Is Mr Biden Trying to Lose the Election?

[Quetzal]

@Sunstone, I think he had a choice: make a play for the moderates lost by Trump or gamble that young people would show up to vote ala Obama 1. I think he made the right choice, young voters are unreliable. In my opinion, his pick is safe enough to take some from each, which should be enough.

Edit: I forgot to quote, so I tagged ya.

 

[Mindmaster]

Trump is the most incompetent leader compared to Biden by far. He is actually worse than anybody I have seen or read. Anybody at all will be better than Trump. Hope he gets out of the White House and then into federal prison pronto.

No, Joe Biden would be completely worse than Trump because he neither has a brain or a spine. He's just a meat puppet zombie... Personally, I can't see why Dem diehards are interested. Harris is the real one running, and she's ethically dubious and a known liar. She's not an upgrade on Trump, even if you feel Trump is a liar he's never lied as much as she has, lol. Thousands of people were falsely incarcerated on her watch and punished far beyond what they deserved for nothing but her ego. Is this what you want? Yeah, I'll pass.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I doubt Biden is trying to lose. But it's a shame the Democratic Party picked such a bad candidate. He certainly has a decent chance of losing to Trump, especially since he shows no leadership or strength. He won't even show up to his own convention because he's scared of getting sick. That's almost like a president hiding in a bunker during a war while ordering his minions to do his dirty work for him.

No, thats called being smart and leadung by example. Wr should all be avoiding public gatherings like the plague. Because theres a good chance the plague is in the crowd.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Thus, now is a great opportunity for multiple wings
to coalesce into a force for positive reform.

And I agree (though I'm not American). But the way to do that is to focus on the issues, not on the party affiliations. Let's talk about how to bring an economy back after a pandemic that's really nobody's fault (not even the Chinese). Let's talk about how to provide vital health care for those who perhaps aren't able to pony up sizeable sums of cash but are still sick. Let's talk about how to galvanize an entire nation into the concerted, communal, effort to defeat an invisible enemy. Let's talk about whether you should have a right (as a libertarian) to live your life as you choose, and whether a pregnant girl should have the right to do the same. Let's talk about whether capitalism is better or worse with a few rules, or with no rules at all -- after all, we can do that with our children, so why not our economy?

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

No, Joe Biden would be completely worse than Trump because he neither has a brain or a spine. He's just a meat puppet zombie... Personally, I can't see why Dem diehards are interested. Harris is the real one running, and she's ethically dubious and a known liar. She's not an upgrade on Trump, even if you feel Trump is a liar he's never lied as much as she has, lol. Thousands of people were falsely incarcerated on her watch and punished far beyond what they deserved for nothing but her ego. Is this what you want? Yeah, I'll pass.

Could you please provide some evidence of the "thousands" who were "falsely incarcerted?" I don't seem to recall having read anything about that.

 

[Tambourine]

Why do we spend so much time with labels, rather than arguments? "LIberal stereotypes?" "Rightish" and "Leftish?"

You want real, broad reform, then I suggest it starts with listening to everybody, not shutting down every argument that doesn't come from "the correct political position."

Would you support any kind of legislation that calls itself a "reform", or do you actually support a specific set of policies?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Must have missed your post during the last administration...

You apparently missed hundreds of my posts, starting under Bush Jr., who was sitting in the White House when I first joined

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Thus, now is a great opportunity for multiple wings
to coalesce into a force for positive reform.

And I agree (though I'm not American). But the way to do that is to focus on the issues, not on the party affiliations. Let's talk about how to bring an economy back after a pandemic that's really nobody's fault (not even the Chinese). Let's talk about how to provide vital health care for those who perhaps aren't able to pony up sizeable sums of cash but are still sick. Let's talk about how to galvanize an entire nation into the concerted, communal, effort to defeat an invisible enemy. Let's talk about whether you should have a right (as a libertarian) to live your life as you choose, and whether a pregnant girl should have the right to do the same. Let's talk about whether capitalism is better or worse with a few rules, or with no rules at all -- after all, we can do that with our children, so why not our economy?

But then again, I have to remember a Canadian election in 1993, when Kim Campbell (running for the Conservatives, and as a brand-new PM after the resignation of her predecessor) said, "An election is no time to discuss serious issues."

I liked her before she said that, and detested her afterward. The party was reduces from 156 seats (in a 295 seat Parliament) to 2 seats! And in my opinion, well-deserved thrashing!

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Would you support any kind of legislation that calls itself a "reform", or do you actually support a specific set of policies?

I am not an American, I'm Canadian, so I am in no position to decide what reforms would be desirable for the US. I was responding to @Revoltingest who said this was a good time to consider reforms.

 

[Tambourine]

I am not an American, I'm Canadian, so I am in no position to decide what reforms would be desirable for the US. I was responding to @Revoltingest who said this was a good time to consider reforms.

It's always a good time to consider reforms, the trouble is that people generally cannot agree on which ones.

 

[Nova2216]

4 more years.

4 more years.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

It's always a good time to consider reforms, the trouble is that people generally cannot agree on which ones.

And as I've been trying to say, I suspect that is mostly because, rather than listening to what each other is actually saying, they are too busy screaming "Republican fascist" and "Democrat commie" at each other.

Dialogue is hopeless when that's all that's going on. You put on your red hat, I'll put on my blue hat, and now that we both know who the enemy is, we know what we have to do -- and it isn't think or talk.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

4 more years.

4 more years.

You, who call yourself "Christian," actually like somebody who spends most of his life trashing other people? Is that what Christ taught you? Or were you listening?

 

[Kenny]

As you might know, the presidential race is significantly closer than the news reports of it would seem to indicate. Mr. Trump is the first president in American history to have never risen above 50% approval in the Gallup Tracking Poll at any point during his presidency, yet he is within striking distance of closing the gap between himself and Mr. Biden to win re-election. Moreover, that gap historically narrows as election day nears.

So perhaps you might expect Mr. Biden to be doing everything to expand the Democratic base, bring in new voters and groups, and advance and consolidate his lead.

As it happens, he is not. On the contrary, he seems to be giving the finger to major groups of potential supporters. For instance, he has just picked Kamala Harris as his running mate, a person who offends numbers of Democrats, who racked up a record as an Attorney General of oppressing certain generally defenseless groups of people, and who is less popular in the Black community than Elizabeth Warren.

Meanwhile, his outreach to Hispanics is in many key areas of the country -- such as North Carolina -- virtually non-existent. As is his outreach to younger voters.

Again, he offers progressives -- who accounted for about 40% of the vote in the primary -- absolutely nothing of substance in order to woo their votes. He seems to be so anti-progressive that I'm starting to hear people say that Mr. Biden's real goal cannot be to beat Mr. Trump, but rather to crush the progressive movement in America. Since I'm not a mind-reader, I can't say that's what he's thinking, but his behavior does seem consistent with that. It makes me wonder if something like or similar to it is not actually true. Maybe he wants to both win the election and crush the progressives at the same time. But if so, can he?

As for myself, I still hope Mr. Biden wins, but I would not be surprised if Mr. Trump is re-elected, given Mr. Biden's apparent mismanagement of his campaign.

Interesting... who do you think he should have picked and why?

 

[Kenny]

You, who call yourself "Christian," actually like somebody who spends most of his life trashing other people? Is that what Christ taught you? Or were you listening?

Is it really as simply as that? I don't think so.

 

[Tambourine]

And as I've been trying to say, I suspect that is mostly because, rather than listening to what each other is actually saying, they are too busy screaming "Republican fascist" and "Democrat commie" at each other.

This view presumes that there is no substantial difference between policies, and that any "reform" is as good as any other.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

This view presumes that there is no substantial difference between policies, and that any "reform" is as good as any other.

Rubbish. I said that "listening" is important. When you can actually listen to other people, you can actually learn something about them. If they listen to you, they can learn something about you. And if you're all doing it, you may discover that there are some important things that you agree on.

And reforms that thoughtful, attentive people agree on, are the ones that are most likely to be beneficial.

 

[Tambourine]

Rubbish. I said that "listening" is important. When you can actually listen to other people, you can actually learn something about them. If they listen to you, they can learn something about you. And if you're all doing it, you may discover that there are some important things that you agree on.

And reforms that thoughtful, attentive people agree on, are the ones that are most likely to be beneficial.

And those who disagree can be dismissed as thoughtless or inattentive, and therefore no longer have to be listened to.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

And those who disagree can be dismissed as thoughtless or inattentive, and therefore no longer have to be listened to.

And where did I say that? Is not disagreement an integral part of any discussion? Good people can and do disagree often, and yet find a way forward.

 

[Tambourine]

And where did I say that? Is not disagreement an integral part of any discussion? Good people can and do disagree often, and yet find a way forward.

Have you never heard of such "good people" having irreconcilable differences?