I wonder if this is really the way things will work going forward - that a SCOTUS justice can only be confirmed if the president also holds the senate. There could be pretty long stretches where the court is not full in that case. Could be a matter of picking nominees that are palatable to the other side. Gorsuch had Democratic votes, and Jackson had Republican votes after all (although in Jackson's case this may have been signalling more than anything, since the Dems had the majority anyway).
The Biden Presidency
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
It won't matter, republicans will never accept a Supreme court nominee from dems, no matter who it is.
Unfortunately, republicans has an in-built advantage in the senate, so only they will be in a position to play these games, nothing dems can do in return.
It will naturally happen less because of relative timescales. Another way of looking at it is that since (and excluding) FDR there have only been 8 opportunities for parties to retain the presidency post an 8 year incumbency. If it's been achieved twice that's 25% of the time. If it happens in 2028 then it would leap to 33% of the time. Not exceedingly rare.
It really depends, if Biden wins this election, who will republicans put up in 2028?
I really do think its likely that Trump will be their nominee again in 2028, he will never stop running for president, until he is dead.
If Trump can't win against this version of Biden, i have a hard time seeing him doing it versus the democratic field in 2028.
You are probably right. Republicans have the advantage that they act with extreme cynicism to get their wins.
Biden has visibly aged a lot in 4 years. Will he even make it to the election? He's struggling with occasional press conferences now. How's he going to cope on the campaign trail whilst still doing the job that's taking its toll on his health?
If he doesn't stand aside or get primaried and goes deep into the election campaign, then kicks the bucket or becomes so unwell he has to step down, then what happens? Would there be enough time to get someone else on the ballot? Even if they could then its an uphill battle as the new person would have missed out in months (years) of campaigning and getting their name known to the electorate.
If he doesn't stand aside or get primaried and goes deep into the election campaign, then kicks the bucket or becomes so unwell he has to step down, then what happens? Would there be enough time to get someone else on the ballot? Even if they could then its an uphill battle as the new person would have missed out in months (years) of campaigning and getting their name known to the electorate.
Newsom is running around everywhere campaigning and being on talk shows, and there's been an increase in public appearances by Harris. Looks to me like the Dems are quietly exploring which of those two would be the safest bet should Biden not be capable of running after all.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
That truly is disgusting, even if it's true or not. Absolutely scraping the barrel going there. When you think what Joe and his wife have endured and suffered in their lives it's quite remarkable they have had the strength to accomplish what they have. Although it's likely he will more be remembered for recent events surrounding Israel and his cognitive decline.
Hur should have been flogged for going in that territory in the report. The topic of Beau's death is not anyone's fecking business but for the Bidens'.
Harris is going to be the nominee if Biden steps down. Newsom himself knows it would be foolish trying to take on Harris as there would be a huge backlash by the elderly African American generation who are the bedrock of the party.
Have they learned nothing from the other side? Gathering a solid base means next to nothing if you cannot reach more voters to appeal beyond the base. I hope someone tells me how Harris can reach to a larger coalition of voters when she has been rather invisible in areas where her boss was more visible during his own VP days.
Last edited:
What's the deadline for getting onto the ballot though? If Biden suddenly can't run close to the election then what happens?
Could something like this happen in a Presidential election?
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/nov/09/pennsylvania-dead-democrat-tony-deluca-victory
I imagine Trump would get a pretty easy victory in that scenario. Although the meltdown of him losing to a dead guy would be a sight to behold!
If Biden is the nominee then it the Dems need to make sure the VP candidate is rock solid and seen as a President in waiting. Ready to take over at any minute as there is a good chance they will become president at some point during the next term. VP nomination has probably never been as important. Is it definitely going to be Harris or could someone like Newsom be selected? If its Harris then that doesn't bode well as she polls worse than Biden!
Found time after being privately livid at Bibi!
...
As I said before, I understand the political calculation to support a deeply immoral bill that will have generation-long repercussions for how the third world will live (and die) with accelerating climate change. Biden is in the chair to represent suburban homeowners who did not like Trump's rudeness - they were the swing demographic between 2016 and 2020. They want brown people to rot, and so they will rot.However, people with my views aren't in power, nor have power. Instead, the Biden adminsitration is crippled by a house that would never, EVER provide more funding for handling border crossings and immigration. The GOP want to see huge lines, people in cages, over-worked, stressed border agents doing horrible things. That's their whole schtick. Further, Biden himself is supposed to be there representing his constituents. And more and more, Americans are sounding like people from my little country: America for Americans. The days of the huddled masses are over, I'd wager less than 50% of under 35 year-olds even know what the inscription is on the statue of liberty, and probably think it was built in the bronx.
So, that's where I sit in terms of what I expect from Biden. As I've tried to articulate, I want a totally different world. But given Biden's actual ability to do anything coupled with what his potential voters WANT from him on immigration - and most importantly given the alternative in November - I totally understand why things are playing out like they are.
There is a world where a huge media campaign highlighting that (reminderAmerica is built on the backs of immigrants. It is an immigrant country. Most of the most major brands have had immigrants at the forefront of success. Athletes, rock stars, movie stars all come from a huge diverse melting-pot of places. Even just calling out the actual demographics of the place would probably shock some people. We could feature amazing stories of asylum seekers bravely giving up their whole lives to see safety in the US and then turning that into amazing contributions to society. But that's all hard. Maybe the next generation will be better, we have to hope so.
What I'm saying is that people are going to reach to this in ways you might not like. Some have moral standards and red lines. Some have personal connections with what is happening at the border. Like very political move, this has winners and losers. Almost all the losers are part of his vote base.
I don't fully buy this notion that the bill is harsh *purely* as a response to changing voter sentiment. Voter sentiment on supplying Israel with weapons is negative among Democrats and neutral-to-negative among "independents", which would mean it is quite negative among Dem-leaning independents (the people really essential to re-election). This has been the case even in the direct aftermath of Oct 7! The only people with whom it is substantially popular are Republicans - the people still identifying with that party in 2024 - which I think you'll agree aren't where Biden is going to find voters. If he was driven purely by electoral calculations, he could have appeased a vocally upset base with a bold statement, a bill veto, backing a UN SC resolution, etc, 2-3 months ago. He has instead gone out of his way to mock Palestinian suffering ("they can't shoot straight", "I don't believe their numbers", the UNRWA stunt), fund Israel without waiting for Congress, bomb countries on their behalf, and of course make sure nothing can touch them at the UN. "'""Leaks"""" about his "private anger" against Bibi are a played-out joke, transparently planted literally every week to keep the most gullible voters in line. That's what happens when his personal moral stance - support Israel, always - actually matters and dictates his administration policy.
So what we're seeing in one case is political calculation shoving an important votebase under the bus, and in another, personal moral conviction against his bases' wishes. To be blunt, he believes more in Israel's right to kill children than he does about the "huddled masses" at his border. For somebody campaigning on "empathy", from the "nice" party, this isn't in line with how many of his voters see themselves or their interests. I would not be surprised, or blame his votebase, if some abandoned him.
And finally, about the hypothetical pro-immigrant media campaign. They aren't 1:1 with Fox, but the newsrooms and staff of most mainstream media is very heavily blue, and would certainly be amenable to suggestions from the administration. See the campaign in 2020 calling his stumbling over words "a stutter" - a line faithfully repeated by mainstream outlets, despite everybody having access to clips from 2012 or even 2016, where he sounds much sharper. At any point during the last three years, watching their voters turn to the right, the administration could have started, and asked friendly journalists to promote, a campaign spreading the opposite perception of immigrants. I have no idea if it would have worked. But there wasn't even an attempt. Beyond votes, this kind of bipartisan anti-immigrant stance leads to the GOP going further right forever (see Fox proudly airing an anti-immigrant lynch mob at Times Square beating up an Asian citizen).
For what it's worth, I'm a resident not a citizen, so don't have a vote, and live in a place where a vote has zero deciding power anyway (NY). I personally hope Biden lives out the rest of his life like the average Gazan of his age.
I've not seen or read anything about it, but has anyone seen what Harris or Newsome's opinions are on Israel/Palestine?
Now, Biden's own screw-ups aside, why is it that democrats has to be good little boys, and have the opposite side investigate them, but republicans are free to have members of their own party do the same to them?
Bipartisanship/neutrality only works one way, it seems.
Democrat investigator probably don't bring up even half of the stuff this guy did in his report.
This isn't about right or wrong btw, all i'm saying dems should play by the same rules as republicans do.
Bipartisanship/neutrality only works one way, it seems.
Democrat investigator probably don't bring up even half of the stuff this guy did in his report.
This isn't about right or wrong btw, all i'm saying dems should play by the same rules as republicans do.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
I think you will see more of this moving forward, it used to be that Dem and swing voters punished Dems a lot more than Republicans but I don't know if this will be as much the case anymore.
I think the Dems knew long in advance that Trump would oppose the immigration bill and so would never have to face legitimately hard questions from the base for making such a compromise. The goal was always to pass foreign aid without immigration. In many ways they did a service as we likely will never see such a harsh immigration bill ever again, this was the GOP's best chance in generations.
Fair enough.
I still think that the Dems are playing with fire and it's a gamble that could spectacularly backfire. Regardless of who wins, the fact that Americans have to choose between a corpse and an egomaniacal psychopath is already incredibly damaging at both domestic and international level. There are many who are licking their lips while looking at how this circus is going to play out.
Last edited:
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Lloyd Austin has been hospitalized again. Wishing him the best in the final stages of his life but someone needs to get a grip at the White House as he is in no fit state to continue at the Pentagon.
Seriously, I also think this should be the end of the road for Austin as SECDEF. I guess we will see how Kathleen Hicks performs as the new SECDEF in the next year or so.
If Hicks works fine and that Biden wins the next election, all good. If Biden wins the election and then wants someone more solid on the job though, I hope he will ask William McRaven to become the new SECDEF.
Her reaction to these questions are absolutely disturbing.
And yet exactly what you'd expect. Few places are more corrupt or inept (take your pick) than the Pentagon.
Biden admin should honestly just declare some kind of emergency and send weapons over to Ukraine at this point.
Courts might strike it down, but lets see them enforce it, GOP deploy these tactics, dems should do the same.
Of course, dems will never be that bold, unfortunately.
Courts might strike it down, but lets see them enforce it, GOP deploy these tactics, dems should do the same.
Of course, dems will never be that bold, unfortunately.
Because of the base constituencies and histories of both parties.
On the Dem side, this coalition was first formed in the early 30s and then refined in the late 60s. Union leaders and Black leaders were both outsiders and radicals who had been persecuted by both parties, they were brought into the Democratic party, becoming loyal votebases. The model was to become subservient to the party, which delivered the main goals of these groups multiple times, and formalised them as part of the power structure of the party/govt. The other side of the coalition is educated liberals, who are ideologically committed to the party, to liberal ideals, and do not face existential economic worries. The dominant theme here is to support the party and leadership, which protects from the opposite party bad guy, and provides its largesse.
On the GOP side, the coalition was built in response to the massive shifts of the 30s and 60s. But where the Democratic party initially honoured its base with big historic laws, the Republicans repeatedly blocked them from reaching the top - in 1940 the non-isolationist Wilkie kept out Robert Taft, in 1952 the moderate Eisenhower kept out Taft again, both times with the party elite going against their base. This crated a historic rupture between the conservative movement and party base - even when they took over the party under Reagan, and then again under Gingrich, and again as the Tea Party, and now with Trump - they continue to angrily discipline the pro-business "centre-right" establishment and make it align with their lunatic stances.
Republicans are incentivised to go extreme in a way Dems aren't.
This has changed a bit during Trump and after. At least initially, Biden was more able to do partisan things than Obama ever tried. It's not the Biden was especially strong on this, but 20008-10 shows just how weak Dems and Obama were - he refuses to campaign for the 60th senate seat after a vacancy, during the peak of his own popularity, the insane desperate dealmaking on big bills despite historic majorities in both chambers, which all failed and still produced right-wing diluted bills, and refusing to use that majority to pass smaller campaign promises (like card check unionisation) by taking advantage of those numbers. The Russia hysteria, and the (now totally forgotten) sentiment about "kids in cages" hardened the Dems during Trump's term.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
To be fair the operation was using American equipment, backed by American warships in the red sea, aided by American surveillance and American funding. It is as much an American operation as it is an Israeli one. So this isn't a mistake.
I mean it was either old man saying wrong things, or an unfortunate Freudian slip. Either way it doesn't look good
It’s giving Murtough & de Jong summer 2022 vibes.
They really take public for idiots. Sad thing is, these all media sources hold credibility in the eyes of public, and they are nothing but propaganda mashine. Haven't still stooped as low as Russia today for example, but are playing pretty much the same sort of game.
Even if it was true, why would Netanyahu even care? The money keeps rolling in, and he is experiencing at most very mild public pushback from Western leaders. I don't think he cares one bit about what happens behind the scenes. It leads to no material change anyway.
Hardly surprising given that a large % are idiots!
They’ve been coached for years with their shitty “News” shows. When I first heard of “most trusted new reader” I couldn’t quite believe it.Its election season pandering. Beneath the surface, the Israeli-US relationship remains unchanged. The former still enjoys complete impunity when it comes to committing its atrocities in Gaza and the West Bank, and weapon deals are still being rushed (or often bypassed) through congress. Not to mention the US' laughable response to the ICJ allegations, and their steadfast willingness to veto anything that is remotely critical of Israel at the UNSC. Those things have always been a constant, and will continue to be so.
Biden is just weary that the US's compliance in a genocide might cost him in the upcoming election, especially in key states like Michigan, where losing would strike a massive blow to his re-election chances. Hence why we have these amusing gossip columns about Biden being very cross with Nutty Yahoo, and how their relationship is allegedly at an 'all time low'. Ariel Sharon famously once said 'Don't worry about American pressure, we control America', and that sentiment still holds true today. Biden can pretend to be as mad as he wants to be with Israel as a pathetic means of appeasing the progressive elements of his base, but the fact is he'll still protect and absolve Israel regardless of of how much more deranged they behave during this massacre.
And for the record yes I know Trump will likely be more subservient to Israel. But that hardly offers any consolation to the million plus Palestinians currently suffering tremendous agony under Biden's blessing.
Soooo, now that Putin has said he prefers Biden over Trump I assume Tucker Carlson has officially endorsed Joe Biden's campaign? Or am I mistakenly using logic again?