US Politics the Biden's age a nothing burger edition

[DireWolfSpirit]

Im convinced Joe will do the right thing and step down.

Let the other team be the guys with the 20 yrs past his prime candidate.

Dems win that race by a wide margin, none of this "even in the polls with a criminal" bullcrap.

Edited November 23, 2023 by DireWolfSpirit

[ThinkerX]

Nope. Biden stays, dies in office, and we find out how good Harris is in the top slot.

 

[DireWolfSpirit]

You have to go all the way back to Carter to find a President polling this poorly at this point in thier term.

Jimmy Carter1977-81

Carter36.6%

39.2%Biden

BidenDAY 1,036

According to 538.

[kissdbyfire]

38 minutes ago, DireWolfSpirit said:

Im convinced Joe will do the right thing and step down.

Let the other team be the guys with the 20 yrs past his prime candidate.

Dems win that race by a wide margin, none of this "even in the polls with a criminal" bullcrap.

I asked in the previous iteration, but maybe you didn’t see it so here it goes again: who would you like to see as the dem candidate? Or a few names you’d like to see as candidates in a primary?

[DireWolfSpirit]

1 minute ago, kissdbyfire said:

I asked in the previous iteration, but maybe you didn’t see it so here it goes again: who would you like to see as the dem candidate? Or a few names you’d like to see as candidates in a primary?

When Biden steps down their will be a vigorous competition with candidates jockeying.

I havent a preordained favorite but i have more confidence in the Vice President or if another challenger overtakes her so be it, Kamala's numbers are poor as well so im not assuming she is automatic to be nominated.

Its less about endorsing a particular candidate for me and more about not wanting to see Joe be the candidate. Have more confidence in any generic candidartes like a Buttigieg, Bloomberg or another cabinet member.

The important thing for me is that the candidate not be Biden, I dont think he can win.

We will see who the race coalesces around.

[kissdbyfire]

41 minutes ago, DireWolfSpirit said:

When Biden steps down their will be a vigorous competition with candidates jockeying.

I havent a preordained favorite but i have more confidence in the Vice President or if another challenger overtakes her so be it, Kamala's numbers are poor as well so im not assuming she is automatic to be nominated.

Its less about endorsing a particular candidate for me and more about not wanting to see Joe be the candidate. Have more confidence in any generic candidartes like a Buttigieg, Bloomberg or another cabinet member.

The important thing for me is that the candidate not be Biden, I dont think he can win.

We will see who the race coalesces around.

Gotcha. And just for the record, Bloomberg is almost a year older than Biden, so if the problem for so many (not talking about you specifically) is Biden’s age, Bloomberg wouldn’t work either.

Edited November 22, 2023 by kissdbyfire

[DireWolfSpirit]

12 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

Gotcha. And just for the record, Bloomberg is almost a year older than Biden, so if the problem for so many (not talking about you specifically) is Biden’s age, Bloomberg wouldn’t work either.

Bloomberg has immense resources though as you know. With such a short window it may require a type that can just bankrolll an enormous amount of the campaign .

Bloomberg is also older but I dont think the public perception of his fitness is out there as the issue it is with Joe. The press pounces on it with nearly every Biden appearance/event, ive not seen that phenomenon over the reporting on Bloomberg.

With Biden the fitness narrative seems to have a life of its own and its grown worse, he isnt shaking the perception. Its not his age, its the publics perception of his decline from that age, a difference at work there imo.

Eta: And Bloomberg may not even be the viable alternative anyways, the voters will determine the nominee. Surely someone can beat the felonious Trump once there are more options than Biden available.

Edited November 22, 2023 by DireWolfSpirit

[kissdbyfire]

11 minutes ago, DireWolfSpirit said:

Bloomberg has immense resources though as you know. With such a short window it may require a type that can just bankrolll an enormous amount of the campaign .

Bloomberg is also older but I dont think the public perception of his fitness is out there as the issue it is with Joe. The press pounces on it with nearly every Biden appearance/event, ive not seen that phenomenon over the reporting on Bloomberg.

With Biden the fitness narrative seems to have a life of its own and its grown worse, he isnt shaking the perception. Its not his age, its the publics perception of his decline from that age, a difference at work there imo.

Eta: And Bloomberg may not even be the viable alternative anyways, the voters will determine the nominee. Surely someone can beat the felonious Trump once there are more options than Biden available.

My point was that, from what I’ve been reading and watching, Biden’s age seems to be a huge issue for many voters. And after months of reporting on how his age is the problem, I don’t see how an older candidate can be the answer. And sure, perception plays a part as well, even if that perception is somewhat skewed by the media. I get that the actual age is not the main problem for you, but it sure seems to be for many. 
I this this discussion is academic anyway, since I really don’t see how anyone other than Biden as the candidate. 

[Phylum of Alexandria]

49 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

I this this discussion is academic anyway, since I really don’t see how anyone other than Biden as the candidate. 

Academic is way too kind a word. It's damn close to pie-in-the-sky fantasy.

 

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

2 hours ago, DireWolfSpirit said:

You have to go all the way back to Carter to find a President polling this poorly at this point in thier term.

Jimmy Carter1977-81

Carter36.6%

39.2%Biden

BidenDAY 1,036

According to 538.

Given the polling how do you explain the Democratic Party wins in the Virginia Legislature, the Kentucky Governor’s race, and on Issue 1 in Ohio?

[IheartIheartTesla]

Presidential approval is nationwide, these are all local races. Obviously the correlation between the two can vary from state to state. Also, nearly all reproductive rights legislation appears to win regardless of partisan lean.

[Phylum of Alexandria]

16 minutes ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

Presidential approval is nationwide, these are all local races. Obviously the correlation between the two can vary from state to state. Also, nearly all reproductive rights legislation appears to win regardless of partisan lean.

That's all true, but it's important to note that journalists and pundits weren't so optimistic about the prospects of the state elections, or were at best agnostic, because of those nationwide polls.

The urge is to let the poll predict the future, even if it's not at all appropriate to do so. Because it's the only information they have to go on with respect to the horse race, and horse race betting is quite easy to do, though of little value.

[ThinkerX]

What gets overlooked here is that when it comes down to Biden verses Trump, then for the majority of voters, Biden is the best choice, regardless of age, because Trump is actively alienating the much of the voting populace.

[Phylum of Alexandria]

8 minutes ago, ThinkerX said:

What gets overlooked here is that when it comes down to Biden verses Trump, then for the majority of voters, Biden is the best choice, regardless of age, because Trump is actively alienating the much of the voting populace.

That's certainly the hope. Especially once the media puts its full spotlight onto Trump, and everyone is reminded of how fucking exhausting his constant tirade is.

I wish people would be motivated for something more noble than "that man is annoying af," but I'll take what I can get.

[Zorral]

As Democrats push to ban caste discrimination, some Indian Americans object

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/11/22/indian-americans-caste-discrimination-newsom-veto/

Quote

 

.... Newsom vetoed the bill on Oct. 7, weeks after Bhutoria and another high-profile Indian American Democratic donor, Ramesh Kapur, spoke to him at a Democratic National Committee retreat in Chicago, they said.

The governor’s decision has cast into stark relief a growing rift within the Democratic Party among Indian Americans — an increasingly important demographic in the party — over the movement to prohibit discrimination by castes, the rigid system of social hierarchy traditionally linked to Hinduism.

California’s caste anti-discrimination bill was the culmination of a recent wave of bans across the country, mostly pushed by Democratic lawmakers and liberal activists. Two cities, Seattle and Fresno, Calif., made caste a protected class this year, and several universities, including the 23-campus California State University System, have also created special caste-based protections for students and faculty.

Caste is a fixed social group that people are assigned at birth and that traditionally dictates opportunities for jobs, education and marriage. In India, the caste system originally applied to Hindus but now covers people of various religions. Because of this, the California bill ultimately took out all references to Hinduism.

Newsom’s office said that in addition to meeting with Bhutoria and other opponents, he also met with bill supporters, and that he believed that the state’s anti-discrimination laws already covered castes.

“The Governor met with a number of people on both sides of this issue,” said Erin Mellon, a Newsom spokesperson. “He made his decision because it would be duplicative with existing state law, as stated in the veto message.”

But supporters of the measures, including the American Bar Association and some Hindu civil rights groups, say that Newsom is incorrect and that people from lower castes are routinely losing educational, housing and job opportunities when someone from an upper caste learns of their status.

“Current laws do not provide adequate protections against discrimination that follows people from a lower caste,” said Tarina Mand, a lawyer and past president of the South Asian Bar Association of San Diego. “The beauty of America is that we pride ourselves on the notion that if you work hard enough, you can work your way up, but caste is not something you can shed.” ....

 

Nikki Haley is against anti-caste discrimination too, you can just betcha, along with Ramaswamy, another Indian American clown running to be POTUS -- and probably so would be Sunak, etc. in the UK.  Coincidence ya think?

BTW, the big justification they present as 'no anti-caste discrimination law' is that it would discriminate against THEM, as being of high caste wealth, etc. thus creating 'division' and making them targets of violence.

Edited November 22, 2023 by Zorral

[TrackerNeil]

6 hours ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

Presidential approval is nationwide, these are all local races. Obviously the correlation between the two can vary from state to state. Also, nearly all reproductive rights legislation appears to win regardless of partisan lean.

Presidential approval is also highly situational--people will blame the president for all manner of mishaps and grievances, even those he has nothing to do with. Doesn't really predict how they are going to vote on Election Day, when the choice is between Biden and Trump.

In my view, if voters really felt terrible about Biden, you'd see it in downballot races, and we aren't. That's meaningful.

Also, this talk about the "public perception" of Biden's age is on point, because that perception IMO is largely activist and media driven. Trump is nearly as old, and the guy has never sounded competent or together, yet for some reason he's not dogged by he's-so-old concerns.

Edited November 22, 2023 by TrackerNeil

[Phylum of Alexandria]

3 minutes ago, TrackerNeil said:

Also, this talk about the "public perception" of Biden's age is on point, because that perception IMO largely activist and media driven. Trump is nearly as old, and the guy has never sounded competent, yet for some reason he's not dogged by he's-so-old concerns.

I do concede that there's an energy difference between Biden and Trump. Biden often seems tired and frail, and Trump, for all his rabid incoherence, has the onstage energy of a cokehead. I think that's what a lot of people are focusing on.

But, as you say, "a lot of people" are doing so because journalists and pundits harp on it. I actually think this harping both helps and hurts Biden. It dampens enthusiasm, but it also lowers expectations, making it easier to pleasantly surprise people with a vigorous speech.

As for Trump, sure he's more energetic, but he's also insufferable. I have noted though that he too seems more low-energy than he used to be, and far more incoherent. When people hear more of his rants about beating Obama and preventing WWII, Biden won't seem nearly as weak.

[TrackerNeil]

12 minutes ago, Phylum of Alexandria said:

As for Trump, sure he's more energetic, but he's also insufferable. I have noted though that he too seems more low-energy than he used to be, and far more incoherent. When people hear more of his rants about beating Obama and preventing WWII, Biden won't seem nearly as weak.

Here's a question: Should Biden refuse to debate Trump next year?

I'm leaning towards "yes", and here's why. As far as I know, there's no good evidence that presidential debates influence very many people, and certainly not in this case, where the candidates are very, very familiar to the American people. Try to find me a voter who does not have an opinion, good or bad, on Donald Trump--you might just as well seek for unicorns.

Debates also just give Trump the opportunity to spread more bullshit, or to pull stunts like he did with Hillary Clinton, inviting her husband's accusers. Why not deny him the opportunity for such theatrics?

I am sure the pundits and talking heads would scream and predict doom and defeat were Biden to take such a step, but they did the same in Arizona in 2022. Democrats were bedwetting from the Rockies to Appalachia, claiming that voters would punish Katie Hobbs for the effrontery to refuse to debate Kari Lake, and then voters elected Katie Hobbs. If 2016 proved anything, it's that Americans often don't give a shit what the New York Times or CNN thinks.

(It should be noted I have no knowledge that the Biden campaign is considering such a move; I'm just blueskying.)

Edited November 22, 2023 by TrackerNeil

[Zorral]

Really hate the title of this thread.  IT IS NOT HELPING.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Racism in North Dakota and Voting Rights  (Something to think about while watching the new season of Fargo that started this week, set in ND, unlike the previous seasons.)

https://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2023/11/racism-in-north-dakota

North Dakota is so excited by that appeals court ruling that guts the Voting Rights Act. That’s because that for all we focus as a society on anti-Black racism in places such as Alabama and Louisiana, the racism in the Great Plains toward the tribes is equally as horrifying and the whites there are just as evil as George Wallace, but with a different accent.

A day after a federal appeals court dealt a significant blow to the Voting Rights Act, North Dakota’s top election official announced Tuesday that he wants the court to review a judge’s recent ruling that protected two Native American tribes’ voting rights.

Voting rights groups had hailed U.S. District Chief Judge Peter Welte’s ruling Friday that the tribes’ voting rights were unlawfully diluted by a 2021 legislative redistricting map.

But, in an unrelated lawsuit Monday, the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that private individuals and groups such as the NAACP do not have the ability to sue under a key section of the Voting Rights Act.

In announcing his intention to appeal Welte’s ruling, Republican Secretary of State Michael Howe specifically cited Monday’s 2-1 ruling by the appeals court panel, which is based in St. Louis and has jurisdiction over seven states, including North Dakota. It is unclear whether the same panel of three judges would hear the North Dakota case.

Republican Attorney General Drew Wrigley on Monday said the appeals court ruling “is an interesting and timely development” as state officials and legislative leaders pondered their next steps as to the Friday ruling. A spokesperson said he wasn’t immediately available for comment but would follow up.

The Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians, the Spirit Lake Tribe and three tribal members sued last year, seeking a joint district for the two tribes. They alleged the 2021 map “simultaneously packs Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians members into one house district, and cracks Spirit Lake Tribe members out of any majority Native house district.”

I will state again that this nation’s focus on race as being about Black and white people is really problematic, because that’s just one side of it. A big side, I grant you. But far from the whole.

[Phylum of Alexandria]

17 minutes ago, TrackerNeil said:

Here's a question: Should Biden refuse to debate Trump next year?

I'm leaning towards "yes", and here's why. As far as I know, there's no good evidence that presidential debates influence very many people, and certainly not in this case, where the candidates are very, very familiar to the American people. Try to find me a voter who does not have an opinion, good or bad, on Donald Trump--you might just as well seek for unicorns.

Debates also just give Trump the opportunity to spread more bullshit, or to pull stunts like he did with Hillary Clinton, inviting her husband's accusers. Why not deny him the opportunity for such theatrics?

I am sure the pundits and talking heads would scream and predict doom and defeat were Biden to take such a step, but they did the same in Arizona in 2022. Democrats were bedwetting from the Rockies to Appalachia, claiming that voters would punish Katie Hobbs for the effrontery to refuse to debate Kari Lake, and then voters elected Katie Hobbs. If 2016 proved anything, it's that Americans often don't give a shit what the New York Times or CNN thinks.

(It should be noted I have no knowledge that the Biden campaign is considering such a move; I'm just blueskying.)

I'm not sure it would make a huge difference either way, but if I had to lean, I'd say debate him.

Biden and Trump's debates in 2020 were really hard to watch, but Biden did fairly well in looking like a normal person standing up to a human firehose of psychotic rage. Biden came out looking okay, while Trump looked awful to anyone outside of his cult.