[GeneticKiss]

Originally Posted by Skuj

Wait....I thought the only nuking ever was America against a country that acted more in their own interests than America?

Anyway. You don't think Team Trump is actually CAUSING China to become a political/economic leader of the world? How ironic that all of the anti-China bluster from these idiots will do nothing, when the reality is that the world no longer looks to America for global leadership. America is a tragic joke around the world now.

I do, and that's one of the several reasons I want him gone.

Biden wasn't my first choice for Democratic nominee (that was Warren) but if that's what we've got, I'm voting for him. If he picks Warren to be his VP, all the better.

[Screaming Skull]

So back to the original question...Is Biden really a serious contender for the Democratic nomination? Or do you think the nominee will be Hillary Clinton, Andrew Cuomo, Bernie Sanders, or [fill in the blank]?

[Skuj]

Um.....

A) It will be Biden of course, or

B) 7/10....I replied.

[!@#$%!]

Opinions


Why Joe Biden’s VP will be the person he trusts and admires the most

By Rahm Emanuel

May 9, 2020 at 7:00 a.m. MDT

Rahm Emanuel is a former mayor of Chicago, White House chief of staff and Democratic congressman from Illinois.

For most of our history, vice presidents have been chosen to help bring “balance” to a ticket, uniting a party divided by ideology or geography ahead of the general election. As a result, most vice presidents have been little more than window dressing. Two men who went on to be president learned this firsthand: LBJ was iced out of JFK’s Camelot; Dwight Eisenhower, asked about Richard Nixon’s contribution near the end of his two terms in the White House, said, “Give me a week, and I’ll think of one.”

To this day, choosing a running mate remains an explicitly political decision. But, more than most people realize, it is, above all, a very personal choice. A ticket’s chemistry is among the most important (if underappreciated) factors in determining electoral success. More importantly, vice presidents now wield real power in the West Wing. For that reason, my bet is that however much his choice helps him politically, Joe Biden, a former vice president himself, will select the person he admires most, trusts most deeply and gets along with best.

The present job was forged in 1992, when Arkansas Gov. Bill Clinton made the unlikely choice to run with someone from the state next door. Tennessee Sen. Al Gore turned out to be a political asset because he underscored Clinton’s moderate, Southern, “New Democrat” credentials. Voters could see that the two men, and their spouses, had genuinely come to like each other, though they had different interests and skill sets.

Few of us involved in the vetting process at the time understood how important that personal connection would be. Throughout the first meeting Clinton held on whom to pick, convened in Tallahassee, he clutched a copy of Gore’s book “Earth in the Balance.” Over the course of the following weeks, names came on and off Clinton’s list. Despite broad expectations that Clinton would “balance” the ticket somehow, Clinton’s respect for Gore’s intellect ensured that his name remained — the only constant in the group.

After the election, that bond became even more important. Clinton brought Gore into every important decision. During the government shutdown of 1995, House Speaker Newt Gingrich was pushing Clinton to accede to big cuts to Medicare and Medicaid, and the president’s pollster, Dick Morris, was urging Clinton to cave. Gore stood alone with Clinton in the Oval Office as they decided to reject Morris’s advice. That proved to be the right call: Voters blamed Republicans for shutting down the government in pursuit of their heartless agenda, and the standoff turned the political tide for much of the next six years.

The lack of a personal bond can unravel a ticket. Arizona Sen. John McCain’s decision to nominate Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin in 2008 briefly put a scare in some old Democratic hands. Palin, a newcomer, checked all the right boxes — young, female, reliably conservative. But she was entirely out of sync with McCain’s persona and message. Within two weeks of her boffo introduction at the GOP convention in Saint Paul, she ran afoul of McCain’s politics and personality and quickly became a drag on the ticket.

Biden was an effective vice president because President Barack Obama trusted his political judgment. At a final auto bailout meeting convened in the Roosevelt Room, the president’s economic and political teams were largely at odds. Some believed we should let GM and Chrysler go bankrupt — others recommended a bailout for GM alone. Biden, himself a blue-collar kid from Scranton, Pa., understood the impact shuttered plants could have on a community, and argued persuasively that if Washington was going to be in for a penny it should go in for a pound by saving Chrysler as well. He was right on the merits — and his standing with the president helped steer the administration in the right direction.

When Biden is president, his toughest days will be those where policy and politics are in conflict. He will need to trust the judgment of his vice president to help him steer the country through. The good news for this year’s Democratic nominee is that the women he will consider have a lot to offer his ticket politically. Each promises to strengthen his standing among a specific demographic or, in other cases, in a crucial region. But only Biden can measure the personal chemistry that will help him convince the country the two people on the ticket can work together to manage the many challenges ahead.

Picking a running mate is a bit like picking a partner or even a spouse. “Balance” has a lot to recommend it. But outside appearances are far less important than underlying trust.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...-admires-most/

[Skuj]

So, Warren then.

[Screaming Skull]

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y. told National Public Radio last week that while the allegations against Biden are "not clear-cut," she believes "something has happened" between Reade and then-Senator Biden.

"There have been investigative journalists that have corroborated certain aspects of her account -- that is undeniable -- [and] have raised questions about other aspects of her account," Ocasio-Cortez said Thursday. "It certainly seems as though something has happened. I'm not sure... Frankly, this is a messy moment, and I think we need to acknowledge that -- that it is not clear-cut."

[Screaming Skull]

Is #MeToo officially dead? Male, white corporate oppression prevails yet again?

[tw2113]

Do movements ever truly die? It just may not be as vocal or other topics are even more vocal, given the times.

[choc e-Claire]

Originally Posted by Robert Schunk

It's having just a bag of tactics instead of a set of actual principles

hmmmmmmmmmm...

[demonrail666]

Originally Posted by Robert Schunk

It's having just a bag of tactics instead of a set of actual principles

Spot on.

[GeneticKiss]

Originally Posted by Screaming Skull

Is #MeToo officially dead? Male, white corporate oppression prevails yet again?

Sometimes, change can take generations. 30-40 years ago, a boss slapping his secretary on the behind would've been accepted as sleazy yet normal behavior and likely not have had any consequences for the boss. Nowdays, people can sue and get people fired over things like that. This battle may have been lost, but the war is far from over.

[Screaming Skull]

Originally Posted by GeneticKiss

This battle may have been lost, but the war is far from over.

I guess we're willing to concede this battle given Biden's irrefutable and irresistible combination of intellectual prowess, visionary leadership, verbal eloquence, ethical principles, etc. I can see that.

[Bytor Peltor]

Originally Posted by Screaming Skull

I guess we're willing to concede this battle given Biden's irrefutable and irresistible combination of intellectual prowess, visionary leadership, verbal eloquence, ethical principles, etc. I can see that.

 

[h8kurdt]

Originally Posted by Screaming Skull

I guess we're willing to concede this battle given Trump's irrefutable and irresistible combination of intellectual prowess, visionary leadership, verbal eloquence, ethical principles, etc. I can see that.

Sorted that for you. All it does is highlight how much of a shit show this whole election is going to be.

[GeneticKiss]

Originally Posted by Screaming Skull

I guess we're willing to concede this battle given Biden's irrefutable and irresistible combination of intellectual prowess, visionary leadership, verbal eloquence, ethical principles, etc. I can see that.

So you think that if Biden steps down, then Sanders will become the nominee? That all the people who couldn't be bothered to vote for him in South Carolina/on Super Tuesday will come crawling out of the woodwork and bury Trump in a landslide and create a people's utopia? Instead of the GOP/right wing media machine dredging up all of the worst human rights abuses, poverty and pollution of the USSR, China, Khmer Rouge, Cuba etc. and scream, "This is what Sanders wants for America!!" and scare those on the fence into giving us 4 more years of Orange Moronade?

Face it, even if this country would benefit from some socialist policies, we will never have a self-proclaimed socialist in the driver's seat so long as there are people alive to remember ever having read about the Soviet Union in anything other than a history book.

[!@#$%!]

nice reply gk but you’re feeding a maga troll

[GeneticKiss]

OK, how's this then:


*ahem*


Nuh uh! Tara Reade's a Russian plant trying to cause chaos! It's Biden's turn!!!1!!111!!

[choc e-Claire]

I'd like to think that everyone campaigning "vote blue no matter who" would have stuck with that had it been a Sanders vs. Trump campaign in the end. Honestly seems kind of unlikely though.

[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by GeneticKiss

OK, how's this then:


*ahem*


Nuh uh! Tara Reade's a Russian plant trying to cause chaos! It's Biden's turn!!!1!!111!!

lol that’s not what i meant.

i prefer your first reply. i’m just saying the critter up there is not pro-bernie

Originally Posted by choc e-Claire

I'd like to think that everyone campaigning "vote blue no matter who" would have stuck with that had it been a Sanders vs. Trump campaign in the end. Honestly seems kind of unlikely though.

i would have, and said so. i don’t care who at that point honestly.

[choc e-Claire]

Originally Posted by !@#$%!

i would have, and said so. i don’t care who at that point honestly.

I'm aware, but for some reason you don't strike me as the type who would've normally gone for the runny porridge of a candidate we have now. Those who were (and are) firmly supporting him seem like largely the type to quake in their boots at the 'dangerous socialist extremist' running for president - the one who, y'know, actually votes differently, and more progressively, than the norm.