On the connection to Obama thing, the talk about he and Obama were "co-captains" as the GQ article talked about is important I think. https://www.gq.com/story/joe-biden-presidential-campaign-2016-2013
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
***Official Joe Biden Campaign Thread (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Joe Bryant
- Start date
jerry jones
Footballguy
NCCommish
Footballguy
Well Obama didn't endorse him but he kind of did. Best decision I ever made, touted all his experience, etc.
msommer
Footballguy
Henry Ford
Footballguy
Mister CIA
Footballguy
Henry Ford
Footballguy
There’s no way she would do that.
Abrams, Harris, Klobuchar in that order, in my opinion.
Philo Beddoe
Footballguy
Yeah this guy didn’t think Bush’ war on drugs went far enough. Hard pass.
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
Last edited by a moderator:
timschochet
Footballguy
The two biggest criticisms against Biden in terms of his political record are (a) his treatment of Anita Hill and (b) his promotion of the 90s crime bill. In both instances Biden has said that if he had to do it over he would have done things differently. But many people do not accept this and accuse Biden of political expediency.
Yesterday I was watching Steve Kornacki on MSNBC and he made a couple of points I was unaware of and found compelling: first, he revealed that during the Clarence Thomas hearings, the vast majority of the public, including the vast majority of African-Americans and the vast majority of Democrats, sided with Clarence Thomas and against Anita Hill. It was only a year later that polling revealed that the majority of the public switched sides and now believed Hill had been unfairly treated, a position they have held ever since. Second, he revealed that when the crime bill was passed, a majority of African-Americans approved of it, including a majority of the Congressional Black Caucus. Again it was only some time later that it began to be believed that the crime bill was negative.
Neither of these points exonerate Biden’s actions, but they do suggest that there is a little bit of revisionist history going on. Of course, most of the other candidates don’t have to worry about be challenged on positions they took 30 years ago, when they were teenagers or younger.
Yesterday I was watching Steve Kornacki on MSNBC and he made a couple of points I was unaware of and found compelling: first, he revealed that during the Clarence Thomas hearings, the vast majority of the public, including the vast majority of African-Americans and the vast majority of Democrats, sided with Clarence Thomas and against Anita Hill. It was only a year later that polling revealed that the majority of the public switched sides and now believed Hill had been unfairly treated, a position they have held ever since. Second, he revealed that when the crime bill was passed, a majority of African-Americans approved of it, including a majority of the Congressional Black Caucus. Again it was only some time later that it began to be believed that the crime bill was negative.
Neither of these points exonerate Biden’s actions, but they do suggest that there is a little bit of revisionist history going on. Of course, most of the other candidates don’t have to worry about be challenged on positions they took 30 years ago, when they were teenagers or younger.
urbanhack
Fight The Power!
timschochet
Footballguy
Is this an important issue for you, that you will decide who to support based on their position regarding it?
urbanhack
Fight The Power!
Top 3 issue for me since I work in the industry and am an advocate for the plant.
Not just that but the social damage that’s been done because of people like Biden.
timschochet
Footballguy
OK. I can see that.
Given climate change, healthcare, immigration, the need to see Trump defeated (not necessarily in that order) I can’t place this very high on my priority list.
Last edited by a moderator:
Juxtatarot
Footballguy
Wait...Is Biden still opposed to recreational marijuana legalization?
“Joe Biden. He understands what’s happening today.”
The newspaper ad ran a few weeks before the 1972 Senate election in Delaware, when the upstart 29-year-old was challenging a 63-year-old incumbent. The ad, which appeared in The News Journal, Delaware’s major newspaper, happened to run under a column that described Biden’s newly combative strategy in the closing days of the race.
Biden’s approach then, according to the columnist, was “in effect, ‘Dear old dad may have been right for his time—and I love him—but things are different now.’”
The newspaper ad ran a few weeks before the 1972 Senate election in Delaware, when the upstart 29-year-old was challenging a 63-year-old incumbent. The ad, which appeared in The News Journal, Delaware’s major newspaper, happened to run under a column that described Biden’s newly combative strategy in the closing days of the race.
Biden’s approach then, according to the columnist, was “in effect, ‘Dear old dad may have been right for his time—and I love him—but things are different now.’”
Juxtatarot
Footballguy
https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/joe-biden-weed-war-drugs-candidate-2020-827319/
Biden is coming across so old and behind the times with this, the creepy touching, Anita Hill issue, etc. I’ll be so disappointed if he or Warren get the nomination. Honestly, too, I don’t think he is as good at beating Trump as others think. Biden opponent is not only Trump but also the couch. A lot of young voters would pick the couch like they did against Hillary.
AAABatteries
Footballguy
Biden, in my mind, absolutely represents the establishment. What I don’t know is if that is a bad or good thing for him. I think it’s potentially good in the primaries but bad in the general. But I honestly don’t know because it’s been undeniable that older people determine elections. It really does seem like it will come down to getting out those younger voters. I think Bernie has the chance to do that if he were the nominee but I don’t think Biden would.
pollardsvision
Footballguy
The issue itself may not be a top priority, but a politician's stance on it, to me, is a big clue as to how they will make decisions. Opposing legal marijuana, imo, either means a politician isn't very bright, or (obviously more likely) they are in too many back pockets to lead effectively.
timschochet
Footballguy
I don’t think either of these apply to Obama, or to Biden for that matter.
I think in this instance Biden is simply old fashioned. He thinks marijuana is dangerous and shouldn’t be legal. I know plenty of people who think that way and they’re not stupid or corrupt.
pollardsvision
Footballguy
Too old-fashioned is a fine disqualifier for me too. Are you just going to do what you've always done because that's what you know? Or are you trying to make a difference to improve people's lives?
These days, I'd guess that any politician that might stand in the way of the natural progression towards legal marijuana is probably going to be completely worthless in terms of actually driving down healthcare costs. Stance on marijuana is pretty good clue on who they are really working for.
In the past there was a very real possibility that it was just political good sense not to come out in favor of marijuana, but that's changing pretty rapidly.
Last edited by a moderator:
timschochet
Footballguy
This may change but at the moment I’m all in for Biden.
Meet the Press offered analysis that is similar to my own- you need the black vote to win the nomination, which means that ultimately it’s likely to come down to Biden or Harris. Bernie is going to run into the same roadblock he ran into in 2016, but hopefully this time his supporters won’t blame that on the DNC (though Trump is already trying to help him do it.)
The main reason I am for Biden is that, among viable candidates, he most represents the centrist, pro-business Democratic Party that I want to return to- the party of Barack Obama. I don’t want something new. I don’t want progressivism. I don’t want Medicare for All or free education or an attack on Wall Street. I want the New Deal, protection of Obamacare, a reasonable plan to combat climate change, a pro-business attitude, a reasonable approach to immigration and a return to our traditional international commitments since 1945. Biden IMO represents all this.
But I also believe he is the only candidate who I am reasonably sure will defeat Donald Trump, my first priority. Despite the polls NCCommish keeps touting, I just don’t think Bernie will do it. A Bernie vs Trump campaign would no longer be the referendum on Trump that I want it to be; it would instead become a referendum on Bernie’s ideas. And I don’t think enough people are ready for those ideas to elect him.
Anyhow, that’s my thinking. It’s not too dissimilar from my reasoning behind my support for Hillary Clinton. However, Hillary had baggage that Biden does not. I will support any Democrat no matter who it is. I would be absolutely delighted with Harris, Buttigieg, Booker or Klobuchar. But Biden is my choice for now.
Meet the Press offered analysis that is similar to my own- you need the black vote to win the nomination, which means that ultimately it’s likely to come down to Biden or Harris. Bernie is going to run into the same roadblock he ran into in 2016, but hopefully this time his supporters won’t blame that on the DNC (though Trump is already trying to help him do it.)
The main reason I am for Biden is that, among viable candidates, he most represents the centrist, pro-business Democratic Party that I want to return to- the party of Barack Obama. I don’t want something new. I don’t want progressivism. I don’t want Medicare for All or free education or an attack on Wall Street. I want the New Deal, protection of Obamacare, a reasonable plan to combat climate change, a pro-business attitude, a reasonable approach to immigration and a return to our traditional international commitments since 1945. Biden IMO represents all this.
But I also believe he is the only candidate who I am reasonably sure will defeat Donald Trump, my first priority. Despite the polls NCCommish keeps touting, I just don’t think Bernie will do it. A Bernie vs Trump campaign would no longer be the referendum on Trump that I want it to be; it would instead become a referendum on Bernie’s ideas. And I don’t think enough people are ready for those ideas to elect him.
Anyhow, that’s my thinking. It’s not too dissimilar from my reasoning behind my support for Hillary Clinton. However, Hillary had baggage that Biden does not. I will support any Democrat no matter who it is. I would be absolutely delighted with Harris, Buttigieg, Booker or Klobuchar. But Biden is my choice for now.
ren hoek
Footballguy
https://twitter.com/JediofGallifrey/status/1122330280658907142
Notice how the antisemitism smears only seem to manifest when someone is critical of Israel, but not when pro-Israel politicians actually make inflammatory comments about Jews.
Notice how the antisemitism smears only seem to manifest when someone is critical of Israel, but not when pro-Israel politicians actually make inflammatory comments about Jews.
Last edited by a moderator:
timschochet
Footballguy
That’s certainly not true. Breitbart is extremely pro- Israel, yet has been heavily criticized for its use of anti-Semitic tropes. So have many conservative Republicans who have criticized George Soros in an anti-Semitic fashion.
BobbyLayne
Footballguy
“Marijuana is a gateway drug”
Joe Biden in the current millennium
Joe Biden in the current millennium
ren hoek
Footballguy
Doesn't seem analogous to draw a comparison between an Islamic congresswoman and a hard right publication like Breitbart. Biden will not face anything close to the same level of scrutiny, because he isn't a brown immigrant and is friendly to the Israel lobby.
His position has evolved. In a 2014 Time interview: he didn't support legalization, but said "I think the idea of focusing significant resources on interdicting or convicting people for smoking marijuana is a waste of our resources." But he did support the war on drugs and the Iraq war. Does this make make him as flawed as Hillary?
timschochet
Footballguy
Lolren hoek said:
NCCommish
Footballguy
You want the thing that the future of the party hates. It's over. The millenials and gen x are slowly but surely becoming the majority of voters and they dont want bought sold "pro-business" politicians. That's what got us into this mess and this neoliberalism is what has led to the rise of the Trumps worldwide.timschochet said:
Run Biden give Trump 4 more years. I warned you about Hillary but no. So go ahead do the same thing and expect a different result.
timschochet
Footballguy
I told you 4 years ago that your side would win out- not only with the Democratic Party but with the nation. I will lose this struggle.
But maybe not by 2020 though.
NCCommish
Footballguy
Are you willing to watch Trump get 4 more years so you can keep a corpse walking? Because all it takes, as we've seen, is a few thousand people in the right states to think you know Biden screwed us while he served his credit card masters with his bankruptcy bill so screw him to tilt the thing. It's going to be used against him and that's just one anchor.
timschochet
Footballguy
NCCommish
Footballguy
timschochet
Footballguy
Not necessarily. There’s no way to know that Bernie would have performed better than Hillary. You can theorize but we will never know.
NCCommish
Footballguy
Last edited by a moderator:
msommer
Footballguy
Too simplistic to look at an election that way - imo.
The only states that mattered were Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin. Bernie probably would have done well there with the white working class voters - and cut into Trump's base.
"Socialist" Sanders would never lose California, and "Centrist" Clinton would never win Alabama.
So, nationally, more people would have had a problem with the term "Socialist" but most of those people already live in Red states.
TobiasFunke
Footballguy
I'm no fan of Biden, but one of the strongest and most consistent arguments from Sanders supporters was that he polled better head to head against Trump than Hillary. I can't remember if you specifically made this argument but if you didn't you may be the only Sanders supporter on earth who didn't. The problem is, now Biden polls the best head to head against Trump.
Maybe that won't be the case in six months, but for now these "warnings" ring hollow. Again, I wish that wasn't the case. I would prefer that Sanders or really almost anyone else in the field was the one polling the best head to head with Trump. But it's Biden. And Sanders supporters can't ignore that now. For whatever reason, he seems to draw a small but important number of voters that the other Dem candidates don't. Doesn't mean he's the right candidate, but for now it means the Sanders supporters can't really make the "we were right last time so listen to us this time" argument IMO.
msommer
Footballguy
Other states would potentially have swung Red on the socialist scare. We'll never know. Don't think Bernie has a hope of becoming president 2020 either.
timschochet
Footballguy
timschochet
Footballguy
But the more crucial question is how many states would Bernie have won that Hillary did not? And my answer, which I’m sure many will dispute here, is zero.
Ditkaless Wonders
Footballguy
Wisconsin can be a weird state. it is capable of supporting Republicans, Democrats, and even Socialists. Every Wisconsin school boy back in my day was required to learn about Fighting Bob La Follete. Dane County D.A., Republican Governor, U.S. Senator, and eventually presidential candidate supported, by, among others, the Socialists. The word 'socialist" does not upset Wisconsinites. Socialist do, as folks there tend toward self reliance, except in Milwaukee where the democrat handout machine is well entrenched, and so too the ethos.
Last edited by a moderator:
Henry Ford
Footballguy
Tulsi Gabbard was 23 when she testified against allowing Civil Unions, calling them a dishonest attempt to fool voters into giving gay people marriage rights. So the wording on this confuses me.NCCommish said:
ren hoek
Footballguy
Biden has pledged that his 2020 campaign won’t take in any direct donations from lobbyists. But on the first night of his official candidacy, Biden hit the suburbs of Philadelphia to attend a $2,800 per person fundraiser at the home of David L. Cohen, the executive vice president and chief of lobbying for Comcast.
Comcast, one of the biggest lobbying spenders in Washington, also owns MSNBC, which has showered Biden with favorable coverage both before and since his announcement.
In March, Nevada lieutenant gubernatorial candidate Lucy Flores published an article in New York Magazine (3/29/19) that described how Biden inappropriately kissed her at a campaign event. Biden has quite a long history of awkward and inappropriate touching, kissing or groping of women and girls.
Mika Brzezinski (MSNBC, 4/1/19) defends Biden’s “physical style with women” with former DCCC staffer Adrienne Elrod.
Mika Brzezinski, co-host of MSNBC’s Morning Joe, was one of the first to defend Biden (4/1/19). Brzezinski suggested that Flores’ allegation was politically motivated, citing Flores as a “huge Bernie person,” and asking, “Are we just supposed to take all the words and the fact she said she was violated at face value?” Her guests later that day (4/1/19), former DCCC chief of staff Adrienne Elrod and former CIA and DoD chief of staff Jeremy Bash, seemed to agree that such #MeToo accusations against Biden were “meaningless moments,” and merely baseless finger-pointing from Biden’s political opponents.
Brzezinski continued her defense of Biden the following day and later in the week on Morning Joe, after another woman came forward with allegations of inappropriate behavior (4/2/19, 4/5/19). Brzezinski said that the allegations were “sad,” and that Biden is a “nice guy” and “not a predator.” She continued:
This is ridiculous. The conversation has gotten out of control, and Democrats and those on the left who want to tweet me today and go nuts and get all woke, you’re eating your young. You’re eating those who can beat Trump. You’re killing the very people who have been pushing women ahead, who’ve been fighting for equal pay, who have been doing everything they can to respect women in their lives. We’re going to after Joe Biden for being affectionate to women of all ages, and to men as well? It’s ridiculous.
While he is indeed a frontrunner, defense of Biden as supposedly the only candidate with the ability to beat Trump is frequently parroted by many corporate Democrats (and by totally, definitely well-meaning Republican Party figures as well). MSNBC contributor Mike Barnicle recently re-upped this trope (4/24/19) on the day of Biden’s announcement, though to his credit, Axios’ Jim Vandehei did push back on this narrative.
Joe Biden (11/18/93) assures the Senate: “It doesn’t matter whether or not they’re the victims of society. The end result is they’re about to knock my mother on the head with a lead pipe, shoot my sister, beat up my wife, take on my sons.”
On another Morning Joe panel (4/26/19), MSNBC correspondent Rev. Al Sharpton criticized Biden’s role in drafting and sponsoring the 1984, 1986, 1988 and 1994 crime bills, and his treatment of Anita Hill during the Clarence Thomas confirmation hearings. Biden recently issued a half-apology phone call 28 years after the fact to Hill, who told the New York Times (4/25/19) that the call “left her feeling deeply unsatisfied.” (Biden continued to dance around giving a full-throated apology to Hill in an appearance on The View—4/26/19.) But despite Sharpton’s misgivings about Biden’s history, he maintained that Biden somehow had the “equipment despite the hurdles” to appeal to both “blue collar white workers” and “black and brown communities.”
Comcast-Owned MSNBC in the Tank for Joe Biden’s Presidential Run
Comcast, one of the biggest lobbying spenders in Washington, also owns MSNBC, which has showered Biden with favorable coverage both before and since his announcement.
In March, Nevada lieutenant gubernatorial candidate Lucy Flores published an article in New York Magazine (3/29/19) that described how Biden inappropriately kissed her at a campaign event. Biden has quite a long history of awkward and inappropriate touching, kissing or groping of women and girls.
Mika Brzezinski (MSNBC, 4/1/19) defends Biden’s “physical style with women” with former DCCC staffer Adrienne Elrod.
Mika Brzezinski, co-host of MSNBC’s Morning Joe, was one of the first to defend Biden (4/1/19). Brzezinski suggested that Flores’ allegation was politically motivated, citing Flores as a “huge Bernie person,” and asking, “Are we just supposed to take all the words and the fact she said she was violated at face value?” Her guests later that day (4/1/19), former DCCC chief of staff Adrienne Elrod and former CIA and DoD chief of staff Jeremy Bash, seemed to agree that such #MeToo accusations against Biden were “meaningless moments,” and merely baseless finger-pointing from Biden’s political opponents.
Brzezinski continued her defense of Biden the following day and later in the week on Morning Joe, after another woman came forward with allegations of inappropriate behavior (4/2/19, 4/5/19). Brzezinski said that the allegations were “sad,” and that Biden is a “nice guy” and “not a predator.” She continued:
This is ridiculous. The conversation has gotten out of control, and Democrats and those on the left who want to tweet me today and go nuts and get all woke, you’re eating your young. You’re eating those who can beat Trump. You’re killing the very people who have been pushing women ahead, who’ve been fighting for equal pay, who have been doing everything they can to respect women in their lives. We’re going to after Joe Biden for being affectionate to women of all ages, and to men as well? It’s ridiculous.
While he is indeed a frontrunner, defense of Biden as supposedly the only candidate with the ability to beat Trump is frequently parroted by many corporate Democrats (and by totally, definitely well-meaning Republican Party figures as well). MSNBC contributor Mike Barnicle recently re-upped this trope (4/24/19) on the day of Biden’s announcement, though to his credit, Axios’ Jim Vandehei did push back on this narrative.
Joe Biden (11/18/93) assures the Senate: “It doesn’t matter whether or not they’re the victims of society. The end result is they’re about to knock my mother on the head with a lead pipe, shoot my sister, beat up my wife, take on my sons.”
On another Morning Joe panel (4/26/19), MSNBC correspondent Rev. Al Sharpton criticized Biden’s role in drafting and sponsoring the 1984, 1986, 1988 and 1994 crime bills, and his treatment of Anita Hill during the Clarence Thomas confirmation hearings. Biden recently issued a half-apology phone call 28 years after the fact to Hill, who told the New York Times (4/25/19) that the call “left her feeling deeply unsatisfied.” (Biden continued to dance around giving a full-throated apology to Hill in an appearance on The View—4/26/19.) But despite Sharpton’s misgivings about Biden’s history, he maintained that Biden somehow had the “equipment despite the hurdles” to appeal to both “blue collar white workers” and “black and brown communities.”
Comcast-Owned MSNBC in the Tank for Joe Biden’s Presidential Run
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
I don’t think you need a media conspiracy to understand the establishment supporting a VP from the last Dem administration, a popular one at that.
ren hoek
Footballguy
On the same program, Joe Scarborough castigated Biden detractors, maintaining that they failed to understand the context of Biden’s past support for harsh drug laws, opposition to school integration and support for the Iraq War. He later added that “it’s easy for you to sit there behind your laptop, drinking your soy lattes in 2019 judging [him] for trying to make the country better.” Sharpton chimed in with further attacks on so-called “latte liberators” and “limousine liberals.”
Similar threads
