US Politics: Biden vs. Ron DeCardassian in the Delta quadrant

[Larry of the Lawn]

24 minutes ago, Arakan said:

I very much doubt that Biden will be physically able to run again in 2024, he really looks his age now. Very tired, understandably so. I can only hope that the Democrats will be able to get enough people to vote in 2024. The next Republican President will likely be another populist demagogue, climate change denier, anti vaxxer, you name it. With such a base I see no chance for a „moderate“ Republican to get nominated. In the end, Europe needs the US to lead, especially with China in the background. After all you always were our young, dynamic brother who gave us a needed kick in the ass from time to time. 

At the moment I am quite hopeless. Of course life always goes on but I have the strong feeling the best years are over and now it’s about damage control. Maybe it’s the recency of the Afghanistan debacle speaking out of me right now. 

  As long as he can stand or lean on a podium for a couple hours he'll run.  Incumbency is a huge advantage and the Dems will cling to that unless it's absolutely impossible.  

Also, it's not clear (at least from what I've heard thrown around the last 6 months or so) that high general turnout will continue to be an advantage for Democrats.  

[Corvinus85]

2 minutes ago, larrytheimp said:

  As long as he can stand or lean on a podium for a couple hours he'll run.  Incumbency is a huge advantage and the Dems will cling to that unless it's absolutely impossible.  

Also, it's not clear (at least from what I've heard thrown around the 6 months or so) that high general turnout will continue to be an advantage for Democrats.  

Yes, the caveat is will all the people who want to vote be able to vote?

[Mindwalker]

6 minutes ago, larrytheimp said:

Also, it's not clear (at least from what I've heard thrown around the 6 months or so) that high general turnout will continue to be an advantage for Democrats.  

Yup, particularly with all the voter suppression in place, and election officials now being partisan hacks who'll willingly overturn if the results are inconvenient. And a right-wing SCOTUS just to be safe.

Also, maybe something happens with Feinstein, and Gov. Elder sends his replacement...

But hey, I'm sure Dems can out-campaign this.

[Arakan]

Sometimes I ask myself: how the fuck did we end up here? Did we have it too good? Did we get bored? Do we as humans simply need all the drama? 2021 feels so much worse than 2008/09 and in those crisis years we were supposed to have learned our lesson: more cooperation, less greed, more longterm thinking, less shortterm optimization and quick fixes. We did learn shit. The only thing missing is the next stock market collapse which seems overdue. 

[Mindwalker]

27 minutes ago, larrytheimp said:

  As long as he can stand or lean on a podium for a couple hours he'll run.  Incumbency is a huge advantage and the Dems will cling to that unless it's absolutely impossible. 

And I don't think Harris is popular enogh to run in his place.

[Martell Spy]

Stephen Breyer says he's still mulling retirement
"I don’t think I’m going to stay there till I die — hope not," he told The New York Times.

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/08/27/breyer-mulling-retirement-decision-506987

Quote

 

Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer remains undecided about his future on the United States’ highest court, the longtime jurist said in an interview published Friday.

Breyer, who at 83 years old is the oldest member sitting on the court, has been cagey about any potential retirement plans in the face of a political pressure campaign to get him to step down while Democrats control the White House and the Senate.

In an interview with the New York Times timed to the release of his forthcoming book, Breyer indicated he is still weighing his decision.

“There are a lot of blurred things there, and there are many considerations,” he told the Times’ Adam Liptak. “They form a whole. I’ll make a decision.”

Still, Breyer, who was nominated to the high court by President Bill Clinton in 1994, gave some indications that he is mindful of the dynamics looming over his potential retirement. He cited the late Justice Antonin Scalia, whom he served on the court with, as saying he didn’t want his legacy on the court washed away by an ideologically opposed successor.

“He said, ‘I don’t want somebody appointed who will just reverse everything I’ve done for the last 25 years,’” Breyer said in the interview, which was conducted Thursday.

Breyer also signaled that he did not want to follow in the path of Scalia or Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, both of whom died while serving on the Supreme Court in recent years. Those vacancies immediately became bitter political battles that were ultimately won by Republicans and shifted the ideological balance of the court to the right.

“I don’t think I’m going to stay there till I die — hope not,” Breyer said.

 

 

[mcbigski]

On 8/25/2021 at 11:00 PM, Corvinus85 said:

They went into a dangerous area, which likely caused a security risk/distraction and didn't even announce their plans until the plane was well on its way to Kabul. And yes, on top of that, that was 2 more seats that could have been taken by someone in need on the way out of Kabul. That's a military operation, they're not in the chain of command, they can check the executive branch all they want, but all they could do there was distract. As veterans they should have known better. 

 Sorry for late response, my wifi is down, so less convenient to post.

I thought they announced nothing until after leaving Kabul.  So who are they distracting?  The legislative branch should be checking up on the executive branch.  Congress, nor the people at large for that matter, should not just accept whatever the executive says as infallible.  I trust bi-partisan veterans rather more than the media that are trying pillory them.  If the people are just supposed to accept whatever the official line is, then why do we even need democracy at all?

[Corvinus85]

22 minutes ago, mcbigski said:

 Sorry for late response, my wifi is down, so less convenient to post.

I thought they announced nothing until after leaving Kabul.  So who are they distracting?  The legislative branch should be checking up on the executive branch.  Congress, nor the people at large for that matter, should not just accept whatever the executive says as infallible.  I trust bi-partisan veterans rather more than the media that are trying pillory them.  If the people are just supposed to accept whatever the official line is, then why do we even need democracy at all?

Sigh. Distraction was towards the service members on the ground. I'm pretty sure they couldn't keep their identities secret while there. And the recent 24 hrs makes it clear they shouldn't have gone. It's not like they went to oversee a construction site.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

2 hours ago, Arakan said:

I very much doubt that Biden will be physically able to run again in 2024, he really looks his age now. Very tired, understandably so. I can only hope that the Democrats will be able to get enough people to vote in 2024. The next Republican President will likely be another populist demagogue, climate change denier, anti vaxxer, you name it. With such a base I see no chance for a „moderate“ Republican to get nominated. In the end, Europe needs the US to lead, especially with China in the background. After all you always were our young, dynamic brother who gave us a needed kick in the ass from time to time. 

As of right now I would still assume Biden will run again, but who knows, he's not even through his first year in office.  And you're right to think the next Republican nominee will be very extreme. Liz Cheney is ultra conservative, but she's not batshit crazy and she's been run out of leadership. There are a lot of potential candidates, but I can't think of a realistic one that isn't going full anti-vax at this point. Trump got booed the other day for saying people should get vaccinated. That should let you know how bad things have gotten.

I'm surprised that's your take on U.S.-European relations. I would think our inaction and collapsing political state would make Europe realize she can't rely on us at this point in time. 

Quote

At the moment I am quite hopeless. Of course life always goes on but I have the strong feeling the best years are over and now it’s about damage control. Maybe it’s the recency of the Afghanistan debacle speaking out of me right now. 

It is. I don't think the near future is looking bright, but you never know, a lot can change in a relatively short amount of time.

[mcbigski]

Do you really think the service members on the ground are going resent two members of Congress, each former military, putting themselves, at least moderately, into harms way (and probably more so than any member of Congress this year, anywhere and anywhen else for that matter)  in an effort to make sure the guys on the ground are getting all the support they need?  

I can't speak for the troops on the ground, but I would think that knowing that there are at least two Congressmen taking a very personal interest has to be more reassuring than what ever the media and White House press folks are spinning.  And again, Congress has a significant interest in this.  If there aren't checks and balances, then we don't have a functional republic.  These two should be commended, not condemned, but the media drum is beating a different beat.  Remember that.

ETA: @Corvinus85, Ty slipped a response in between.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

15 minutes ago, Corvinus85 said:

Sigh. Distraction was towards the service members on the ground. I'm pretty sure they couldn't keep their identities secret while there. And the recent 24 hrs makes it clear they shouldn't have gone. It's not like they went to oversee a construction site.

While I do agree, it is interesting to note that both said they changed their minds upon going and now agree we need to GTFO now.

[Larry of the Lawn]

1 hour ago, mcbigski said:

Do you really think the service members on the ground are going resent two members of Congress, each former military, putting themselves, at least moderately, into harms way (and probably more so than any member of Congress this year, anywhere and anywhen else for that matter)  in an effort to make sure the guys on the ground are getting all the support they need?  

I can't speak for the troops on the ground, but I would think that knowing that there are at least two Congressmen taking a very personal interest has to be more reassuring than what ever the media and White House press folks are spinning.  And again, Congress has a significant interest in this.  If there aren't checks and balances, then we don't have a functional republic.  These two should be commended, not condemned, but the media drum is beating a different beat.  Remember that.

ETA: @Corvinus85, Ty slipped a response in between.

Then don't.  

This is a non-story.  Why should they be commended or condemned?

This is the check-and-balance scenario that concerns you?  

[mcbigski]

41 minutes ago, larrytheimp said:

Then don't.  

This is a non-story.  Why should they be commended or condemned?

This is the check-and-balance scenario that concerns you?  

Just to be clear, the part that concerns me is that people seem to think Congressmen actually wanting to verify first hand what the executive is claiming is somehow dangerous.  I'm taking the position that members of Congress can do some amount of fact finding on their own in such a pivotal security situation.  (Which is not to say they should be able to negotiate directly with foreign powers regardless of their constitutional standing.  It's not like they're John Kerry level of war heroes or something.)

[DMC]

And here come the drone strikes...U.S. airstrike targets Islamic State member after Kabul airport attack:

Quote

The United States launched a drone strike targeting members of the Islamic State in Afghanistan on Saturday local time in response to Thursday's Kabul airport attack, the Pentagon said.

Driving the news: “U.S. military forces conducted an over-the-horizon counterterrorism operation today against an ISIS-K planner,” Capt. Bill Urban, spokesman for the U.S. Central Command, said in a statement.

 

7 minutes ago, mcbigski said:

Just to be clear, the part that concerns me is that people seem to think Congressmen actually wanting to verify first hand what the executive is claiming is somehow dangerous.  I'm taking the position that members of Congress can do some amount of fact finding on their own in such a pivotal security situation.  (Which is not to say they should be able to negotiate directly with foreign powers regardless of their constitutional standing.  It's not like they're John Kerry level of war heroes or something.)

The objections to that trip very obviously have nothing to do with "congressional oversight."  It's absurd to act like anyone has a problem with that.  The problem is doing it at a time when, frankly, no Americans should be traveling to Afghanistan.  Let alone members of Congress that will be straining resources that should be focused on getting people out.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

Pretty much. Citing oversight is BS and frankly laughable, they made a complicate situation worse for a number of reasons and they didn't even inform the appropriate parties of their actions beforehand. Maybe their hearts were in a reasonable place, but they got basically everything else wrong here. 

[Kalbear]

5 hours ago, Arakan said:

Sometimes I ask myself: how the fuck did we end up here? Did we have it too good? Did we get bored? Do we as humans simply need all the drama? 2021 feels so much worse than 2008/09 and in those crisis years we were supposed to have learned our lesson: more cooperation, less greed, more longterm thinking, less shortterm optimization and quick fixes. We did learn shit. The only thing missing is the next stock market collapse which seems overdue. 

The problem is that you're looking at now as the aberration instead of the last 30 or so years as the aberration. Especially in the US. 

[DMC]

21 minutes ago, Kaligator said:

The problem is that you're looking at now as the aberration instead of the last 30 or so years as the aberration. Especially in the US. 

Er...If anything this what's happening is an extension/result of what's happened over the last 30 years or so, not as an aberration of it.  Especially in the US.

[Varysblackfyre321]

5 hours ago, Martell Spy said:

Stephen Breyer says he's still mulling retirement
"I don’t think I’m going to stay there till I die — hope not," he told The New York Times.

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/08/27/breyer-mulling-retirement-decision-506987

 

It’d be great if he could retire tomorrow.

Also Feinstein’s in case republicans actually get a republican governor.

But sadly liberals tend to terrible team players

[Kalbear]

43 minutes ago, DMC said:

Er...If anything this what's happening is an extension/result of what's happened over the last 30 years or so, not as an aberration of it.  Especially in the US.

Authoritarian tendencies, repression of minority rights, carceral abuse, military buildup, anti foreigners and isolationism have been much more the norm for the US rather than the exception. If things were better before it was because people willingly chose not to exercise the power they could. That is no longer the case. 

[DMC]

3 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Also Feinstein’s in case republicans actually get a republican governor.

But sadly liberals tend to terrible team players

This could only happen due to a Senator dying after a GOP candidate gets elected in a recall vote.  In the very unlikely event that happens, I hardly think it means it was because liberals weren't "team players."

1 minute ago, Kaligator said:

Authoritarian tendencies, repression of minority rights, carceral abuse, military buildup, anti foreigners and isolationism have been much more the norm for the US rather than the exception.

Ok.  And how is this an aberration now rather than a reflection of trends that have been permeating for the last 30 years?