***Official Joe Biden Campaign Thread

[huthut 1,540]

30 minutes ago, Rich Conway said:

I guess I'm having trouble following the progressive plan for moving forward.  I get the idea that "Biden sucks".  For sake of argument, let's say I agree, Biden sucks.  Now what?  What's the next step?  What's the progressives' plan for getting where progressives want to be?

Edit to add: And let's not have the answer be "nominate someone who isn't Biden in 2020".  That ship has sailed.  Biden is the Democrat nominee for 2020.

Primary out crappy dems when you can (eg Newman beating Lipinski this year, AOC beating Crowley in 2018). Pretty much every dem in a safe dem seat should be primaried from the left if possible. 

I am a little more pragmatic about conservative dems in conservative areas, where I know Manchin is garbage and most leftists hate him, but WV literally cannot do better, and I would rather have him than any republican that would replace him. I know on other forums I visit there were a lot of tears about Ralph Northam in Virginia being a right wing DINO by leftists during that election, with a similar contingent of left posters saying they will not vote for him, but compare all of the positive changes that Virginia has been going through with him there vs a Republican the last few years.

However, as I have stated in other threads, I believe the Democratic Party is incapable of moving leftward by losing elections. I see the best way to move them leftward is to keep winning. Hypothetically, I anticipate that if they win in 2020 and 2024, the party will be further left in 2028 than it would be if they lose in 2020 and 2024, with the caveat that you need to have power for it to matter. They can lose 10 elections in a row until they become the most pure leftist party in history, but if they only get 10% of the voters what good is it.

Edited April 16, 2020 by huthut

[Rich Conway 3,574]

Appreciate the responses above.

I'd argue that the single most important thing progressives can do in the near future is show up in 2020 and vote for Democrat candidates for governor and in state legislatures.  2020 is a Census year.  That means 2021 is a "redraw maps" year.

Edited April 16, 2020 by Rich Conway
Grammar!

[fatguyinalittlecoat 11,250]

43 minutes ago, KiddLattimer said:

Going forward it doesn't seem like there's much of a bullpen for progressives at least for presidential politics. I still hold out hope for Tulsi Gabbard (yea i know, putin, assad, russia russia russia... save it everyone) but I doubt she ever gets anywhere as a democrat. Maybe endorsing Biden put her back in some good graces, if not I've been reading a bit about the populist right so maybe there's a lane for her there. AOC is too young for 2 cycles I believe and by then I'm assuming she'll be swallowed up by the establishment. Feels like that's started a bit with her already. Beyond that I'm not seeing anyone but I didn't see Bernie so maybe I'll be surprised.

Katie Porter!

[Rich Conway 3,574]

27 minutes ago, Rich Conway said:

I'd argue that the single most important thing progressives can do in the near future is show up in 2020 and vote for Democrat candidates for governor and in state legislatures.  2020 is a Census year.  That means 2021 is a "redraw maps" year.

To be fair, I suppose it's also the single most important thing Tea Party types can do on their side?

[roadkill1292 10,465]

25 minutes ago, Rich Conway said:

To be fair, I suppose it's also the single most important thing Tea Party types can do on their side?

The GOP indeed killed it with their big win in 2010. Their down ballot wins and re-districting efforts helped them maintain a disproportionate amount of the nation's political power for the ensuing decade. Dems have to understand how important this is, maybe as important as Supreme Court nominations. They will need to use their future power to reform the nation's election systems so we get fair representation and legitimate third party candidacies for Congress or winning right now might not really help in getting the country moving in the right direction.

[McBokonon 2,859]

Biden leading by 9 in latest AZ poll.

[Golf Guy 69 498]

On 4/15/2020 at 9:19 AM, Sinn Fein said:

I started supporting Biden when Pete endorsed.  Pete was a guy for whom I had a lot of respect.  If he says the right path forward is with Biden - I respect that.

 

But, its really less about "support" at this stage.  If your guy was Bernie, the closest candidate to Bernie's positions that is still in the race is Biden.  You may not campaign for Biden, but you are cutting off your nose to spite your face if you don't vote for Biden in the general election.

This is the kind of rhetoric that got Trump elected.   If you can't learn from that lesson, you can't be helped.

[Sinn Fein 33,971]

8 minutes ago, Golf Guy 69 said:

This is the kind of rhetoric that got Trump elected.   If you can't learn from that lesson, you can't be helped.

Fair enough.

[Leroy Hoard 13,344]

1 hour ago, McBokonon said:

Biden leading by 9 in latest AZ poll.

Arizona is considered one of the key swing states. R governor, but that's not necessarily a positive in these times.

[Dinsy Ejotuz 12,870]

If 10% of all eligible voters vote for a candidate in a party's primary that candidate is all but certain to get the nomination.

10%

 

Edited April 16, 2020 by Dinsy Ejotuz

[KiddLattimer 1,101]

Hey Joe, what do you think of Elizabeth Warren's Medicare For All plan?

Time To Get Real 

 

Edited April 17, 2020 by KiddLattimer

[ShamrockPride 5,289]

20 minutes ago, KiddLattimer said:

Hey Joe, what do you think of Elizabeth Warren's Medicare For All plan?

Time To Get Real 

Lmao. And suckers in this forum actually think all his talk in the past few months to gain votes is enough evidence to override his 40 years of a public record. I am embarrassed for them.

[NutterButter 6,066]

23 hours ago, McBokonon said:

Biden leading by 9 in latest AZ poll.

I loved to see a nice turnout in AZ b/c that also bodes well for Kelly.   Let's turn Arizona blue.

[Widbil83 4,009]

Not a single post in this thread in almost 5 days?  

[GoBirds 9,791]

Why the 🦗 🦗 🦗? Biden basement clips are creating energy?

[SaintsInDome2006 47,463]

15 minutes ago, Widbil83 said:

Not a single post in this thread in almost 5 days?  

Obligatory.

[squistion 12,450]

38 minutes ago, Widbil83 said:

Not a single post in this thread in almost 5 days?  

We have been too busy laughing at Trump's daily pressers.  

[shadrap 1,765]

1 minute ago, squistion said:

We have been too busy laughing at Trump's daily pressers.  

Laughing is better than feeling sorry for Biden.  Joe seems like a good guy but has middle stages of dementia.   I feel contempt for those that are shoving him out there & sorry for Joe.

no way he makes it to November unless he stays hidden.  IMO

[squistion 12,450]

37 minutes ago, shadrap said:

Laughing is better than feeling sorry for Biden.  Joe seems like a good guy but has middle stages of dementia.   I feel contempt for those that are shoving him out there & sorry for Joe.

no way he makes it to November unless he stays hidden.  IMO

This is like a parallel universe. Did you watch Biden in the last debate? He was great in like 45 minutes of questions and answers. I saw a live MSNBC interview a few days back, which he didn't stumble either (not edited, not cherry picked) and he was fine. 

Meanwhile Trump keeps rambling incoherently more and more in every daily presser...

Edited April 22, 2020 by squistion

[ren hoek 4,995]

Cecillia Wang @WangCecillia

Wow ⁦@JoeBiden⁩. Already trying to out-Trump Trump. This kind of fearmongering is causing violent attacks on Asian Americans. If you are trying to reform your past history of racist policymaking, like your 1994 crime bill, you had better do some homework. This ain’t it.

 

[shadrap 1,765]

27 minutes ago, squistion said:

This is like a parallel universe. Did you watch Biden in the last debate? He was great in like 45 minutes of questions and answers. I saw a live MSNBC interview a few days back, which he didn't stumble either (not edited, not cherry picked) and he was fine. 

Meanwhile Trump keeps rambling incoherently more and more in every daily presser...

You can bash Trump all you want but this is a Biden thread the last I looked.

Last debate?  so when was that?  he is losing it on a daily basis.

Anyone not concerned about Joe's welfare i think is divorced from reality.  IMO

[squistion 12,450]

1 minute ago, shadrap said:

You can bash Trump all you want but this is a Biden thread the last I looked.

Last debate?  so when was that?  he is losing it on a daily basis.

Anyone not concerned about Joe's welfare i think is divorced from reality.  IMO

Supposedly he lost it way before the last debate according to the usual suspects here. 

And we can't talk about Trump in a Biden thread when this election is a referendum on Trump? Really? Please. 

[timschochet 33,219]

Nearly 100% of the discussion about Joe Biden at this point is about his supposed mental decline. There is, among his opponents, almost no mention of his political views in opposition to President Trump, and small wonder, since polls suggest the public largely supports Biden’s viewpoint on nearly any issue. 

In modern political history there have been two attempts by the opposing party to suggest that a Presidential candidate was senile: Eisenhower in 1956, and Reagan in 1984. Both attempts failed miserably. I suspect this one will too. 

[identikit 1,386]

21 minutes ago, timschochet said:

Nearly 100% of the discussion about Joe Biden at this point is about his supposed mental decline. There is, among his opponents, almost no mention of his political views in opposition to President Trump, and small wonder, since polls suggest the public largely supports Biden’s viewpoint on nearly any issue. 

In modern political history there have been two attempts by the opposing party to suggest that a Presidential candidate was senile: Eisenhower in 1956, and Reagan in 1984. Both attempts failed miserably. I suspect this one will too. 

Both incumbents.

Biden isn't.

[timschochet 33,219]

38 minutes ago, identikit said:

Both incumbents.

Biden isn't.

I don’t see how that makes a difference to my point. 

[TripItUp 3,941]

1 hour ago, timschochet said:

Nearly 100% of the discussion about Joe Biden at this point is about his supposed mental decline. There is, among his opponents, almost no mention of his political views in opposition to President Trump, and small wonder, since polls suggest the public largely supports Biden’s viewpoint on nearly any issue. 

In modern political history there have been two attempts by the opposing party to suggest that a Presidential candidate was senile: Eisenhower in 1956, and Reagan in 1984. Both attempts failed miserably. I suspect this one will too. 

Are you forecasting a Biden victory? 

[identikit 1,386]

2 hours ago, timschochet said:

I don’t see how that makes a difference to my point. 

Incumbents are much tougher to defeat.

[GoBirds 9,791]

10 hours ago, squistion said:

We have been too busy laughing at Trump's daily pressers.  

This kind of low energy won’t get Bernie Lomax elected, be better. 

[GoBirds 9,791]

6 hours ago, timschochet said:

Nearly 100% of the discussion about Joe Biden at this point is about his supposed mental decline. There is, among his opponents, almost no mention of his political views in opposition to President Trump, and small wonder, since polls suggest the public largely supports Biden’s viewpoint on nearly any issue. 

In modern political history there have been two attempts by the opposing party to suggest that a Presidential candidate was senile: Eisenhower in 1956, and Reagan in 1984. Both attempts failed miserably. I suspect this one will too. 

Don’t be shy, let’s get it on the record. 

[Leroy Hoard 13,344]

10 hours ago, squistion said:

 we can't talk about Trump in a Biden thread when this election is a referendum on Trump? Really? Please. 

We can't talk about Trump in the Biden thread and we can't say anything bad about Trump in the Trump thread. 

Edited April 22, 2020 by Leroy Hoard

[timschochet 33,219]

30 minutes ago, GoBirds said:

Don’t be shy, let’s get it on the record. 

Sure. I’ve actually written this many times. I predict Joe Biden will win. 

I can’t guarantee it. I put it at about 80-85% (for the record, I had Hillary winning at about 65-70% so this is much better.) Certainly things can change; if the election were held today I’d be about 95% certain. The coronavirus is, of course, everything. 

Normally any national poll number should be ignored since this is an electoral college fight. But here’s one that’s very revealing: among senior citizens, Joe is ahead by 8 points. Hillary lost this group by 7 points and it’s the main reason she lost Florida. After 2018 I’ve had Joe losing Florida but still winning the election by taking Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin. But if he takes Florida as well this won’t even be a close contest, and now I think it’s more likely than not. 

[identikit 1,386]

6 hours ago, timschochet said:

I don’t see how that makes a difference to my point. 

Incumbents are historically tougher to beat.

[Rich Conway 3,574]

46 minutes ago, timschochet said:

Sure. I’ve actually written this many times. I predict Joe Biden will win. 

I can’t guarantee it. I put it at about 80-85% (for the record, I had Hillary winning at about 65-70% so this is much better.) Certainly things can change; if the election were held today I’d be about 95% certain. The coronavirus is, of course, everything. 

Normally any national poll number should be ignored since this is an electoral college fight. But here’s one that’s very revealing: among senior citizens, Joe is ahead by 8 points. Hillary lost this group by 7 points and it’s the main reason she lost Florida. After 2018 I’ve had Joe losing Florida but still winning the election by taking Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin. But if he takes Florida as well this won’t even be a close contest, and now I think it’s more likely than not. 

Pretty sure the betting sites had it more than 65% for Clinton in 2016.  I can't remember the exact time, but there was a point on election night as returns started rolling in where I placed a bet on Clinton at 7-1 odds against.  I think that may have been after FL went towards Trump and PA was leaning that way, but again I can't remember the exact time.  In any case, 7-1 seemed like good odds at the time.  Not the first bet I've lost, may not be the last.

I do think comparisons to Eisenhower and Reagan aren't terribly relevant, as incumbents hold a lot of advantages, and the reality is the world has changed a lot.  The very notion of 24x7 cable news networks catering to specific viewpoints didn't exist in those times.  That by itself changes all calculations.

I agree that Biden would win going away if the election were held today.  But, it won't be, and November is a long time from now.  I'm hopeful that Biden will win.  I'm terrified that he might not.

[identikit 1,386]

9 minutes ago, Rich Conway said:

Pretty sure the betting sites had it more than 65% for Clinton in 2016.  I can't remember the exact time, but there was a point on election night as returns started rolling in where I placed a bet on Clinton at 7-1 odds against.  I think that may have been after FL went towards Trump and PA was leaning that way, but again I can't remember the exact time.  In any case, 7-1 seemed like good odds at the time.  Not the first bet I've lost, may not be the last.

I do think comparisons to Eisenhower and Reagan aren't terribly relevant, as incumbents hold a lot of advantages, and the reality is the world has changed a lot.  The very notion of 24x7 cable news networks catering to specific viewpoints didn't exist in those times.  That by itself changes all calculations.

I agree that Biden would win going away if the election were held today.  But, it won't be, and November is a long time from now.  I'm hopeful that Biden will win.  I'm terrified that he might not.

[Kal El 3,691]

1 hour ago, identikit said:

Incumbents are historically tougher to beat.

It should also be mentioned that 2 of the past 3 incumbents to lose reelection have been Republicans. Granted, the last one was 28 years ago, so take this with a grain of salt.

[ren hoek 4,995]

2 hours ago, Rich Conway said:

I do think comparisons to Eisenhower and Reagan aren't terribly relevant, as incumbents hold a lot of advantages, and the reality is the world has changed a lot.  The very notion of 24x7 cable news networks catering to specific viewpoints didn't exist in those times.  That by itself changes all calculations.

But, it won't be, and November is a long time from now.  I'm hopeful that Biden will win.  I'm terrified that he might not.

I agree with this.  The question isn’t what the polls say today, but what they will say after a drawn out slugfest.  Trump isn’t afraid to put Biden on blast like his primary opponents were.  Biden’s not going to like it when his mental acuity, rape allegations, shoddy record, and quotes of himself that could suppress black/youth turnout are blown up for the whole world to see.  

I don’t think corona virus will be Trump’s undoing either.  I know people that spent 3 years pushing the Russiagate/Impeachment fails want to make it so.  But he’s already succeeded at making our horrible covid response more about China than himself.  Biden is helping him by putting out ads saying he ‘rolled over for the Chinese.’  Pundits are now playing into the anti-China theater.  People really underestimate Trump’s ability to dictate the narrative.  

[timschochet 33,219]

2 hours ago, identikit said:

Incumbents are historically tougher to beat.

That wasn’t my point. My point was that the attempt to paint those two men as senile didn’t work. I don’t think it will work this time either. 

[SaintsInDome2006 47,463]

Fox poll update - Biden up 8 in MI & up 8 in PA

[roadkill1292 10,465]

"But people lie to pollsters!"

[KiddLattimer 1,101]

2 hours ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

Fox poll update - Biden up 8 in MI & up 8 in PA

I think Biden still would need Wisconsin (barring an unexpected swing elsewhere) but that's a really good sign for him.  I have a feeling that PA number will tighten up though.

[identikit 1,386]

19 hours ago, timschochet said:

That wasn’t my point. My point was that the attempt to paint those two men as senile didn’t work. I don’t think it will work this time either. 

I know it wasn't.

It was lacking the history of the incumbent advantage.

[timschochet 33,219]

Just now, identikit said:

I know it wasn't.

It was lacking the history of the incumbent advantage.

The incumbent advantage is a separate issue from trying to paint Biden as senile. 

But in any case the incumbent advantage won’t work for Trump anyhow. Biden’s locked up Michigan. He’s leading in Pennsylvania, tied in Wisconsin, ahead in Arizona. But worst of all for Trump, Biden is ahead in Florida and that’s only going to increase because seniors are terrified of these growing conservative calls for a “Darwinian solution”. Not gonna be that close IMO. 

[knowledge dropper 6,399]

28 minutes ago, timschochet said:

The incumbent advantage is a separate issue from trying to paint Biden as senile. 

But in any case the incumbent advantage won’t work for Trump anyhow. Biden’s locked up Michigan. He’s leading in Pennsylvania, tied in Wisconsin, ahead in Arizona. But worst of all for Trump, Biden is ahead in Florida and that’s only going to increase because seniors are terrified of these growing conservative calls for a “Darwinian solution”. Not gonna be that close IMO. 

Locked up Michigan?   It’s April.  

[ren hoek 4,995]

Jeet Heer @HeerJeet

Lawrence Summers, currently advising the Biden campaign, at Jeffrey Epstein's residence in 2011, 3 years after Epstein was convicted of raping children.

A memo from Lawrence Summers, currently advising the Biden campaign, arguing that Africa is under-polluted and "the economic logic behind dumping a load of toxic waste in the lowest wage country is impeccable"

Good thread on how Lawrence Summers, who is right now advising the Biden campaign, lied to progressive senators in way that materially hurt countless ordinary Americans.

Lawrence Summers, who is currently advising the Biden campaign, has a terrible record on environmental matters even leaving aside his view that Africa is "under-polluted." In power, he'd be a major impediment to climate action. //

The most progressive platform of all time!!!

[ShamrockPride 5,289]

Steve Cox @RealSteveCox

The narrative is:
“Without Biden appointing judges, progressive legislation will die in the Supreme Court for the next 30 years!”

Let’s set aside the fact that Biden gave us Thomas and Scalia. Can anybody name the times when progressive legislation was overturned by SCOTUS?

[lod001 5,406]

Can someone wake up Joe. It's 2:00 in the afternoon.

[squistion 12,450]

Joe Biden‏ @JoeBiden 2m2 minutes ago

I can’t believe I have to say this, but please don’t drink bleach.

[jamny 6,292]

Biden should pick Buttigieg as his running mate. 

[ShamrockPride 5,289]

16 minutes ago, jamny said:

Biden should pick Buttigieg as his running mate. 

It's a great strategy if he wants to lose. He already promised a female.

[timschochet 33,219]

7 hours ago, ShamrockPride said:

 

Let’s set aside the fact that Biden gave us Thomas and Scalia. 

It should be set aside because it’s extremely misleading, unless you’re actually suggesting that Biden as President would have chosen Thomas and Scalia.