Re: Presidential Election 2024
Posted: Fri Sep 08, 2023 2:46 pm
It's the sixth version of The Swamp. What could possibly go wrong?
http://www.sportsfrog.net/phpbb/
I'm not convinced the party focuses on who's most electable. It's a factor. But both parties absolutely also care about fealty to the party as much or more than electability. The GOP absolutely didn't want Trump even though he was by far the most interesting (and I guess that's pretty close to "electable") candidate in 2016. But they knew he didn't really give a shit about the GOP. Of course, he still doesn't, but they (nearly) all lick his boots anyway.
It just kinda seems like "most electable" is cover for what they're really doing. Biden wasn't the most electable candidate last time and definitely isn't this time.
He might be this time only because if they replace him, it's essentially saying that he wasn't a good president. And if he wasn't a good president, why vote for a Democrat when they're responsible?
You mean when Jim Clyburn threw his support behind Biden and saved his campaign?Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2023 2:27 pmLol.
Sanders got 20 percent in South Carolina the week before Buttigieg and Klobuchar dropped out. That was even worse than Sanders had done there in 2016. (26 percent.)
(And neither Buttigieg nor Klobuchar even reached 9 percent in South Carolina - showing that they just didn't have any pull with the black voters who make up a large part of the Dem base. But yeah, it's a mystery why they dropped out after that.)
DaveInSeattle wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2023 12:36 pmYou also can't ignore that waging a primary campaign against a sitting, incumbent President would have disastrous consequences, for both the "rebel" candidate and the Party. Look how well it worked out in 1980.
Biden ain't perfect, by a looooooooooong shot, but unless he decides not to run again, it's who the Dem's are stuck with.
Please pick a consistent argument.DaveInSeattle wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2023 3:25 pmSince he's the only one running, he definitely is the "most electable" Dem.
I do agree that the only way it works to replace Biden is if he steps up on his own and bows out. The problem then is that I'm not sure there's someone ready to step in. The party (and probably Biden) would want to go with Harris, but I think she'd get stomped and we can't take that risk. Not in this election. (I retract that if somehow the GOP kicks Trump off the ballot and they end up going with Haley or similar. Harris would have a shot then.)mister d wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2023 3:27 pm "Biden was a great bridge out of Trump, but he's fucking 80-something and with his full agreement and blessing its time to move towards the future." You can't exactly say "... move towards the future with _______" because that would be anointing a candidate and we know the Dems don't do that. But there doesn't need to be a primary fight because politicians call it a career on their own all the time without irreparably harming the party in that next election. All it takes is Biden telling the party or the party telling Biden its over and we move on.
This is true. We will EAT SHIT and LIKE IT.Shirley wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2023 4:14 pmI do agree that the only way it works to replace Biden is if he steps up on his own and bows out. The problem then is that I'm not sure there's someone ready to step in. The party (and probably Biden) would want to go with Harris, but I think she'd get stomped and we can't take that risk. Not in this election. (I retract that if somehow the GOP kicks Trump off the ballot and they end up going with Haley or similar. Harris would have a shot then.)mister d wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2023 3:27 pm "Biden was a great bridge out of Trump, but he's fucking 80-something and with his full agreement and blessing its time to move towards the future." You can't exactly say "... move towards the future with _______" because that would be anointing a candidate and we know the Dems don't do that. But there doesn't need to be a primary fight because politicians call it a career on their own all the time without irreparably harming the party in that next election. All it takes is Biden telling the party or the party telling Biden its over and we move on.
It is consistent. Running against an incumbent President is proven to be a losing battle, so no "serious" Dem is gonna do it (RFK Jr is neither serious, or a Dem). Therefore, Biden is it.Johnnie wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2023 4:11 pmDaveInSeattle wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2023 12:36 pmYou also can't ignore that waging a primary campaign against a sitting, incumbent President would have disastrous consequences, for both the "rebel" candidate and the Party. Look how well it worked out in 1980.
Biden ain't perfect, by a looooooooooong shot, but unless he decides not to run again, it's who the Dem's are stuck with.Please pick a consistent argument.DaveInSeattle wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2023 3:25 pmSince he's the only one running, he definitely is the "most electable" Dem.
not trolling, and definitely not advocating for trump, but watching biden talk feels for all the world like the beginning of dementia. I watched it happen to my dad. I think in a year hes gonna be a major cognitive problem, but apparently im a troll for mentioning it as an electability consideration. I really think the party needs to force him not to run again or it will be disasterousThe Sybian wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2023 8:42 amBiden has some definite mental decline, but I think it's slightly overblown. The guy has always been a huma gaffe machine with no ability to control himself from saying stupid shit.TT2.0 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2023 8:03 amThis exactly. Why do yall think America is in a hurry to reelect someone who is seemingly losing his mental capacity right before our eyes? The democrats need to be running a non biden candidate or i think anyone could win if he looks bad enough campaigning and debating.The Sybian wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2023 6:22 pmYeah, that's what we said during the 2016 primaries. I have zero confidence Biden beats Trump if they are the nominees in 2024, right now it's a coin toss if you look at the polls.
Ok...maybe your right...maybe someone could primary Biden, beat him, and then beat Trump in the General.mister d wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2023 5:04 pm Isn’t this another deal that can’t be decoupled? Running against an incumbent is a losing battle because the party fights anyone who runs against an incumbent. There’s no inherency to that logic any more or less than “it’s impossible to win as a woman”. It was impossible to win as a black dude until a candidate who propelled himself did it.
(And if that’s ok and you’re accepting that as inherently built in, you should probably have the same hatred for the party I/we do. These obstacles exist in large part because “our” party ensures they do.)
I don't think anyone was arguing for a primary, that's a recipe for disaster. Biden should have announced years ago that he wasn't going to run for reelection, and the Party should have pressured him into that decision. It's way too late now.DaveInSeattle wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2023 5:57 pmOk...maybe your right...maybe someone could primary Biden, beat him, and then beat Trump in the General.mister d wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2023 5:04 pm Isn’t this another deal that can’t be decoupled? Running against an incumbent is a losing battle because the party fights anyone who runs against an incumbent. There’s no inherency to that logic any more or less than “it’s impossible to win as a woman”. It was impossible to win as a black dude until a candidate who propelled himself did it.
(And if that’s ok and you’re accepting that as inherently built in, you should probably have the same hatred for the party I/we do. These obstacles exist in large part because “our” party ensures they do.)
But who? Who is going to take that challenge, and pull it off? Anyone who tries, and then loses, will be persona non grata in the party for the rest of their career. Hell, Kennedy only survived because he was a Kennedy.
Yeah, Biden's too old. He should retire...which I thought he was going to do. But he's not...so here we are.
Manchin, too, but he's worse anyway.degenerasian wrote: ↑Tue Sep 12, 2023 12:26 pm it expired because of objections from the Republicans was it not? how is that both sides?
Implication that it's Biden's fault. Start to read a couple of comments, and that's how people read the Tweet.degenerasian wrote: ↑Tue Sep 12, 2023 12:26 pm it expired because of objections from the Republicans was it not? how is that both sides?
Yeah, this seems to be a classic example of "90 percent of Democrats are willing to do what I want, and 0% of Republicans are willing to do what I want, therefore both parties are bad."A_B wrote: ↑Tue Sep 12, 2023 12:27 pmManchin, too, but he's worse anyway.degenerasian wrote: ↑Tue Sep 12, 2023 12:26 pm it expired because of objections from the Republicans was it not? how is that both sides?
Steve, we're both a safe distance from worrying about living below the poverty line, but I'd love to hear you explain your math to someone who isn't so lucky.Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Tue Sep 12, 2023 12:39 pmYeah, this seems to be a classic example of "90 percent of Democrats are willing to do what I want, and 0% of Republicans are willing to do what I want, therefore both parties are bad."
Maybe I'm missing something, but wasn't a continuation of the child tax credit (which the Dems forced through in the first place) supported by a vast majority of Democrats and approximately no Republicans?mister d wrote: ↑Tue Sep 12, 2023 1:17 pmSteve, we're both a safe distance from worrying about living below the poverty line, but I'd love to hear you explain your math to someone who isn't so lucky.Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Tue Sep 12, 2023 12:39 pmYeah, this seems to be a classic example of "90 percent of Democrats are willing to do what I want, and 0% of Republicans are willing to do what I want, therefore both parties are bad."
(And "blame Manchin" is tired. If Manchin ever stood in the way of something the party truly cared about, there would be ramifications because everyone, even Dem senators from red states, have lines they aren't allowed to cross.)
This is right. And this is why the Dems cannot force Manchin to do anything. Because they have no leverage over him.
They are going to open an impeachment inquiry. They are going to need to try to find some sliver of something to hang an impeachment on. I think they will keep it at the inquiry stage and make a ton of viral clips saying "Biden is so corrupt we have to have a Congressional impeachment inquiry." They'll milk the fuck out of the inquiry, because they only need the appearance of Biden being corrupt, they don't want to actually have televised hearings that expose they have nothing. Unless, of course, they find something. I mean, they spent 5 years of a Special Counsel investigation on Hunter to come up with an underpayment of taxes.BeckyHammon’s hoodie wrote: ↑Tue Sep 12, 2023 10:36 pm It looks like the House is going to impeach Biden and in doing so will accomplish jerking off their extreme base and pissing off moderates. The complete incompetence of GOP leadership is the only blessing in these shitty times
The GOP has been calling Biden corrupt for a decade now? How does an impeachment inquiry where they don’t pull the trigger move the needle at all? If anything, it makes them look weak and Biden stronger. “See, the House looked into it and they didn’t find anything”The Sybian wrote: ↑Wed Sep 13, 2023 8:40 amThey are going to open an impeachment inquiry. They are going to need to try to find some sliver of something to hang an impeachment on. I think they will keep it at the inquiry stage and make a ton of viral clips saying "Biden is so corrupt we have to have a Congressional impeachment inquiry." They'll milk the fuck out of the inquiry, because they only need the appearance of Biden being corrupt, they don't want to actually have televised hearings that expose they have nothing. Unless, of course, they find something. I mean, they spent 5 years of a Special Counsel investigation on Hunter to come up with an underpayment of taxes.BeckyHammon’s hoodie wrote: ↑Tue Sep 12, 2023 10:36 pm It looks like the House is going to impeach Biden and in doing so will accomplish jerking off their extreme base and pissing off moderates. The complete incompetence of GOP leadership is the only blessing in these shitty times
If they can avoid nominating Trump, isn't the danger that the party that's infinitely better at messaging outside their base is able to frame MAGA as fringe while still getting most of their vote?Nonlinear FC wrote: ↑Wed Sep 13, 2023 10:46 amThey have nothing and McCarthy is simply serving the MAGA wing of the party.
That’s the fear for sure. But that assumes this non-Trump nominee doesn’t willingly embrace the MAGA torch to try and keep Trump’s base in the fold.mister d wrote: ↑Wed Sep 13, 2023 11:05 amIf they can avoid nominating Trump, isn't the danger that the party that's infinitely better at messaging outside their base is able to frame MAGA as fringe while still getting most of their vote?Nonlinear FC wrote: ↑Wed Sep 13, 2023 10:46 amThey have nothing and McCarthy is simply serving the MAGA wing of the party.
I'll answer that...no. Trump is a cult of personality, and those don't transfer.BeckyHammon’s hoodie wrote: ↑Wed Sep 13, 2023 11:19 am Will a candidate other than Trump be able to engage those people?