an utterly reprehensible person who offers them nothing. The Democratic Party and a sizable chunk of its supporters do not care about sexual harassment or assault. Al Franken resigning was a fluke that the party likely regards as a huge mistake; they've since learned that the "right" response to this kind of thing isn't to apologize or resign, but to power through it and smear their victims; if he had just stuck it out, he could easily still be a senator. As for "what to do", there's only one thing to do: Stop supporting predators and their enablers, period. No exceptions, no excuses; it needs to be absolutely clear that you will lose if you try to run as a Democrat and have committed or helped to protect and perpetuate sexual harassment and assault, and that the party's only acceptable response to learning that one of their candidates has engaged in such is to immediately ditch them and find someone better instead of being party to their misdeeds. It doesn't matter how bad their opponent is; the Republicans will always be worse, so using "lesser evil" arguments when making defenses or excuses for Democratic predators merely tells both them and their victims that the latter are, and will always be, an acceptable sacrifice. That, because the shepherd tries to keep away the wolves, he is entitled to the occasional rack of lamb.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2021 21:33
|
|
|
Yeah I could reluctantly buy the idea that Trump was uniquely evil and we had to elect a lesser accused rapist and groper to get him out of office if the Dems didn't support and promote other rapists, rape apologists and rape enablers at every turn. Nominating Biden, nominating Tanden, giving Bill Clinton a featured slot at the DNC in TYOOL 2020 all make it pretty clear that they do not view this sort of behavior as disqualifying or even something worth hiding in the backrooms.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2021 21:50
|
|
|
They could have coalesced around literally any of the other primary candidates. Only the donors have ever really mattered to the party.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2021 22:08
|
|
|
Harold Fjord posted:They could have coalesced around literally any of the other primary candidates. Only the donors have ever really mattered to the party. The May 2020 polling I posted just a little earlier showed, in the Party crosstabs, that about 20% of Democrats reported they though the allegations were true, while 55% actively did not think the allegations were true and 26% said they didn't know. It's not just the donors, most Democrats either didn't believe her or didn't know/care, period. e: I should say: according to this data from this snapshot in time, May 2020. I would really love to see new polling on the issue. How are u fucked around with this message at 22:20 on Feb 18, 2021 |
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2021 22:14
|
|
|
How are u posted:The May 2020 polling I posted just a little earlier showed, in the Party crosstabs, that about 20% of Democrats reported they though the allegations were true, while 55% actively did not think the allegations were true and 26% said they didn't know. It's not just the donors, most Democrats either didn't believe her or didn't know/care, period. I assume new polling would look worse for Tara Reade because of the smear job that has been so thoroughly conducted against her. RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA!!!!
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2021 22:23
|
|
|
Harold Fjord posted:They could have coalesced around literally any of the other primary candidates. Only the donors have ever really mattered to the party. The result was utter panic after sanders sweeped the first 3 states, unprecedented for a candidate. These circumstances forced them to push the candidate who announced amidst a bunch of sexual harassment allegations, joked about inappropriately touching a bunch of women and children, and required the entire democrat-aligned media to smear his public sexual assault victim as a warning to anyone else. Their priorities are very clear.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2021 22:44
|
|
|
comedyblissoption posted:The democrats actually did try to coalesce around anyone else that were not the 3 candidates joe rogan was willing to invite onto his show. They tried to push kamala, klobuchar, buttigieg, and the rest of the clown car hard and all of them failed. I think it was CNN that had multiple post-audience panels with a majority saying klob won every debate. I'm sure your intention was good when you wrote this but it comes across as dehumanizing. Her name is Tara Reade and she can be referred to directly. Maybe say her name and add the other bit as a paranthetical?
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2021 23:13
|
|
|
silicone thrills posted:I wasn't old enough to remember the first Clinton election. Was his sex allegation stuff brought up at the time? All of the allegations surfaced publicly after Clinton was elected president, and some even after the Lewinsky stuff broke in his second term. Here's the wiki on the accusations. Sodomy Hussein posted:I guess what I'm saying is that Biden mismanaging the crises in front of us is his only path to defeat, since it was Trump's path to defeat and people in aggregate have weighed the Reade allegations against the situation and voted Biden. That's not necessarily true; modern history is rife with examples of things that were considered politically acceptable in the recent past but would bury a candidate today. I'm sure that'll be true in the years ahead, as well. Pres. Puddin'head won't be running again in 2024 anyway; it'll be Kween Kamala as the Dem candidate.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2021 23:35
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:All of the allegations surfaced publicly after Clinton was elected president, and some even after the Lewinsky stuff broke in his second term. Maybe. They definitely want to set up Kamala. But the going narrative in 2015 was that Biden couldn't be president because he's tried 11 times and says dumb poo poo all the time, and well, Trump normalized saying dumb poo poo all the time and now Biden is president. For another example, a plagiarism issue would absolutely not slow down Biden today.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2021 00:05
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:All of the allegations surfaced publicly after Clinton was elected president, and some even after the Lewinsky stuff broke in his second term. Remembering the way Democrats responded to Clinton really puts the lie to the idea that the average Democratic voter is significantly less awful than Republican voters. For anyone old enough to remember, the average liberal take was that no one should care about the President's personal life and that Lewinsky was actually a temptress slut. Hell, I'd wager that most older Democrats would still agree with this take. I've always felt extremely bad for Lewinsky. Just everything that's bad about the Tara Reade situation, except even worse due to how well-known it was. At least with Reade there's a "faction" of people who believe and support her, but I remember Democratic hate towards Lewinsky being drat near universal.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2021 02:05
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:Remembering the way Democrats responded to Clinton really puts the lie to the idea that the average Democratic voter is significantly less awful than Republican voters. For anyone old enough to remember, the average liberal take was that no one should care about the President's personal life and that Lewinsky was actually a temptress slut. Hell, I'd wager that most older Democrats would still agree with this take. Many women supported both Lewinsky and Hill.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2021 02:08
|
|
|
Clinton's approval among women was higher after impeachment than before, IIRC.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2021 02:24
|
|
|
Insanite posted:Clinton's approval among women was higher after impeachment than before, IIRC. That doesn't mean no one supported Lewinsky.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2021 02:27
|
|
|
Insanite posted:Clinton's approval among women was higher after impeachment than before, IIRC. Yes; that buttressed my disgust at the "feminists" who slut-shamed Lewinsky. They won! Just like Tara's slut-shamers won! If there's one thing we know by now, after the last 25 years, it's that morals & principles fly out the window when team spirit's at stake.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2021 02:29
|
|
|
xcheopis posted:Many women supported both Lewinsky and Hill. Which goes to show you that morality is elastic, and subject to political expediency.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2021 02:32
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:Which goes to show you that morality is elastic, and subject to political expediency. Not just political expediency. Emotional expediency too.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2021 02:51
|
|
|
I do remember watching the Lewinsky stuff. My parents were hardcore republicans and it was one of the things that initially formed my opinions - which unfortunately at the time as an 8 or 9 year old girl was "wow who cares, they're both adults" and it wasn't until I was in my early 20s that I was like "holy loving poo poo that power imbalance, how hosed up was that"
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2021 03:43
|
|
|
Yeah, the prevailing Democrat message at the time was that it was all consensual and you should be ashamed for digging into their private lives. Which A) totally ignores the fact that she was 22, he was 49 and also her boss and also the president and B) there were plenty of non-consensual allegations about Bill going back decades.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2021 05:35
|
|
|
Harold Fjord posted:They could have coalesced around literally any of the other primary candidates. Only the donors have ever really mattered to the party. There's a big open question about Sanders, especially given on the other side of the pond the Labour party literally threw the election and self-destructed rather than let a leftist win.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2021 06:18
|
|
|
Clinton was first elected president during the Year of the Woman, which arose out of women's anger & disgust over the Clarence Thomas confirmation hearings, which were led by one Joseph Robinette Biden. Now there's a circle of hell for ya.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2021 07:37
|
|
|
xcheopis posted:I'm sure your intention was good when you wrote this but it comes across as dehumanizing. Her name is Tara Reade and she can be referred to directly. Maybe say her name and add the other bit as a paranthetical? This really seems like extremely nitpicky and unhelpful point scoring rather than any kind of sincere attempt to actually grant Reade some dignity or recognition, maybe leave it out?
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2021 06:37
|
|
|
I'm surprised MeToo hasn't gone after MoveOn.org to change their name. What a gross legacy.Willa Rogers posted:Which goes to show you that morality is elastic, and subject to political expediency.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2021 13:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 19:47 |
|
|
some plague rats posted:This really seems like extremely nitpicky and unhelpful point scoring rather than any kind of sincere attempt to actually grant Reade some dignity or recognition, maybe leave it out? I don't consider sexual assault a game.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2021 16:46
|
|