Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 79

Thread: The Case for Biden

  1. Top | #41
    Veteran Member PyramidHead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    RI
    Posts
    4,607
    Archived
    4,389
    Total Posts
    8,996
    Rep Power
    58
    Quote Originally Posted by Elixir View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by PyramidHead View Post
    I see two quotes of my question and zero answers to it, stop being cowards ...
    No I wouldn't vote for any of those scumbags in a primary. Would you vote for them in a general? Don't be a coward, now...
    I would vote for Romney or Jeb, but not W, in the general election if he was the only option against Trump, sure. I wouldn't blame anyone who sat it out, though, even for the first two. But the question was about the primary, and both you and Harry have made it clear that being ahead in the polls is not everything. There is a limit to who can gain your vote purely by being the most "electable" and "safest" choice (remember, in my hypothetical, Romney/Jeb/W is polling just like Biden). By the time the general election rolls around, there is no longer any opportunity to decide on the direction for the party. A primary is where those issues should be hashed out, and resolving them should be encouraged, not put down as divisive.

  2. Top | #42
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    3,508
    Rep Power
    12
    Quote Originally Posted by PyramidHead View Post
    But the question was about the primary
    Using a false equivalence.

    There is a limit to who can gain your vote purely by being the most "electable" and "safest" choice
    Which are your strawmen. MY point was that, because he is the most feared candidate that this is a strong indication we should back him. It's ancillary to the fact that he is already the most qualified and one of the most electable in the field.

    As has been explained to you endlessly, there are no major policy divisions in the Democratic party, including anything Sanders has advocated, so the false equivalence of a Mitt Romney or Bush running as a Democrat is already self-defeating.

  3. Top | #43
    Content Thief Elixir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Mountains
    Posts
    11,406
    Archived
    707
    Total Posts
    12,113
    Rep Power
    45
    Quote Originally Posted by PyramidHead View Post
    I would vote for Romney or Jeb, but not W, in the general election if he was the only option against Trump, sure.
    Really???? If that's truly the case I have to assume that you are too young to appreciate the fact that W wasn't a traitorous, willing Russian tool who knowingly sacrificed US National security to sate his considerable greed, and didn't advance his racism as National policy, strong though it was.
    I despised W, but Cheato is on a whole other level of bad for the Country.

  4. Top | #44
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    15,711
    Archived
    15,686
    Total Posts
    31,397
    Rep Power
    79
    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Bosch View Post
    But would I rather have her candidate for secretary of the interior rather than Ryan Zinke who believes that the world is 6,000 years old and wants to give federal land to be stripped mined??
    I would prefer a candidate for secretary of interior who accepts that the Earth is ~4.5 Ga old AND who accepts the need for environmentally responsible mining and pipeline construction. Like it or not, our economy needs extractive industries.

    In 2016, Hillary refused to take a clear position on the then raging controversy about the Dakota Access Pipeline for example.

  5. Top | #45
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Lots of planets have a North
    Posts
    5,642
    Archived
    5,115
    Total Posts
    10,757
    Rep Power
    57
    Quote Originally Posted by Gun Nut View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by KeepTalking View Post
    I won't be voting for Biden in the primary. The case against Biden for me is I don't think it is a great idea to replace our current president, who is suffering from a declining mental state, with a candidate who is suffering from a declining mental state. At this point, I would hope that just about anyone could beat the thoroughly corrupt and morally bankrupt Trump, so I am going to vote for the candidate who best represents my values. If I am wrong about that and Trump gets re-elected just because we didn't elect the "perfect" candidate (who is obviously losing his mind as well), fuck it, we are done, no need to keep on pretending that our country is a functioning democracy.
    You don't see the difference between a wild psychopathic serial killer and a gentle old man that is slow at recalling, as any different from one another? Both have an 'illness'.... mental issues.. on both sides, is it?
    I will call one of them a "gentle old man" when they pledge to pull all the troops out. Any candidate who doesn't promise that is a "wild psychopathic serial killer".

  6. Top | #46
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    15,711
    Archived
    15,686
    Total Posts
    31,397
    Rep Power
    79
    Quote Originally Posted by KeepTalking View Post
    I am leaning towards Amy Klobuchar at the moment,
    Did you know that she supports government cracking down on porn?
    Senators ask Holder for more pornography prosecutions
    Unlike Biden, the Mad Hatter IS in the wrong primary.

    but like Warren as well. I know that is moderate vs far left, but I pretty much fall right between them on the spectrum myself.
    There are more than those two running who are between moderate and hard left. Why do you like these two candidates in particular?

  7. Top | #47
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    15,711
    Archived
    15,686
    Total Posts
    31,397
    Rep Power
    79
    Quote Originally Posted by southernhybrid View Post
    I think if Biden were to become the nominee and he chose Stacey Abrams as his running mate, he would probably win.
    I don't think Stacey Abrams is seasoned enough for a presidential election. After all, she is only a former state legislator. Each Georgia House district is only about 60k people (about half the population of South Bend, IN) and her district (89th) is so blue, she ran unopposed.
    If she wants to prove her mettle let her run for Senate or House. Or maybe try again for statewide office. But for 2020, she would not make a good running mate. After all, Biden's vice president would be one 78 year (at time of inauguration) old's heartbeat away from the presidency.

    I don't see Bloomberg as having a chance. I'm not even sure he's really going to enter the race.
    He thinks Biden might falter and that Warren has no chance to beat Trump (or whoever is actually on the ballot in 2020).

    He's not well liked by black voters due to the "stop and frisk" policy, started un his forerunner Rudy ( yuck ) but expanded under him.
    You seem to think that what black people think should be the sole determination of who a good candidate is.
    Also, what's wrong with "stop and frisk"? It's necessary when you have many illegal guns in the streets. It is certainly better than what's been going on under DeBlasio, which is thugs feeling emboldened to dump water on police officers and trash on police cars.

    He's been a Dem and a Repub and an independent over the years.
    So possibly an independent thinker. We need more of that and less blind party loyalty.

    He's socially liberal but way too fiscally conservative for most Democrats.
    But is he too socially conservative for most Americans? Democrats are a minority of the electorate. Democrats + Independents are a majority. Bloomberg in the general would win over Independents much easier than say Warren.

    Maybe he could beat Trump but I'm not convinced of that and I seriously doubt he would become the nominee.
    I think he would almost certainly beat Trump, but unless the stars align just right, he will have an almost impossibly steep hill to climb in the primaries.

    Warren and Sanders are both considered too far left for the middle and southern parts of the country. I find it odd that most of Bernie's supporters are younger voters, when you consider his age and health. I've said this before, but those of us old enough to have voted for George McGovern in 1972, don't want to watch someone who is very progressive lose again. Sanders is the only candidate that I would have a very hard time voting for, but he doesn't have a chance of winning in Georgia, so it's mute.
    You are right that Sanders and Warren are too far left. But Democratic primaries are not winner take all, so somebody not being able to win a state is not a reason not to vote for them at all. They can still get some good delegates.

    I like Warren, but I have no doubt, despite what Derec says, that sexism is part of the reason why she would have a hard time winning a national election. It would also be difficult for her to win enough swing states. So both her gender and her unrealistic policies would be big obstacles for her.
    I disagree. I think Americans would vote for a woman depending on the candidate. Likability is important for both male and female politicians.

    Mayor Pete is simply too young and inexperienced
    You think Mayor Pete is too inexperienced and yet you think Former State Representative Stacey should be one heartbeat away?

    and I actually agree with Derec when he said that short men don't usually win presidential elections int he US. He's 5'8". That's as stupid as gender discrimination, but it's a real thing. Plus, he seems phony to me, and his record in Indiana leaves a lot of black voters unlikely to vote for him in the primaries.
    Again you with the black voters. They should not be seen as sine qua non, that Democratic candidates must forever pander to them no matter what. And what is his damaging "record" in South Bend anyway? I can only think of that guy who got shot by police, but a) it was not Mayor Pete who shot him and b) apparently he had a knife. Just because a black man was shot by police, does not mean that the shooting was unjustified and it certainly doesn't mean that the mayor was responsible for it.

    I just don't see him as presidential. I don't see him having much chance of winning enough swing states either. Maybe one day, he'll be ready to take on a bigger role.
    I also think he needs more seasoning.

    Regardless of what I think, the other unmentioned candidates aren't gaining any steam and are unlikely to at this point. I wish they'd back out soon. And, it's rather odd, or disappointing that so many Democrats aren't sure of who they want to run, or have changed their minds several times. One of my friends has gone from Biden to Booker to Warren. I need to ask her if she's changed her mind again.
    According to Hillary, many people want her to run. And Deval Patrick is trying to get in too. It might be a second wave of entrants.

  8. Top | #48
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    1,666
    Rep Power
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by Jason Harvestdancer View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Gun Nut View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by KeepTalking View Post
    I won't be voting for Biden in the primary. The case against Biden for me is I don't think it is a great idea to replace our current president, who is suffering from a declining mental state, with a candidate who is suffering from a declining mental state. At this point, I would hope that just about anyone could beat the thoroughly corrupt and morally bankrupt Trump, so I am going to vote for the candidate who best represents my values. If I am wrong about that and Trump gets re-elected just because we didn't elect the "perfect" candidate (who is obviously losing his mind as well), fuck it, we are done, no need to keep on pretending that our country is a functioning democracy.
    You don't see the difference between a wild psychopathic serial killer and a gentle old man that is slow at recalling, as any different from one another? Both have an 'illness'.... mental issues.. on both sides, is it?
    I will call one of them a "gentle old man" when they pledge to pull all the troops out. Any candidate who doesn't promise that is a "wild psychopathic serial killer".
    ah.. so words.. they don't mean things to you. got it.

  9. Top | #49
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Lots of planets have a North
    Posts
    5,642
    Archived
    5,115
    Total Posts
    10,757
    Rep Power
    57
    Quote Originally Posted by Gun Nut View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Jason Harvestdancer View Post

    I will call one of them a "gentle old man" when they pledge to pull all the troops out. Any candidate who doesn't promise that is a "wild psychopathic serial killer".
    ah.. so words.. they don't mean things to you. got it.
    It is because words mean something that I won't call a hawk a "gentle old man". Biden was part of one of the most hawkish administrations in US history. Trump can't make up his mind on whether he believes in peace or war. You can't be a "gentle old man" when you spend your time dropping bombs on brown kids.

    ah.. so foreigners.. they aren't people to you. got it.

  10. Top | #50
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    South Pole
    Posts
    9,719
    Archived
    3,444
    Total Posts
    13,163
    Rep Power
    70
    Quote Originally Posted by PyramidHead View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Elixir View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by PyramidHead View Post
    I see two quotes of my question and zero answers to it, stop being cowards ...
    No I wouldn't vote for any of those scumbags in a primary. Would you vote for them in a general? Don't be a coward, now...
    I would vote for Romney or Jeb, but not W, in the general election if he was the only option against Trump, sure. I wouldn't blame anyone who sat it out, though, even for the first two. But the question was about the primary, and both you and Harry have made it clear that being ahead in the polls is not everything. There is a limit to who can gain your vote purely by being the most "electable" and "safest" choice (remember, in my hypothetical, Romney/Jeb/W is polling just like Biden). By the time the general election rolls around, there is no longer any opportunity to decide on the direction for the party. A primary is where those issues should be hashed out, and resolving them should be encouraged, not put down as divisive.
    The sad part about it, is that you're right that this should be set int he primary, and yet there is no obligation for democracy in the primaries. They can trot out things like "super delegates" etc.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •