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.
I never look at polling. I have no interest in hoping to settle for mediocrity. I don't want to return to the status quo from yesteryear, I want us to actually be something I can be proud of. I want us to move forward, boldly. Settling seems good now but it will get stale very fast and lead to dissatisfaction. I want vision, not political triangulation. Others, well, the tide would seem to ride with you.
You misunderstand me. I want vision. I want us to move forward boldly too. But:
A thing that has happened in the past is that individual populist movements get subsumed and represented by major parties - some populism doesn't go away, it gets accounted for in some measure. I think accelerating wealth disparity and environmental/ecological concerns are not issues that are going to "go down" any time soon. Candidates that have more vision in these areas are going to be more appealing as time goes on. Rightly so. Biden does not strike me as a leader in that regard.
This would be a fair point of not for the fact that if Trump wins we'll get that worse Trump redux even sooner.
Like Kennedy Reagan, Churchill, and FDR?
Yup, Pennsylvania is his best argument. Born and raised in Scranton, and Wilmington is basically a glorified suburb of Philly. Hard to imagine him losing Pennsylvania, and If he's smart he'll play this up constantly.
I agree that these are pressing issues.
I registered as a Democrat to support him in the primary. Pretty funny. He's a real advocate against war, opposes mass incarceration and the failed drug war, sides with people over transnational corps, doesn't mince words about Washington's blatant corruption, and likes to spend his time dunking on centrist triangulators, so he's really not up your alley at all.
So instead they support the guy who just fundraised with a union busting lawyer. Brilliant.
I understand your perspective. I oscillate between that (playing it "safe") and thinking the way to assure victory is to offer something different than what lost the game last time.
Excuse me? The New Deal was the essence of populism. You're welcome to your own opinion but not your own facts.
Yes and no.
Lol. All of the people you would have supported at the time hated the New Deal. They were the populists: Norman Thomas, et. al. They thought FDR didn't go far enough; they wanted huge taxation and a full redistribution of wealth.
First off you have no idea who I would've supported. You see everything that isn't kissing corporate butt as radical and you lump it all together. I support who I support now because he is the guy who has been fighting that for the last 30 years. I have no problem with what FDR did economically and it is the very opposite of the candidates you continue to support despite all the screwing of the middle and working class they do. And then they wonder why do the people turn on us? All my rich donors love me.
He's so much more interesting than that. Check out why he was run out of office in the Senate.
This would be a meaningful point if Democrats had demonstrated the existence of a spine against Donald Trump. But they didn't. The GOP ran the train on Chuck Schumer. Trump packed the courts no problem. Here's what Brian Fallon said about it:
I don't think it'd really make a difference at all. Biden will continue the wars, surveillance, banking hegemony, broken healthcare system, Saudi/Israeli partnership, oil wars. Nothing of import would change.
I'm sure you could get in the weeds all day about how the GOP is worse than the Dems. But there needs to be a higher standard than another 4 years of establishment centrists. And really, if they were that interested in an equitable democracy, they would have A. blown up the Democratic party for its heavy-handedness in 2016, and B. gotten rid of superdelegates a long time ago.
Biden is not going to right the ship. He will do the same things that led to Trump in the first place. He will do the same stuff Trump is doing right now with more favorable media coverage. The same corporations are lining up behind Biden because Biden already knows the playbook. It's not good enough anymore.
Who exactly has been prospering in this country over the last decade?
Sorry GB, but if you don't understand the difference between Senate Dems not opposing Trump's judiciary nominations forcefully enough and having a Democratic president making the nominations in the first place, there's no real reason to continue the discussion. Or any discussion, really. This is a genuinely ridiculous and silly point to make in response to the argument that Joe Biden would be better for the judiciary than a second term of Donald Trump.
Sleepy Joe off to a good start.
Fully expected an announcement bump. But as even Nate has said those tend to fade. And fading is what Joe has done best. To me his fundraising with union busters and GOP fundraisers day one is going to be a problem after the honeymoon period. And it will be brought up. Along with the rest of his record.
The Democratic voters are going to turn on any candidate who attacks Biden- or any other candidate, for that matter. They’re not in the mood. They want unity against Trump, they don’t want a lot of infighting.
Right now your opinion isn’t shared by the majority of Democratic voters. That could change but until it does, Biden’s the guy.
After Trump i would not be at all opposed to Biden just for things to calm down a bit.
I think a whole lot of moderates, independents, and even some conservatives feel this way. And don’t think Democratic voters don’t know it. They do, and it’s probably the main reason that Biden is going to win the nomination.
I have noticed that Tim jumps on the leader out of the gate and says no one else has such a chance. The problem is that leader out of the gate is leading on name recognition alone, not on character, policy, or vision. His party does this as well having had some past bad experiences where too much openness up to the convention proved problematic. They are fighting yesteryears battles. If they let the new ideas or faces breath for a moment who knows what they would find. Instead they find the staunch negativism he embodies for anybody other than the early frontrunner to be appropriate. I picture Biden and his supporters doing the Hillary, trying to lock up endorsements, donors, and delegates long before they should, and then facing resentment within and without. The party needs to have a bit of faith in its new generation of candidates and voters. Trust.
I disagree totally. Let's use this primary election process for what its for. A great discussion on ideas. I think liberal policies are by and large fairly popular in comparision to the alternatives. let's squab it out and let the cream rise.
Again, you seem to evaluate a huge difference between Trump and Biden. There isn't one. They will both continue endless wars, selling out the poor to the financial system, mass surveillance, mass incarceration, subservience to transnational corps and so forth. Biden will even continue the drug war!
If the Blue Wave taught me any lesson it is that the voters will respond in droves to messages they can believe in. Anti-Trump folks took one message, that it was all about a repudiation, and no doubt that was a large part, but the enthusiasm, the enthusiasm was for a new generation of faces and ideas. It was for bold legislative moves. The turn out was for addressing gun control, school violence, student debt, climate control, and yes, even health care, but the energy, it was due to implication that there would be change, not gentle triangulation to careful use of power.
You are dead wrong about the bolded. There would be one in how they would behave as president from 2021-2025 and what their presidencies would do to the government and the country. I explained some of the countless differences I perceive thoroughly. You didn't address any of it, other than being misleading at best about the family separation policy. You slammed Obamacare without acknowledging my actual argument which is that Trumpcare and his administration's attacks on protection for preexisting conditions would be infinitely worse. You ignored what I said about changing the makeup of the judiciary and all the horrors that could result from that. You apparently are unconcerned about his FBI pretending white nationalism isn't a problem, which is troubling to say the least. You apparently don't care about climate change, one of countless issues on which Biden and Trump are miles apart even if Biden's position is weaker than it should be. You apparently are not concerned about voter suppression. You apparently have no problem with Saudis and Russians and other violent dictators being allowed to murder and torture whoever they want without having to worry about diplomatic pushback from the artist formerly known as the most powerful country in the world. And of course you're unconcerned about foreigners committing crimes and attacking our elections without pushback from the federal government- at least you're consistent on that one!
It's infuriating. Imagine telling these people that there's no difference between a person who wants to protect and enhance the ACA and its treatment of preexisting conditions and a person who wants to destroy it.timschochet said:
